Full Report - Knight Program in Community Building

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS 9Another early task is to agree on a facilitator for the group, whether it is aseparate hired facilitator, or simply group members rotating to play that role. Thefacilitator is part traffic cop, part gadfly. As traffic cop, the facilitator keeps the groupfocused on the agenda and enforces the ground rules, making the group a safe placefor people to discuss ideas and problems. As gadfly, the facilitator asks for clarification,uncovers underlying interests, and tests statements and agreements to see if they hold.Having a neutral third party whose job is to focus only on the process frees upother group members to advocate their own positions.Lesson: Have a charrette team member whose primary responsibility is to focuson the process. Be clear about the rules of engagement.As discussed earlier, many collaborative projects are consensus-based. However,the key point here is to be explicit about how decisions are made and who makesthem. People should know from the very beginning what role they play. Theparticipatory process should always be tied directly to a decision-making process.In charrettes, the role of participants is typically advisory. The designers use thatinput to develop and improve the plan, but the City Council makes the decisionabout whether or not to adopt the plan. Although charrettes are transparent inthe sense that the meetings and events during the charrette are public and publicized,there is not always a clear explanation of how the charrette fits into the larger policymakingframework.Lesson: Be clear about the decision-making process and the role of the public.In some cases, one or more parties in a collaborative process may need trainingto participate effectively, training in either the process or in the substantive issues.This task is especially important if parties have very different levels of education orskills. The Opening Presentation common in New Urbanist charrettes plays this role.Some of the activities common in the assessment/convening stage are conductedby the charrette sponsor and the designers as part of the RFP and contracting process.For example, the client usually identifies some of the important stakeholders andtheir interests. That task is continued in the public meetings held during charrettes.However, I believe that more thorough attention to the tasks of this stage wouldleverage the power of a charrette to spark lasting change in a community.Strategically, I think that more attention to these tasks would lead to more frequentand more faithful implementation of charrette plans.
HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS 10Step 2: Building the AgreementIn charrette terms, this step involves developing the plan. Tasks that make upthis phase include:• Define the problem/task (includes discussion of positions/interests)• Generate options/brainstorming• Analyze options• Point fact-finding• Package the agreement• Test the agreement• Secure support from constituentsSome mediation models place heavy emphasis on the group defining the problemor agreeing on the task. Getting to that agreement involves discussing each party’spositions, and hopefully identifying the interests that underlie those positions. Ifeveryone can come to a common definition of what the problems are, and agreethat the underlying interests are legitimate, developing a solution that is mutuallysatisfying is much easier than if all of the parties are pulling in different directions.In a consensus-building process, the stakeholders usually work together todevelop a joint definition of the problem. In a charrette, the clients and designersusually define the scope (problems to address, tasks to accomplish) during the RFPand contracting process. Although some adjustment to the scope is often madeduring a charrette, there is rarely an explicit discussion with all of the stakeholdersabout what the scope should be. In many cases, leaving out this task as an explicitstep is probably fine. However, if stakeholders have very different ideas about whichissues should be addressed, they may be resistant to any proposals that are introduced.If you experience seemingly irrational resistance to proposals during a charrette, itmay be because people are upset about a different problem.Lesson: Especially in situations with high levels of conflict, make sure the keystakeholders agree with the scope and focus of the charrette.Charrettes excel at three tasks in this stage: brainstorming, analyzing theoptions, and joint fact-finding. The synergy of having a variety of specialists, theshort feed-back loops, and the public transparency of the analysis are some of thestrengths of the charrette process.Lesson: Facilitators and mediators would benefit from learning about charrettepractices for creating and filtering physical design options.
Page 1 and 2: The Public Process andNew UrbanismB
Page 3 and 4: 2The Public Process and New Urbanis
Page 5 and 6: 4The Public Process and New Urbanis
Page 7 and 8: HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS6So what
Page 9: HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS 8Lesson
Page 13 and 14: HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS 12Exper
Page 15 and 16: HURLEY | THE PUBLIC PROCESS 14In ad

Full Report - Knight Program in Community Building

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?