We had a chance to talk with Hutspot, a Rotterdam-based organization that helps public institutions design for better collaboration, smoother transitions, and stronger civil engagement. We spoke with Eline, one of Hutspot’s project leaders, about how their work has evolved through years of designing participatory processes, often in places where involvement still means showing up in person.

What followed was a conversation about seeing things differently, meeting people where they are, and recognizing that even the most well-intended involvement efforts can fall short without safety, anonymity, or flexibility. The following four takeaways stood out, and left us with new questions about what it really means to invite people in.

‍

1. Involvement is a way of seeing

“We’ve always been eager to try new tools and approaches, but many of our clients were much more hesitant. For them, the most important thing was that we could see each other in person.”

Hutspot has long been open to experimenting with new ways to support involvement. But they’ve often had to work with clients who were skeptical at first: for them, face-to-face still meant ‘real participation,’ and digital felt like a risk. Changing how involvement works in those settings didn’t just take tools: it required a mindset shift about what presence really means, and how alternatives might lead to even better results.

“It’s funny, but doing this kind of work made me approach my private life differently. For example, I am renovating my home. Normally, I’d just make a list and start calling contractors. But now I think more in steps, stakeholders, where dependencies lie… I think about the whole process before jumping in.”

It surprised us how naturally involvement had extended beyond Eline’s work. For her, designing for participation is not just a skill: it has become a way of noticing things. A way of seeing connections between people, tasks and things, and spot frictions and overlaps throughout a process, even in something as personal as redoing her kitchen. 

‍

2. Participation that fits real life

“We prioritize tools that are really useful in projects where we need to collect input but don’t want to ask people to take a whole day off. Many organizations still rely on in-person meetings a lot, which is not viable for many people to participate.”

Beneath Eline’s reflection, we sense a modern confrontation with systems that resist adaptation. In many public institutions, presence still signals legitimacy, while digital participation can be seen as a shortcut or, worse, as an afterthought. But real inclusion isn’t about volume or visibility: it’s about how low we set the threshold for people to meaningfully contribute.

“We’ve noticed that especially for people with kids or those who work full-time, it's much easier to participate using more flexible and digital mediums like Involved, where they can also interact with others. They don’t have to rearrange their lives just to be included.”

Designing for flexibility isn’t just a matter of format: it’s a matter of care. When people are given more accessible ways to share their thoughts, the question becomes: what could stop them from speaking openly once they step in?

3. Anonymity invites truth

“Sometimes you’re hosting a session with people you know, like colleagues or clients you’ve worked with for years, and that creates pressure. Something similar happens if most people in a meeting don’t know each other. In either case, it's harder for them to say what they really think if they feel it’s tied to your name or face.”

Involvement doesn’t just depend on access: it depends on safety. Even in familiar teams, feeling exposed can quietly shape who speaks, how they do it, and how much. What might look like politeness or disengagement among strangers can easily just be caution. Eline highlighted in our conversation how anonymity can soften that tension, not by erasing responsibility, but by making space for truth to emerge without fear of judgment or hierarchy. It’s a way of leveling the room.

“With Involved, people can just focus on the content. You don’t have to impress anyone or respond right away. That really changes how honestly people share what they think.”

In situations where participation is still shaped by presence, personality, or politics, anonymity becomes more than a feature: it is an invitation for open collaboration.  And this applies even more when a person is new to an organization or a process, as we also learnt with Eline.

‍

4. We never thought of these circumstances

Most likely you have been through a job onboarding process in the past. You arrive at your new workplace, and you are introduced to multiple people and activities, usually within a short period of time. At different points, someone would ask you: “Do you have any questions?”. Depending on how confident you are and how safe your new job feels, you may bring up most of your doubts, or quiet down those queries that may make you sound dumb or scattered. But what if you were offered an alternative?

“What stood out to me when we hosted a strategic session with one of our clients was how active their newest hirings were among their colleagues. After the session, they gave us feedback about how much they learned by seeing all the ideas in the room, so they could form their own opinion while feeling safe to speak up their own minds. They said that in a live event they wouldn't feel the confidence to do so. But by the end, there was so much more clarity and shared relief that all important information was brought forward, that the whole process was worth it.”

Honestly, we didn’t think about this situation before talking with Eline. But it makes so much sense: the core of most organizations' cultures manifests when new people are brought in. They have the potential to add value and make the organization grow, but they also face the weight of the status quo the most intensely. Yet, this is a situation where deep, foundational relationships can begin to set in.

‍

Final reflections

Many public institutions still default to formats that need to adapt. They unintentionally exclude people who can’t be physically present, and they often limit the expression of those who are. Without more thoughtful design, even well-intended involvement can reinforce silence—especially among those with less confidence, time, or status.

Anonymity is often overlooked as part of that design. It's misunderstood—dismissed as risky or impersonal. But most people don’t need total visibility to be honest. They need just enough privacy to avoid self-censoring, and just enough distance to think before they speak. That’s not a weakness in participation—it’s what allows real perspectives to surface.

And in group settings, where reputation and seniority quietly shape who speaks first and who stays quiet, it’s not enough to hope for fairness. You have to build it in. That means creating ways for people to interact, compare, and align—without social pressure distorting what they actually think. When you do that, priorities can emerge from the group itself, not just from the loudest voices in the room.

We’re grateful for teams like Hutspot that show us how subtle choices can create conditions for people to share what they mean, and we are excited to continue supporting them in their journey. If you’re working to make your organization a more courageous, inclusive, and responsive space, we’d love to learn from your efforts and explore how we can support you.