👉🏻You formed an advisory group. You invited the “right people.” You asked for feedback. So why does it still feel… off?

If you’ve ever sat on an advisory group — or tried to run one — you might’ve noticed something.

The same people always speak up. The same suggestions are repeatedly made. The same structural issues remain unaddressed.

That’s not a coincidence. It’s the result of a design that wasn’t built with equity in mind.

Advisory groups can be helpful. But for many marginalised communities — including disabled people — they often end up reinforcing the very exclusion they’re meant to solve.

Let’s break down why.

1. Being invited to the table isn’t the same as holding power

Many advisory groups are set up after the big decisions have already been made. The agenda is set. The project is scoped. The timeline was approved.

Now the group is being asked to react to work, not shape it.

For marginalised folks, that’s not inclusion — it’s observation.

👉 True inclusion means co-creating the table. It means influencing the purpose, process, and outcomes, not just having your photo taken at a meeting.

2. Lived experience is not free labour

Let’s be blunt: if your staff are being paid to be in the room and your advisory group members are not — that’s exploitation, not engagement.

Marginalised people are constantly being asked to educate, advise, and review. Often without pay, and always with emotional labour attached.

👉 Compensate people for their time and insight, not just with a coffee voucher, but with fair, respectful remuneration that recognises their expertise.

3. Community engagement doesn’t follow corporate timelines

Building trust takes time. So does safety. And so does shifting power.

But most advisory groups are formed for 24 months, often rushed into action to meet project deliverables.

👉 Inclusion can’t be squeezed into a timeline that was never designed for it.

If you’re not prepared to invest beyond the current funding cycle, it’s worth asking whether the work is ready for community input.

4. Voices are filtered through layers of comfort

This one’s tough to talk about — but essential.

Even when people speak up, what they say is often:

• Reworded to sound more “constructive”
• Filtered through organisational language
• Removed from minutes or reports if it feels too “political”

👉 That means truth is sanitised, urgency is delayed, and the clarity of lived experience is lost.

5. One person cannot speak for all

It’s surprisingly common for organisations to assemble an advisory group with a single disabled person, a single First Nations person, a single trans person — and then expect them to represent everyone who shares that identity.

👉 That’s tokenism. Not inclusion.

People don’t exist in neat categories. Identities intersect. Experiences vary. One voice cannot — and should not — speak for a whole community.

So what does work?

Here are a few shifts that can move you beyond the limits of advisory groups:

✅ Co-design, not consultation. Bring people in at the start. Let them shape the goals, the process, and the evaluation—not just respond to what’s already decided.

✅ Power-sharing, not performance. Examine who sets the agenda, who facilitates it, and who has the final say. If power isn’t shared, it’s not equity.

✅ Resourcing and relationships, Budget for access. Pay for time. Create consistent, safe spaces. Build relationships that outlast the project.

Ask yourself this:

“Would I be happy being a participant in this group if I were the one with the least power in the room?”

If the answer is no, it’s time to rework the model.

How to Work with Me

• I’m available for Disability Inclusion Policy and Action Plan Development, Inclusive Committee Reviews, Workshop and Focus Group Facilitation, Data Analysis, and Disability Inclusion Advising.
• You can book an intro chat to discuss your organisation’s specific needs.
• Book an intro chat with Ainslee.