Michelle and Linda, You raise a topic of great interest to me in your recent messages on the "voting process". I had been using an approach to convergence other than by "votint", an approach that some of us developed at the OSonOS, 3 years ago in Toronto, but was not totally content with it so I tried something else recently that I like better.
First let me explain what the concerns were about the "voting" (dot or electronic). We were looking for a process that avoided the possible skewed results of voting on all discussion topics: duplicate or similar topics getting their votes split and not making it to the priority list while in fact, pulled together represented a real priority for the participants. The other problem we identified with using existing topic sheets on the wall is that topic content may have significantly evolved through discussions and is better reflected by a new title. Michelle, you have addressed that concern by writing on newspaper pages, topic titles as they appear in the report - not on the wall. The process developed in the OSonOS involved re-opening the space for action topics, participants writing them down on a sheet and posting them in clusters (with other similar topics) or in a Mind map fashion - any of these affinity mapping processes. The problem is that often participants came up with totally new topics as their thinking had evloved and they were into more exploration. Others saw this as a disconnect with their first discussions, afraid that the leadership would then not pay sufficient attention to the first set of discussions reported. So I was looking for a quick and simple process, for small and very large groups, that is respectful of topic conveners' initiative and leadership and addresses all of the concerns above. Here is what I tried recently with a small group and will try again as the results and improvements observed in that experience lead me to beleive it is worth trying again. In these instructions, I use the term "Initiator" instead of convener because "convener" does not translate in French and initiator does; and other facilitators have confirmed my experience ie that many English speaking people are not at the outset familiar or comfortable with "convener" either; and the image that Initiator seems to convey is a dynamic one of moving forward. Report reading instructions: While reading, identify 3 (or 5 depending on size of the event or other factors) topics or areas which you feel are of significant interest or significant concern to you. What are the things for which you now have energy to take to a next step with an action plan? Combining topics Initiators have been invited to meet at the wall half an hour earlier, before the reading part, to combine topics that are the same, similar or closely related. Initiators have to update each other as to the direction topics have evolved and each initiator must agree as to where their topic goes. A new title may be given to the cluster and posted visibly. Initiators of a grouping chose one person that will pursue the role of leader for this issue by: choosing and putting up a meeting site Post-it for the grouping title, bringing a report form to the site and by initiating the group discussion that will include all interested participants. The group will be invited to choose a champion for the action plan. If the sponsor wishes to further identify priorities, a voting process can be used (dot or computer voting being the most commonly used), the vote being on cluster titles and other topics that are different and not clusters. Explaining the process These instructions are given to Initiators during their meeting at the wall and also to the whole group before they break out into groups. All are invited to the wall to choose a topic or grouping for which they now have energy to take to a next step. They vote with their feet by going directly to the designated meeting site where they sign up on the participants list and participate to the discussion. Participants can work as a grouping/cluster or they can subdivide in smaller groups to address specific topics or issues under that cluster. The task at hand is not to discuss again the topics but to identify common ground, areas of consensus for which you can develop or propose a "what, when, who, and how" type of plan. If more information is needed, plan to find it.Where there is not a clear collective direction, plan for another open space on these issues and set them aside for now. The principles and the law of the two feet also continue to apply. Group members cannot assign work or responsibility to people who are not present to their discussion but if needed, they can plan to approach these people with proposals. The group chooses a leader that will take responsibility for keeping the plan alive. A reporter notes key points on the Planning Report form and types it in as soon as possible. Copies will be given to all participants. Another participant summarizes key points on flip chart pages for a walk about where participants circulate in the room to see the various action plans. Group members can plan to relay each other at the flip chart to provide answers to visiting participants if they wish to do so. The facilitator announces the Walk About Process The time for the walk about is specified. Participants circulate, can add ideas on a sheet attached to the action plan flip chart page(s) and can sign up as interested "action members". Conveners may be invited to meet briefly after the closing of the event to plan a meeting or future communications that will help sustain the energy and the accountability. Meetings with relevant senior managers can be discussed and coordinated from there. I am looking forward to using this approach again and would welcome your comments. Diane Gibeault
<<attachment: dgp.vcf>>