A Community Engagement & Stakeholder Feedback Process ... · Web viewMayor Nenshi leading change...

Summer 2013

Table of Contents

Executive Summary............................................................................................................3

Understanding the History of the Problem We Seek to Change...........................................4Table 1: History of the Problem.....................................................................................................................................5

The Process of Identifying Leverage Points for Change........................................................81. Vision.................................................................................................................................................................................... 82. Education/Awareness................................................................................................................................................... 83. Expectations...................................................................................................................................................................... 84. Technical Design............................................................................................................................................................. 8

Voices in the Room..............................................................................................................................................................8One New Insight................................................................................................................................................................... 9Six Leverage Points...........................................................................................................................................................10

Leverage Points for Change...............................................................................................11Working with the ARP as a Living Document.......................................................................................................11Backing Up the Front End of the Engagement Process.....................................................................................12Telling the Story of the Vision of Hillhurst Sunnyside......................................................................................12Multiple Ways to Provide Feedback..........................................................................................................................13Engage in Research & Inquiry to Find Promising Practices...........................................................................14

Next Steps – Testing the Prototypes..................................................................................15

Appendix 1 – List of Acronyms..........................................................................................16

Appendix 2 – MSFT Meeting Agendas...............................................................................17April 10, 2013..................................................................................................................................................................... 17April 24, 2013..................................................................................................................................................................... 17May 8, 2013......................................................................................................................................................................... 18May 22, 2013....................................................................................................................................................................... 19June 5, 2013......................................................................................................................................................................... 20June 19, 2013...................................................................................................................................................................... 21

Appendix 3 – Guidelines for Prototyping...........................................................................23

Hillhurst Sunnyside Multi-Stakeholder Taskforce Ver July 31, 2013 2

Executive SummaryThe community of Hillhurst Sunnyside is facing rapid growth and development. It is expected that both development applications and the demands on residents’ time to review these applications will increase.

Up until the winter of 2012, community residents volunteered on the Community Planning Committee (CPC) to solicit and submit community members’ feedback on development applications. However, committee members became overwhelmed with the demands on their time and it was agreed that the committee would be disbanded. An Interim Planning Committee (IPC) has continued to meet and review development applications.

At the same time, the Hillhurst Sunnyside Multi-Stakeholder Taskforce (MSTF) was convened in February 2013. As the name suggests, it is a diverse group of residents, local businesses, developers and City of Calgary staff, who agreed to come together to co-design a new community engagement and stakeholder feedback process. This new process would serve to: improve the development application process and contribute to good decision making that addressed the needs and concerns of all stakeholders.

The MSTF worked with a facilitator and was guided through a six-session design process, utilizing the Reos Change Lab methodology. This approach is well suited for multi-stakeholder initiatives and has a strong track record of supporting effective solutions for ‘stuck’ problems.

The MSTF met every second Wednesday, for three hours between April and June 2013. It was guided by the convening question: How can we, the MSTF, successfully achieve a great community, as defined by Hillhurst Sunnyside’s Area Re-development Plan, through a community engagement and stakeholder feedback process that is inclusive, efficient and influences good decision making?

This report summarizes the work completed in those meetings. Most importantly, it captures the five leverage points – elements of the entire development application feedback process – that if changed would make the most difference towards positive outcomes for all. Together, these represent the essential elements of the community engagement and stakeholder feedback process.


http://reospartners.com/service-view/223

Understanding the History of the Problem We Seek to ChangeA critical first step in developing new solutions to the development application challenges the community is facing was to deepen the group’s understanding of the history of the problem. The group identified events, patterns, structures and mental models that have all influenced the current state of the problem from 2004 to 2013.

Events are observable actions, incidents or circumstances Patterns are repetitive events or trends that become recognizable Structures are elements that are related to events and patterns – such as policy, by-laws,

legislation – that might be causally related, or not. Mental models are deeply held beliefs about a system; these are often implicit and unknown

until thoughtfully considered.

The MSTF’s conversation of uncovering the history of the problem is summarized below in Table 1.

