How “User Stories” Can Improve Public Engagement: 6 Lessons

Welcome to The Triangle’s Corner, Subscriber First Name

The Impact Angle

How to frame public engagement activities so they actually produce useful input.

Most public engagement is designed to gather opinions. If you want engagement to shape decisions and lead to measurable community impact, it needs to be designed to surface real needs instead.

One practical way to do this is to structure engagement so that the engagement facilitators can gather user stories.

What Is a User Story?

A user story is a short statement that describes a real need from the perspective of a specific group of people. User stories are commonly used in the product development process.

Its purpose is not to suggest solutions.

Its purpose is to clearly describe A) who needs (or demands) something, B) what they want to do with it, and C) why.

The Simple Structure

A user story follows this structure:

[Specific group of people] needs [a capability or support] so that [a meaningful outcome is possible].

That’s it.

Examples (Policy & Public Engagement Context)

Residents living in flood-prone areas need clear evacuation information so they can make safe decisions during extreme weather.
Parents using public transit Need reliable schedules so they can get to work and childcare on time.

Why This Structure Matters

This structure forces three things that public engagement often skips:

Specificity: who exactly are we talking about?
Needs, not solutions – what do they need to be able to do?
Outcomes – what changes if that need is met?

If you can’t write a clear user story, it usually means the engagement goal (or the decision it’s meant to inform) isn’t clear yet.

So, this is how to frame your public engagement meeting to gather meaningful input:

1. Start by Clarifying the Purpose

Before the meeting—and again at the start—be explicit:

The goal of this engagement is to understand what specific groups need to be able to do, and what gets in the way.

This sets expectations. You’re not asking people to approve solutions; you’re trying to learn from their experience.

2. Be Clear About Who the Engagement Is For

Avoid vague terms like “the community.” Name the specific group and why their input matters for upcoming decisions. If multiple groups are involved, separate them. User stories don’t work well in mixed rooms.

3. Ask Questions That Surface Needs

Replace “What do you think?” with questions like:

What are you trying to do that’s harder than it should be?
What happens if this doesn’t change?

4. Capture Input in Simple, Structured Form

As people talk, translate what you hear into short statements and check them in real time:

People in [this situation] need [this capability] so that [this outcome] is possible.

Make these visible and let participants refine them.

5. Make Tradeoffs Explicit

Before closing, ask:

Which of these needs feels most urgent?
If only one could be addressed first, which should it be?

6. Close the Loop

End by stating:

which decisions these needs will inform
what constraints already exist
when and how you’ll report back

Why This Matters for Community Impact?

This approach creates a clear line from engagement to decisions to outcomes. That traceability is essential for community impact measurement. Without it, engagement risks becoming activity instead of impact.

Public engagement doesn’t need to be bigger. It needs to be clearer—and more honest.

This 55 second video summarizes last week’s the story.

It explains what we can borrow from Agile methodology to design more effective public engagement processes .

Missed our story about California’s ambitious transportation and climate program? This 1-minute video summarizes it.

What would you think of a chef who spends years perfecting a recipe, knowing the kitchen doesn't have an oven? That’s the story of many of our climate policies in California, including the SB 375 program.

We know the kitchen doesn't have an oven. But instead of installing one (instead of building the actual implementation tools) we're still perfecting the recipe.

If we're serious about policies with real community impact, we need to stop pretending refinement equals progress.

Watch the 1-minute story here.

👉 Want to learn more about us?

I am Nader Afzalan, Ph.D.

Founder of The Triangle and Director of the Sustainable Environmental Program at UC Berkeley.

At The Triangle we help measure the community impact of programs and design programs that deliver.

🌐 thetriangle.io
📩 nader@thetriangle.io

This story explores what we at the California Governor’s Office learned about the importance of accepting that you can’t make everyone happy when designing climate and economic development programs.

The lesson is simple but hard: programs designed for impact require focus, and focus requires tradeoffs.

Here is the story in 57 seconds.

This 15-minute video is based on one of my recent talks and provides a simple framework for designing impactful programs. It reflects on the following three case studies:

SB 375 Program at the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
Homeless Data Integration System, run by the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (CalICH)
California Jobs First, run by the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency and the Governor’s Office

I know this story is more critical than the previous ones. My hope is that this transparency helps raise awareness and unpack the secret sauce behind creating real community impact.

Looking for ways to measure your community impact?

This 2 minute video shows how a simple fellowship program responded to California’s complicated climate policies. Mainly because addressed the needs of government, recent grads, and industry all at the same time.

The Behind the Impact #7 discusses how California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development mobilized actions to streamline its ZEV (Zero Emission Vehicle) strategy.

Behind the Impact #6 is an amazing story showing a closure of a refinery in California ignited an unexpected partnership between labor unions and environmental justice communities.

Behind the Impact #5 is a fascinating story on how to make plans live out of shelves and create a movement.

Behind The Impact #4 is a great example of how DOE connected policy and contracting to make sure communities benefit from billions of dollars in funding.

Behind the Impact #3, shows how Ben Metcalf at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation found a single number that changed the housing conversation in California.

The fascinating part is that how this one number sparked new debates.

Behind the Impact #2 is a fascinating story where Joaquín Rodríguez Álvarez, Ph.D., talks about the secrete sauce behind Pla Buits, Barcelona’s “Empty Plots” program. The program turned abandoned land into thriving, community-managed spaces.

The first Behind the Impact story dives into my conversation with Jessie Buendia, highlighting reflections on the “secret sauce” that made California’s Transformative Climate Communities program (TCC) work.