User Tools

Site Tools


partnerships:guide:stance

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

partnerships:guide:stance [2017/06/12 10:20] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +# Where do you stand?
 +
 +One of the main ideas in the Guide is that of level of participation,​
 +and that an organisation promoting participation takes a stance about
 +the level it suggests is appropriate for different interests. This
 +section deals with five levels.
 +
 +1.  [Information](stance#​inform)
 +2.  [Consultation](stance#​consult)
 +3.  [Deciding together](stance#​together)
 +4.  [Acting together](stance#​act)
 +5.  [Supporting local initiatives](stance#​support)
 +
 +Choosing a level - taking a stance
 +----------------------------------
 +
 +The previous section developed the idea of levels of participation based
 +on Arnstein'​s ladder described in [10 Key ideas](ideas)**.** Here
 +each level is dealt with in more detail, with suggestions on where it is
 +appropriate.\
 + This section, as others, is written on the assumption that you are
 +promoting or managing a participation process. Your precise role will
 +affect what stance you take.\
 +\
 + For example, if you are controlling resources you may be very clear and
 +firm about how much say you are prepared to offer others. If you are
 +acting as a neutral facilitator you may be helping different interests
 +negotiate appropriate levels.\
 +\
 + For further discussion of these issues, see *Some early questions* at
 +the end of the [previous section](frame),​ the items on *Power* and
 +*Role of the practitioner* [*in the A-Z*\
 +](AZparticl)
 +
 +Stance 1: Information
 +---------------------
 +
 +Information-giving underpins all other levels of participation,​ and may
 +be appropriate on its own in some circumstances. However, you are likely
 +to hit problems if all you offer is information and people are expecting
 +more involvement.
 +
 +### Basics
 +
 +-   The information-giving stance is essentially a 'take it or leave it'
 +    approach.
 +-   ​People may not accept they can't have a say. Is there really no
 +    alternative to the ideas you are putting forward?
 +-   Your information will be judged on who you are and your style as
 +    well as what you say.
 +-   Even though you may not want much feedback, put yourself in the
 +    place of the people you are communicating with: the meaning of any
 +    communication lies in the response that you get - not what you say.
 +
 +### Where appropriate
 +
 +Information-only may be appropriate when:
 +
 +-   You have no room for manoeuvre and must follow one course of
 +    action - for example, where there is a clear legal requirement.
 +-   An authority is reporting a course of action which is essentially
 +    internal and doesn'​t affect others.
 +-   At the start of a consultation or other process, with the promise of
 +    more opportunity to participate later.
 +
 +Information-only is inappropriate when the following apply (alternative
 +stances in brackets):
 +
 +-   You are seeking to empower community interests. Information is
 +    necessary for empowerment,​ but seldom enough on its own (3, 4 or 5).
 +-   There are alternatives and others have a legitimate interest in
 +    developing them (3 or 4).
 +
 +### Methods
 +
 +See the [A-Z](AZparticl) for methods to use with this and other
 +levels. Consider the following:
 +
 +-   ​Print:​ leaflets, newsletters,​ etc.
 +-   ​Presentations at meetings.
 +-   ​Briefing the media through press releases and press conferences.
 +-   ​Advertising through posters, radio, press.
 +-   Film or video.
 +
 +Avoid any methods which imply that people can have a say.
 +
 +### Guidelines
 +
 +In planning how to inform people, and carrying this out:
 +
 +-   ​Consider what frame of mind your audience is in - for example, what
 +    do they expect or know already?
 +-   Try a simple presentation on colleagues or a less informed audience
 +    before you prepare materials.
 +-   Use language and ideas which your audience will find familiar.
 +-   Be clear about why you are just informing rather than consulting.
 +
 +### Possible problems
 +
 +*You have a low budget*.\
 + ​Concentrate on using existing channels of communication:​ local groups,
 +media, simple posters or leaflets. Be prepared to answer questions.\
 +\
 + *The PR department of your organisation wants to take over
 +communications*.\
 + ​Insist on getting the basic messages clear before anything gets
 +'​glossed up'. Work on one product - say a leaflet - and use that as the
 +reference for other things. Make sure you have internal agreement to any
 +messages.\
 +\
 + *You get no response from the audience you are addressing*.\
 + Since you are not asking people to become involved, that may be
 +understandable. However, ask a few people to play back to you what they
 +understood from your communication to see that you have got your message
 +across.\
 +\
 + ​*People want more say*.\
 + Do they have a case? Who is setting the rules? Take comments seriously.
