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

June 2008 The Osprey Group 2

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 Proactive







































































Reactive Reactive
 Decisions
made
by
the
parties






































Decisions
made
by
third
party
 Greater
interdependence















































Interdependence
varies


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

June 2008 The Osprey Group 4

Public Involvement Public Involvement Approaches Approaches

• Public
meeting

• Working
meeting

• Public
hearing

• Community
forum

• Open
house

• Blue
Ribbon
panel

• Task
force

• Advisory
committees

• Facilitated
dialogue

• Use
of
existing
civic
groups
and
others

• Exhibit
with
feedback
device

• Brochures

• Meet
with
opinion
leaders

• Press
release

• Radio
call-in
show

• Petition

• Survey

• Focus
group
interviews

• Brainstorming
sessions

• Charrette

• Share
background
studies
or


assessments



• Conflict
mediation

• Internet
tools

• Email

• Have
an
“800”
number


Satisfaction with Public Processes

Substantive:
Were
 the
right
issues
 addressed?
 Procedural:
Was
 the
process
fair?
 Psychological:
 Was
I
heard
and
 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

High
Priority
 Issues
 Stakeholders
 willing
to
 Participate
 Potential
for
 a
Better
 Solution
 Outcomes
 Genuinely
in
 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
Problem
 Transportation
Master
 Plan
 Commitment
to
Beauty
 and
Function
 Dedicated
Team
within
 City
Government
 Success
 Keys


June 2008 The Osprey Group 11

Collaboration Success II Thornton, Colorado

Motivated
Council
&
 Community
 Moratorium
on
 Development
=
Desire
 to
Seek
Solution
 Technical
Planning,
 Economic,
Land
Use
 Resources
 Advisory
Group
+
Four
 Subcommittees
 Success
 Keys


June 2008 The Osprey Group 12

Collaboration Success III Columbia, Missouri

Early
Assessment
 Willingness
of
Advisory
 Group
to
Examine
 Issues
 Independent
 Engineering
and
 Facilitation
Services
 Non-Defensive
 Participation
from
 MDOT
Representatives
 Success
 Keys


June 2008 The Osprey Group 13

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

Outcomes Outcomes

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
 Purpose
Statement
 Operating
 Agreements
 Criteria
for
Solutions
 Candidate
 Solutions/
Options
 Outreach
 Analysis
&
 Synthesis
 Recommendations


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



So Why Bother?

• Collaboration
makes
sense
under
the
right
circumstances:

• Genuine
problem
--
perceived
to
be
important

• Creative
solutions
are
needed


• Adequate
stakeholder
interest

• Creating
advocates
for
a
solution
is
helpful

• The
situation
exists
where,
by
working
together,
a
better
and


more
acceptable
solution
can
be
reached
than
by
working 
alone


• Collaboration
can
produce
results
that
satisfy
the
substantive,


procedural
and
psychological
needs
of
a
community


April 2008 The Osprey Group 23

Questions?