Table 1: History of the ProblemThe following table summarizes the events, patterns, structures and mental models associated with the development application and stakeholder feedback challenges faced by the community of Hillhurst Sunnyside.

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Events BRZ hires

Exec Director

ToD

ARP Stake-holder invite

iC published

Brenda Stratford House

Approval of ARP/ToD amendment

CAC-ToD groups combined

Feasibility of secondary suites

MDP

Stampede tents in business district

Bar application turned down

Street-scaping

New mayor

BRZ strategic plan high-lights need for collaboration w/HHSS

Bow to Bluff

Bucci

Pixel Application – Land Use Development

10 St bike box & lane

10A street public improvement (BRZ funded)

5 Ave Land Use Application

McHugh Bluff stairway deteriorates

BRZ & HSCA Boards begin regular social evenings

LRT Platform extension

Hillhurst United Church development application

Peace Bridge opens

Demo of the Triangle Building

Community Planning Community disbanded (Oct)

Vendome pop-up patio

Astoria Land Use Application

HHSS investing in mobility

BRZ business tax abolished/ membership changes

Container in Sunnyside

Poppy Plaza is completed

MSTF formed (Feb)


Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Patterns Stability in a

single, long-term Councilor

Lack of alignment on DPS between developers, City & community

BRZ not involved in DP reviews

Sun & Salsa Festival

Increasing development pressures

Urban infills

Interest to maintain heritage

Single family housing boom

Some consistency in community volunteers

Community moves from being combative to being collaborative

Condo dev’p boom

Conflict & misalign-ment between policy documents & land use by-law

High # of volunteers & rapid turn-over

Lack of coordinated City communicat-ion

Turn-over in City staff

Turn-over in comm. paid staff

Getting densified, but beautified

Market driven conflicts with common good

BRZ/HSCA collaboration

Too many policy & by-law documents

Not getting true community engagement

Parking issues & traffic studies

Increased congestion on residential streets & lanes

More spending on infra-structure such as bike lanes, Memorial Dr & Bow to Bluff

Mayor Nenshi leading change towards more citizen-centric government

Changing dev’p rules for low density dev’ps

BRZ takes a wider view; sits on City committees

Changing demographics

Not accommodating families in multi’s (no 3 bedrooms)

Proliferation of bars & banks

Conflict over planning approvals

Lack of understanding of planning process & policy

Time/ pressure for responding to DPs

Parking limiting new development

Broader feelings of community engagement

Repeated need for multi-stakeholder meeting

General lack of innovation


The following structures and mental models are not categorized by year, as it was agreed that the themes/ideas transcend any one year. Instead the comments that were put forth by the group are simply included below.

Structures MGA/ legislation where community input is required Development Authority PlanIt/Transit Oriented Development/Calgary Transportation Plan

City Council Area Re-development Plan Corporate Planning Application Group HSCA Interim Planning Committee

BRZ by-laws & Board HSCA Organizations by-laws Circulation process for development applications Open House process

Land Use & By-law Regular HSCA meetings w/Developers

Mental Models

HSCA represents all community residents/stakeholders Infill housing = increasing population More density is bad Density is always good

City has no flexibility City staff doesn’t care City has a unified voice More people = more cars Cars have priority over cars

Relaxations in ARP are bad Recognizing change is hard Development is universally lucrative Communities are losing character & change is bad

Profit before people Community planning is just about buildings Community/Residential can co-exist

BRZ does not care about community, they only care about business & parking Community planning committees are exclusive

City departments have self interest only and don’t care about community/developers/BRZ Developers don’t want input from the community

We don’t think in whole communities/We think in isolation Developers always have to push the limit Pedestrians are good for business

Community is anti-development Individual rights trump the common good Community associations are only successful when they get their way

There are absolute rules that if applied will result in good outcomes Community voice carries the least weight Pre-determined decisions despite input


The Process of Identifying Leverage Points for ChangeMapping out the history of the problem allowed the group to scan the multiple perspectives present within the diversity of the group. With this new insight, participants were asked to consider what they thought were the highest leverage points for change. Four themes emerged and the group identified people that should be invited to the subsequent meeting. These folks were thought of as “learning journey hosts” and were picked because they represented someone who did remarkable work with or within the identified leverage points.

