Theme 3: Facilitation Skills for Public...

Advanced Training Course on Moderation/Facilitation Skills 3-7 December 2002, Kathmandu, Nepal

-9-

Theme 3: Facilitation Skills for Public Participation


-10-

Planning for Participation Community and Public Participation has become increasingly important for Local Government in recent years. Participation has been recognised as being one of the fundamental elements of effective development processes and projects. Increased Participation in Government is an essential part of all types of Government reform, and is especially relevant at the Local Government level. Participation is a key element of good Governance and it also increases the efficiency and the effectiveness of the decision-making (and policy development) processes. In recent times, enhanced participation has also been required as Local Governments have become the facilitators of all kinds of relationship -building between various stakeholders in the local area. Participants may be individuals, groups, NGOs and/or members of the civil society. They may also be from other Government agencies and institutions, and Private sector representatives. Such participation does not simply happen as an unmanaged process. Successful participation is often via a facilitated process or through a series of processes. This these processes are ideally designed, delivered and managed by "facilitators". Facilitators are simply people who are skilled in the processes of facilitation. Hence this program is about enhancing your skills and knowledge about facilitation processes and techniques, so that you may, in turn, pass them on to others.


-11-

What is Public Participation? There is no official, authorised definition of 'public participation" in Local Government. In one sense there has always been some form of participation in Local Government as there have always been people taking part - the question is more usefully "which people and how do they take part?". Typically, in elected forms of Local Government, all citizens have at least been involved in the voting process, and of course others maybe involved as elected local representatives. Others may belong to local lobby groups, NGOs or the so-called 'civil society'. Or they belong to other government institutions or agencies. Or, they be representatives of local businesses, the private sector or even overseas interests. All of these individuals or groups may be regarded as the 'public' and hence all of them may be included in 'participation'. In recent times we have been increasingly using the term "stakeholder" - ie a person or persons who has a 'stake" or a "vested interest" in the outcomes of an issue being discussed. Understanding and identifying our stakeholders in any given issue is an important task and we will return to this topic later. However, let us, for the purposes of this workshop, agree that the 'public' is in fact everyone who may be affected by the outcomes of our decision-making. Therefore, our aim is to successfully identify the 'public' and then find ways that we can 'facilitate' their involvement. 'Public Participation' can be called many things : 'Community Involvement', 'Public Consultation', 'research', 'public relations'. All of these terms may relate to the involvement of people in the decision-making processes, and they imply different levels of public involvement in the processes of "Governance". Osborne and Gaebler (1993) in their book Reinventing Government give the following useful definition of Governance:

Governance is the process by which we collectively solve problems and meet our society’s needs - Government is the instrument that we use.

Other definitions of Public Participation could include:


-12-

• Public Participation simply means the way that people take part in public life, even if their roles are relatively passive or seemingly powerless,

• Public Participation is a way in which communities can participate and become involved.... using different methods and processes and in varying degrees. By taking the appropriate action, Local Government can help them to do this.

• Public participation can range from minor and infrequent comment to active and powerful influence.

In many of our systems of Local Government the following model may be seen to explain a system of 'representation'. In the past, some people have seen this model as the only way in which to conceive Local Government. Some people also believed that to give members of the public a more active role in Local Government other than that of a voter, was to undermine the role of the elected representatives to exercise public judgement and also to undermine their authority to instruct and supervise the staff. What such a strict model fails to recognise is, that in the real world, there is far more interaction and that the day-to- day business of Local Government would not function effectively if we only relied on 'representative' government. What we have come to learn in more recent times is than 'participative ' government is not an alternative to representative government - it is a valuable and vital supplement to it.

The Citizens

elected representatives...who collectively form....

The Local Authority (e.g. Council or Committee)... which sets policy and determines courses of action

who...as voters, choose...

...and employs staff to plan, manage and deliver appropriate

programs and services to....


-13-

Why have Public Participation? Although it has become commonplace for all sorts of government and non-government agencies to talk constantly about the need for more public participation, it is still worth us reflecting for a moment and reminding ourselves WHY have more public participation in Local Government? Public participation in Local Government can be viewed as both a MEANS and an END – i.e. as both a way of carrying out Local Government and also as a goal to be achieved in itself. However, these two perspectives are not mutually exclusive. When viewed as a MEANS, public participation: • Utilises the widest range of collective expertise and experience when

dealing with an issue • Means that the local authority shares the processes of making

judgements in sometimes difficult situations and hence means that the community has to also share some of the responsibility for such decisions.

• Means that community and stakeholder opinions are known “up-front’ and do not appear as “a surprise” at a later date.

• Allows the development of all sorts of useful relationships and partnerships.

• Can help change and shift community attitudes. • Can help people understand the “bigger picture” • Increases the accountability and transparency of Local Government

decision-making • Is an educational and learning process – for all the stakeholders and the

local authority itself • Brings together a variety of different (and sometimes conflicting)

viewpoints and can assist people to understand and empathize with others.

As an END, public participation: • Is a fundamental aspect of democratic good governance • Validates the local authority as a legitimate forum for local decision

making • Can be the ‘glue’ that bonds a community together. • Is (in many situations) a critical indicator of program effectiveness. • May often improve the quality of public debate • May help enhance the quality of elected representative performance. • Is a key to the real empowerment of citizens and communities.


