I enjoyed hearing about the process that ensure decisions were informed by community voices rather than one's own preferences. At the 38:22 mark, the words I believe that fit are "complex facilitation." https://bra.in/4pdmnJ Traditional facilitation works well in the Cynefin Complicated domain but in the Complex domain, different tools are required.
I appreciate the differentiation @GaryWong. I think about when traditional facilitation is used for a more nuanced community or urban planning project. The responses of the focus groups may or may not fit with the developer vision. Maybe they are not given enough information or time to process the full vision. If I am cynical, I might say they are WOWED by developer plans and project their vision on to the one presented to them. Later on, they see a disconnect, but it is too late. This is still seen as a participatory process, but it is a barely disguised PR move to get buy-in.
Most if not all development projects are presented to decision makers (e.g., Board, Council, investors) and stakeholders (citizens, suppliers, interest groups, etc.) as an idealistic future state. Accompanying this vision is a business case and a linear blueprint showing how to get from here to there. All this assumes the future is certain, predictable, stable. The project plan will identify Known knowns and Known unknowns which we call Risk. Business case revenues/benefits are assumptions (best guesses) about the future.
However, when Unknown unknowns emerge during focus groups, the project can quickly go sideways. Complex facilitation is needed to deal with uncertainty and unpredictability.
What I like is Mike’s comments about where to invest the group’s limited resources. Do you spend time, money, energy to contest the Why? Resist the What? Or accept the articulated vision and explore the How? As an engineer, my druthers is to work on the How. How the heck are we gonna build that crazy looking thing dreamed up by the architects?! As you begin to explore the technical practicalities, often the dream idea will change due to the arrival of new information. Ditto when exploring social practicalities as a complexity facilitator.
I've written on this practice and the context in which it emerged in the journal Critical Social Policy in 2003 - 'Partnership and the governance of regeneration'. Alas, as so often is the case, the experiment was short lived. But that is another story.
I enjoyed hearing about the process that ensure decisions were informed by community voices rather than one's own preferences. At the 38:22 mark, the words I believe that fit are "complex facilitation." https://bra.in/4pdmnJ Traditional facilitation works well in the Cynefin Complicated domain but in the Complex domain, different tools are required.
I appreciate the differentiation @GaryWong. I think about when traditional facilitation is used for a more nuanced community or urban planning project. The responses of the focus groups may or may not fit with the developer vision. Maybe they are not given enough information or time to process the full vision. If I am cynical, I might say they are WOWED by developer plans and project their vision on to the one presented to them. Later on, they see a disconnect, but it is too late. This is still seen as a participatory process, but it is a barely disguised PR move to get buy-in.
Most if not all development projects are presented to decision makers (e.g., Board, Council, investors) and stakeholders (citizens, suppliers, interest groups, etc.) as an idealistic future state. Accompanying this vision is a business case and a linear blueprint showing how to get from here to there. All this assumes the future is certain, predictable, stable. The project plan will identify Known knowns and Known unknowns which we call Risk. Business case revenues/benefits are assumptions (best guesses) about the future.
However, when Unknown unknowns emerge during focus groups, the project can quickly go sideways. Complex facilitation is needed to deal with uncertainty and unpredictability.
What I like is Mike’s comments about where to invest the group’s limited resources. Do you spend time, money, energy to contest the Why? Resist the What? Or accept the articulated vision and explore the How? As an engineer, my druthers is to work on the How. How the heck are we gonna build that crazy looking thing dreamed up by the architects?! As you begin to explore the technical practicalities, often the dream idea will change due to the arrival of new information. Ditto when exploring social practicalities as a complexity facilitator.
I've written on this practice and the context in which it emerged in the journal Critical Social Policy in 2003 - 'Partnership and the governance of regeneration'. Alas, as so often is the case, the experiment was short lived. But that is another story.