Bringing the community’s ideas together – the synthesis phase

In this report, all ideas submitted directly on the website (through the survey, at community engagement events or in written form), have been incorporated into the ideas section under each relevant goal and priority.

Comments on ideas

In the ideas phase, people were encouraged to comment on ideas to stimulate debate, add to the original idea and/or generate new ideas. Ideas generated through comments have been incorporated into this report under the Goals and priorities discussion section. All ideas, regardless of whether they were commented on or not, have been incorporated and treated equally. It is felt though that the presentation of comments listed under the themed ‘topics’ in this manner, provides a transparent indication of the content of original comments and additional comments associated with that comment.

Rating the ideas

People could either click on the ‘thumbs up’ button to indicate that they loved the idea or on the ‘thumbs down’ button to indicate that they were not so sure about the idea. This approach was used to foster debate. The use of thumbs up or down buttons does not determine which ideas should be adopted.

The survey

The survey results are reported under each question. Specific ideas contained in survey responses that are more appropriately grouped under goals and priorities have been included in the ideas section of the report. They are not also included in the survey results.

Methodology

Every idea and survey question was included within NVivo analysis software. A team of qualitative analysts from Global Research read every idea, conversation comment and survey response and collated it under the most appropriate topic or topics to inform assessment of the 2008 goals and priorities. This resulted in every idea, comment and survey answer being individually read and considered multiple times by multiple analysts. Summaries that form the sections of this report were then written. The themes and topics emerged from the public’s contributions and evolved as the analysis was completed. Quality checks were undertaken to ensure consistency and completeness of analysis.

In reading, analysing and synthesising participants’ ideas, comments on ideas and survey responses, every effort was taken to consistently group points made into the most logical topics. The goal has been to deliver a thorough and objective presentation of the range of ideas, points and opinions expressed: relevant to each goal, and priority, and survey question.

The number of statements made on each goal and priority is presented so as to indicate the relative amount of opinion provided. These numbers present a consistent indication of the weight of discussion in particular areas, making comparisons possible regarding the general amount of interest. The numbers alone though do not indicate that a particular goal or priority is more or less significant than others. There may be many reasons why there were large amounts of information provided on some goals and priorities and less on others. These include factors such as; agreement or disagreement with the current goal or priority, and also the amount of stimulus related to particular topics that were provided to participants during public engagement activities.

The following descriptors have been used throughout the discussion to consistently describe the number of statements that made similar points:

“One participant” – 1 statement

“Few/some” – 3-5 statements

“Several” – 6-10 statements

“Many” – 11-20 statements

“A large number” – 21-30+ statements

“A very high number” – 100+

The use of specific portions such as: “half”, “three quarters” or “two thirds” of a particular section, have also been used when appropriate.

Direct quotes are included from participants to illustrate specific points; they are italicised and also indented from the margins.

Report structure and presentation

Part A of this report Goals and priorities discussions is structured by the Future Melbourne 2008 goals and priorities, with headings coloured to reflect the different themes. Each goal is supported by a set of priorities, prepared during the 2008 Future Melbourne process. The analysis has been primarily focused on identifying, presenting and summarising the information received under each of the priorities; structuring information in the best possible way to inform assessment of the 2008 goals and priorities, from the information provided by Melbourne’s citizens in 2016.

At the start of each section a summary provides an overview of all the information provided, focused on how the information received aligns with the 2008 goals and priorities. The body of each section is a synthesis of the information grouped under common themes. The discussion on each goal commences with an Overview of priority discussions section, which is a synthesis of all the information received on each goal’s priorities. Also on each goals page is a word cloud that represents the most commonly used 40 words (grouped with synonyms) within all the priorities that comprise that goal. The size of words in each word cloud is reflective of how often each word, or words similar to it, were used by people who contributed to the Future Melbourne 2026 process.

The Participate Melbourne website collected comments on ideas, which gave people the opportunity to comment on posted ideas. When multiple people engaged in dialogue on a particular idea this has been identified as a conversation within the report to consistently identify when single or multiple comments have originated from a point made on an idea.

The 970 Ideas, 636 Comments on ideas and 350 surveys resulted in the following number of comments made on the Future Melbourne 2008 Goals.

  • Total: 4531
  • A city for people: 1661
  • A creative city: 400
  • A prosperous city: 468
  • A knowledge city: 306
  • An eco-city: 740
  • A connected city: 956

The existing goals and priorities discussions are followed by a short section titled: Possible new priorities. Discussions on Citizens and Governance and Managing Growth are presented here. These two themes emerged from the data in a significant way, enough to warrant brief discussions of their own; there was substantial discussion on these topics and they didn’t fit neatly within the Future Melbourne 2008 Framework.

Survey question answers are mostly included in Part B of this Report. The answers that predominantly discussed the 2008 goals and priorities have been included with the ideas and comments on ideas in Part A of the report. These were questions:

Question 2: What is your vision for Melbourne?

Question 5: What are the three most important priorities to focus on for Melbourne’s future?

Question 10: Do you have any other thoughts or ideas for Future Melbourne 2026?

The answers provided to these three questions, focused on goal and priority topics and as such, were included there.