UW Public Participation & Engagement LC

Next Meeting -- August 15th on the Terrace

2011-08-10T07:22:00.000-07:00

Our summer meeting schedule continues... on the Memorial Union Terrace (weather permitting, otherwise go into the Lakefront Cafe)... Monday, 1-3pm per usual. Our last discussion focussed on issues related to public participation in the WI political environment, a promised 'revisit' of this issue six months after things got thoroughly stirred up in our State Capitol. Several excellent points were made by the 8 PPLC members in attendence... here are a few:
* People tend to come out to participate when they feel threatened... it needs to be a shared crisis, it seems, to be a primary motivator for sustained engagement. People would not have come out over the health care provisions of the 'budget repair bill' or most of the other elements, though threatening to their interests. But the collective impact of the threat, most directly felt in the right to organize and bargain across all sectors of public employment, led to this huge response. How do we, as facilitators, tap into such energy and transform it into a constructive force?

* The concept of the 'Network of Criticality,' a small force, properly applied, can cause big changes with a disproportionately small amount of energy expended... We have many people invested in the issues here, with long histories of engagement at very personal levels... but where should the force be best applied? It appears that the Governor's allies have been masters of this approach thus far.

* The dispute has not transformed into meaningful negotiations, it appears, because it has not yet been RIPE to do so... the drama of the political story still needs to play itself out in the Recall process and pending court cases before there is readiness for any effort at a paradigm shift. It also remains questionable whether the Republicans would view it in their interests to negotiate and reach collaborative solutions...

* There is a long history of antagonism here between certain sectors, such as b/w School Boards and teachers unions, so the underlying narrative of the situation varies significantly across WI. Thus, we are not witnessing a muddy middle that looks 'purple' in polling, but a polarized set of core stories with long histories. Rhetoric simplifies the message, and elections thrive on rhetoric. To transform this situation into one of deliberation and engagement requires a willingness to accept that the current system and paradigm are broken... perhaps the national debt debate and debacle can serve as such a driver.

*The Wisconsin Idea is a pwoerful resource for the UW to become engaged as a resource here... either in hosting deliberative processes, cultivating capacity for such dialogues (as we do as PPLC members), or in other vehicles not yet explored. Our group felt this capacity should be tapped, and the 100th anniversary of the WI Idea offers a special opportunity in that regard.

Join us as the conversation continues! See you Monday... or comment here to add to the depth of our insights...

-Harry

Next Public Participation LC Meeting - July 18th on the Terrace

2011-07-13T13:40:00.000-07:00

We are meeting on the Terrace this summer… and it sounds like several of us will be there:

Next meeting is Monday, July 18th, 1-3pm

Focus (anticipated): Follow-up from our February 21st meeting in which we discussed events at the Capitol in light of public participation and engagement challenges (see below for details):

How do we create spaces of engagement and dialogue in the midst of highly polarized debate?
How do we facilitate within such spaces in light of our own biases, responses, and interests in the outcomes?
Are there ways to support constructive dialogue and deliberation outside of the ‘main spaces’ of the formal process (we can look at Track III Diplomacy for some examples here)?

Join us for the discussion! If you can't be there in person, please comment on the Blog!

Harry

Public Participation LC Meeting to Discuss Unfolding Events at Capitol and UW

2011-02-21T07:45:00.000-08:00

*** See Update Below ***
Today's (Feb 21st) meeting of the PPLC will be held at Fair Trade Coffeehouse in order to accomodate competing demands for members' presence in these amazing days in Madison. At the Capitol, a political stalemate over the so-called 'budget repair bill' introduced by Gov. Walker has fomented a significant political action unlike any we have seen in WI since the Vietnam War. Each day, tens of thousands of protesters are peaceably demonstrating their anger and intense frustration with the proposals of this bill, most notably the severe restrictions on future collective bargaining rights of public employees. While the Governor has claimed these changes, along with increased employee contributions to health and retirement benefits are essential for government to function in an economically responsible manner, the concerns of most of the demonstrators are that these changes will leave unchecked workers' rights that have been negotiated over the past 50+ years. There are other, less-publicized aspects to the bill, such as increasing the number of governor-appointed employees, reducing the power of the legislature, significant cuts in Badger Care Medicaid programs, the dissolution of regional mass transit systems, and the likely loss of federal aids to urban mass transit because of the lack of a collective bargaining agreement framework.

There are certainly more details to this situation. One challenge for the PPLC to consider is: What are the underlying needs, interests, and concerns of this crisis? How might they be best addressed? It appears to me that had the Governor merely sought to increase the financial contributions of state workers to their benefit plans, only a modest objection would have been raised. Indeed, both the AFSCME and WEAC leadership have publicly stated they would accept such contributions at this point, and the Democratic State Senators who left the Capitol and shut down the process have stated they would accept those changes as a compromise. The deeper issue, substantively, is clearly the loss of workers' rights to a collective bargaining agreement, and the perception that this is an effort to bust the public unions.

As strong as this issue impresses me, the larger issue I see is that the PROCESS by which all of this was introduced appears to be disingenuine, untrustworthy, incidious in its nature and delivery, and the RELATIONAL aspects of this dispute are filled with rhetoric of disrespect. The people who support this bill also feel angry and frustrated: They voted for Walker in order to bring fiscal responsibility to the Capitol, and they support his efforts to bring public employee benefits more into accord with what they view as fair compensation. They are also angry that the Democrats bolted town, and perceive many demonstrators as being irresponsible and unrealistic in terms of what Wisconsin now needs.

At this point, although the 70,000+ anti-Walker demonstrators on Saturday were tested by some pro-Walker voices, there has been a commitment among the demonstrators to be peacable, and relatively respectful in tone... indeed, the Grassroots Leadership College has taken the lead in organizing training in non-violent communication and resistance, and orange-vested peace marshalls abound in the Capitol rotunda to help maintain that peaceful spirit. However, law enforcement is properly maintaining its presence in channeling energy and intervening at any smaller confrontations that arise. Once the bill's fate is resolved, especially if passed, there is definitely potential for the situation to deteriorate.

