You thought you were through? Agreements are only worthwhile if they actually work. Implementation needs to be built in.
Consider using the Oregon Solutions Collaborative Governance model for implementation! GOOD LUCK!
Once the Collaborative Decision-Making Process has been convened and agreement is reached on operating principles or working agreements, the process moves into Phase Two, Seek Agreement. Many people see this phase as the process, because it is in this phase that all the group meetings occur, and the work on the substance takes place.
However, there are two major steps in this phase, and it is important to start with Step 3, Education, even though many people want to jump right into negotiating on solutions.
Doing the education step well will pave the way for efficient, productive and collaborative agreements and solutions. It will also help the group sort out the problem(s) it is REALLY needing to solve. (So often groups spend a lot of energy on things that are not the real problems.)
Sometimes the person who “convenes” the meeting is automatically looked to as the “chair” or the facilitator. It is rare, however, that a convener or chair has the skills of a well trained consensus facilitator. Therefore, when it is appropriate to have a person serve in the role of a chair or a convener because of their position or because they hold the respect of the participants and can get them to the table, it is still useful to have a trained facilitator work with them.
Two other roles that are often needed in a collaborative process are that of a SPONSOR and that of a RECORDER.
SPONSOR
A sponsor is one who initiates a collaborative process and either supports it financially or helps to gather the necessary funding and resources to support the process. Usually the sponsor has a direct interest in the outcome, so is not neutral. The sponsor, if an interested party, should be represented in the process, but should not be in control of it. Serving dual roles of sponsor and convener can be problematic, but is sometimes necessary. Having a neutral forum and a neutral facilitator will help to meet the principles of collaborative governance.
RECORDER
Ideally the role of recorder is also a neutral role. The recorder works with the facilitator to capture the work of the collaborative group, to maintain the collective conversation by serving as the group memory. Recording may be done by charting – recording on flip charts in front of the group in order to help group members know they have been heard and help others in the group hear and recall what was said. It may also be done by simply taking notes during the meeting, then summarizing them and distributing them after. Or, it may be a combination. It is important for the recording to be done in a neutral fashion, reframing language for clarity and respectfulness, but maintaining the tone. It is also important to help sort through the chaos of ideas at certain stages and help the group see how the ideas are building toward the problem solving goal.
Recording is a crucial and often under-valued role in helping a group reach consensus. It is both a talent and a skill that must be honed with practice.
Any comments or questions on roles?
Hello again you hearty beta testers. We are realizing that there is a lot of content in this course, and that it is difficult to work through all the technical glitches and the content in the short time we have allocated. Thus, we have simplified the last week somewhat. We would still like you to try to make your way through all the HOMEWORK assignments, and complete the final project summary, so we can get some assessment of how the material worked. (Remember, you are not getting graded. We just want to get a sense of what was communicated.)
The schedule and outline for the course now looks like this:
| Blog Post | Topic | Activity and Time |
| Week One | Posted by May 11 | Responses by May 18 |
| 1-1 | Introductions | Response – quick |
| 2-1 | Conflict | Response – quick |
| 2-2 | Thomas Kilman Conflict Styles | Response – quick |
| 2-3 to 2-7 | Individual Conflict Styles | Response – quick |
| 2-8 | Conflict Styles Summary & Reflection | Response – quick |
| 3-1a to 3.1f | An Overview of the Context for Collaboration: Leading in a Power Shared Worlda.Federalismb. Civil Societyc. Economyd. Procedural & Civic Republic Trad.
