Effective Strategy for Community Change

Copyright 2014 – Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Effective Strategy for Community Change

Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.

National Association of Community Development Extension Professionals Annual Conference

Grand Rapids, MI – June 24, 2014

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

The Great and the Near Great in the White River Country

by Z. M. Horton The Baxter Bulletin

Dec 31, 1915

S. J. Hutcheson, a well known farmer and stockman ofNorfork, roping a calf

White River Ferry at Norfork, Arkansas, circa 1900

Rich DeVos & Jay Van Andel, Co-Founders of Amway


Norfork, Arkansas

(pop. 550)

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

✔

✔

✔

✔


Research Question

Why are some strategies for community change successful and others…not so much?

Answering the Question

A grounded theory exploration using a sequential mixed method

approach beginning with a qualitative phase in which semi-

structured interviews resulting were conducted with a purposively

sampled panel of experts resulting in data that was open coded using

the data spiral analysis method followed by a quasi-experimental quantitative phase in which two

contrasted groups of purposefully sampled, randomly assigned participants were surveyed,

resulting in data that was analyzed using Spearman’s rho to determine

correlation coefficients.

1. Literature review2. Interviews3. Surveys


Problem Statement

• Literature gap regarding factors contributing to effective strategy in the context of community change issues like economic development (Kwon, Berry, & Feiock, 2009).

• Civic leaders face daunting tasks of developing and implementing community change strategies (Markey, 2010).

• Very little research-based information to guide decisions about effective strategy-development processes.

• Evolution of dealing with community change • Institutionalization• Locus of control• Increasing complexity

• Tools for managing community change • Early tools• Evolving tools• Emerging tools

• Contributing theories• Strategy formation• Collaborative governance• Social innovation

Insights from the Literature

Conducted as part of the grounded theory data collection process (McGhee, Marland, and Atkinson, 2007).

Conducted to provide contextualization (Dunne, 2011) and orientation to the phenomenon (Pozzebon, Petrini, de Mellow, and Garreau, 2011).


Evolution of How We Deal with

Public Issues

Institutionalization• Pre-institutional (Pre- WW2)• Institutional (1950-1990)• Multi-Institutional (1990 to today)

Locus of Control • Control in the hands of the “elite”

(Perrucci & Pilisuk, 1970). • Most economic & community

development issues are “Type 3 Public Problems” and control is shared by a group of “nonexperts” (Heifitz and Sinder, 1988).

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics•Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

15

Co

mp

lexi

tyBoulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

The Extension Economist vs. The Rocket Scientist

16


•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

17

Co

mp

lexi




18

Co

mp

lexi




19

Co

mp

lexi


Dealing with the Complexity

20

Early Models• 1960s in universities, schools, municipalities (Hamilton, 2007)• Late 1980s/Early 1990s first economic development strategic plans

(Blackerby & Blackerby, 1995) • Borrowed from industry models (Blair,2004)

Evolving Models• Recognition that corporate models are less effective (Bryson and Roering,

1987).• U.S. Economic Development Administration’s CEDS; Cooperative Extension

Service’s Take Charge (Hein, Cole, & Ayres, 1990); Asset-Based Community Development, (Kretzmann and McKnight, 1996; Community Capitals, Flora, 1992)

Emerging Models• Effectiveness of strategic planning in business questioned (Mintzberg, 1994).• Effectiveness of strategic planning in economic & community development

questioned ( Blair, 2004; Robichau, 2010; Morrison, 2012)• Organic Strategic Planning (McNamara, 2010, Open Source Economic

Development (Merkel, 2010), Strategic Doing (Hutcheson, 2008; Hutcheson & Morrison, 2012; Walzer & Cordes, 2012)


Complexity

Community change issues are complex

Institutions emerged to

deal with the complexity

There are lots of institutions

No single institution is “in charge” of most

community issues

Complex environment

Contributing Theories

•Social Innovation•Strategy Formation•Collaborative Governance

23

Social Innovation

Social innovations… • are best designed and implemented in networks• emerge from heterogeneousness (diversity)• are framed using existing assets• are products of co-creation• are the result of collective action• should have decentralized implementation• ,when implemented should focus on tangible results

Bland, Bruk, Kim, and Lee (2010); Bouchard (2012); Mulgan, Ali, Tucker and Sanders (2007); Neumeier (2012); Oliveira and Breda-Vazquez (2012)

Strategy Formation

Strategies… • are formed intuitively• are iterative•must be designed to account for unanticipated variables•must take into account contextual values, assumptions,

beliefs, and expectations•must be flexible• should be designed collaboratively• and best developed as an intra-organizational activity

Feser, 2012; Johanson, 2009; Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg, 1978; Parnell, 2008; Rindova, Dalpiaz, and Ravasi, 2011; Sminia, 2012; Tapinos, Dyson, and Meadows, 2011

Collaborative Governance

Collaborative governance…• takes advantage of network structures• connects existing assets• focuses first on small wins• Requires decision making to be made by consensus•works when there is trust among participants• is efficient• involves successful management of both internal and external

stakeholders

Ansell and Gash, 2008; Chiclana et al., 2013; Clarke, Huxley, Mountford, 2010; Emerson, Nabatchi, and Balogh, 2012; Gibson, 2011; Johnston, Hicks, Nan, and Auer, 2011; Kwon, Berry, and Feiock, 2009; Merkle , 2010; Olberding, 2009;