-14-

All of these aspects are important, and as was mentioned earlier, in some cases the pursuit of these objectives will often mean that public participation is seen as both a MEANS and an END. However, achieving effective public participation in all cases is not so simple – there are definitely some drawbacks and the real potential for problems and difficulties.


-15-

EXERCISE: List down some of the drawbacks and/or difficulties that may arise because of the use of public participation. ______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________

It is important to recognise these difficulties and to be honest about them. Quite frankly, sometimes it would be easier not to have so much public participation!


-16-

Types of Public Participation Before we even begin to talk about facilitating or moderating public participation sessions we need to be clear on exactly what sort of session we are intending to run and what are our objectives and goals. There are many different models and ‘styles’ to what we might call “public participation”, and they each require different approaches in terms of planning. It is important that we are clear and honest with (at least) ourselves at this early planning stage – what exactly is it we want to do, what exactly is it we are able to do, and what would we like to happen? • What do we want to do? – to ask?, to convince?, to persuade?, to soothe

and placate?, to sell an idea?, to raise awareness?, to consult?, to get feedback?, to clarify? to validate?, to educate? to solve conflict?

• What can we do? – what are the constraints or limitations in terms of: time, money, political support, public support, government regulations, power structures, funding donor guidelines etc?

• Who is going to participate? – what do we know about the participant’s: culture, language, power, background, education, literacy skills, attitudes etc?

A number of authors have suggested that one on the most common problems encountered when trying to plan and manage public participation is that the local authority does not ask the above questions and hence gets problems because they approach the process in one way but the ‘public’ were actually expecting something else. Connor (1985) offers us a neat model of various types or approaches to public participation:

ParticipationIs……

Persuasion

Self-determination Education

Delegated Authority Information

Feedback

Joint Planning

Partnership Consultation


-17-

A Variety of Approaches to Public Participation1 A Persuasion or Influence exercise

Broad Definition – Community involvement in order to persuade or influence them that “our idea is a good idea”

Objective – to convince the public that our idea is a good idea.

Key Features – organised and orchestrated presentation of our preferred option – make it look as good as possible.

An Education and Awareness-raising exercise

Broad Definition – using information and general instruction to create awareness of programs and/or issues.

Objective – to enhance program effectiveness, to create a foundation for further and future work, to enhance community awareness and consciousness.

Key Features – a planned and managed process to raise awareness but not necessarily linked to any particular program – it still requires a firm commitment of time and resources.

An Information- gathering or Feedback exercise

Broad Definition – to disseminate information effectively and to gather feedback

Objective – to get feedback on a preferred option.

Key Features – presentation of all the details, an organised and orchestrated presentation of our preferred option – make it look as good as possible.

Consultation with a Flexible position

Broad Definition - a formal dialogue on options available to meet agreed objectives

Objective - to facilitate the development of an agreed option that meets the agreed objectives

Key Features - no preferred option, flexibility and openness to suggestions.

1 Adapted from Connor, D.M., (1985) Constructive Citizen Participation, Catalina Press, Victoria BC.


-18-

Joint Planning Broad Definition - a shared decision-making process with public involved in setting objectives as well as formulating options

Objective - to evaluate issues and develop a policy response

Key Features - the public is invited to join local authority representatives in working through the whole planning process.

Partnerships Broad Definition - a mutually agreed arrangement with obligations and control shared by all the partners. Partners may be civil society, public or private sector

Objective - to build a working partnership and utilise the resources and expertise of all the partners

Key Features - the partners are clear of their obligations as well as what control they have of the process. The key phrase is a 'mutually agreed arrangement - this may include some form of formal "contract".

Delegated Self-management

Broad Definition -the transfer of responsibilities (and sometimes resources) to a group outside the local authority.

Objective - to utilise the existing expertise within the community and provide some real empowerment.

Key Features - the recognition that the best expertise for decision-making may lie outside the authority itself. This may entail the complete transfer of both responsibilities and resources.

Self-Determination Broad Definition - the public are given as much responsibility as possible for the planning and management of issues.

Objective - to empower the community to identify and deal with issues themselves. To enhance and maintain the capacity of the community for self-determination

Key Features - the local authority often cannot delegate everything but this option attempts to maximise the self-determination capacity of the community and provide as much resource as possible.


-19-

Similarly, Sherry Arnstein (1969) developed what she called the "Ladder of Citizen Participation" which sets out various forms and types of participation and assigns different degrees and levels of influence to each type. This "Ladder" also highlights a fundamental issue for us to consider in this workshop - the issue of participant (or citizen) power and control. The ladder is composed of eight rungs and each represents the extent of citizen decision-making power. The eight rungs are divided into three groups that reflect the degree of real involvement in decision-making: • Degrees of non-participation - where the real objective is not to enable

people to participate in planning or conducting programs, but to enable powerholders to 'educate' or 'cure' the participants.

• Degrees of tokenism - varying levels of tokenism where the 'have-nots' are allowed to hear and to have a voice, but are not afforded the power to ensure their views are heard or given the right to decide.

• Degrees of citizen power - varying levels of transfer of decision-making power from powerholders to citizens providing opportunities for negotiation, formulation of trade-offs and full managerial power.

