A G O R A S

Presented by Dr. Thomas Flanagan World Bank Presentation, February 2009

The Institute for 21 st Century Agoras Presented by Dr. Thomas Flanagan “ People who do not design the world they live in will live in worlds that other people design” World Bank Presentation, February 2009

Individuals shape the voice of groups

Groups self-organize based on shared beliefs and ideas

Groups often intensify the conviction with which they cling to the ideas that they share

When groups meet to solve problems, the group members may bring along strong feelings and some group dysfunctions

Group Think (excessive agreement)

Spread Think (excessive disagreement)

Erroneous Priorities (premature decisions )

Groups enhance creativity and make better decisions when they are able to genuinely share a variety of perspectives with group members who think differently

Groups risk becoming islands of reinforced perspectives

Groups communicate at human scale

Agoras allow groups to connect on the human scale where individuals are able to exchange meaning and understandings

Expressions need to be understood in context

Context needs to be explored to be understood

Dialogue is the means of exploring context

An environment must be created to support dialogue

Where we must collaborate, we must share understandings

An agora supports communication

In an agora, people of many backgrounds and experiences come together and exchange ideas. Sometimes this is a one-to-one exchange. Sometimes this is a one-to-many exchange. But many times this is a many-to-many exchange.

Many-to-many exchanges are very challenging

The openness of many-to-many builds trust

Trust is essential for collaborative action

Success results in trust, consensus and collaborative action

An agora is essential, but not sufficient

Dialogue enables coherent action

Carrying a dialogue foreword into action requires continuously retelling stories about the discovery of shared understandings (“ narrative management ’)

Retelling complex dialogues requires “artifacts” that remind participants about their discovered understandings and agreements

Simple graphic representations work best

Any artifact derived from a dialogue is a byproduct – the authentic and enduring product is the social contract that cements the participants into a collaboration

Enduring collective agreements must be made in an environment of shared understanding and trust

High risk decisions may need to be revised or updated

Artifacts are not the goal of dialogue, they are its byproducts

Dialogue needs a sociotechnology

Modern agoras need to manage important, many-to-many discussions under increasingly complex conditions

Leadership control is becoming decentralized

Group dialogue falls hostage to power dynamics

Community trust is eroding / hope is vanishing

Complexity is tilting toward crisis

Some urgently want to charge forward

Some disparately want to plan more thoroughly

Some forget, and want to discuss issues endlessly = > CONFLICT within CRISIS

Information Management requires fusing engineering and sociology

21 st Century Agoras provide technology

A 21 st Century Agora uses advanced sociotechnology founded on systems science to help groups efficiently construct new, shared understandings and plan collaborative action to address complex challenges

Groups:

Commit time to fully discuss well-selected questions

Jointly name observations to collectively understand

Listen as individuals explain their observations

Identify systemic connections among observations

Reflect on their shared systemic understanding

Form an action plan

Structured Dialogic Design is an enabling sociotechnology

Structured Dialogic Design’s “artifact”

Groups using SDD produce a systems diagram of the influence that links their distinct concerns

Planning which does not support collective action is unethical The group focuses on mapping strong agreement. Agreement is forged with respect to the issues that the group puts into the map and the relations which the group agrees exists among elements in the map. The map is a creative product of the group. It is a living artifact that the group can update or revise as needed.

Where has the 21 st Century Agora made a difference?

Forging a Global Partnership

World Health Organization

GENEVA

Harmonizing Indigenous Governance

Americans for Indian Opportunities

NORTH AMERICA (New Mexico)

Rebuilding Divided Communities

Reunification of Cyprus

CYPRUS

World Health Organization’s challenge: Most costly, most extensive (20 years), most inclusive campaign to eliminate a global disease

Uncertain of accuracy of cost for action

Uncertain of political will among constituents who must make the 20 year commitment

Uncertain of feasibility of the coordinated approach

October 28-30, 1998 in Geneva

72 world experts on public health

14 distinct stakeholder clusters International Agencies; Philanthropic Organizations; Non-governmental Organizations; National Government agencies; Academic Research Communities; Professional Healthcare Associations; Health Service Oversight Bodies; Pharmaceutical Suppliers; Monitoring and Testing Equipment Systems Suppliers; Primary Healthcare Providers; Public Health Field Workers; Health Training and Education Programs; Patients; Media

“ What barriers/inhibitors do we anticipate in the quest to eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis by the year 2020? ”

54 unique challenges were identified & clarified

7 classes of challenges were defined

12 high priority challenges were structured (e.g., the need for a clear action plan; the need for a clear statement of the public heath situation)

