Learning From Each Other

Decision Support for Boundary-Spanning Groups Leadership is all about making decisions and improving decision making Tom Flanagan, Director SouthCoast Community Collaborative Design Studio A Project of the Community Foundation of Southeastern Massachusetts

Lots of Moving Parts We have all had some experience in group decision making

Competing Processes, Recognized Confusion, Ineffective Incentives Working with Groups is Tough

Bryn Gweled, Bucks County PA JAN 2003 – 34 residents define community future One Day – 42 ideas – 12 high priority ideas – one shared framework TOP PRIOTITIES: Transition from high growth to stewardship of community; Retain elderly residents; Engage less active residents DEEP PRIORITIES: Tap into our experiences; Enhance our decision-making processes

Illustration of the Framework that the Group Created

International Forum, Washington DC SEPT 2002 – 40 delegates launch communication plan Day One – 79 ideas – 8 high priority barriers – one shared framework TOP BARRIERS: Lack of coordinating body; Lack of resources; Lack of respect for indigenous cultures; Lack of shared space DEEP BARRIER: Lack of vision and lack of shared vision Day Two – 49 action items – 5 classes of action – one menu of action items Day Three – 6 action scenarios – convergence on one shared action plan

Energy Alliance, Skamania WA MARCH 2001 – 35 stakeholders energy efficiency action plan Day One – 168 trends – 58 strong trends – 24 themes – one shared framework TOP TRENDS: Reliability of service; Hardware preferred over behavior solutions; Urbanization; Efficiency; Capacity to supply DEEP TRENDS: Price signals & volatility; Equity in energy usage Day Two – 91 action items – 57 priority actions – 8 priority clusters Day Three – 4 action scenarios – convergence toward one shared action plan

First Define the Focus for Planning

Next Collect Focused Input

Clarify the Meaning Behind the Input

Explore Similarities in Input

Consider Apparent Importance of Input

Map Distinctions among Input

Reflect on Relations across ALL the Input

We All Think in Frameworks To Make Collaborative Decisions , Groups “ just ” have to Create a Shared Framework

Complexity Makes Building a Shared Framework Difficult

Complexity leads to “under-conceptualization” which puts programs and projects at risk

Multiple Moving Parts ( numerical complexity )

Very Long Time Frames ( temporal complexity )

Many Boundaries Spanned ( dimensional complexity )

Differing Unspoken Perceptions

Missing Voices

Overpowering Self-Confidence of Some Individuals

COMPLEXITY = parts x time x boundaries

“ Sponsors are rarely willing to invest adequate time in building firm foundations for their teams at the start of a project. But they are often willing to start over when the project fails .” Unknown Author How Do Groups Handle Complexity in the Planning Process

Dialogue is Complex – Planning Time is Short – Stakes are High – Sponsors and Others are Watching Paralysis by Analysis Shoot from the Hip

Reuse an old framework?

Build a new framework?

Call a group facilitator?

Call a systems engineer?

Call a design manager?

Time is Money

Group Processes Need to be Experienced, so I will provide you with a simulation and then we can continue to discuss the process Simulation : “ What Specific Skills Do We Want to Learn from Each Other Within the Leadership SouthCoast Program ?” We now will create our own framework for collaboratively addressing this challenge

Disassemble and Rebuild Individual Perspectives

Triggering Question 1 st We Need to Assure Focus Individuals think quickly. Groups think slowly. Special consideration is needed so that rapid-thinkers do not divide the group. A “triggering question” helps groups retain their focus during extended deliberation.

Every Question Has Its Impacts

Idea Label Writing 2 nd We Need to Generate Ideas BRAINSTORMING has limited usefullnes. Lots of stuff – limited shared understanding. CREATIVE thinking versus CONNECTIVE thinking. The ROUND ROBIN process assure equitable participation.

Nominal Group Technique 3rd We Need to Explore Meaning Nominal Group Technique is a dialogue process wherein meaning is explored without JUDGEMENT. During clarification, authorship needs to be protected. An author’s full meaning only gradually unfolds through deliberation.

Inductive Clustering 4 th We Need to See Similarities We seek shared wisdom by agreeing upon the same generalities. A “triggering question” helps groups retain their focus during extended deliberation.

Individual Priority Voting 5 th We Need to Seek Importance Learning within groups leads to concentration of priority votes on certain ideas that the group has discussed. Priority voting focuses attention on a subset of ideas but does NOT yet define the most powerful ideas for collective action.

Interpretive Structural Modeling 6 th We Need to Map Influence Interpretive Structural Modeling is a rapid and comprehensive “cross-impact” analysis of ideas. The resulting “tree” reveals those ideas which have the most profound impacts upon the group’s shared challenge.

Reflect on Influence 7 th We Need to Use Systems Thinking With a systems view, the group’s understanding of the importance of individual ideas shifts. Experience with over 500 design sessions upholds the universality of the ERRONEOUS PRIORITIES phenomenon in collaborative design.

Designing Options for Action 8 th We Need to Collect Action Items The structural framework provides a platform for constructing a menu of option items. In complex design situations, options for actions need to be clarified, clustered and structured so that the group shares a deep understanding of the impact of individual action items.

Multidimensional Planning 9 th We Need a Balanced Action Plan Action scenarios are constructed by drawing action items from across the action item clusters. Chosen items are woven into a narrative of the action scenario, and items which are consistently woven into multiple action scenarios are tagged as highly usable action items.

Revising the Framework 10 th We Need to Keep the Plan Current Interpretive structural modeling lends itself to the removal and insertion of individual items with extraordinary efficiency. High efficiency revision saves time and energy, and assures low barriers to making important mid-flight corrections in an action plan.

Where to use Collaborative Design … Design an agenda for a Leadership SouthCoast alumni league Develop a plan to reduce recidivism Establish a healthcare network for obesity Launch a local currency program Create a program for “green” technology in New Bedford harbor

“ For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” H.L.Mencken Political Commentator