Citizen control Delegated power Partnership Placation Consultation Informing Therapy Manipulation

Further explanation of the "rungs" in the "ladder" describes:

Degrees of citizen power

Degrees of tokenism

Degrees of non-participation


-20-

• Manipulation / Therapy. Both are non-participative. The aim is to cure

or educate the participants. The proposed plan is best and the job of participation is to achieve public support by public relations.

• Informing. A most important first step to legitimate participation. But

too frequently the emphasis is on a one-way flow of information. No channel for feedback.

• Consultation. Again a legitimate step - attitude surveys, neighbourhood

meetings and public enquiries. But Arnstein still feels this is just a window dressing ritual.

• Placation. E.g. co-option of hand-picked 'representatives' onto

committee. It allows citizens to advise or plan ad infinitum but retains for power holders the right to judge the legitimacy or feasibility of the advice.

• Partnership. Power is in fact redistributed through negotiation between

citizens and power holders. Planning and decision-making responsibilities are shared e.g. through joint committees.

• Delegated power. Citizens holding a clear majority of seats on

committees with delegated powers to make decisions. Public now has the power to assure accountability of the programme to them.

• Citizen control. Citizens handle the entire job of planning, policy

making and managing a programme e.g. neighbourhood corporation with no intermediaries between it and the source of funds.

Obviously, our aim is to “climb up the ladder” towards more genuine empowerment.However, no matter what approach you take to public participation, it is important that you are clear and honest with yourself about what it is you want to try and achieve and what is possible. Ideally, of course, we would like to suggest that you are also always honest with the public and any other stakeholders…. But sometimes you may be forced into a position where you simply have to follow orders and do a ‘public relations’ job on some issue that you have mixed feelings about. In such circumstances you can only do you best to be as ethical as possible.

What kind of public participation process are you going to facilitate? Planning the Process A number of authors have suggested that the most common reason for a lack of success in projects that involve public participation, is simply….a lack of planning. Without proper planning, sessions could be targeted at the wrong groups, important stakeholders may be missed, the location and times for sessions could be inappropriate- plus a whole host of other problems.

Dtho H •

•

•

Note: In some situations, as the facilitator you may not be able to directly affect the planning and design of the whole process – so you may have to work with a process designed without your involvement. However, in many situations you may be able to have some input to the planning and design process.


-21-

avid Wilcox in The Guide to Effective Participation (1996) gives a useful eoretical framework for thinking about and planning for, participation. Much

f the following sections are copied and/or adapted from his work:

e suggests some important points:

There are different levels of participation appropriate for different situations, and it is important to decide where you stand. There isn't one `community' but many interests - or stakeholders - to consider. Participation takes time.


-22-

A Framework for Planning Participation – Level, Phase and Stakeholders The framework is developed from Arnstein’s idea of a ‘ladder of participation’ – but it also adds two other dimensions to the idea of the level of participation on a ladder: • The Phase or stage of the participation process. • Different interests - or stakeholders - may be involved in different ways

and at different levels or stages of participation. 1. The Level of Participation - where do you stand?

Arnstein’s “ ladder of participation” model suggests that some levels are better than others. However, Wilcox suggests in his framework, it is more of a case of “horses for courses” - different levels are appropriate in different circumstances. The key issue is what `stance' are you taking as someone managing a participation process, or controlling resources, and your reasons for doing so. He suggests thinking of five levels - or stances - which offer increasing degrees of control to the others involved. • Information -The least you can do is tell people what is planned. • Consultation - You offer a number of options and listen to the

feedback you get.


-23-

• Deciding together -You encourage others to provide some additional ideas and options, and join in deciding the best way forward.

• Acting together -Not only do different interests decide together what is best, but they form a partnership to carry it out.

• Supporting independent community initiatives -You help others do what they want - perhaps within a framework of grants, advice and support provided by the resource holder.

The 'lower' level of participation keep control with the initiator - but they lead to less commitment from others.

2. Phases of Participation Projects

Participation is a process in which people have to think through what they want, consider some options, and work through what should happen – Wilcox suggests four phases:

• Initiation - The phase at which something triggers the need to involve people, and you start to think what that involves.

Supporting Acting Together Deciding Together Consultation Information

Substantial Participation

• Preparation - The period when you think through the process, make the first contacts, and agree an approach.

• Participation - The phase in which you use participation methods

with the main interests in the community. • Continuation - What happens in this phase will depend very much

on the level of participation - you may be reporting back on consultation, or at another level setting up partnership organisations.

Of course, in reality life is never that tidy, and we find that we are pitched into trying to do things without enough planning. Often it is difficult to see what to do before trying something out, and reflecting on what happened. It may only be then that we find out what the real problem is. This cycle goes on throughout any process to carry out a project or programme. Participation is no different. Because participation doesn't run on predetermined tracks it isn't possible to set out a step by step guide - every situation will be different. However there are some key issues which keep cropping up, and some are more important in particular phases. Initiation The process of participation may be triggered in many ways:

• A campaign of protest may be turned into a more collaborative programme of action.

• An authority may promote a project.

• Government may announce funding is available for community-based projects.