Below is the description of each theme. Also included is the person(s) who were invited to the MSTF’s third meeting (May 8, 2013) to act as a “learning journey host”. The eight hosts were interviewed to provide insight/learning that could be applied in order to meet the MSTF’s challenge.

1. Vision Getting all stakeholders to buy into a shared vision and work in service of achieving that vision

Ryan Hall – Transit Oriented Development policy, City of Calgary Natalia Zoldak – Community visioning, including Bow to Bluff and Belvedere Area Structure

Plan (among others)

2. Education/Awareness Ongoing work that needs to happen to ensure that people can participate and contribute in a meaningful way

David White – Hillhurst Sunnyside resident, Bow to Bluff

3. Expectations Setting principles and guidelines for how the work gets done and keeping those alive even when people leave and new people enter the process

Cesar Cala – Strategy Lead, Neighbourhoods, United Way of Calgary & Area

4. Technical Design Processes/technologies that ease the collection of information and ensure its usability

Dave Robertson, Mistri Jim Gibson and Jaime Soulodre, Chaordix

After participating in conversations with the learning journey hosts, the group participated in two activities:

Voices in the RoomThe purpose of this exercise was to hear verbatim comments (as much as possible) from everyone’s learning journeys, but not to identify or allocate these to any particular person.

The comments from people’s learning journeys were as follows: Make sure the process creates empathy Multiple platforms of engagement make it appealing Simple and clear


http://www.chaordix.com/

http://mistri.ca/

Roles and responsibilities should be defined Come to a design meeting with a blank piece of paper Don’t reinvent the wheel, take good ideas where you find them Stakeholders can collaborate on education and awareness Important to combine ideas with open mindedness Be clear in your initial ask at the beginning of the process Share the community Area Re-development Plan with the entire community Match the conversation with appropriate scale Be inclusive not exclusive Ensure that community is represented Different types of engagement is required to hear different voices Have realistic time expectations Build capacity Make the ask appropriate to the outcome Validate the vision Inclusive communication Generate feedback from different residents I believe that solutions are unlimited as long as you’re not limited in your own thinking Should engagement happen before the application? This is a great community and people want to develop in it Don’t be constrained by what we’ve already been through Continuously reach out to new stakeholders

One New InsightNext, participants were asked to answer the question: Thinking about the learning journeys – and everything else we’ve learned so far – what one new thing have you learned that would make the most difference to our convening question?

The answers are as follows: Review applications as a group, such that you don’t struggle independently Come to engagement meetings with blank pages Timing and engagement are critical What rules aren’t working well?

o Engage in ways that honor the intento Reward sincerity and risk takers

Have a professional planner that will look out for the community and provide technical support/advice.

Have multiple ways to provide feedback Tell the story of the community in an ongoing way / broadcast it out Constantly share the story about the vision of the community / in the ARP Share stories of success

o Get stories of people moving into the buildings who are now connected to the community (to share with developers)

Reward good behaviour Tap into assets of the new people moving into the community Define / reframe community Stakeholders set the agenda


Think of the ARP not as the end, but as a journey Develop an “engagement formula” that can be used earlier on at the front end of the

process Deal with the “airy fairy” nature of the ARP Identify where and when research needs to be done Get okay with the ARP being a living document and have ongoing conversations based on

trusto Build something that is safe to fail (vs. fail safe)

Early engagement and trust Risk, trust, fail safe

Six Leverage PointsAs a result of the learning journeys and debriefing exercises, the group revised its original leverage points, resulting in six leverage points that needed to be considered for their new community engagement and stakeholder feedback process. These are:

1. Working with the Area Re-development Plan (ARP) as a living, evolving document (structure)2. Backing up the ‘front end’ of the engagement process so it starts earlier in the developer’s

processa. Make engagement about learning

3. Telling the story of the vision for Hillhurst Sunnyside4. Identify multiple ways to provide feedback, that is still efficient and timely

a. Onlineb. Group feedback (Community Association, BRZ, etc all at one meeting)

5. Reward good behaviour6. Engage in research/inquiry to see how other neighbourhoods and cities are overcoming similar

challenges around the world


Leverage Points for ChangeThe last three meetings of the MSTF were dedicated to building prototype models of the leverage points, gathering feedback and making revisions of the models. Guidelines for prototyping can be found in Appendix 3. By the end of the process, group 5 (Reward Good Behaviour) had decided their leverage point was not as influential as previously thought, and so only the remaining five leverage points are described below. To ‘codify’ their models, groups were asked to respond to eight questions, of which the answers are captured below.

