Identifying Shared InterestsMoving Beyond Positions: Before collaboration begins, the situation may seem chaotic: different groups with opposing viewpoints who can't seem to agree on anything dominate the scene. At this stage in the process, it's important to step back, and make a clear distinction between positions and interests. Positions are the specific actions or outcomes a stakeholder wants to see, e.g. more water in the stream. Interests, however, are broader, and usually involve fundamental values, e.g. a healthy, functioning ecosystem. Clarifying this distinction is a critical first step for any community based group. Try getting stakeholders to reframe their positions as interests and look for overlap.
The 80/20 Rule: The Blackfoot Challenge in western Montana is an example of a strong community-based collaborative that has managed to get diverse stakeholders to work together effectively. Their secret to success? Barbed wire. This ubiquitous fencing material, when examined closely, is actually mostly smooth with only a few pointy barbs spaced along its length. Leaders of the Blackfoot Challenge realized that if they envisioned their collaborative as barbed wire, they could see that people agreed on things about eighty percent of the time. Focusing on the eighty percent that was shared, not the twenty percent that divided, allowed them to move forward without getting hung up on the barbs. Connecting Beyond Differences: It's important to remember that collaboration is a social endeavor as much as anything else. Getting stakeholders to engage with each other as people, and not as adversaries, creates the necessary respect and relationships for successful work in the future. This means taking collaboration outside the conference room--on a hike, to a local watering hole, or to a potluck. Breaking bread together is an age old strategy for conflict resolution, and is still relevant and effective today. |
Clarifying What You Want to AchieveThis can be trickier than it sounds. Is your objective to generate a report, or make recommendations to an agency? Or is it more long term, taking the form of a robust and sustained group that can address a range of issues as they arise, from water to wildlife to invasive weeds? Or maybe you simply want disparate stakeholders to communicate more effectively with each other. Whatever you hope to accomplish, goals and objectives should be clarified early as they will determine everything else that follows: who to include, the best process for meetings, and the structure of the group.
The convener of a collaborative group or process should decide early the degree to which they are willing to share responsibility in shaping its objectives and outcomes. It is possible for that person to take a large early role in laying these out, and also possible that they step back and allow the group to clarify them. Ultimately, the efficacy of the group will largely depend on the degree to which the objectives are clear, well-communicated, and also re-evaluated as the process moves forward. |
Including the Right PeopleThis is a critical early step in any collaborative group. Who is included impacts everything from decision making and fundraising to interpersonal dynamics, level of engagement, and community acceptance. Being thoughtful and strategic at this stage can make for smooth sailing later on. Here are some things to keep in mind when trying to decide who to include in a collaborative process:
|
Providing Facilitative LeadershipA collaborative group, by its very nature, will almost certainly not have a rigid power structure. However, that doesn't mean that there isn't room for leadership. In fact, without effective leadership, a collaborative will struggle and likely fail. So where does that leave someone hoping to provide leadership to a collaborative group? How does one balance these two nearly contradictory aspects of collaboration? Facilitative leadership threads an effective path between the extremes of top-down management and disorganized chaos.
What does the word "facilitative" even mean? According to Webster, it means "to make easier, to help bring about." Alright, fine--but that doesn't give us much in the way of specifics for leading a collaborative group. Another way of conceptualizing facilitative leadership is to imagine leading from within a group, rather than outside of it. Instead of issuing directives, a facilitative leader might ask questions; instead of hoarding decision-making power, they might devolve it. A facilitative leader acts not out of their own interests, but in the interest of the group. They seek to elevate voices or concerns that are going unheard, and to move the conversation forward. In the early stages of a collaborative, this type of leadership is critical because it is inclusive, open, and welcoming. |