70 actions were proposed to high priority challenges (e.g., elucidating mutually agreeable goals; organizing a steering committee; and defining sources of support for capacity building)

Impact: 10 years later “ No public health programme has ever expanded as quickly as the Global Programme to Eliminate LF ”

“ The 1998 Partners Forum was most interesting and a first-time experience for me and I suppose for most participants. I have, on one or two occasions, used the collaborative design approach but not at the scale of the Partners Forum .” Dr. Joseph Williams , Honorable Member of Parliament, Accident & Family Health Care, Mt Wellington, New Zealand

Forging a Global Partnership REFLECTION _ 1. A milestone to the real work of tactical planning 2. A foundation of confidence in being able to understand the same huge problem and still agree to work together 3. A seamless transition into a more familiar mode of tactical planning and project management. Attempting to plunge directly into crafting a tactical plan with a large and diverse set of stakeholders frequently results in failure , a delayed start , or a slow expansion of collaboration. None of these negative impacts plagued the advance of the Global Alliance .

Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO) faced a longstanding challenge

Conflict within and among tribes was strong

Tribes were not able to articulate their needs and goals both internally and with agencies such as the EPA

LaDonna Harris, executive Director of Americans for Indian Opportunity

Ruben Snake, Chairman of the Winnebago Tribe

In 1987, 17 Native American leaders gathered

Tribal leaders rapidly recognized how the method matched Native American approaches to deliberation

It honored everyone by listening to their voice

It treated the spoken words as sacred

The group recognized that it was uncovering collective wisdom

They discovered that their conflict related to the ways that they “filtered” the information they shared

This wisdom crystallized their understanding of the seriousness of their shared predicament, and this shared understanding liberated them

Impact: 20 years later

The design methodology of the Agoras has been adopted as the “Indigenous Leaders Interactive System” and is shared globally

In 1987, the second use was for planning tribal self-sufficiency

In 1993, AIO launched a leadership capacity building program for Native Americans based on the methodology

In 1996, AIO fully internalized the methodology

In 2002, the AIO forged a relationship with a group of Maori leaders in New Zealand to diffuse the use of the planning method

In 2008, the AIO and their Maori partners brought their Ambassadors International Gathering to Bolivia

Harmonizing Indigenous Governance REFLECTION – Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO) exists as a overarching agency for transformative governance for indigenous peoples. AIO success is founded on a critical mass of tribal communities who experienced the methodology Early uses of the new methodology were externally “ grant funded ” Fund was difficult because granting institutions often did not understand the language of structured dialogic design AIO could have moved faster if an organization – such as the World Bank – were helping funding agencies to understand the methodology

Cyprus faced a divisive challenge

Civic conflict was sharply divided along lines of national ethnicity

Ben Broom introduced the Agoras’ methodology as a conflict management approach in 1994

Subsequently he and a number of other experts trained a group of local Greek and Turkish Cypriots as conflict resolution trainers

Between 1995-1997 these trainers used the methodology to engage 2,000-3,000 Cypriots in peace building activities

SDD is accepted by government offices based on success in communities

In 2004, the Cyprus Government introduced structured dialogic design to train executives and for vision building in governmental departments

In 2006, six peace pioneers launched a grassroots SDD effort to identify “ obstacles we must deal with as we engage in our peace-building efforts”

In 2008, the Cyprus Government considers using structured dialogic design in municipalities for reconstructing the civic sector

Impact: 14 years later

In 2003, the “wall” was taken down ,,, ending the capital of Cyprus’ status as the last divided city in Europe

In 2004 Cyprus joined the EU

In 2006 the methodology dominates a number of peace-related, UN-funded projects aiming reconciliation and re-unification

Between 2005-2008 the methodology is used in more than 10 occasions to support pan-European groups(>18 countries each time) resole complex societal problems

Reconstruction of the civic sector in Cyprus is acknowledged by the UN with a visit from “the Elders”

Five EU countries begin discussing plans to establish a training school for SDD in Cyprus

Rebuilding Divided Communities REFLECTION – SDDP requires an environment of trust so that participants will share openly and sincerely. Conflict resolution has stages. In Cyprus the “desire” to move beyond conflict emerged within the hearts of the peoples of Cyprus. SDD was the means of creating the shared understandings that have liberated the people from their quagmire of conflict. Without the benefit of early “experiences” with the power of SDD, the people of Cyprus may have become trapped within the myth that there was no way that they could develop a shared understanding. Years of work created shared experiences of community learning with SDD preceded the collective recognition that the island was once again one people with multiple legitimate perspectives.

21 st Century Agoras offers its sociotechnology to the world