e. Nature of today’s envt & NR problems f. When and Why to collaborate |
Review and take in (like a lecture) Brief response to let us know you’ve heard and to ask any questions you’d like. |
| 3-2 to 3-4 | Public Decision Making Models – Model #1, #2 and #3 | Exercise – respond – quick |
| 3-5 | Decision Making Models – Debrief Summary | Summary – reflect – quick |
| 4-0 | Emergence of Collaborative Governance | Overview info – respond to let us know you’ve been through it and to ask any questions |
| 4-1 | Context of Public Decisions | Respond – quick |
| 4-2 | Problem Abyss to Implementable Solutions | Anchor in Road Map and begin the journey. Respond to let us know you’re with us. |
| 4-3 | Initial Screening | Application of content: HOMEWORK #1 – Post in student blog. |
| 4-4 | Junction of Public Processes | Analysis – HOMEWORK # 2 Post in student blog |
| 5-0 | Key Elements for Collaborative Success | Appreciative Inquiry Exercise – participate |
| 5-1 | Overview of Collaborative Decision-Making | Review and respond with observations |
| 5-2 | Summary of Collaborative Decision-Making Elements | Summary of content – Review and respond to let us know if you are still with us. |
| 5-3 | Junction of Public Processes Analysis | Application of theory. HOMEWORK #3 – Post in student blog |
| Week Two | Posted by May 18 | Responses by May 25 |
| 6-0 | Framing an Issue for Collaboration | Overview – let us know you’re with us |
| 6-1 | Creativity in Framing | Video – post responses |
| 6-2 | Considerations in Framing | Group exercise – Post responses |
| 7-0 | Collaborative Decision-Making Step 1: Assessment and Planning | Discussion – quick responses |
| 7-1 | Conducting the Internal Assessment | Worksheet – HOMEWORK 7-1 |
| 7-2 | Internal Assessment Analysis | Worksheet and Analysis HOMEWORK 7-2 |
| 8-0 | Understanding Interests | Overview – let us know you’re with us |
| 8-1 | Exploring Interests | Overview – let us know you’re with us |
| 8-2 | Tips to Uncover Interests | Review roleplay and post responses |
| 9-0 | Conducting a Neutral External Assessment | Worksheet — HOMEWORK 9-0 |
| 9-1 | Interviewing Stakeholders | Develop Protocol — HOMEWORK 9-1 |
| 9-2 | External Assessment Summary | Worksheet Summary – HOMEWORK 9-2 |
| 9-3 | Collaboration Assessment | Analysis – HOMEWORK 9-3 |
| Week Three | Posted by May 25 | Completed by June 1 (or 3) |
| 10-0 | Collaborative Process Step 2: Organization | Overview – let us know you’re with us |
| 10-1 | WHAT: Defining the Group’s Purpose | Purpose Stmt. HOMEWORK 10-1 |
| 10-2 | WHO: Defining Group Composition | Stakeholder List HOMEWORK 10-2 |
| 10-3 | The How: Group Structure and Process | HOMEWORK 10-3 |
| 10-4 | Consensus Decision-Making | Information only |
| 10-5 | Working with FACA in designing a process | Information only |
| 10-6 | Working Agreements: Capturing the Org. | HOMEWORK 10-6 |
| 10-7 | The Organizing Step: Putting it all Together | Summary – Chance for Q&A |
| 10-8 | Tips for Meeting Planning | Information only |
| 10-9 | Planning for a Successful Meeting | Information only |
| 10-10 | Roles: Facilitators, Conveners, Sponsors, Recorders | Information only |
| 14-0 | Final Project Summary Assignment | HOMEWORK 14-0 Due June 1-3, 2012 – Debriefing conference call to be scheduled June 5 or 6. |
| End of Beta Test Course | The Following are Informational Only So you can see the rest of the steps | Summary pieces are being posted for your information |
| 11-0 | Collaborative Decision Making Step 3: Education | |
| 12-0 | Collaborative Decision-making Step 4: Negotiation-Resolution | |
| 13-0 | Collaborative Process Step 5: Implementation | |
You will notice the last few blog posts are listed as informational only. They contain information that we thought most students would like to see, but we are not able to have you actually apply them in this course setting. Thus, they are not necessary in order to complete the final project summary.
About the final project summary: If you completed all your homework assignments, you will have basically completed the project. The final summary is a reflection on what you have come up with along the way, and an analysis of how well your project (problem, issue) is suited for a collaborative process. We’d like you to advise your managers on its likelihood for a successful process and agreement on an outcome.
As outlined in the last section, planning is key to facilitating a successful meeting. This section will highlight the three critical areas for planning: 1) purpose and outcome, 2)meeting agenda and process, and 3) logistics.
1) Purpose and Outcome
To be effective, the group must have a clear sense not only of its overall purpose but also of the purpose of each specific meeting and how it ties into the group’s mission overall.
For example, a group organized to create funding recommendations for non-roadway funding (the mission of the collaborative group) may have a specific meeting to educate themselves about the current funding needs (meeting purpose).
In addition, it is helpful to define what outcome the group is seeking to achieve. This outcome gives the group a focus and helps them know how it will measure its success at the end.
For example,for the meeting mentioned above, the meeting outcome could be stated, “By the end of the meeting, the group will have a shared understanding about the funding revenue that needs to be generated.”
2) Agenda and Process
Once the purpose and outcomes have been defined, it is helpful to begin to plan how the group will reach that outcome.
Below is a basic agenda structure for most meetings
To reach the outcome, the facilitator breaks the task into pieces on the agenda and figures out the best method to do each piece. It can be helpful to determine whether you are wanting the group to broaden their thinking and generate ideas and perspectives (divergent) or for the group to start clustering these ideas and coming to agreement (convergent). Below are some examples as to how to match the right process for each task.
This form can be a useful guide in developing an agenda to distribute to the group.
3) Logistics
Many a good meeting has been ruined because the room was inadequate, the equipment didn’t work, or the participants did not receive notice. Attending to the logistics is a critical component of the facilitator’s work in helping the group succeed.
Much has been written about the usefulness of checklists. So we offer you the following checklists to help manage logistics for a successful meeting.