At the UW, the Chancellor's proposal to gain greater flexibility and independence from the State has taken on some powerful drama, as faculty, staff, and students are split in their opinions. There is also much not yet known about how the plan will shape up. Once again, while there are substantive issues to consider, there are stronger emotional reactions to the PROCESS by which this plan is being advanced and the perception among some that it is going to have serious repercussions that have not been thoroughly discussed in the campus community. There is also a view that, even if UW-Madison should gain increased self-determination and authority, the consequences for UW System would be negative in ways that don't sit well with many on campus.

Enough from me at this point... I'm just attempting to get a few things out there to frame our discussion. These are 'heady times' with lots to consider on both ends of State Street.

***Updated Feb 24th ***
Ten members of the PPLC met on Monday afternoon and had an excellent conversation regarding the events of the past week (now 11+ days) and the possibilities of instilling some of the principles of facilitated, collaborative, participation and engagement into the efforts to address the political, social, and economic concerns of the Budget Repair Bill impasse. A number of excellent ideas emerged, a few of which I highlight here:
     1. If we can 'hold the space' with a peaceful, facilitative presence in the midst of all of the polarizing animosity, that will be of service to the greater good. Some examples have already been quite present in the Capitol, ranging from many written reminders that "This is a Peaceful Protest" to groundrules for the Gallery to the non-violence training that occurs every night.
     2. While it may not be possible on a large scale, expanding opportunities for "Tea and Coffee Tables" to be present on the Square is a great idea. They are open invitations for dialogue across the political divide and, as has also been stated in the Rotunda, the end of the dispute will not occur with shouting and coercion, but with patient discussion and civil persuasion through insight.
     3. Some creative ways to retain the sense of inter-generational festivity were suggested, including the use of street theatre (how about inviting Madison jugglers, or choreographing a 'red' and 'blue' dance?). While some are portraying the thousands in the crowd as an 'angry mob,' there has actually been very little of this behavior thus far. However, that could change if the bill passes and there is an effort to disburse the crowd.

Any efforts to maintain the true intentions of the citizens expressing their concerns beyond the current debate should also consider meaningful opportunities for participation. The economic impacts of the legislation and the upcoming Budget Bill will be signficant, and a shift in workers' collective bargaining rights will have major influences on our communities. As such, creating opportunities to invite people to discuss these concerns and develop creative, effective responses to them may be one of the core opportunities of the Public Participation Learning Community.

Further comments are invited...

The Scarlet X

2010-12-20T19:15:00.000-08:00

The Task

Think of an extremist...what are the top three things that come to mind.
Ok, now a moderate...what comes to mind?

Now that you have done that, think about each of the following people, how would you characterize each of them, as an “extremist” or a “moderate”?

Frida Kahlo

Glenn Beck
Geronimo
Rosa Parks
Sarah Palin
Emma Goldman
Mahatma Gandhi
Nelson Mandela
MalcomX

Hmmm, does that make you want to change your answers to the first questions?

Is "extremist" just a label or a stereotype?

Does history change the evaluation of an extremists?
And perhaps most importantly, can we separate extreme ideas from extreme behaviors?

That’s how we began what became an excellent discussion at today’s Public Participation Learning Community meeting.

Our wide-ranging discussion touched on the following points:

The Diagnosis
When we call someone an extremist, might that tell us more about us than it does them? Is it just a response to the discomfort we are feeling? Are we just reacting to a difference between their world view and ours? Perhaps we are being overly diagnostic. And, does attaching that label to someone affect our own ability to work with them? Do we sometimes not let the extremists talk because their views are too different from our own? We live in a society that is very quick to judge and is often intolerant of things that make us uncomfortable. Things that threaten our worldview are “not normal.”

The Behaviors or the Ideas
Can we separate the behaviors of people from the ideas they are proposing? Is someone an extremist because they are proposing radical ideas that fundamentally rather than incrementally change the system? Sometimes those we might label as extremists are pioneers, innovators, first movers, who see something clearly that most of us aren’t seeing. They may be people who are willing to fail, they may be willing to leave people behind, and we might even think this is OK unless we have an attachment or a stake in their failure.

To Negotiate or Not to Negotiate?

Are there times when we shouldn’t be seeking consensus from a group? The example of the mediator's joke that had a mediator been on the bus with Rosa Parks it might have set back the civil rights movement by 20 years. So, if a negotiation isn’t always appropriate what kind of moral obligation does this place on a facilitator? Facilitators need to guard themselves with great vigilance so that their own discomfort doesn’t cause them to “abandon the richness of disagreement.” We must be vigilant against “the worst kind of consensus, the tyranny of mediocrity” where a consensus is foisted upon us by exhaustion or alleged deadlines.

Shopping for Extremists?

When we think of group processes, are there times when the extremist point of view is the most helpful? Maybe we should make sure the extremists have a voice at the beginning during the framing of the issue/problem. Maybe we should even "shop" for certain viewpoints to make sure they are a part of the discussion. But if someone is given the label of extremist--the big scarlet X--will they be able to help shape the discussion?

The Scarlet X

Once you are labelled an extremist it often doesn’t matter what you say anymore. It can feel quite horrible to wear the scarlet X, and we should have compassion for those who do. Presenting an extremist view point can be a courageous act. As a facilitator you should ask yourself: “Am I creating a space for courageous acts and if I am not, then what the hell am I afraid of?” The discomfort an extremist can invoke in the group can be a service to the group. Groups with a devil's advocate come up with much better solutions to the problems they attempt to solve.

Sanctuary
How do we create a safe space for courageous acts?
Start with shared values and move on from there. Make the distinction between accepted wisdom and common sense (see Sustainable Capitalism). Let people know they will feel some discomfort. Create Sanctuary. Create art spaces that catalyze a conversation--art has the capacity to help us create spaces to let go of our preconceived ideas. Remember that while some people are looking for quick answers, a lot of us are looking for more deliberative answers and that requires slowness.