Some key questions at the initiation phase

1. Who is going to champion the process?

2. Who pays? Who administers? Who convenes ?

3. What are you trying to achieve through participation?

4. Who are the key interests in the community?

5. Who are the key interests within any organisation promotingparticipation, and what are their attitudes?

6. What level of participation is likely to be appropriate and acceptable?

7. How will you know when you have succeeded?
Advanced Training Course on Moderation/Facilitation Skills
3-7 December 2002, Kathmandu, Nepal -24-


-25-

Often situations will be messy and unclear, with different people and groups having different views of what is going on. In order to move into a planned process of participation, it is important to start asking some key questions. These will recur in different forms throughout.

Preparation As these key issues become clearer, it is important to prepare on three fronts: • Initial groundwork with whoever is promoting the process. • Agreeing the approach with key interests . • Developing a strategy. Most experienced facilitators and trainers agree that 80% of successful participation lies in preparation - so don't skimp on it . Groundwork with the promoter

Many experienced facilitators suggest that the toughest problems in participation processes do not stem from apathy, ignorance or lack of skills among residents or other community interests -given time and effort these can be worked through – but the most intractable problems arise because organisations promoting participation aren't clear about what they want to achieve, are fearful of sharing control, and seldom speak with one voice. Unless these issues are tackled at the outset they are likely to lead to frustration, conflict and disillusion further down the line. The key issue is, what does the promoting organisation want from the participation process? The most common goals are:

• Improving the quality of the outcome - the project or programme.

• Developing the capabilities of the participants.

• Building working relationships of benefit for the future.

• Increasing ownership and the acceptability of the outcome.

In preparing a participation process it is important to consider the mix of these desired goals, and whether they are they realistic.

In particular, is there the internal commitment within the organisation to bring them about? What is the internal agenda?:


-26-

• What does the organisation want to achieve from the participation process?

• What are the boundaries of the task? What is fixed, and what is still open?

• What level of participation is appropriate with the different outside interests?

• Can the organisation respond to the outcomes of the process or are they intending to manipulate the participants towards pre-determined outcomes?

• What is the `real' agenda? Are there any hidden agendas?

• What is the history of the issues, and what are the positions of the various parties?

• Who owns the process within the organisation? Is there more than one owner and if so how will this be managed?

• Are the senior officers and politicians prepared to make a public commitment and to be accessible to the participants?

• Who is involved internally? Have they got their internal act together? Are they really committed to the process? Will they stick at it when the going gets tough?

• What resources are available? How much time is there?

• How does this measure up to the support or involvement expected by community interests?

If you are acting as the manager and facilitator of the participation process it is important that the internal `client' understands, agrees and values your role.

Understanding key interests and identifying stakeholders

Before starting the formal processes of producing leaflets, calling meetings or running workshops it is important to understand who's who and what outcomes they may be looking for. Here's a checklist of some of the early tasks and issues:

• Sketch out a quick outline of what is already known about the topic or issue. Be careful to be honest about what is known. What is rumour, and what is opinion.


-27-

• Identify all the potential stakeholders (see the later section for more detail) – don’t forget to include all the ‘internal’ and ‘external’ stakeholders

• Meet some of the key stakeholders if possible. Get out and network formally and informally. Open new lines of communication. Meet one-to-one when possible to encourage candid responses.

• Consider the potential obstacles to participation, for example: rigid views, authoritarian cultures, grudges and antagonisms, passive and hard-to-reach interest groups, professionals and technicians with poor communication skills, groups defending perceived power and status, or those lacking the confidence, skills, or knowledge to participate. How will these be managed?

• There are usually four main groups of participants: politicians; decision makers and resource holders; activists; and ordinary people. How will you get beyond the (often self-appointed) activists? How will you pro-actively involve hard-to-reach groups?

• Not everyone has an equal stake: build in different levels of involvement for different levels of commitment and purpose. Not everyone needs to be involved in every issue at every level and at every stage.

• Research the availability of resources and the immovable constraints such as time and distance

• Start the initial work to design your process and strategy Agreeing on the approach - a strategy After discussions with the promoting organisation and some of the external interests, you should be able to develop a strategy for the participation process. The precise nature of the strategy will, of course, depend upon circumstances and the level of participation sought with different interests.

Some of these issues may have to evolve with the process: it may not be possible to agree everything at the start. If it seems worth the risk, you may just have to get some action off the ground and work out the details as you go along. You should also:

• Bear in mind that people have limited patience and attention spans: how will you deal with long lead times?

• Be sure everyone understands the constraints: what the process will not achieve for them. Unrealistic expectations can only lead to disillusionment.


-28-

• Be realistic about what can be achieved with the time and resources available.

Participation During this phase you will be running events, producing printed materials and using a range of methods. (see later section for techniques) The following are some of tips which emerged from public participation sessions with experienced practitioners about this phase of the process: • Don't underestimate people. Give them tools to manage complexity

don't, shield them from it. • Divide the issues into bite-sized chunks. • Start with people's own concerns and the issues relevant to them. Don't

superimpose your own ideas and solutions at the outset. • Help people widen their perceptions of the choices available and to

clarify the implications of each option. • Build in visible early successes to develop the confidence of participants.

`Staircase' skills, trust and commitment to the process: offer a

Strategy checklist As far as possible gain agreement of all parties to the following:

• The aims of the process and how progress will be evaluated.

• The `feel' of the process: the style and tone.

• Timing and location of sessions

• The groupings, forums and decision cycles to be employed.

