Here’s some timely advice on working across difference. Sometimes the hardest cuts to bear are from the very people we view as being ‘on the same side’; non-profit blogger Vu Le offers some powerful medicine for prevention and healing. Source: 7 agreements for productive conversations during difficult times
Check out this great article by Jodie Tonita on the role of trust in movements for social change. She explains why trust is key for effective collaboration, and how to intentionally cultivate trust among individuals and organizations. http://bit.ly/yes-trust
I’ve been working with a few organizational clients recently who are struggling to perform at their individual and collective best, due to deeper issues with trust. When people don’t trust one another, collaboration, quite simply, simply takes longer. Or doesn’t occur at all. Without trust, people are less likely to assume good intentions, to the point where they might even approach each interaction ‘pre-loaded’ to assume the worst in others – and it can take extensive time and energy to unpack and adjust those assumptions. High levels of trust, on the other hand, allow individuals and groups to move quickly during periods of stress or rapid change, without wasting energy on speculation, translation or missed signals. As the Center for Social Transformation’s Director Jodie Tonita explains, the same dynamics play out at the movement level. Read her excellent article on the role of trust in movements for social change. She explains why trust is key for effective collaboration, and how to intentionally cultivate trust among individuals and organizations. http://bit.ly/yes-trust
I confess, after facilitating last week’s leadership training on skillful listening and peer coaching, this little video had me in complete, tears-running-down cheeks hysterics: It’s not about the nail…
As a facilitator, I’m always searching for new approaches to help groups plan strategically and make smart decisions. One approach I’m currently exploring is “structured decision-making”, or SDM (though somehow that sounds faintly obscene when I say it out loud).
Structured decision-making is a systematic process developed for making wise, transparent decisions in the face of complex issues with diverse stakeholders, high stakes and divergent perspectives.
Example: The Holiday Dilemma
Here’s a super-simple example of how SDM might work, from my friend and colleague Trent Berry. He’s the co-founder of Compass Resource Management, based out of Vancouver. Compass boasts one of the world’s most masterful teams at designing and facilitating structured decision-making processes for resource and environmental issues.
He explains: “Imagine you and your spouse want to plan a holiday. You want to go to Mexico. They want to go to Hawaii. How do you resolve the difference? Well, you start by trying to understand why each other prefers one location or the other. What are you really trying to achieve. So, you might point out cost, things to do, safety, etc. Those are your objectives or interests. Now rather than just arguing about a location, you can discuss the relative merits of each from the perspective of what you each want to achieve. doing that you may discover that some of your facts are wrong – e.g., cost. But you’ll also understand how much importance each of you is placing on different things – e.g., cost vs. safety. And through the process you may understand each other better and you may actually come up with a third option that meets both of your objectives. Not always – but sometimes. Really, structured decision making is similar to what used to be called ‘interest-based negotiation’. The only way it may differ is there is the discussion goes beyond two private parties and the focus is on not only understanding interests but also doing a better job of really understanding how different options perform across interests. Its a marriage of science and values.”
The Steps to SDM
In practice, SDM processes can often be described in decision trees or other concept maps. The basic steps follow, in many ways, a really great government policy briefing note. Here are the steps for a “PrOACT (Problem, Objectives and Measures, Alternatives, Consequences, and Trade-offs” SDM framework (originally outlined in the book “Smart Choices”):
- Define the problem
- Specify the objectives and measures – including getting agreement on “what matters”, and prioritizing information and assessing uncertainty or risk with different kinds of information
- Create imaginative alternatives
- Identify the consequences for each
- Clarify the trade-offs.
Growing interest in SDM
From Alberta to Australia, the wave of interest in this approach is growing. One major application is for complex resource management issues. Imagine a group of environmental activists, First Nations, oil industry proponents and government staff trying to come to some sort of sound, values-based decision-making around large-scale oil exploration over a relatively intact natural ecosystem. How do you design a dialogue process that isn’t about greenwashing or tokenism and doesn’t suck the life force – not to mention the coffers — of all involved for the next decade? Past experience has shown that lengthy land-use planning approaches and environmental assessments don’t always yield wise results, and especially not in a timely or cost-effective way.
As Berry explains, “environmental assessments all too often look like a long, expensive shopping list of environmental impacts, with no way to prioritize or sort through them. Structured decision-making starts from a place of shared values – because science can tell us about all the options, but it can’t do a thing about setting priorities or assessing the relative risks among them. Only a clear set of values can do that.”
Beyond Resource issues…
SDM is also being used with child welfare workers in California, adult protective services in Michigan and a host of other agencies. Check out several other case studies on-line, including several at http://www.structureddecisionmaking.org/applications.htm.