Ospina and Saz-Carranza, 2010; Pammer, 1998; Poister, 2010


These Things Matter

•Organizational Structure (hierarchy, network, etc.)• Framework (asset-based, deficit-based)•Processes (planning and Implementation separate and distinct, planning and implementation integrated and iterative, etc.)• Timeframe (focused on longer-term goals, focused on shorter-term goals, etc.) • Implementation (tasks centralized with one organization, tasked disseminated among multiple organizations)

Insights from the Panel of Experts

The Qualitative Data• Population of scholars and practitioners who design curricula, teach, and/or practice strategy development for addressing public issues (economic development, community development, community health, etc.)• Sample: N=12• Semi-structured interviews (IRB-approved, anonymity)• Verbatim transcripts, data spiral analysis with three levels of coding: open, axial, selective using qualitative analysis software• 56 single-spaced pages/over 31,000 words of data

Findings from the Interviews

29

1. Network organization structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community

Variables

30

1. Network organization structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community

Independent Variables

Dependent Variable = Effectiveness

EffectivenessFor the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how would you describe its level of effectiveness:

• Completely effective• Significantly effective• Somewhat effective

IneffectivenessFor the ineffective strategy initiative you have in mind, how would you describe its level of ineffectiveness:

• Somewhat ineffective• Significantly ineffective• Completely ineffective

Organizational Structure, etc.

Measuring the Variables

Hierarchical, with a clear top and bottom

Network, with a hub and spokes

Insights from Participants

The Quantitative Data• Population of individuals who have participated in

community-based strategy initiatives to address community change (economic development, community development, community health, etc.)

• Sample of 300 (plus those reached by use of snowball sample) participants were randomly selected from PCRD contact database (N=209). Assured that Indiana was not over represented

• IRB-approved survey constructed using the factors identified in phase 1, participants randomly assigned to two contrasting groups

Findings from the Surveys

33

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses

Completely Effective

Completely Ineffective

Significantly Effective

Somewhat Effective

Somewhat Ineffective

Significantly Ineffective

Findings from the Survey

Effectiveness Continuum

Dep

ende

nt V

aria

bles

Correlation

Findings from the Surveys

35

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables

Recipe for INEFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a hierarchical organizational structure

• Frame strategies primarily around addressing problems or deficits

• Have a planning and implementation process that is linear and sequential

• Include only long-term, transformational goals

• Centralized responsibilities for implementation with one organization

• Uses metrics primarily for accountability

• Proceed even though there are low levels of trust among participants

• Proceed although participants are not ready for change

Recipe for EFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a network organizational structure• Frame strategies primarily around

building on existing assets • Have a planning and implementation

processes that is iterative • Include short-term, easy-win goals• Decentralize responsibilities for

implementation among multiple organization • Use metrics to learn what is working

and to make adjustments along the way• Build high levels of trust among

participants• Assure that participants are ready to

change

Improving Our Practice

Strategic Doing enables people to form action-oriented collaborations quickly, move them toward measurable outcomes, and make

adjustments along the way.

Strategy Answers Two

Basic Questions

Strategic Doing Divides the Two Basic Questions into Four Appreciative Questions

40

Strategic Doing Moves from the Linear to the Agile

Strategic Doing Is Iterative & Ongoing

http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/accelerating_civic_innovation_through_strategic_doing



In neighborhoods besieged by complex, wicked problems, Strategic Doing creates hope through the power of taking action with the assets or gifts that

we already possess. In that moment when we combine assets, we begin to tell a new story of opportunity and possibility, and it gives us the power to

change our lives, our neighborhoods, and our communities.Bob Brown, Associate Director of University-Community Partnerships

Michigan State University

We finally broke our “grant addiction.” Flint Community Resident

http://www.choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/theme-articles/public-sector-options-for-creating-jobs/transforming-regions-through-strategic-

doing

http://www.choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/theme-articles/public-sector-options-for-creating-jobs/transforming-regions-through-strategic-doing



• Proceedings of the 2014 International Research & Development Conference, Stuttgart, Germany (published)

• Community Development Journal (accepted)

• Economic Development Journal (accepted)

• Long Range Planning Journal (invited)• Harvard Business Review (proposed)

Recent & Forthcoming Scholarship

Practicing Strategic Doing

47

• Local & Regional Economic Development Strategy

• Community Development Strategy• Cluster Development• Local/Regional Food Systems• Community Health• Innovation Platform Development• Strategic Alliances• Inter-unit collaboration within a single

organization• National Associations

Practicing Strategic Doing

Teaching Strategic Doing

Existing & Emerging University Partnerships

Michigan State UniversityUniversity of Alaska

University of MissouriNew Jersey Institute of Technology

University of Central FloridaStanford University

Southhampton Solent University (United Kingdom)

University of the Sunshine Coast (Austrailia)

Teaching Strategic Doing

To know what you you’re going to draw, you have to begin drawing.

- Pablo Picasso

Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.765-479-7704

[email protected]/in/scotthutcheson/

www.twitter.com/jshutch64www.facebook.com/scott.hutchesonhttp://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/

For More Information & to Connect

Copyright 2014 – Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Slides available

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/



http://www.twitter.com/jshutch64

http://www.facebook.com/scott.hutcheson

http://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/

Effective Strategy for Community Change

Education

Transcript of Effective Strategy for Community Change