• Precisely what authority is being delegated to whom.

• The appropriate approaches and techniques, taking into account time scale, objectives, resources, openness of information sharing etc.

• The ground-rules: how are we going to deal with each other?

• The resources available and any conditions attached.

• The technical and administrative services available.

• The mechanisms for recording and disseminating information.

• The level of support and resources to be made available.


-29-

progressive range of levels of involvement and help people to move up the ladder.

• Direct empowerment training for participants may not be appreciated - it may be better to develop skills more organically as part of the process.

• If at all possible, avoid going for a comprehensive irreversible solution. Set up an iterative learning process, with small, quick, reversible pilots and experiments.

• Continuously review and widen membership. As new interests groups are discovered how will they be integrated into the process?

• Help people to build their understanding of complex and remote decision processes which are outside the delegated powers of the participation process but which are affecting the outcomes.

• Nurture new networks and alliances. • Plans must be meaningful and lead to action. • Manage the link between the private ability of the various interest

groups to deliver on their commitments and the public accountability and control of the implementation.

• Build in opportunities for reflection and appraisal. • Make sure people are having fun!

Continuation - keeping going

The final phase in a participation process. By this time it should be clear how any agreed proposals are going to be taken forward. How this is done will depend very much on the level of participation. At one level - of consultation - you may have worked through some prepared options with different interests and then agreed to take the results away for evaluation and implementation. At another level - working together - you may be setting up new partnership organisations.

Checklist • Did we achieve what we set out to do in the process?

• Were the key interests happy with the level of involvement?

• Have we reported back to people on the outcomes?

• Are responsibilities clear for carrying projects forward?

• Are there major lessons we can learn for the next time?

3. Being clear about your Role and Identifying Stakeholders At any phase of the project there may be a variety of stakeholders involved, and possibility involved at different levels at different times. Some people will want - or demand - more involvement than others. Others will wish not to be involved. Identifying these different interests - stakeholders - and negotiating their level of participation appropriate is the third dimension of the framework. Some of the main issues in participation are about where power and control lies between these interests, and also the role of `you' in this. Before starting a participation process it is important to reflect on the role you have - the hat you are wearing. The way you act may be influenced by how far you control resources, to whom you are answerable. People's attitudes to you will certainly be influenced by the role and power they think you have. It is also essential to identify your stakeholders and clarify their role in participation

Politicians Officers Activists Residents Businesses Local Groups Government NGOs

It is also essential to identify your stakeholders and clarify their role inparticipation.

Who are you? For example: Someone in a position of power controlling funds or other resources. Someone with influence because you are planning or managing a participation process. Someone with professional expertise or knowledge? What do you want to achieve by working a participatory style? To try and develop plans that meet people's expectations. To give people a say in the plans. To give people control over the solutions. Who will have the final say over decisions? Yourself. A management team. Everyone who gets involved. A political institution or other body


-30-


-31-

Stakeholder Analysis - Vital Planning Before You Start What is Stakeholder analysis? Stakeholder analysis is the identification of a project's key stakeholders, an assessment of their interests, and the ways in which these interests affect project riskiness and viability. It is linked to both institutional appraisal and social analysis: drawing on the information deriving from these approaches, but also contributing to the combining of such data in a single framework. Definitions Stakeholders are persons, groups or institutions with interests in a project or programme. Primary stakeholders are those ultimately affected, either positively (beneficiaries) or negatively (for example, those involuntarily resettled). Secondary stakeholders are the intermediaries in the aid delivery process. This definition of stakeholders includes both winners and losers, and those involved or excluded from decision-making processes. Key stakeholders are those who can significantly influence, or are important to the success of the project Who should do the analysis? Certainly, a team approach is likely to be more effective than an individual doing the analysis alone. However, stakeholder analysis often involves sensitive and undiplomatic information. Many interests are covert, and agendas are partially hidden. In many situations there will be few benefits in trying to uncover such agendas in public. Draw up a chart

Prepare a chart on a whiteboard, or perhaps butcher paper, like this: Stakeholders Interests Att Inf Imp Strategies & Actions

E C E C

Att=attitude Inf=influence Imp=importance E=estimate C=confidence

Identifying the stakeholders and creating a list Identify and list the stakeholders. These may be individuals, or stakeholder groups, or some combination. Stakeholders can be listed and categorised in various ways. One starting point is to divide a list into primary and secondary stakeholders. Primary stakeholders are those people and groups ultimately affected by the project. This includes intended beneficiaries or those negatively affected (for example, those involuntarily resettled). In most projects primary stakeholders will be categorised according to social analysis. Thus, primary stakeholders should often be divided by gender, social or income classes, occupational or service user groups. In many projects, categories of primary stakeholders may overlap (eg. women and low-income groups; or minor forest users and ethnic minorities). Secondary stakeholders, including the local authority itself , are intermediaries in the process of delivering goods or services to primary stakeholders. They can be divided into funding, implementing, monitoring and advocacy organisations, or simply governmental, NGO and private sector organisations. In many projects it will also be necessary to consider key individuals as specific stakeholders (eg. heads of departments or other agencies, who have personal interests at stake as well as formal institutional objectives). Also note that there may be some informal groups of people who will act as intermediaries. For example, politicians, local leaders, respected persons with social or religious influence. Within some organisations there may be sub-groups which should be considered as stakeholders. For example, public service unions, women employees, specific categories of staff.