----

There were many more wonderful points made in the discussion, so those of you who were a part of it, what parts did I miss? And of course, those of you who missed it, please let us know what you think!

Jury and Democracy

2010-12-07T11:17:00.000-08:00

The Jury and Democracy Project blog provides great discussions, ideas, and resources regarding Juries and collaboarative processes. They have even discussed the idea of a Jury training program! Check it out.

"The Jury and Democracy Project aims to understand the impact that jury service has on citizens. Too often, people think of the jury as nothing more than a means of reaching verdicts. In fact, serving on a jury can change how citizens think of themselves and their society. Our purpose is to study those changes."

Collective Impact

2010-11-24T14:36:00.000-08:00

This seems like something we could talk about someday.

Collective Impact

Links to Documents

2010-11-23T09:49:00.000-08:00

Public Participators:
Here are "clickable" links to the documents posted by Deb.

Cognitive Edge, Ritual Dissent-assent: http://www.scribd.com/full/43759835?access_key=key-1opiyfw1ucc14ssgf0es

Consensus Building Tools: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760613?access_key=key-buarvmj66w84parbr08

Blake and Moulton's Conflict Grid: http://www.scribd.com/full/43760618?access_key=key-l7c9f58dpfvzabe9upl

Thanks!

Cognitive Edge

2010-11-19T19:07:00.000-08:00

Consensus Building Tools

2010-11-19T19:04:00.000-08:00

Blake and Moulton's Conflict Grid

2010-11-19T18:55:00.000-08:00

Invitations. 11.15.10

2010-11-16T09:10:00.000-08:00

Peter Block's book, Community: The Structure of Belonging was the inspiration for today's conversation.
After check in, Sue and Sheila started us off with the following question: What excites you about being here? The responses were quite inspiring:

Reenergizing
Learning something new
Always a strong sense of support
Connection with the group
Some validation of what I do know and practice for what I don't
Courage to go out and try it
The space and safety to experiment--connect to possibility
Stimulating and energizing

From here we focused on the idea of Invitation as Block imagines it. At this point, Harry described his experience and the effect music had on his thinking as he sat in a coffee shop while Bach was playing. Harry felt that music could be part of the invitation. Mark described a grad school experience where food played an important part of the invitation, creating an environment for conversation.

Block describes possibility as what we have come together to create. It is future oriented. Declaring something as possibility is the first step in making it happen.

Jay prefers the term engage rather than participate as it involves thought and talking about possibility, not getting lectured at or listening to the expert tell us what we should be thinking; instead, getting to generative dialogue.

Creating a cradle for dialogue: the irony is that more structure on the front end allows for creativity and generative dialogue; important to recognize and hold on to the tension found in these two opposites.

When facilitating a group, remember the following: Plan well and play loose.

How do we balance opportunities for things like the PPLC and all of the other things people need to do? Is it sustainable?

Block's view on sustainability: what can I do; what do I commit to regarding the possibility we can together talk about. The group consensus: we live and reaffirm the list at the beginning of this post every time we come together. We are being the future we would like to see.

Mark quoted a poem with a line that was meaningful to him: Peace is this moment without judgment, that is all.

Cassandra thought the group was sustainable as we use it to invite others who have similar interests. She thought it was like a pyramid scheme; others thought it was more organic, like an algae bloom, viral.

This group is an antidote for the dysfunctional politics that exist today. See The Politics of Meaning by Michael Lerner.

Melissa stated that she felt there is an abundant quality to this group.

The question was posed: Why do people come? Is it dependent on the schedule or topic-driven? Some come when they can, given their schedules. One comment (sorry, I don't know who said this: I come because I have a tremendous confidence that I will get something from this group). We need to remember that the list generated at the beginning of the meeting includes the core of why people are coming to these meetings.

We are going to use the blog to create an artifact that validates the value of this group.

We need to determine a process for generating paper handouts. Should presenter assume to bring them? Or should participants take responsibility for bringing their own copies?

For a future agenda: complete StrengthsFinder, a tool that can be used to help us uncover our talents.

o Engaged Participators

From Sheila Spear and Sue Robbins

At the PPLC meeting on November 15th we plan to use Peter Block’s advice to see if we can develop an invitation to join the Public Participation Learning Community that is so compelling that people will engage and participate actively. (See attachment; also below).

We hope you will come to share your sense of interest in this group and engage in developing its possibility.

The attachment has definitions we plan to use in this session. Please review it and bring a copy with you.

If you are interested but cannot attend this session, do let us know by responding to sspear@wisc.edu to share any thoughts you have on the topic.

Public Participation Learning Community

1 pm, November 15^th 2010, Memorial Union (TITU)

Handout for our discussion on Structuring the Invitation

Source: Peter Block: Community – the structure of belonging

A. THE INVITATION (p. 113 and elsewhere)

The first critical question is who do we need in the room. But we (Sue, Sheila) are setting aside for now the issue of whom we want to be in the room.

The invitation is the first step in creating an accountable and hospitable community. It is the means through which hospitality is created. (The need for invitation arises because we don’t just ‘run into each other’).
Invitation counters the conventional belief that change requires mandate or persuasion.
Invitation honors the importance of choice, the necessary condition for accountability.
An invitation is more than just a request to attend; it is a call to create an alternative future, to join in the possibility* we have declared.
The question is: “What is the invitation we can make for people to participate in creating a future distinct from the past?”
P 118: There are certain properties of invitation that can make it more than simply a request.
(the hurdle) – to make even the act of invitation an example of the interdependence we want to experience. So the invitation is a request not only to show up but to engage. “We want you to come, but if you do we want you to do something.”

The elements of the invitation are: (p 119)

Name the possibility about which we are convening.
Frame the choice
Name the hurdle: specify what is required of each person should they choose to attend.
Reinforce the invitation but be clear that not attending does not carry a cost
Decide on the most personal form.

