Participate Now

Nadja Sutter, Editor-in-Chief, “Schweizer Gemeinde”

«Our expectations were far exceeded.»

Nadja Sutter, Editor-in-Chief of 'Schweizer Gemeinde,' carries responsibility: The monthly magazine is published in three languages and reaches all Swiss municipalities. It should be current, informative, and easy to read. But there is hardly any feedback from readers. Nadja Sutter wanted to know what was desired – and relied on the online dialogue with BrainE4.

Ms. Sutter, how did the collaboration with BrainE4 come about?

Andreas Seonbuchner from BrainE4 approached our Director Claudia Kratochvil. He wanted to make his offer known to the municipalities and was looking for collaboration for an advertising partnership. But we had been thinking for a while about surveying the municipalities about the association's communication offerings. We were convinced by BrainE4's presentation. That's why we decided to collaborate beyond just advertising.

What did you want to know from whom?

We were particularly interested in which channels municipal staff and municipal authority members use to get their information. How intensively is the magazine read? How is the newsletter used? Where do people get their information?

What was your problem?

We didn't know exactly which topics people were interested in. But also: Are the texts understandable? Is simpler language needed? Or more examples?

How did you set up communication with the addressees when it came to this online dialogue?

In an exchange with Andreas Seonbuchner, we learned how often and where we needed to communicate. Based on this, we made a plan for the invitations: In the magazine, on social media, in the newsletter, and also a direct mailing to the municipalities.

What worked?

Direct mailing worked very well. Participation increased noticeably each time. The newsletter and the announcement in the magazine also had a big effect. Social media had less influence.

Regarding participation: What were your expectations and what actually happened?

Our expectations were far exceeded. We didn't set a target number beforehand, but we hoped and expected that more than 100 people would sign up. But already at the beginning, over 200 people participated within just a few days. In the end, there were 512. That was definitely more than we expected. With just over 2,100 municipalities in Switzerland, of which 1,500 are members with us, that's an impressive number.

What also impressed me were the duels played: over 14,000 "votes." That's a number that even tells a layperson that this provides a good data foundation.

The online dialogue was conducted multilingually. That means everyone could participate in their native language.

For us, it was a great advantage, indeed a prerequisite, that we could do the whole thing trilingually. Otherwise, we wouldn't reach our entire target group. Everything was translated directly by BrainE4. In advance, we compiled a list of specific municipal terms. Automatic translation programs sometimes don't use the right word for specific vocabulary. We received no feedback about the translations. Therefore, we assume they were well received.

1/3

Did you receive personal, direct messages from participants?

The people on the team who weren't familiar with the online dialogue yet found it innovative and interesting. But otherwise, we weren't in direct contact with the participants. I generally assume that if no feedback comes, it's well received.

What knowledge was new to you?

The topic that people want to know considerably more about is digitalization. We knew it was a topic, but not that it was the most important one. In further places were citizen participation and the skilled labor shortage. We adjusted the topic planning for next year, explicitly including these three topics because we realized how important they are.

What surprised you about the results?

The importance of the topic of citizen participation. I knew it was a topic. But I didn't think it was so extremely important.

Topics like energy or biodiversity were requested but were rather further back. This ranking is very valuable for us. The results also confirmed our previous strategy, because it's clear that "Schweizer Gemeinde" is diligently read and enjoys high credibility.

You also formulated your own hypotheses. You had to bring those into play at the beginning of this online dialogue. How did your opinions and suggestions for change perform?

Mixed. In assessing the use of channels, they performed quite well. But with topics, there were many suggestions from participants that were ranked better than ours.

What did you specifically decide?

For the 2026 topic planning, we directly incorporated the suggestions. There will be an issue specifically on artificial intelligence – the topic of digitalization – as well as an issue on community life, which also includes citizen participation. And a magazine on the skilled labor shortage.

What conclusion do you draw from this online dialogue?

It worked well for us. Especially in the area of "What topics do people want?" Many people contributed strongly with their own ideas. We were pleased, also when we saw the results.

Why?

On one hand, because it confirmed our current strategy. We're on a good path with what we're doing. On the other hand, we now know where we can improve. The collaboration throughout the entire process and afterwards was also very pleasant and positive. Whenever a question came up or we needed support, there was always a very quick response.

How do you assess the final report you received?

Very positively. We had the most important results at a glance in a summary. If you want, you can also go into great detail. I found that very positive. The report from BrainE4 is simpler than if you have to go through question by question in a classic survey and compile the results. You save a lot of time with BrainE4.

We're talking about the final report. But there was also the possibility to look at interim results constantly. Did you use that?

The online dialogue ran for a good five weeks. I looked in often, especially at the beginning, because I was simply curious and wanted to know what people were doing. I found it exciting to see how opinions developed. Some answers were at the very top at the beginning and slipped down over time.

Who would you recommend BrainE4 to?

I would especially recommend it where it's about collecting ideas or asking for topic requests. So where you're ready for an open question format that allows people to contribute.

2/3

BrainE4 is still new. It probably took some courage for you to use this web app.

We knew that various municipalities had already used BrainE4 and were satisfied. Then it can't be wrong for the municipal association. Furthermore, we viewed the collaboration with BrainE4 as a partnership. Various success stories from the municipalities were published as advertorials in the magazine. It was a win-win situation for everyone involved. We simply thought: "That sounds interesting. Let's try it now." Voilà.

Facts and Contact:

Swiss Association of Municipalities

Number of members: around 1,500 (71% of all municipalities)

Online Dialogue:

7 open questions

512 participants

112 opinions and ideas

14'182 interactions

Editor-in-Chief «Schweizer Gemeinde»:

Nadja Sutter

Phone: 031 380 70 01

Mail: nadja.sutter@chgemeinden.ch