Advanced Training Course on Moderation/Facilitation Skills

Checklist for identifying stakeholders • have all primary and secondary stakeholders been listed? • have all potential supporters and opponents of the project been identified? • has gender analysis been used to identify different types of female stakeholders (at

both primary and secondary levels)?

• have primary stakeholders been divided into user/occupational groups, or incomegroups?

• have the interests of vulnerable groups (especially the poor) been identified? • are there any new primary or secondary stakeholders that are likely to emerge as a

result of the project?
3-7 December 2002, Kathmandu, Nepal
-32-


-33-

Identifying stakeholders' interests in relation to the project The resulting list of stakeholders forms the basis of an overview of each stakeholder's interests in the project, and the project's likely impact on them. Interests of all types of stakeholders may be difficult to define, especially if they are "hidden", or in contradiction with the openly stated aims of the organisations or groups involved. Estimate attitude (and confidence) The likely or actual impact of the project on the stakeholders will then give you some idea towards what their attitude towards the project may be. Column 3: Your best estimate of the stakeholder's attitude, from supportive to opposed. It is usually adequate to use a 4-category code: ! ++ positive ! + uncertain ! - weakly opposed ! -- strongly opposed Column 4: How confident you are about your estimate in column 3. Here you can use: ! ✔ for fully confident ! ? for reasonably confident (some missing information, perhaps, or

some doubts about interpretation) ! ?? for an informed guess ! ??? for wild guess or sheer fantasy Unless the group achieves immediate agreement, then at least one question mark is warranted.

• what are the stakeholder's expectations of the project? • what benefits are there likely to be for the stakeholders? • what resources will the stakeholder wish to commit (or avoid committing) to the project? • what other interests does the stakeholder have which may conflict with the project? • how does the stakeholder regard others in the list?


-34-

Assessing Influence Influence is the power which stakeholders have over a project - to control what decisions are made, facilitate its implementation, or exert influence which affects the project negatively. Influence is perhaps best understood as the extent to which people, groups or organisations (ie. stakeholders) are able to persuade or coerce others into making decisions, and following certain courses of action. Power may derive from the nature of a stakeholder's organisation, or their position in relation to other stakeholders (for example, line ministries which control budgets and other departments). Other forms of influence may be more informal (for example, personal connections to ruling politicians). It may also be necessary to consider stakeholders whose power, and therefore influence, will increase because of resources introduced by the project. Column 5: Your best estimate of the influence of the stakeholder. A three-category code is usually enough – ! H high; this person or group has power of veto, formally or ! informally ! M medium; you could probably achieve your goals against this ! person's or group's opposition, but not easily ! L this person can do little to influence the outcomes of your ! intended actions Column 6: How confident you are about your estimate in column 5. You can use the same codes as before Importance Importance indicates the priority given by the local authority to satisfying stakeholders' needs and interests through the project. Importance is likely to be most obvious when stakeholder interests in a project converge closely with the local authority's objectives. Importance is distinct from influence. There will often be stakeholders, especially unorganised primary stakeholders, upon which the project places great priority (eg. women, resource poor farmers, slum dwellers, ethnic minorities etc). These stakeholders may have weak capacity to participate in the project, and limited power to influence key decisions.

• which problems, affecting which stakeholders, does the project seek to address oralleviate?

• for which stakeholders does the project place a priority on meeting their needs,interests and expectations?

• which stakeholder interests converge most closely with policy and project objectives?


-35-

You could rate the importance simply as: H=high, M=medium and L=low Plan Strategies and Actions Plan your strategies for approaching and involving each person or group. Look at all the information you have plotted on your chart. Using this information you can begin to target various aspects of your program to best meet both the needs/interests of the stakeholders in conjunction with the project objectives. Your estimates in columns 2 to 4 help you to do this. Your strategy is written in column 6. It usually takes the form of obtaining more information, or of involving the stakeholder in the planning for the change. Importance usually implies that you form a close working relationship with those stakeholders (and /or their representatives) and that you will typically involve them and inform them in all aspects of the program. In general, question marks indicate a need for more information. The more question marks, and the more influence the person/group has, the greater the need. On some occasions you will choose to approach the person/group concerned. On other occasions you may instead approach someone else who can be assumed to know about the person's attitude or influence. (On occasion, you may want to obtain some of this information before completing the analysis.) In general, high influence indicates a need to involve the person in some way. (Or, if you choose not to do this, and they are opposed, you may choose to find some way to neutralise their influence.) The people or groups who require most attention are those who are influential and opposed - but check that your assumptions are correct and that they are not more supportive than you think. For involvement, decide the extent. For example: ! involved only as informants ! consulted ! directly involved in decision-making ! involved as co-researchers and co-actors ! or some similar categories. Where the stakeholder is a group rather than an individual, you will probably want to include in your decision the style of participation appropriate: for example, direct participation of everyone, or representation or some similar categories.