POSSIBILITY

The power of possibility as used here is distinguished from words like vision, goals, purpose.

A possibility is a declaration of a condition or value that we want to occur in the world.

A possibility is created in the act of declaring it, what we create when we show up.

Possibility is a statement of a future condition that is beyond reach. It works on us (we don’t have to work at it) and evolves from a discussion of a personal crossroads (I don’t quite get that bit). It is an act of imagination of what we can create together and it takes the form of a declaration, best made publicly.

The possibility is one way of speaking of the future. Declaring the possibility can itself be the transformation. Postpone problem-solving and stay focused on possibility. Once we have fully declared in it works on us.

You might also want to read “The Possibility conversation” pp125-7

Innovation Café Focuses on "Technology & Community" on November 11th

2010-11-02T12:40:00.000-07:00

Innovation and Collaboration Café: Technology & Community

Thursday, November 11, 8:30am-1:00pm, Pyle Center, $15

Join us at our next MANIAC Innovation Café!

This is an opportunity to explore a variety of technology tools and how they may be used to enhance innovation and collaboration in the workplace. The workshop will help participants recognize opportunities for technology tools in their workplace and projects; demonstrate the basics of web site design, social media (facebook/ twitter), blogs, surveys, and video conferencing; showcase good examples of technology use; and provide helpdesk support for real world technology questions. Register here! Or go to www.ohrd.wisc.edu, look for upcoming events.

You have MANIAC potential! Hope you can join us!

Leveraging the Power of Public Participation

2010-10-26T10:09:00.000-07:00

I came across an excellent blog post the other day about a city government IT makeover. What is most striking is the ingenious way this vision takes advantage of a community's greatest resource, the people! I have pasted the first few paragraphs below, please click on the link to read the post:

http://govfresh.com/2010/10/gov-2-0-guide-to-a-city-makeover/

Gov 2.0 Guide To A City Makeover
My name is Dustin Haisler and I’m the Assistant City Manager and Chief Information Officer (CIO) for the City of Manor, Texas. Manor is a small community, located just east of Austin, of approximately 6,500 citizens. More recently, Manor has received a lot press for some of our innovative projects; such as our QR-code program,citizen idea portal, and pothole reporting system. In fact, we are in such a state of continuous improvement that we even added the word ‘beta’ to our city logo.

Over the past year, it’s been my pleasure to be one of the many evangelists of these new citizen-empowering technologies for government agencies across the country. In the process, I’ve realized that there are many bureaucratic constraints, fears and misunderstandings about how these technologies fit within municipal government. Further, I understand that type of innovation within government is sometimes seen as a risky concept; however, I would argue there is a science to what we do in Manor that can and should be replicated by other municipalities.

So let me brake down what we’ve done by starting at the beginning. Continue reading...

"Leadership" in Engagement/Transformation?

2010-09-21T13:19:00.000-07:00

Great discussion yesterday around helping Deb engage school board members, in a short period of time, around the issue of educational reform. A word that kept being bandied about, and seemed central to the discussion (and plans) was "leadership." Yet, we did NOT make the time to talk about how leadership is/might be perceived with this group (or our group, for that matter).

As I reflected on the discussion it occured to me that one "definition" of leadership (or maybe better stated as one aspect of leadership in this area) would be facilitating the conversation between the stakeholders in the reform/transformation itself. Being a BIG believer in solutions from within (makes the whole issue of "buy in" completely absolete!) I do believe this to be one of the primary roles of leadership. Peter Block, who came up, again, in our dialog yesterday, agrees, stating that the two questions to keep in mind are always "How do we choose to come together?" and "What do we want to create together?"

Final reflection - true, sustainable change (read transformation, if you want) is an ongoing process. It is NOT wholesale change, it is not finding the "silver bullet." Acceptance of this very concept is a primary step in helping people see that change, positive change towards the world we collectively would like to see, is possible and that they (the community or any human system, from 1,000's down to the individual) can make it happen. Helping people come to this realization, in today's world of the "instant solution" is an ongoing challenge!

Introduction to Participation and Engagement Course Offered Again this Fall

2010-08-31T11:24:00.000-07:00

For those seeking to learn more about the convening, design, and facilitation of participatory engagement processes, they are invited to take the free course we offer each fall through OHRD. The "Introduction to Participation and Engagement Processes" course provides a solid foundation for bringing together multiple stakeholder groups of various sizes and contexts to engage in collaborative deliberation regarding a wide range of issues. Registration information may be found at:

https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/OHRDCatalogPortal/Default.aspx?tabid=29&CourseGroupKey=26287

Although the course is primarily intended for University of Wisconsin-Madison staff and faculty, students and members of the community are welcome to attend. For those interested in the "Fully Prepared to Engage" Certificate Program, this course serves as the "Level 1" point of entry into the program, as well as excellent background for participation in the Public Participation Learning Community that meets each month, or any of our other communities of practice.

Please check with me with any questions at hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu or 608-262-9934.

-Harry

Consensual Process -- Training for Juries and Other Deliberative Groups?

2010-07-20T07:19:00.000-07:00

The Public Participation Learning Community has engaged in a series of fascinating discussions regarding consensus, dissent, and how to facilitative collaborative process. This included a viewing of the classic film, "12 Angry Men" at our May meeting, which led to the question, "Would there be value in offering brief training to juries around collaborative group process before they began deliberation?"

As we engaged in the June discussion, we broadened the conversation to include other types of groups, depending upon (a) their length of time together, (b) their level of transparency in process, and (c) the formality of their decision-making process. At yesterday's meeting, we continued to explore the value of this training in various contexts, likely sources of resistance and what they mean, and the continued application of such training for capacity building (in organizations and across citizenry) for student leaders, as well as those in workplace, organizational, and public policy leadership roles. At next month's meeting on August 23rd, 1-3pm at the Union, we will more specifically discuss the components of such training: What is needed? How should it be taught? How might content and process be varied to accommodate for different contexts?