Working with the ARP as a Living DocumentName: Community Vision Sustainability ModelWhat is it?

A two pronged review of the community vision and the ARP (ongoing and iterative)

Who is responsible for stewarding the initiative? City is responsible for ARP HSCA/BRZ responsible for community

vision Both involve overlapping groups of

stakeholdersWhat is it serving?

It serves the community vision The relevancy of planning tools and

processesHow is it serving its beneficiaries?

Engagement, empowerment, feeling of involvement

Provides information and knowledge Contributes to better outcomes

How is it resourced? Initially

o Grants, existing funding sources Maintained

o City for ARP componento Community visioning fund (co-managed by FCC for broader application of model)

What are the missing voices? Transient stakeholders. For example, out of town developer

Who was part of the team? Deborah Cooper Thom Mahler Natasha Kumak


Backing Up the Front End of the Engagement Process

Name: Early Engagement and Process GuideWhat is it?

Process to encourage an early and collaborative relationship between developers and the community

Who is responsible for stewarding this initiative?

City (rezoning or development) application

City creates a guide for uniformity to all communities

What is it serving? To encourage community and development to engage towards creating ‘best’ developments

How is it serving its beneficiaries? Creating open, active communication. Given better assurances and feedback to both participants

How is it resourced? Initially – left blank Maintained – left blank

What are the missing voices? Project developers Councilors, BRZ

Who was part of the team? Ken Melanson Decker Butzner Keiran Slattery Bob McKercher Jennifer Dobbin

Telling the Story of the Vision of Hillhurst SunnysideName: Telling the StoryWhat is it?

We are the ‘why’. We explain, we inspire, we teach about Hillhurst Sunnyside and Kensington, what it was and where it is going

Who is responsible for stewarding this initiative? The community, including the BRZ and the City

What is it serving? It shapes the future by creating a walkable, accessible, engaged, welcoming community


How is it serving its beneficiaries? It serves better decision

making by providing understanding of the process and of the goal

How is it resourced? Initially – Digital initiative: all

stakeholders (City, BRZ, Developers) will put a team together so they can resource their piece. Links to community (HSCA and BRZ) websites. We need a dedicated project team to determine content and distribution.

Maintained – Storefront initiative: Storefront engagement location (maybe the triangle lot) with community and BRZ volunteers (limited hours, this summer)

What are the missing voices? Developers and landowners

Who was part of the team? Tim Kitchen Annie McInnis Denise Carbol

Multiple Ways to Provide FeedbackName: The Great Digital HubWhat is it?

A comprehensive digital, interactive stakeholder-driven communications platform

Who is responsible for stewarding this initiative?

HSCA with City partnershipWhat is it serving?

Serves the entire community in its interaction with the City, businesses, development and all residents

How is it serving its beneficiaries? By being a resource and contact

database, portal for input and discussion space, repository of experience, bulletin board, crowdsourcing feedback mechanism


How is it resourced? Initially – Content from HSCA, City and applicants Maintained – HSCA communications lead, FCC, consultant and volunteers

What are the missing voices? Only the politicians

Who was part of the team? John Chisholm Cody Van Hell Chris Fewemore Ken Uyeda

Engage in Research & Inquiry to Find Promising PracticesName: Tower of KnowledgeWhat is it?

A place where today’s best practices can be easily found and used to build a better community. It grows taller overtime as experiences of community, City and developers are recorded; also as other communities, planning professionals, local and international research grows. Getting in touch with everyday progress.

