Collaboration: Why Bother? LaneCounty MovingForwardTogether - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Collaboration: Why Bother? Lane
County 
 Moving
Forward
Together 
 June
11,
2008 
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 1

Continuum of Conflict Continuum of Conflict Management Approaches Management Approaches Informal




Negotiations


Collaborative

Facilitation/



Arbitration


Legislative


Judicial
 Discussion























Problem










Mediation




Admin








Decisions




Decisions
 









































Solving
































Hearings
 Proactive 







































































 Reactive Proactive Reactive 
 Decisions
made
by
the
parties






































Decisions
made
by
third
party
 Greater
interdependence















































Interdependence
varies 
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 2

Public Engagement  Lots
of
approaches
or
techniques
 Lots
of
approaches
or
techniques
  Need
to
be
clear
about
the
goal
for
public
engagement
 Need
to
be
clear
about
the
goal
for
public
engagement
  Right
size
it
 Right
size
it
  Collaboration
can
be
highly
effective,
but
it
should
be
used
in 
the
right
circumstances
  Don’t
assume
that
because
you
have
the
collaboration 
hammer,
every
problem
is
a
nail
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 3

Public Involvement Public Involvement Approaches Approaches Public
meeting
 Press
release
   Working
meeting
 Radio
call-in
show
   Public
hearing
 Petition
   Community
forum
 Survey
   Open
house
 Focus
group
interviews
   Blue
Ribbon
panel
 Brainstorming
sessions
   Task
force
 Charrette
   Advisory
committees
 Share
background
studies
or   
assessments

 Facilitated
dialogue
  Conflict
mediation
  Use
of
existing
civic
groups
and
others
  Internet
tools
  Exhibit
with
feedback
device
  Email
  Brochures
  Have
an
“800”
number 
  Meet
with
opinion
leaders
  June 2008 The Osprey Group 4

Satisfaction with Public Processes Substantive:
Were
 the
right
issues
 addressed?
 Psychological:
 Procedural:
Was
 Was
I
heard
and
 the
process
fair?
 respected?
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 5

Collaboration: What is It?  People
with
differing
views
and
interests
working
together
in
a 
systematic
and
organized
way
to
find
workable
solutions
to 
shared
problems
  Typical
ingredients:
  Multiple
stakeholders
with
diverse
interests
  Neutral
facilitation
  Decisions
by
consensus
  Process
agreed
to
by
the
parties
  Multiple
viable
options
identified
  Government
entity
is
initiator
  Independent
technical
resources
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 6

Not a Panacea  Not
a
good
idea
when Not
a
good
idea
when :
  Not
everyone
agrees
there
is
a
problem
or
conflict
  When
one
or
more
of
the
key
parties
have
better
ways
to 
achieve
their
interests
(BATNA)
  Resolving
the
issue
is
not
that
important
to
key
stakeholders
  It
is
difficult
to
identify
stakeholders
who
are
willing
to 
systematically
address
the
issue
  Decisions
need
to
be
made
quickly
or
the
decision
that
will 
be
made
is
clear
  Critical
thinking
is
not
allowed
to
generate
solutions
that
are 
better
for
everyone
  Resources
are
limited
and
other
less
expensive
approaches 
can
address
the
problem
adequately
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 7

Ingredients for Success  Consider
when Consider
when :
 :
  Issues
are
high
priority
to
all
parties
  All
affected
stakeholders
are
willing
and
able
to
participate
  No
single
party
can
resolve
the
situation
on
its
own
  There
is
the
view
that
by
working
together,
a
better
solution 
can
be
reached
than
by
working
alone
  Outcomes
or
decisions
are
genuinely
in
question
  Implementation
is
important
and
commitment
to
the
solution 
is
desired
  There
is
reasonable
time
  There
are
resources
available
  Neutral
facilitation
is
available
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 8

Collaboration Success Stakeholders
 Potential
for
 Outcomes
 High
Priority
 willing
to
 a
Better
 Genuinely
in
 Issues
 Participate
 Solution
 Question
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 9

Examples  Boulder,
Colorado
  Challenge:
Recognition
of
transportation
limits
and
need
for 
more
creative
solutions
  Thornton,
Colorado
  Challenge:
Following
a
divisive
Walmart
siting
decision, 
need
for
comprehensive
land
use
planning
in
area
that
will 
double
size
of
the
City
  Columbia,
Missouri
  Challenge:
Aging
Interstate,
growing
college
community, 
early
set
positions
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 10

Collaboration Success I Boulder, Colorado Recognition
of
 Transportation
Master
 Transportation
Problem
 Plan
 Success
 Keys
 Commitment
to
Beauty
 Dedicated
Team
within
 and
Function
 City
Government
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 11

Collaboration Success II Thornton, Colorado Moratorium
on
 Motivated
Council
&
 Development
=
Desire
 Community
 to
Seek
Solution
 Success
 Keys
 Technical
Planning,
 Advisory
Group
+
Four
 Economic,
Land
Use
 Subcommittees
 Resources
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 12

Collaboration Success III Columbia, Missouri Willingness
of
Advisory
 Early
Assessment
 Group
to
Examine
 Issues
 Success
 Keys
 Independent
 Non-Defensive
 Engineering
and
 Participation
from
 Facilitation
Services
 MDOT
Representatives
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 13

Outcomes Outcomes Boulder
 Boulder
 Collaborative
transportation
planning
paid
huge
dividends
  Alternative
infrastructure
and
programs
are
implemented
and  
functioning
 Alternative
modes
of
transportation
embraced
by
the
community
  Thornton
 Thornton
 Subarea
plan
unanimously
adopted
by
City
Council
  Embraced
creative
campus
concept
to
address
identity
issue
  Emphasis
on
planned
commercial
development
  Columbia
 Columbia
 MoDOT
has
consensus
plan
for
expansion
of
interstate
  Greatly
improved
understanding
of
challenges
and
tradeoffs
  June 2008 The Osprey Group 14

West Eugene Collaborative  Purpose
Statement
 Purpose
Statement
  ”Develop
an
integrated
land
use
and
transportation
solution 
supported
by
stakeholders
that
will
facilitate
movement
of 
people
and
commerce
from/through/to
west
Eugene
and 
west
of
Eugene
while
enhancing
community,
business
and 
the
environment."



100 Years in Eugene Same spot taken now. (Above train station looking down Willamette. Image courtesy of Special Collections and University Archives, University of Oregon Libraries.

Members

Approach Convening
 Recommendations
 Purpose
Statement
 Analysis
&
 Operating
 Synthesis
 Agreements
 Outreach
 Criteria
for
Solutions
 Candidate
 Solutions/
Options
 June 2008 The Osprey Group 18

Design Storming

WEC: The Challenge Ahead  Meaningful
engagement
with
the
community
  Ability
to
synthesize
and
simplify
numerous
land
use, 
transportation
and
environmental
ideas
  Ability
to
develop
politically-acceptable,
technically-feasible
and 
cost
effective
recommendations
  Convey
WEC
recommendations
to
agencies
with 
implementation
responsibilities