You are invited to comment on this topic, offer any resources that may be helpful in understanding what has been done thus far, and (as possible) to join us in the discussion! Some additional notes from our June discussion are included below, as well.

Harry
__________________________
Public Participation Learning Community – Focus on Training in Consensual Group Process for a Variety of Deliberative Bodies (Draft, June 2010)

At our June meeting, we identified a matrix of variables to consider in developing the most effective tools and strategies for helping group members learn effective consensual processes. We thought that if we distinguish among these types of contexts and applications, it may help us arrive at more specific suggestions to offer. We identified three key variables:

(1) Length of time the group is constituted

(2) The degree of transparency in their deliberations

(3) The expected decision-making (DM) protocol

Short-term
(e.g., Jury, Project Team) Medium-term
(e.g., Task Force, ad hoc Committee) Long-term
(e.g., School Board, City Council, Standing Committee)

Private
(e.g., Jury, Senior Management Team) Semi-public/ Somewhat transparent
(e.g., School Board in ‘executive session’) Public/Transparent
(e.g., open meetings, forums)

Majority Rule (Likely using Robert’s Rules) DM
(e.g., City Council, School Board) Consensual Approaches with Majority Vote ‘Default’
(e.g., Many Task Forces and Committees) Consensus DM
(e.g., some staff teams and committees, Coops; Quaker Meeting, Swiss Legislature)

The core elements we think need to be understood in all cases include:

• Communication Skills (both assertion and listening) that are consistent with inquiry, dialogue, and problem-solving based upon a mutual understanding of members’ perspectives

• Negotiation Skills that emphasize interest-based approaches to conflict management and solution seeking

• Creative thinking and problem-solving, including processes that appreciatively invite divergent thinking and welcoming innovative perspectives on issues, the testing of potential solutions and convergence around solutions in a manner that is connected to transparently articulated criteria.

• Facilitative Leadership, both in formal ‘Chair’ functions and embodied in members, so that a safe, constructive working environment is present that cultivates respectful application of the above skills and practices. The group facilitator needs to help the group fulfill its charge within its scope and parameters (often legal), in a manner that is both efficient in use of resources and effective in bringing forth the best participation of the group members.

There are likely additional elements that are required, though they appear to be more appropriate in some circumstances than in others. For example, school boards need to be educated regarding legal obligations, funding streams, collective bargaining agreements, and other specific information that would be quite different from a jury. However, a jury needs to understand its charge under the law, the admissibility of certain evidence (or not), and the specific consequences of lack of consensus.

-- Harry W-B

The Challenges of Seeking Consensus

2010-03-26T06:22:00.000-07:00

Over the past three months, the Public Participation Learning Community has been exploring the challenges of consensus, as well as resources for being able to achieve it in various participatory processes. We've explored polling tools, to take the 'temperature' of the group at any given point in time without it being 'voting' with an implication of decision-making momentum, and we've examined the curcumstances where really taking the time to achieve a consensus decison makes sense.

The key, from my perspective, is to approach consensus-seeking in the context of a respectful, genuinely collaborative effort to meld interests and seek solutions in which all are free to express dissent, reservations, and questions. The worst types of results are those that emerge from the 'tyranny of mediocrity,' that exhaustive point in group process where people simply no longer have energy to explore the "groan zone" and accomodate the powerful in order to save face, avoid conflict, or otherwise close the conversation. Consensus must truly be a way towards insight and improved solutions that consider the diverse perspectives and needs of stakeholders (both represented at the table direectly and otherwise considered). I'm excited that the group will now be turning its attention to the challenge of integrating the expression of dissent into our processes, whether for use in consensus deliberations or those that make decisions in other ways.

I invite PPLC members and others to offer comments on our learning these past few months, as well as to post resources we have uncovered for ths work.

-Harry

Center for Positive Organizational Change

2009-11-23T04:29:00.000-08:00

I first heard Dan Mulhern speak about a year ago. He talks about everyday leadership. One of my favorite lines from his talk was "putting energy on the grid."

He has a weekly e-mail that often includes amazing insights and cool tools. This week he talked about the Center for Positive Organizational Change at the University of Michigan.

Thought you all would find this intriguing.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Deb

AmericaSpeaks Issues New Impact Video

2009-10-29T08:35:00.000-07:00

I was pleased to see AmericaSpeaks has now issued an updated video that promotes their approach, using recent examples of their efforts to illustrate the power of their participation model. This could be a useful way to quickly convey the value of public participation.

However, my sense is that this is a video that is more useful to the 'choir,' folks like us who already 'get the value' in this approach, and that it may have less impact on those with limited knowledge of public participation processes. If used in combination with their previous piece on "Citizen Engagement in Governance", I expect we could provide useful information to policy-makers and other leaders (both public and private) who are considering participatory engagement processes. The previous video, which runs a bit longer, provides depth regarding the elements of their approach and the values that are embedded in their design... the marketing piece really doesn't give us much of this substance, only that it has been effective in the eyes of diverse policy leaders.

Thoughts? Other resources for fairly promoting engagement processes are also appreciated.

World Café - Seven Design Principles

2009-10-06T10:22:00.000-07:00

This simple presentation by Samantha Tan conveys the seven core design principles behind a successful World Café process. We ought to be able to incorporate such ideas into many of our learning and decision-making events, shouldn't we? Where do you see opportunties in your work around engagement? What are some challenges that make it difficult to implement?

-Harry

"traditional expectations of a public hearing"

2009-09-30T11:11:00.000-07:00

This morning I read an article mentioned in a local blog. An excerpt from the actual article is pasted below. It seems that the DOT, for whatever reason, used what they called an 'open house' instead of a public hearing. I am not sure I would have used the term 'open house' to describe their method for collecting public input, but apparently they chose to only collect public comments in writing or dictated to a court reporter. The two arguments made against this method was that public comments weren't made in the presence of the public, and they weren't made directly to decision-makers.