Who is responsible for stewarding this initiative? Likely, City will have to lead

What is it serving? Everyone – facilitates best

practices in every aspect of community development research

How is it serving its beneficiaries? Excellent outcomes

How is it resourced? Initially – Through the City,

with leadership and funding

Maintained – All stakeholders provide input and knowledge

What are the missing voices? Developers General public

Who was part of the team? Barb Gosling Giyan Brenkman Afrah Rayes Pat Mahaffey


Next Steps – Testing the Prototypes The prototype models described above represent a proposed new community engagement and stakeholder feedback process for the community of Hillhurst Sunnyside. The MSTF must now test how each of these models work, individually and in concert with one another, in the real world. Different members of the group will be interested in testing different models and elements of the process. It will be imperative that implementation strategies, actions and associated learning be documented such that it can inform revisions to both the models and process overall.

Additional facilitation to coach, guide and track learning may be required. A governance structure, to support the leadership, implementation and ongoing development of this process will likely also be required.


Appendix 1 – List of AcronymsARP – Area Redevelopment PlanBRZ – Business Revitalization ZoneCPC – Community Planning CommitteeDP or DPS – Development Permits FCC – Federation of Calgary Communities HHSS – Hillhurst SunnysideHSCA – Hillhurst Sunnyside Community AssociationiC - imagineCALGARYIPC – Interim Planning CommitteeMDP – Municipal Development PlanMSTF – Multi-Stakeholder TaskforceTOD – Transit Oriented Development


Appendix 2 – MSFT Meeting AgendasApril 10, 2013Meeting Objectives:

Meet everyone who is interested in participating on the Hillhurst Sunnyside MSTF Develop a shared understanding for why we are all meeting and what we plan to accomplish Clarify the process, meeting dates and expectations of participation

AGENDA Time TOPIC WHAT & HOW6:00 Welcome & Intros Welcome & Opening round:

Back-to-Front (endearing/charming; outstanding/remarkable)

6:30 Shared Understanding of the Purpose of the MSTF

This is What I Know About You and Your Work (seek clarification, did I get this right? Anything missing?)

Can we use this question to guide our work together? Is it ‘roughly right’? How can we, the Hillhurst Sunnyside MSTF, successfully achieve the iC targets that are relevant for our community, through a community engagement and stakeholder feedback process that is inclusive, efficient and productive?

Expectations of involvement (attend all meetings; remain radically curious; come ready to participate; be creative; yes, and…)

Group Works cards to develop ‘group ground rules’

7:30 Generative Dialogue Introduce concept of ‘generative conversations’ (relate back to expectations of participation)

Get into pairs for Dialogue Interviews – Tell a story, from personal experience that talks about the current reality of the question? (5 minutes)

o Listen to understand Debrief

8:00 Next Steps Any questions? Clarification?

8:15 Close

April 24, 2013Meeting Objectives:

To review convening question and confirm it is still ‘roughly right’ To develop a shared understanding of the history of the system/process we are trying to shift To set up the work that needs to happen between this meeting and the May 8 meeting


AGENDA Time TOPIC WHAT & HOW6:00 Welcome & Intros Welcome, Food & Opening Round:

6:30 Reviewing of Last Meeting

What questions are you holding? Review the ‘roughly right’ convening question? (Deep

Democracy)How can we, the MSTF, successfully achieve a great community, as defined by Hillhurst Sunnyside’s Area Re-development Plan (or other planning document) through a community engagement and stakeholder feedback process that is inclusive, efficient and influences good decision making?

6:45 Iceberg Model Introduce the ‘iceberg model’, and as a group, work through a real example

7:15 Mapping the System Develop a shared understanding of the system/process we are trying to shift

4 rounds of small groups and big group debrief – Events, Patterns, Structures, Mental Models

8:15 Identifying Leverage Points

Looking at the history of the system, what do you notice? Thinking about the convening question (reason we are here),

where are the greatest opportunities for change/influence? Back in circle, think about the ‘leverage point’ you want to focus

on. Write down on a piece of paper, share with group and self-organize into groups

In groups, identify – who is one person (that is not here) that you could speak with between now and the next meeting to learn more about the leverage point you’ve identified? Who overcomes that challenge/problem remarkably well? (Ideally, not a member of the one of stakeholder groups here)

8:50 Next Steps & Close Pick a ‘point person’ for your group. As best you can, arrange a meeting with the person you identified and your entire group (if possible) to meet with that person. Be prepared to bring what you learned back to the larger group (specific instructions to be provided)

Any questions? Clarification?

