Center for Positive Organizational Change

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

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

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"

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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...

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

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

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

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 .