The DOT method described does have one benefit to the public, that of being able to make comments when convenient, not necessarily when someone else has scheduled a meeting. But most public hearings provide that opportunity already by allowing for written comments. So, it sounds like the DOT thought they could just replace the hearing part of a public hearing with dictations made to a court reporter.

I am surprised that the DOT would think they could use a method which is clearly worse than a public hearing (Before this, I would have had a hard time coming up with something worse than a public hearing!). Of course the public comments should be public. It would also be pretty tough to argue that public comments are being taken seriously when the comments aren't made directly to decision-makers. (I can't even begin to say anything about the DOT guy's town hall comment.)

What bothers me the most about all is that the situation is causing the public hearing to be held up as the ideal for public participation despite the fact that we have come so far in developing much more participatory methods. We should be moving forward not backward when it comes to public participation.

Article Excerpt:

Public Hearings That Actually Include the Public

But Gonyo said the biggest victory came from Adelman’s finding that the DOT’s “open house” format doesn’t match “traditional expectations” of a public hearing.

“The format that WisDOT used did not permit members of the public to publicly express their views directly to WisDOT representatives or to other members of the public,” Adelman wrote. Instead, residents could “either dictate their comments in private to a court reporter or complete written comment forms.”

DOT’s Jambois said that “open houses actually provide a more welcoming way for the public to state their views,” especially when compared to this summer’s Town Hall meetings on health care. He said open houses are used across the country because they comply with Federal Highway Administration guidelines for public hearings.

Barr, the plaintiff’s attorney, said that the court should determine the definition of an adequate public hearing. “Just because the agency publishes guidelines for itself does not mean that those guidelines are legally adequate,” Barr said.

Deliberative Polling - An Alternative to Town Hall Meetings

2009-08-21T13:42:00.000-07:00

This past Sunday's NY Times features an Op Ed titled, "Town Halls by Invitation," from James Fishkin, Director of the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University. He bemoans the recent 'town hall meetings' over health care reform legislation, and their carnage for those of us seeking full engagement in participatory democracy. His proposal for deliberative polling represents an intriguing alternative for us to consider. The Stanford Center has been involved in a wide range of deliberative polling experiments over the years, with excellent results. Citizens participate in a much more informed, less polarized manner, and politicians get engaged input from a more representative sample of constituents.

In our recent Learning Community meeting, we wondered whether citizens might be engaged in the participatory process other than as crisis response; this approach may offer an important pathway towards such engagement.

-Harry

2009-08-12T10:16:00.000-07:00

Hello fellow public participators,

I am asking for your help. I have a school district that seems ripe for some effective public participation activity. There is an element of the community that has never felt a part of the district (this goes back to the 1960s when this community first joined the district). This spring the board decided to close the elementary school in this district (the reasons don't really matter at this point). In response, this community is working to detach from the district and is attempting to become part of a different district.

There are community and board members who still harbor feelings from the 1960s decision. And some think there was an agreement made that the community elementary school would never be closed (though no documentation of this decision can be found--seems to be one of those "gentlemen's agreements if it does indeed exist at all).

In addition, there has been high turnover in the superintendent over the few years. There has been four in the last five years.

I would like to help the board and district with this issue and would like to know what you all might suggest. I have no firm ideas at this point, but I do think some kind of community dialogue need to occur.

2009-07-09T14:00:00.000-07:00

A recent article in the New York Times had a great quote in it. The article looks at twitter and its use in churches. One of the churches in the article, Trinity Church in Manhattan, opened up their Good Friday service to twitter, and displayed the twitter messages live during the service. As it happened, there was some ‘mischief’:

“The trouble began in the second hour.

Twitter’s interactivity — its essence — made it easy for an anonymous text-messager to insert an unscripted character into the Passion play: a Roman guard who breezily claimed, “I’ve got dibs on his robe.” When another texter introduced a rogue Mary Magdalene, the intrusion only confirmed the obvious: Twitter’s trademark limit of 140 characters per message is no bar against crudity.”

Here is the church’s excellent response:

“If someone chooses to interact with us mischievously, that’s fine,” said the Rev. Canon Anne Mallonee, the church vicar. “The opposite of engagement is not mischief, but apathy.”

What a great answer.

Open Government Initiative Seeks Input

2009-05-26T14:31:00.000-07:00

The Obama Administration is seeking widespread input regarding the best ways to implement the Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government that the President issued in Jan 2009. The Open Government Initiative is collecting dozens of ideas, several of which have bene put forth by organizations such as AmericaSpeaks, National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation, IAP2, World Café, and others who have been deeply involved in public participation initiatives. You can participate directly in this important activity: http://opengov.ideascale.com/

If you visit the sites of the organizations identified above, they will suggest specific initiatives that may be worthy of your consideration. AmericaSpeaks has a particularly comprehensive list, but there are LOTS of great ideas being generated -- check them out!

-Harry

Progress on Federal Government Efforts in Public Participation

2009-04-30T06:45:00.000-07:00

This week's newsletter from Carolyn Lewkensmeyer at AmericaSpeaks highlights some exciting developments! Take a look... perhaps they can inform our next discussions on the "Seven Core Principles of Participation", as well as other conversations.

-Harry

Community Engagement and Public Education

2009-04-08T16:19:00.000-07:00

Hello all,

Yesterday I returned from the National School Board Association's annual meeting in San Diego. My heart was warmed (not by the weather, great as it was) by the large number of presentations related to community engagement. In all, 44 sessions touched on some aspect of community engagement. Some talked about World Cafe and study circles. Others focused on powerful questions and forward focus.

Here in Wisconsin I am working with a district that is reworking its mission statement for the 21st century and is using World Cafe and some really cool work from the KnowledgeWorks Foundation. I will post more on this as the process moves on.

In Minnesota, I am working with the group that planned and presented the community engagement session at the Minnesota School Board Association's annual meeting in January. We are planning a follow-up session for their August meeting.

So, good stuff is springing up all over (sorry, couldn't pass up the pun).