May 8, 2013Meeting Objectives:

To review iceberg model conversation and key leverage points for making the most difference with regards to our convening question

To learn from others who have been successful at their work with the leverage points we are most interested in

To begin prototyping / model building


Pre-Read/Learning Journey #1: Tim found a great article/video that shows us three important things: (1) How shared space can be created, (2) How different mental models inform our opinions of what will work or not (in this case, mental models about traffic signals being ‘a given’, and (3) How it can take years of testing in order to see an idea fully come to life.http://m.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/04/lots-cars-and-trucks-no-traffic-signs-or-lights-chaos-or-calm/5152/

AGENDA Time TOPIC WHAT & HOW6:00 Welcome & Intros Welcome, Food & Opening Round:

6:15 Instructions for Learning Journeys

6:30 Learning Journeys with Guests

What principles and patterns can be applied to our work in Hillhurst Sunnyside?

7:30 Debrief Learning Journeys

Bring voices into the room Share one insight each that is important in helping us

understand the system we are trying to shift?8:15 Begin prototyping

(make sure groups are no more than 5 people)

Round 1 = build highest tower Round 2 = individual model that relates to your leverage point Round 3 = Connect individual models in groups of 5

8:45 Next Steps & Close Any questions? Clarification?

May 22, 2013Meeting Objectives: To review the six leverage points for change, as developed by the MSTF To begin prototyping / building the model for the Community Engagement and

Stakeholder Feedback Process

AGENDA Time TOPIC WHAT & HOW6:00 Welcome & Intros Welcome & Food

6:15 Review of Six Leverage Points for Change

1. Working with the Area Re-development Plan (ARP) as a living, evolving document (structure)

2. Backing up the ‘front end’ of the engagement process so it starts earlier in the developer’s process

a. Make engagement about learning3. Telling the story of the vision for Hillhurst Sunnyside4. Identify multiple ways to provide feedback, that is still efficient

and timelya. Onlineb. Group feedback (Community Association, BRZ, etc all at


http://m.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/04/lots-cars-and-trucks-no-traffic-signs-or-lights-chaos-or-calm/5152/

http://m.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/04/lots-cars-and-trucks-no-traffic-signs-or-lights-chaos-or-calm/5152/

one meeting)5. Develop ‘ceremonies’ and reward good behaviour6. Engage in research/inquiry to see how other neighbourhoods

and cities are overcoming similar challenges around the world

[Get into groups]6:30 Introduction to

Prototyping

(make sure groups are no more than 5 people)

Follow the 80/20 rule Get to 80% of your solution with 20% of your resources Fail forward and fail fast Build not (just) talk

o Use more of your braino Easier to use metaphor – “It represents what I say it

represents” Build together (model things, people, activities) Get feedback from the system to see what they think

Round 1 = build highest tower [prize]

6:50 Prototyping Round 2

[bring bags/trays to carry models out]

Round 2 – Build a model, WRT your leverage point, from your perpective

Tell the story of your model (not the rationale behind it)

7:20 Prototyping Round 3 Round 3 = Combine elements of your individual models

7:50 Presentations of Models

Each group presents their model (5 minutes total) 2-3 minutes to tell the story (NOT the rationale) of the model Clarifying questions Coaching questions

8:30 Iterations/Changes Using the coaching questions to guide your group, make changes / iterations/ revisions to your model Make notes on the story you want to tell to stakeholders that

attend on June 5

8:55 Next Steps & Close What to expect on June 5

June 5, 2013Meeting Objectives: To solicit feedback from additional stakeholders on the prototypes/models that are being built

for the Community Engagement and Stakeholder Feedback Process



6:15 Setting Up of Models Groups setting up their models

6:30 Review of Work Done to Date [for the benefit of guests]