-36-

Recording Techniques One of the most important tasks in any public facilitation process is to record the outcomes of your discussions and deliberations. Not only is it important as a recorded result of the particular session you have been involved in, but it may also be necessary and useful for the conduct of other sessions. However, you may also wish to record other things such as: what happens during the meeting, who was there etc. How and what you record will depend on a number of factors: • The nature of the project, the stage in the project you are’ at, and the

exact details of the information you wish to record • The availability of support people (perhaps from within groups) to act as

‘recorders’ • The techniques available to you (paper, newsprint, photocopiers,

electronic whiteboard, photographs, video, tape recording etc) • The skills that you (and others in the process – including participants)

have to both utilise and use the various techniques. This is especially important in relation to literacy skills.

• What purpose you have for the recorded information – is it public? Is it needed for other sessions? Will it go into a report?

• Will the recorded information be given back to the participants?- if so…. Why?…When and in what format?

• The location of your sessions – what resources (if any) will be there? What do you need to take with you? What transport is available between

• What techniques will prove to be the most helpful during a session and cause the least disruption to the group.

• The funds and resources available to the project. • Whether people wish to be identified • The effect of any privacy or confidentiality laws in the country where

you are working. • How long the session(s) will take –will they be over a number of days?


-37-

In some cases, the selection of inappropriate recording techniques can result in not only a failure to ‘record’ but also cause problems in the conduct of the workshop. For example, in a number of cultures it is forbidden to record the image of a human being (by photograph or video for instance), and in many others people may object to having their picture taken. Forcing people to speak into microphones in order to record their comments often results in stilted comments or (even worse) domination of the session by the experienced “microphone-hoggers”. Recording discussions on newsprint or flipchart is the most common form but requires that someone retrieves all the sheets of paper and transcribes them into a written report. Writing minutes into a laptop computer or a notebook is useful but it means that the group cannot see what is being recorded (see the notes on group memory) – they also may not trust that you are recording accurately?

Recording Checklist

Why are you recording? • To collect a record of outcomes • To include outcomes and events in a written report • To give a record of events back to the participants • To create a record of events that can be agreed to and ‘signed-off” by

participants • To allow all participants to see the results of their work in progress • To take information from one session to another • To gather data for later analysis • To gather “rough” data to turn into a more’ refined’ report later • To record all of the processes used in the project • To put the information into a workbook, videotape or a website • To create database or contact list for future use. • To gather information about attendees


-38-

What do you want to record? • General Comments made during the session • Events that happened during the session • Results and outcomes in an agreed set of statements • Names and contact details of participants • Other participant details • Images of the session – including location, participants, events. • Sounds and recordings • Exact details of everything that was said • Exact details of everything that happened • General comments and conclusions • Exact comments in people’s own words

What recording methods are available to you?

• Newsprint or flipchart paper • Blackboard/Whiteboard • Electronic whiteboard • Laptop computer • Pen and paper • Photo camera or Video camera • Mini tape recorder • Tape recorder with microphones • Notebooks, notecards, flashcards • Overhead projector and transparency film • Data projector

What do you know about the workshop session?

• How formal/informal is the session? • How controversial is the session likely to be? • Do you have a tight agenda? • How big is the group? • What sort of people will be attending?

o Will they wish to be identified? o Will they be confident or a little nervous? o Have they had previous experience of this kind of session? o Will they be able to read and write? o Will they be confident to speak up? o Will they be suspicious of the process? o Will they want to see the results of the workshop before you leave? o Would they object to being filmed or photographed o Would they object to be tape recorded?

• Will you be inside or outside? • What equipment will be there for you to use?


-39-

• Will you have to record as well as facilitate – will there be any resource persons to assist you?

• Will you have to carry in all your supplies – by car, by foot, by plane or boat?

• Is there electricity? • Will the group be sitting down? At tables? In groups? • Will it be night or day? • Will they be serving drinks or food? Will there be breaks? • How long will the session go for? More than one day? • Is the workshop location secure –can you leave things in the room until

the next session? • Will it be hot or cold? • Do you have some way of sticking things up on a wall for display?

A Summary of Alternative Recording Techniques

Technique Issues Writing onto newsprint or flipchart paper

• Allows direct recording in front of the group • Can include pictures and diagrams as well as words • Good for creating a Group Memory (see later section) • Can allow groupwork directly onto the paper • Requires wall space for display –must be used

indoors – and way of sticking to the wall • May not be so useful if people cannot read • Requires that all pieces of paper are noted and then

stored/transported carefully • Not good as a permanent record • Can be retrieved to use again at a later date • Will require transcribing for insertion in a report or

copying and distribution • Could be photographed for permanent record. • Facilitator can also be the recorder • Can be prepared beforehand (limited) • Public record for all to see • Can be “signed off”

Writing onto plain paper (A4 or A3)

• Requires table or desk space for facilitator and/or recorder

• Size makes the format hard to see with a large group • Good for interaction and participation • Easy to photocopy • Good way to order and re-order bits of information

into groups or categories • Requires careful transportation to keep relevant

sheets together. • Requires wall space (or a big table) for work and


-40-

Technique Issues display

• Will require transcribing • Public record for all to see • Can be “signed off”

Using Notecards or PostIt notes

• Easy to transport • Good for smaller groups • Can be used for individual exercises with large

groups • Not so useful for pictures and diagrams • Not easy to copy • Good for ordering and re-ordering chunks of

information into groups or categories. • Public record for all to see

Writing in Journal or Logbook

• Is best done by a recorder not the facilitator • May not be fast enough to exactly capture what was

said • Is often a bit confronting for the rest of the group • Is a secret record that cannot be easily shared with the

rest of the group • Can collect records of all the sessions in one book • Will require transcription for inclusion in a report • Is not useful for work in progress • Usually is for the production of minutes which are an

interpretation of what happened • If shorthand is used it is very secret.