Reframing Public Participation

2009-04-02T12:23:00.000-07:00

I hate to bump Harry's inspiring post, but someone has to eventually, right?

I came across a really interesting article written by Judith Innes, UC Berkeley, and David Booher, California State University. The title is "Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century" It is not only an interesting critique of currently mandated participation methods but offers suggestions for improvement. Here is a link to the article:

http://www.csus.edu/ccp/publications/Reframing_Public_Participation_Final.pdf

I think you will enjoy it!

Public Engagement in the Torah

2009-03-11T12:13:00.000-07:00

I was recently reminded at synagogue that the concept of public participation and engagement is an ancient one. These remarks, recently shared by Rabbi Laurie Zimmerman at Congregation Sh'aarei Sh'mayim in Madison, but originally crafted by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of Great Britain in 2005, get at the importance of participation as a full spiritual exercise that awakens a community to its shared responsibilities together:

(It is time for Britons to pitch their tabernacleCREDO - THE TIMES - MARCH 2005)
It is time for Britons to pitch their tabernacle
THERE has been much debate in recent months about Britain as a multicultural society. The head of the Commission for Racial Equality has argued that we have gone too far. We need now to reaffirm a national identity -inclusive of all groups, to be sure, but British, not just a cacophony of different voices. He is right.
Our once monochrome society has been hugely enriched by Britain's new religious and ethnic minorities: Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain, Zoroastrian and Baha'i. Most of them want nothing more than to integrate into British society.
That is why they came here. But what are they supposed to integrate into? A culture of moral relativism and disrespect for traditions of all kinds? How are they to admire Britain's institutions -politicians, Parliament, the Royal Family, the established Church -when they see them treated with disdain by the British media? How can you love a society that has fallen out of love with itself?
My parents wanted to be British. They wanted us to absorb British values and make them our own. Jews sought to contribute to British society -and they did. That did not mean they wanted no longer to be Jewish. Quite the contrary. Indeed, the greatness of Britain in those days was that it was not an either/or choice.
Already in 1884 The Times published a leader in praise of the great Victorian-Jewish philanthropist Sir Moses Montefiore. It ended by noting that he had shown that "fervent Judaism and patriotic citizenship are absolutely compatible with one another".
Victorian Britain, seen today as a bastion of high-minded hypocrisy, was actually open to outsiders. Those who know who they are, welcome the stranger. Those who don't, become insular and insecure. "Love your neighbour as yourself" presupposes that you love yourself. If you don't, you won't love others either.
The Bible is eloquent on the subject -36 times the Mosaic books command us to love the stranger. At the same time, Moses endlessly instructs his people never to forget their history. That is what we do on Passover and in all our prayers. We endlessly remind ourselves of who we are and why. Identity is like a home. If you feel safe, you offer hospitality to others. If you are afraid, you keep the doors locked. Only a confident society is an inclusive society.
Moses was faced with a problem not unlike ours. How do you turn a group of people -in his case, liberated slaves -into a nation with a collective identity? His answer -God's answer -was dazzling in its brilliance. You get them to build something together. What they built was the Tabernacle, a portable sanctuary.
Normally when we read this story (told in the book of Exodus) we think of its religious dimension: how you build a home for God. But it also has a political dimension. It is about how you create a sense of national belonging. The best way of making people feel "I belong" is to enlist them in a shared project so they can say: "I helped build this".
The Tabernacle is a symbol of society, made out of the contributions of many individuals. What they gave was unimportant; that they gave was essential. Society is what we build together -and the more different types of people there are, the more complex and beautiful will be the structure we create. A national culture can grow without losing its identity, just as an ancient building -Windsor Castle, for example -can be enlarged by additions made in different ages, different styles. It changes, but stays the same. It is always Windsor Castle -not a supermarket or an office block.
The important thing is that we build together. A nation is made by contributions, not claims; active citizenship, not rights; what we give, not what we demand.
Britain can become a country in which many ethnic minorities feel at home - without making Middle England feel that they no longer recognise the place where they were born. A national identity can be made out of the contributions of many cultures, many faiths. What matters is that together we build something none of us could make alone.

As these Rabbis observe, the important thing is that we build together -- this is the essence of public engagement: Sure, there may be times that solutions can be reached more efficiently and less expensively in the near term by more unilateral, closed processes. But the act of building together creates a legitimate sense of ownership and relationship to the creation that enhances its sustainability and squarely invests each 'builder' as a stakeholder in the ultimate success of the venture. This is an important point that many in public agencies and institutions don't appreciate... by holding their power close to the vest, by making it less than transparent, we hoard that power to our own detriment.

It is also essential to integrate the lesson that the only safe society is an inclusive society, and that through this safety and inclusiveness we become confident in a legitimate manner. We tend to invest in so-called 'security' in this society, pushing others into positions of desperation as we grasp to the illusion of power. Only by engaging with the 'other' can we better appreciate who we are and what we all have in common. Then, through such hospitality, we can invite others to share the joyous burden of building community institutions and 'tabernacles' together.

While I hadn't expected to leave services with a Blog entry, I was pleasantly surprised... I hope you find it worth the read!

Harry

WASB puts Community Engagement on the Web

2009-03-01T14:43:00.001-08:00

The Wisconsin Association of School Boards has created a spot on its web site for its members to gather resources on community engagement. Included is a link to an article published in the Minnesota School Board Association's magazine that is sent to all of its members.

MSBA article on Community Engagement Preconference

The Dark Side of Public Participation?

2009-02-27T09:39:00.000-08:00

The ethics of participatory mapping is once again a frequent topic on list serves, with accusations that a current participatory mapping project in Mexico is unethical, what do you think?

http://blogs.bootsnall.com/nomads/a-protest-of-another-kind-in-oaxaca.html

Imagine Chicago Workshops

2009-02-18T11:58:00.000-08:00

Hello Again,

I have never been able to afford them, but if you got the money I am betting any of these workshops will be more than worth your time (see below). IF you are not familiar with the incredible story of Imagine Chicago go to their web site or visit the Appreciative Inquiry Commons and read about this remarkable community development/engagement project!