Brenna to tell the story of our work

Questions/Discussion

6:45 The Story of Your Model [plenary]

Each group tells the story of their model 2-3 minutes to tell the story (NOT the rationale) of the model

7:00 Stakeholder Feedback – Open Space style

#1 - clarifying and coaching questions that you’ve already been asked and incorporated into revised model

#2 – receive new clarifying and coaching questions

8:00 Group Debrief Stakeholders – share highlights of what you saw, learned, key insights

MSTF members – new thoughts, ideas, questions, ideas for your models

8:30 Guests depart, Next Steps and Close

What happens when the MSTF is ‘done’ on June 19th?

June 19, 2013Meeting Objectives:

To incorporate learning from clarifying/coaching questions into the prototypes/models that are being built for the Community Engagement and Stakeholder Feedback Process

To write down the story/purpose of the models so that it can be written up in the final report To discuss next steps


6:15 Refining Models Small groups reconvene, review clarifying/coaching questions and refine their models one more time

6:45 Present Models Each group gets 2-3 minutes to present their model one more time. Focus on key questions:

What is the purpose of this model? What has changed? How does it advance the work described in our convening

question?


7:15 Codifying the Models Small groups get back together to discuss and write down the answers to the following questions on flip chart paper:

Name of the initiative What is it? Who is responsible for stewarding the initiative? What is it serving? How is it serving its beneficiaries? How is it resourced?

o Initially ii. Maintained What are the missing voices? Who was on the team?

Tape these up and discuss as a group Where are the linkages between the models? How can these be

woven together as one process?8:00 Next Steps Discussion How will the proposed process be tested? How will feedback be

collected and used to refine the process? How will the process be resourced now and in an on-going

manner? How will this continue to be a multi-stakeholder process? What

will the governance look like?8:50 Thank you & Closing Closing exercise


Appendix 3 – Guidelines for Prototyping The following are guidelines for prototyping, as developed by Reos Partners.

1. Give participants quiet journaling time. Have them respond to the following question: Given our focus question, our experience, who we are, our learning journeys, etc, what are the greatest leverage points?

a. In a short phrase/sentence, write this on a large piece of paperb. Go ‘round the circle so that people can read these outc. Invite participants to self-organize into groups based on what people said

2. Once in groups, provide these instructionsa. Follow the 80/20 rule – get to 80% of your solution with 20% of your resourcesb. Fail forward and fail fastc. Build not (just) talk

i. Use more of your brainii. Easier to use metaphor – “It represents what I say it represents”

d. Build togethere. Get feedback from the system to see what they think

3. Provide instructions for the actual task: Build a model of an idea/initiative/activity that will address the leverage point you have identified. (Model things, people, activities)

4. To warm people up:a. Build highest tower (1 minute)b. Build model from your perspective (individual)c. Combine elements of your various models (group)

5. First presentation a. Present the model, for 2-3 minutes b. Tell the story of the model, not the rationale behind it

i. Clarifying questionsii. Coaching questions (just record them, don’t answer; use them to guide group

conversation and iterate next model)1. Instructions for the groups asking questions: We, as stakeholders, are

here to set this team up for success6. Groups go back to build (Round 2)

a. Incorporate feedback from the systemb. Use 50% less piecesc. Be willing to let god. Present back to stakeholders by answering the questions below. Then, clarifying and

coaching questions.i. What is the purpose?

ii. What has changed?iii. How does it advance the work described in the focus question?iv. Why is it high leverage?

7. Groups go back to build (Round 3)a. Description of the model and why its high leverage

8. Codify and put on papera. Name of the initiativeb. What is it?


c. Who is responsible for stewarding the initiative?d. What is it serving?e. How is it serving its beneficiaries?f. How is it resourced?

i. Initially ii. Maintained

g. What are the missing voices?h. Who was on the team?

9. Afterwards, as a large group: Do these initiatives represent a response to the focus question?


Date post:	17-Aug-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

A Community Engagement & Stakeholder Feedback Process ... · Web viewMayor Nenshi leading change...

Documents