 +It is easier to change the level of participation and your stance early
 +on. Later it may become an uncomfortable U-turn.
 +
 +### Information checklist
 +
 +Before taking up an information-giving stance consider:
 +
 +-   Are you clear which interests you are informing, and how much they
 +    know already?
 +-   Are they likely to be satisfied with only information?​
 +-   Can you present your proposals in a way people will understand and
 +    relate to?
 +-   Have you identified appropriate communication methods for the time
 +    available and audience?
 +-   Are you prepared to change your stance if people want more than
 +    information?​
 +
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +Stance 2: Consultation
 +----------------------
 +
 +Consultation is appropriate when you can offer people some choices on
 +what you are going to do - but not the opportunity to develop their own
 +ideas or participate in putting plans into action.
 +
 +### Basics
 +
 +-   ​Consultation means giving people a restricted choice and role in
 +    solutions. You may consult on the problems, offer some options,
 +    allow comment, take account and then proceed - perhaps after
 +    negotiation. You are not asking for help in taking action.
 +-   All the basics of information-giving apply, plus the need to handle
 +    feedback.
 +
 +### Where appropriate
 +
 +The consultation stance is likely to be most appropriate when:
 +
 +-   You want to improve a service.
 +-   You have a clear vision and plans to implement a project or
 +    programme , and there appear to be a limited range of options.
 +-   These options can be set out in terms which community interests can
 +    understand and relate to their own concerns or needs.
 +-   The initiator of the proposals can handle feedback and is prepared
 +    to use this to choose between or modify options.
 +
 +It is inappropriate when the following apply (alternative stances in
 +brackets):
 +
 +-   You aren't going to take any notice of what people say.
 +-   You are seeking to empower community interests (3, 4 or 5).
 +-   You are not clear what you wish to do and are seeking ideas (3 or
 +    4).
 +-   You don't have the resources or skills to carry out the options
 +    presented, or other means of implementing (choose stance 4 or 5).
 +
 +### Methods
 +
 +Consider the following methods for consultation,​ detailed [*in the A-Z*\
 +](AZparticl)
 +
 +-   ​Surveys and market research.
 +-   ​Consultative meetings.
 +-   ​Consultative committees.
 +-   ​Simulations where the options and constraints are clear.
 +
 +These methods may be used in conjunction with information-giving and
 +presentational techniques, for example:
 +
 +-   ​Advertisements.
 +-   Media briefing.
 +-   ​Leaflets and posters.
 +-   ​Exhibitions.
 +-   ​Videos.
 +
 +### Guidelines
 +
 +-   ​Consider what response you want and how you will handle it as well
 +    as what you are presenting.
 +-   Make clear how realistic the different options are, and what the
 +    pros and cons are as you see them.
 +-   Avoid using methods like Planning for Real which encourage people to
 +    put forward their own ideas, unless you are moving to stance 3 -
 +    deciding together.
 +-   Be open about your own role, who ultimately takes decisions, how and
 +    when this will be done.
 +-   If you set up a consultative committee, give it clear terms of
 +    reference.
 +
 +### Possible problems
 +
 +*You have a low budget.*\
 + Use basic information-giving methods plus meetings hosted by local
 +organisations. Run an open meeting at the end of the process.\
 +\
 + *The PR department wants to take it over*.\
 + See information giving. Consider throughout: will people understand the
 +options, are they realistic, can we respond to feedback.\
 +\
 + *You don't have time to do things properly*.\
 + Be honest about the deadlines, and use the time-pressure to advantage.\
 +\
 + *You get more - or less - response than expected*.\
 + Was consultation the appropriate stance? Did you think it through from
 +the audience'​s point of view?
 +
 +### Consultation checklist
 +
 +Before taking up a consultation stance consider:
 +
 +-   Are you clear which interests you are consulting, and have you the
 +    means to contact them?