Shared in the hope that someday we can all wallow in the knowledge one of us gained at one of these... Thanks for listening!

Imagine Chicago is pleased to announce some special training opportunities this spring starting in March.

I will be offering a series of 3 day masterclasses this spring entitled Transforming Community Imagination; a brochure and full description of which is attached (not avail on blog...).

March 12-14 Frameworks for Inspiring Community Engagement
Bliss Browne
March 19-21 Building on Community Strengths: AI and ABCD in Dialogue Bliss Browne & Jody Kretzmann
April 27-29 Building on Community Strengths: AI and ABCD in Dialogue
Bliss Browne & Jody Kretzmann
May 12-14 Transforming Imagination about Community
Bliss Browne & Andries Botha

These highly interactive capacity building courses are devoted to the theory, skills, mindsets and tools to activate imagination and transform communities. It is a great pleasure to be able to teach them with 2 incomparable leaders in the field. Jody Kretzmann is the pioneer of Asset Based Community Development. We have been friends for 30 years but are teaming up to teach together for the first time since our approaches are so complementary. It's an amazing opportunity for anyone interested in an immersion course in strength-based community development. In May, I am devoting attention to imagination itself, teaming up with Andries Botha, one of South Africa's leading artists and social innovators and a 30 year teacher of creativity.

As some of you know, Imagine Chicago is about to launch a comprehensive new website which will be a treasure chest of freely downloadable materials. I have spent two months working full time on producing them as a Valentine's present to the world. It;s been a much more massive undertaking than I envisaged. In the process I have rediscovered thousands of pages of curriculum materials, and AI protocols and agendas which I developed for use in community, youth and school applications .

I would love for them to be useful to others. I am therefore also launching this spring a series of one day hands-on skill building workshops in which participants will learn to understand, use and apply Imagine Chicagobs curriculum frameworks and tools, and the design principles behind them. Each workshop will focus on a particular set of applications. Cost includes training materials with permission to adapt them for use in other settings. Each relates directly to major Imagine Chicago proven program initiative.

One Day Skill Building Workshops Spring 2009
March 2 Listening to the Future: Engaging the Next Generation
in Appreciative Inquiry Bliss Browne
March 16 The Art of the Question
Bliss Browne
March 27 Creative Activities for Community Engagement
Bliss Browne
May 4 Strengthening School Community Partnerships
Bliss Browne
May 5 Empowering Citizen Leadership
Bliss Browne
May 6 Renewing the Heart of Teaching
Bliss Browne

Substantial early bird discounts for all courses apply only until February 28. Space will be limited to 15 participants. So if you know you are interested, I encourage you to register early!!
Online registration will be available on the brand new Imagine Chicago website (http://www.blogger.com/www.imaginechicago.org) when it is launched later this week, hopefully by February 18. Feel free to send me an email before that if you want to jump the gun :)

Pondering the "I am" Question

2009-02-18T11:43:00.000-08:00

Hazel's discussion of the power of the "I am" question at our meeting earlier this week brought Martin Buber flooding back into my head. Among other things (jewish), Buber wrote extensively on the nature of human dialog.

His theory, in short summation, cut right to the individual word, each one, we say. He said that each of our words is either an i-you word or an i-it word. If our words are i-you (truely respecting and respectful of the other) then we can achieve dialog. If our words are i-it (seeing the other as an object not fully human) then dialog is not possible.

It strikes me that the "I am" question, put forth in the proper setting and with the correct motivation (that "cradle" for dialog that I mentioned in our meeting), is an "i-you" question.

Voting the "public" off the island...

2009-02-18T10:29:00.000-08:00

I just read an interesting article by Marten Scheffer and Frances Westley. It is from 2007 so some of you may have already read it. Here is a link: The Evolutionary Basis of Rigidity: Locks in Cells, Minds and Society

They make a number of important points, but the part I keep coming back to is their discussion about a study (Boulding 1964), in which groups who had a "devil's advocate" among their members consistently outperformed groups that didn't when solving complex problems. BUT, the "devil's advocate" was always the first person eliminated when the groups were asked to vote one person out of their group.

So, what does this mean for us public participaters...

ThemeSeekr as Public Engagement Software

2009-02-11T11:13:00.000-08:00

UW graduate student Erik Andrejko has gotten some much-deserved publicity for his innovative ThemeSeekr software. This program was developed in response to the UW Accreditation Project's significant success in eliciting tens of thousands of suggestions during its process... they needed a way to manage, track, and sort the information, so Erik wrote the software. Now, it appears to be getting used in a variety of contexts, including a project with (our own) Deb Gurke and the Wisconsin Association of School Boards. As Erik put it in the interview:

“I think of this as public engagement software. As people participate in the collaborative process, they get unique insights into the data, rather than a computer telling you what the data says. A lot of things would be lost without the human interaction with this product.”

Let's keep that cross-fertilization going, folks!
Harry

MN/ WI Schools Collaboration

2009-01-26T07:47:00.000-08:00

Deb Gurke recently participated in an excellent collaboration between Minnesota and Wisconsin school adminsitrators, involving 125 educators, parents and others. The resulting resource page is quite impressive! Check it out: http://www.mnasa.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2009/01/17/4970f42790464?in_archive=1

Harry

UW Public Participation Learning Community

2009-01-06T10:56:00.000-08:00

The UW-Madison Public Participation Learning Community meets monthly on the 3rd Monday of the month, 2:30-4:30 pm, at Memorial Union (check TITU for exact room location). Each month, the group shares strategies and resources together, including advice on projects that members are undertaking in their work on campus and in the community.

On January 26th (note date change this month), we will continue our conversation with Donna Cole regarding the new "Center for Creating a Healthy Mind" being developed on the UW campus.

For additional information, contact Harry Webne-Behrman, OHRD Training Officer, at 262-9934 or hwebnebehrman@ohr.wisc.edu .