Water data fragmentation isn’t just a technical challenge — it’s a human one. Data users, providers, and stakeholders often operate in silos. Across local, state, and federal governments, tribal nations, academia, and more, the stakeholders for any given dataset can span multiple disconnected communication channels. Even within a single agency, internal divisions can stall efforts to build cohesive, shareable data tools. These barriers, whether institutional or interpersonal, lead to a core issue: limited communication and collaboration in the water data community. And without trust and coordination between data providers and users, even the best tools will fail to gain traction.
That’s why stakeholder engagement isn’t a “nice to have” – it’s a critical step toward building tools that work. To transform how water data is shared, used, and maintained, we need tools built with users and providers in mind. That starts with listening. To create a more connected water data future, we need to connect the people behind the data first.
"People are behind both data and technology, so if we're saying that water data are fragmented...the people who work in water are also fragmented."
– Faith Sternlieb, Associate Director, Center for Geospatial Solutions
The Internet of Water team at the Center for Geospatial Solutions (CGS) recently traveled to Arizona to co-host a one-day workshop in collaboration with Arizona State University’s Center for Hydrologic Innovations to develop the Arizona Water Observatory, a water "control center" and one of the pillars of the Arizona Water Innovation Initiative. We brought together water data engineers, developers, and policy experts to identify common roadblocks to water data sharing – and build the relationships necessary to overcome them.
Participants shared openly about their technological needs, data challenges, and visions for future collaboration. For our facilitating team, the event was also a chance to reflect on what makes an engagement session successful:
Water — and water data — is a complex and sensitive topic. Bringing together data providers and users in joint conversation helps bridge both the complexity and sensitivity, but real progress starts with curiosity.
Rather than arriving with pre-baked solutions, it’s critical to hear what challenges our partners face in their own words. As facilitators, we learn far more from our participants — about what they need from a data hub, what gets in the way of sharing or accessing information — than they learn from us.
Opening remarks set the tone: we positioned ourselves as partners, not prescribers. This approach encouraged engagement and fostered a spirit of openness that lasted throughout the day.
Let’s face it: data sharing has plenty of challenges to talk about! To make progress, we kept the group anchored in a shared purpose: How can we approach a data problem together?
Our facilitators used this as a compass to navigate conversations throughout the day. Participants saw this question written at the top of handouts and used it to guide breakout groups. This clear, consistent focus helped transform individual anecdotes into system-level insights that can shape the design of more useful tools.
Our facilitation team ranged from seasoned engagement professionals to first-time facilitators. But everyone agreed on one thing: preparation is key. Rather than write out a general run of show, we wrote out a detailed guide for every session. No detail, down to the number of fidget toys per group, was left to work itself out. This allowed us to work out kinks before they ever occurred and ensured everyone on the team was highly familiar with the content and schedule of the day. What might feel like over-preparing can also be the key to instilling confidence, for facilitators and participants both.
"Things cannot go wrong because we have guardrails...no matter what [happens], we know how to progress." – Gina O'Neil, Associate Director, Center for Geospatial Solutions
In-person time is precious — and easily disrupted. That’s why we designed the entire session to run analog.
Participants received printed handouts with key questions and were encouraged to take notes by hand. Using hard copies relieved any pressure to multitask throughout the day. Only one element, a post-engagement survey, required a phone. This approach kept everyone present and focused, and allowed ideas to flow more naturally.
Evaluating successful stakeholder engagement begins before any face-to-face session ever starts. A pre-workshop survey helped us tailor the session to a baseline understanding of participants’ data use cases, challenges, ideas to address them, and more. This set a useful baseline for both planning and follow up.
Still, measuring the success of an engagement — especially when it is the first of many — can be difficult. So, we turned to Faith Sternlieb, Associate Director of Stakeholder Engagement for IoW at CGS, for her perspective on success. Her top three indicators of a successful engagement:
These indicators can serve as a quick debrief guide after your own events and help you plan for the next.
In the world of water data, stakeholder engagement is the foundation for lasting success. The best tools emerge not just from good code or design, but from relationships. Through thoughtful preparation, active listening, curiosity, and shared purpose, facilitators can help bridge the human gaps that so often mirror our technical ones. That’s how we piece together the water data landscape, one conversation at a time.
Header Image: Getty
Workshop Images: Amelia Green