The TEARS method, developed by Dr. Chanzo Greenidge, is a strategic planning approach that emphasizes emotional connection and responsibility for actions. It involves four main steps: introductions, primary ratings, breakaway group discussions, and secondary rankings to foster collaboration among stakeholders. The process culminates in developed action items and promotes consensus through team-building and negotiation.

1. TEARS:
TIERED EMOTIONAL
ACCESS AND
RESPONSIBILITY SYSTEM
AN ACTION PLANNING METHOD
CHANZO GREENIDGE, Ph.D.

2.  Emotional Connection and Assignment of
Responsibility for Specific Actions are key
elements to producing tangible benefits from any
strategic planning process.
 The challenge for leaders and project managers
is converting research and consultation into clear
options for action and collaboration.
 This presentation presents an original method for
doing so.
 Take a look and send me your feedback at
chanzo7@bravocom.net
INTRODUCTION

3.  To execute TEARS, you need:
◦ 1) A facilitator
◦ 2) A tabulator (can be the same person)
◦ 3) Color-coded place-holders (where you sit
impacts the group you’re in)
◦ 4) Scorecards and option sheets for everyone
◦ 5) Two separate rooms (no sound bleeding)
◦ 6) A good mix of stakeholders
◦ 7) Up to 10 well-researched options/concepts
◦ 8) Four-five hours with at least three breaks
◦ 9) Refreshments
WHAT YOU NEED

4.  The TEARS strategic planning method
consists of four steps between research &
consultations and results.
1) Introductions (Intros & Option Sheets)
2) Primary Ratings/Rankings
3) Breakaway Groups/Option Development
4) Secondary Rankings and Horse-trading
BREAKDOWN

5.  Introductions are 2-3 minute snapshots of
each concept. The Facilitator should present
these snapshots, up to 10 options.
 Introductions should be accompanied by one-
page synopses of the concept or action item.
 At no time should the facilitator betray a
preference, but it is important to be open to
questions that allow the group to understand
the context of each concept.
1) Intros

6.  A scorecard (see next slide) should
accompany the options sheet outlining the
main criteria (political feasibility, social
impact, economic benefit etc).
 Participants are given 10-15 minutes to
rate options on a scale from 1-10 (higher
if discussing more than 10 options).
2) Primary Ratings/Rankings

7. ACTION ITEM SOCIAL ECONOMIC POLITICAL OTHER FACTORS
IMPACT IMPACT FEASIBILITY
1 lowest; 1 lowest; 1 lowest;
10 highest 10 highest 10 highest
2) Primary Ratings/Rankings

8.  The first key to TEARS is this approach to
ranking.
 No rating can be the same for any two
items, so this also becomes a ranking of
these options.
 This forces participants to make early
CHOICES about which options they think
are better and reflect on why they would
choose one option over another.
2) Primary Ratings/Ranking

9.  Breakaway Groups should be assigned
before the management event begins or
by participants selection of seats/folders
etc. No leader should be assigned.
 Once the first tabulation of ratings is done
in plenary, teams now go into separate
rooms and are responsible for elaborating
an equal number of action items (if
possible).
3) Breakaway Groups

10.  Breakaway Groups decide in less than 1
hour on implementation steps, data
needs, and preliminary funding, training
and human resource needs for each
action item.
 The objective is that groups will develop
an ‘affinity’ to their items independent of
their original ratings and rankings as
individuals.
3) Breakaway Groups

11.  The stage is now set. The groups present to
each other on their elaboration work in 15
minutes or less.
 The facilitator should not have been part of a
group, though available to feed information
to each of them. She now becomes the
auctioneer.
 In this auction session, participants are free
to change their individual ratings once more.
4) Horse-trading

12.  These secondary rankings are now tallied, and
the results revealed in front of the plenary.
 Just this process will generated surprises and
excite discussion as people see options they are
emotionally and intellectually attached to now in
danger.
 The facilitator informs the room that only one-
four of the options can be taken up. Leave the
door open for combining options and let the
room talk.
 If a budget is available, decisions on financial
priorities should be made as well.
4) Horse-trading

13.  The TEARS method is a results-oriented,
participative way to achieve consensus
through hard choices, team-building and
negotiation.
 By the end of a TEARS session, participants
have seen each option from a number of
angles, have built coalitions, and are feeling
responsible and motivated to make ‘their’
option a success.
 The end result is a number of well-developed
action items with established champions for
integration into a strategic plan.
Closing the Deal