Planning and preparation BEFORE a meeting enables a facilitator the structure needed to be adaptable and responsive to the needs of the group DURING a meeting. If we were going forward with more homework, we would now have you plan your first meeting of the group. It would be the convening or “kick-off” meeting, and would need to include developing or confirming agreement on the operating principles or working agreements, which would be one of the desired outcomes. It might also include the beginning of the Education Step, described in later posts.
What might be some other desired outcomes for this first meeting?
As a collaborative agreement seeking process moves into the organization stage and beyond, much of the work is done through a series of progressive meetings involving either the full group or sub-committees or task groups. The ability to plan and run effective meetings becomes a critical component of the success of the process. For that reason, we want to use this section to highlight some tips that contribute to effective meetings.
If you think about the best meeting you ever attended, what comes to mind? Most often, people describe things that happened during the meeting: everyone contributed, the session was focused, the facilitator kept things moving. But looking deeper, it becomes clear that good things happened DURING the meeting because a great deal of preparation was spent BEFORE the meeting. Check out this link that describes what the facilitator’s work involves.
Facilitation Handout_ The work of Facilitating
The facilitated session is a structured meeting in which the facilitator guides the participants through a series of pre-defined steps to arrive at a result that is created,understood, and accepted by all participants.
To help make it easy for a group to be successful during a meeting, it is important to consider three main areas:
The following blog posts will focus on these areas of planning for a successful meeting. Any thoughts about facilitation at this point?
So just to summarize, the organization step involves helping the group agree on key organizational elements:
And then documenting it in the form of working agreements (operating principles) that guide the group.
Below is an outline of how a facilitator would work to “put it all together” and approach this stage.
Have fun convening your collaborative groups!
Any comments or questions?
The final stage in the organization step is to capture the group’s organizational agreements in the form of “Working Agreements”. These can also be referred to as “Operational Principles” or “Collaboration Agreements” or any other phrase that might fit for the group and its purpose.
The facilitator will normally prepare a draft set of working agreements based on the information from the assessment and by conferring with key parties in advance of convening a first meeting. Sometimes the draft can even contain some “place-holder” language to be filled in by the participants when they are together. Often this draft set of agreements forms a major part of the agenda for a first “convening” meeting of the group. It helps them to confirm how they really want to work together, and to hash out any concerns they might have about how committed others are to the process. If there has been negativity in the media or in public meetings, discussing the working agreements is the perfect time to bring it out and talk about how to change the tone.
For example, groups often agree that even though their meetings will be open to the public, none of the participants will report to the media about what went on in the meetings. Or they may commit not to speak about what anyone else has said during a meeting. Sometimes the group will want to appoint one spokesperson for the group, or may even want to agree on press statements to go out after each meeting.
Negotiating the working agreements together gives the participants a sense that they really can work together and come to agreement. It is likely to be their first agreement!
Now it is time for you to attempt to pull together the pieces of the organizational step into a draft set of working agreements for your project. Follow the checklist below, and see what you might come up with, even though we know you don’t really know the exact process concerns that the potential participants have.
Post a draft of potential working agreements for your collaborative process group on your Student Blog Assignment as 10-6. I will link some examples of actual working agreements, so you can see how others craft them. These, however, are the ones actually negotiated by the parties, not the initial draft.
Here are some examples of working agreements. Note they also give a good overview of the process design.
Many people involved with collaborative processes “discover” FACA when the group includes Federal agencies. It often is raised as a concern but at times can feel like a block to group formation. What is FACA and what is it all about? The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) was created with the intent of making sure that when federal decisions makers receive advice on decisions from the public all interests have the opportunity to be included. For people interested in facilitating or managing collaborative processes or participating in such a process, the idea of inclusion seems to make sense. Why then does FACA seem to be a constraint? The answer is that it is a procedural law that requires compliance.
There are a number of strategies for approaching FACA. The first question is if it applies. This should be considered as part of the assessment phase of the collaborative process. If federal agencies or their representatives are likely to be involved in the process you are considering, then explore the implications of FACA. We have included a flow chart and some more specific information at links to pages in the Introduction to Collaborative Governance workbook. The flow diagram will help you with you assess the implications of FACA.
If it is clear that FACA does not apply, the process should be designed according to the best principles of collaborative processes, the assessment and the needs of the participants.
If it is not clear, and there is a question, obviously each Federal agency must make a determination with appropriate legal advice. Generally, if the agency is not directly establishing or controlling the group, it can participate without having the group considered its advisory group.
If it is determined that this particular collaboration can only be done as a FACA chartered group, the agency will have to work through the processes for chartering or identify an existing chartered committee. The actual process design can still be established pursuant to principles of collaborative governance, and the process can be conducted pursuant to the steps of a collaborative agreement seeking process.
Comments or experiences you’ve had working with FACA?
Introduction to Collaborative Governance 