Using standard forms • Some records can be usefully gathered using standard forms

• Participant details can be efficiently gathered using a standard form

• Some parts or activities of the workshop could be recorded on a standard from.

• Forms can promote consistency in questioning Tape recording • Mini-tape recorders have a limited time limit on each

tape and don’t give good quality sound records • It is hard to manage the sound recording of large

groups • The process of recording can be intrusive and

distracting • Sound recording can give accurate audio records of

comments and events Photography

• Can give accurate image record of events • Images are easy to store


-41-

Technique Issues • Images are useful tools for group decision making • Some people may object to being photographed. • Often requires a photographer as well as a facilitator • Does not capture written information well • Is not easily shared with the group. • Can be used as a powerful symbol in a lengthy

project. Video • Can give an accurate audio and visual record

• Can be played back to group (if equipment available) • Is expensive technology • Requires an operator and a facilitator • Does not record written information well • Some people may be concerned about being

videotaped.


-42-

Creating and Working with Group Memory Group memory is a vital part of consultative and participative processes in local government. It is an important aspect to design into your workshop sessions. The group memory is exactly what it says: it serves a s both a short-term (working) memory for the group and a long-term memory where information is stored and retrieved. It is a key factor in helping people build a shared information and knowledge base, maintain focus, and build agreements. It also is a vital aspect of the ‘social learning’ perspective of participative processes – it helps people what they have learned through the process so far. Group memory is created by ensuring that things are recorded and made available to the group in a short-term fashion (by being up on a blackboard, whiteboard, or on newsprint) and then stored but also retrievable for future use – through permanent records or through summary sheets. If you are conducting more than one session with a group over time then it is important to keep the group memory fresh and alive by summarising the work done to date and clarifying the current position at every meeting. This may involve producing some form of record from previous sessions to ‘jog’ the group memory.

One of the simplest tools to create the group memory in a form that can be easily retrieved involves the use of many sheets of newsprint that are stuck up on the wall. By working directly onto the newsprint the group can immediately see that information is being stored and recorded in front of their eyes. The facilitator can work alone as a facilitator/recorder but ideally it is good to have a recorder. The recorder stands and writes the key ideas and phrases on the sheets as the group works through the workshop processes. This creates an


-43-

immediate and visible record of what the group is working on. Even though there may be abbreviations or a sort of ‘shorthand’ , if the group can see and understand the text then they will not expect every word to be written down. However, the recorder needs to work fast, keeping up with the group and not worrying too much about grammar or complete sentences – just getting the key words up on the wall in a form that the group members can see and understand at a glance. The value of creating and using group memory: • Keeps the issues in front of the group and helps them to stay focussed • Lets the group see where they have come from , and where they are up

to. • Makes it easier to see trends and patterns • Makes it easier to see gaps in the information gathering or idea-

generation processes • Prevents backtracking over the same issues again and again • Creates a record of what agreements have been made and shows what

issues still need resolving • Sets groups up to identify and face issues together –rather than on their

own – can help reduce polarization and other non-productive conflict • Allows someone coming in late to immediately see what the group is up

to • Helps ensure that ideas are clearly articulated and discussed before

commitments are made • Agreements and action items can be easily reviewed at the end of the

workshop – ensuring that the next steps of action and responsibility are clear

• Can be taken away, transcribed and then returned to the group to allow them to build a ‘running record’ of the whole process

• Can be used at the opening of the next session for clarification purposes. • Allows the group to quickly articulate and communicate their work to

others • Allows an important degree of reflective learning. Note: if you are going to use newsprint or flipchart paper, do not put your paper on a stand, write on it and then ‘flip’ it over where it can’t be seen. Make sure that even if you cannot have all of your newsprint already up on a wall and ready for use, you take the paper off the stand and post it up where everyone can see it while you keep working. It is a good idea if time permits to make sure that you give the group some time to confirm its group memory at the end of each session (see the later sections on Closure)


-44-

Compiled by: Mr. Robert Mellor CLG-UTS

These notes are prepared for educational purposes only, using materials from many different sources. The notes intentionally utilise materials from a wide variety of resources so that you may further explore the original sources at a later date. Some of the key sources are: • Wadsworth, Yoland (1997) ."Do it Yourself Social Research",

• www.toolkitparticipation.com

• Electronic Discussion on Group Facilitation - www.albany.edu/cpr/gf/

• Connor, D.M., (1985) Constructive Citizen Participation, Catalina Press, Victoria BC.

• Kearney, Lynne, the Facilitator’s Toolkit, HRD Press, 1995

• Dick, B. (1997) Stakeholder analysis [On line]. Available at http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/stake.html

• Overseas Development Administration (ODA), Guidance Note on How to do Stakeholder Analysis [online], www.euforic.org/gb/stake1.htm

Theme 3: Facilitation Skills for Public...

Documents

Transcript of Theme 3: Facilitation Skills for Public...