Trust, Impact or AI? What Engagement Professionals Say About 2026

Looking ahead to 2026, engagement practice is being shaped by many forces — from new tools and technologies to rising expectations around trust, transparency and impact.

So, we asked our community a simple question:
What do you think will matter most for engagement in 2026?

The responses were clear — and revealing.

Across sectors including local and central government, infrastructure, energy, planning, health, transport, consulting and the private sector, practitioners shared a strong sense of where engagement needs to focus next.

Here’s what stood out.

Trust Over Tools

The strongest message we heard was clear: trust matters more than tools.

Practitioners consistently pointed to the importance of credibility, transparency and follow-through — especially in an environment where communities are more informed, more vocal and often more sceptical.

This aligns closely with insights from Dr Emanuela Savini and Desley Renton in Elevating Engagement Maturity: Strategies and Practical Tips for Organisations, highlighting that meaningful engagement depends less on individual methods and more on organisational consistency, culture and capability over time. Trust is built when engagement is embedded — not episodic.

External research reinforces this trend. Findings from the OECD Trust Survey and the Edelman Trust Barometer continue to show declining trust in institutions globally, underscoring the need for engagement that is genuine, responsive and values-led.

In short: tools can support engagement, but trust is what sustains it.

AI Will Reshape Practice

Another strong theme was the growing influence of AI on engagement practice.

Rather than enthusiasm for technology alone, responses reflected a more thoughtful question: how can AI support better engagement without undermining judgement, inclusion or relationships?

Julian Moore and Dr Robyn Cochrane’s paper, Exploring the Impact of AI on Engagement Practice, makes a similar point — that while AI can support analysis, synthesis and efficiency, it does not replace human decision-making or ethical responsibility. Its value depends entirely on how intentionally it is applied.

Log in as a member to view Exploring the Impact of AI on Engagement Practice.

This suggests practitioners are thinking critically about AI’s role — not as a shortcut, but as a tool that must be used carefully and transparently.

Impact Will Matter More

Many respondents also highlighted impact — signalling a shift from measuring engagement by activity to measuring it by influence and outcomes.

This reflects growing expectations that engagement should meaningfully shape decisions and deliver public value, rather than simply meet procedural requirements.

These insights echo themes in Strategic Engagement: Democracy’s Urgent Task, which argues that engagement must be accountable, influential and visibly connected to decision-making if it is to maintain legitimacy and trust.

What This Tells Us About 2026

Taken together, the responses point to a profession focused less on novelty and more on credibility, effectiveness and accountability.

As engagement practice continues to mature, the priorities are clear:

• Build and sustain trust

• Use technology with intention

• Demonstrate real-world impact

If these responses are any indication, engagement practitioners are already thinking deeply about how to meet the challenges — and opportunities — of 2026.

This article draws on responses to a recent question shared with the Engagement Institute community. The responses were gathered through a poll on our LinkedIn page.

Follow Engagement Institute on LinkedIn to take part in future conversations shaping the future of engagement practice.