 +-   Are they likely to be satisfied with consultation?​
 +-   Can you present your vision and options for achieving it in a way
 +    people will understand and relate to?
 +-   Have you identified appropriate communication methods for the time
 +    available and likely participants?​
 +-   Can you and your colleagues handle the feedback?
 +-   Have you arranged for a report back to those consulted?
 +-   Are you prepared to change your stance if people want more than
 +    consultation?​
 +-   Are you just seeking endorsement of your plans?
 +
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +Stance 3: Deciding together
 +---------------------------
 +
 +Deciding together is a difficult stance because it can mean giving
 +people the power to choose without fully sharing the responsibility for
 +carrying decisions through.
 +
 +### Basics
 +
 +-   ​Deciding together means accepting other people'​s ideas, and then
 +    choosing from the options you have developed together.
 +-   The basics of consultation apply, plus the need to generate options
 +    together, choose between them, and agree ways forward.
 +-   The techniques are more complex.
 +-   ​People need more confidence to get involved.
 +-   The time scale for the process is likely to be much longer.
 +
 +### Where appropriate
 +
 +Deciding-together may be appropriate when:
 +
 +-   It is important that other people \`own' the solution.
 +-   You need fresh ideas.
 +-   There is enough time.
 +
 +Deciding together is inappropriate when the following apply (try
 +alternative stances in brackets).
 +
 +-   You have little room for manoeuvre (1 or 2).
 +-   You can't implement decisions yourself (4 or 5).
 +
 +### Methods
 +
 +Consider the following methods from [the A-Z](AZparticl)
 +
 +-   ​Information-giving methods to start the process.
 +-   ​Stakeholder analysis to identify who should be involved.
 +-   SWOT analysis to understand where you are.
 +-   ​Brainstorming,​ Nominal Group Technique, Surveys to develop some
 +    options.
 +-   ​Cost/​Benefit Analysis to make choices.
 +-   ​Strategic Choice, Planning for Real, and other simulations as
 +    powerful overall techniques.
 +-   SAST and Action Planning to decide what next.
 +
 +### Guidelines
 +
 +-   Plan the process before you start. Give yourself enough time.
 +-   ​Define clearly the roles and responsibilities of the different
 +    interests - who has a say, who will take action.
 +-   Be open and honest about what you want to achieve, and any limits on
 +    options.
 +-   If you set up any organisational structures, agree clear terms of
 +    reference and powers.
 +
 +### Possible problems
 +
 +*You don't have the time*.\
 + ​Consider whether stance 2 - consulting people - would be more
 +appropriate.\
 +\
 + *You are not sure if your colleagues will back up any decisions*.\
 + ​Involve them in the process. Run internal workshops before involving
 +others.\
 +\
 + ​*People aren't interested in joining in*.\
 + Spend more time on preliminary networking - basically talking to people
 +before holding any meetings. Run sessions hosted by existing
 +organisations as well as open sessions.\
 +\
 + *The techniques look too complicated*.\
 + Try some of the easier ones with a small group that you know. Bring in
 +an external trainer or facilitator.
 +
 +### Checklist
 +
 +Before taking up a deciding-together stance consider:
 +
 +-   Are you prepared to accept other people'​s ideas? What are the
 +    boundaries?
 +-   Are you clear who it is appropriate to involve?
 +-   Are you clear about what you want to achieve, and the boundaries to
 +    any ideas you will accept to get there?
 +-   Do you have the skills to use joint decision-making methods?
 +-   Do you have the authority to follow through with solutions which are
 +    decided with others?
 +-   Have you involved colleagues who need to be part of the solution?
 +
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +Stance 4: Acting together
 +-------------------------
 +
 +Acting together may involve short-term collaboration or forming more
 +permanent partnerships with other interests.
 +
 +### Basics
 +
 +-   ​Acting together in partnership involves both deciding together and
 +    then acting together.
 +-   This means having a common language, a shared vision of what you
 +    want, and the means to carry it out.
 +-   ​Partners need to trust each other as well as agree on what they want
 +    to do.
 +-   ​Effective partnerships take a long time to develop - shot gun
 +    marriages are unlikely to work.
 +-   Each partner needs to feel they have an appropriate stake in the
 +    partnership and a fair say in what happens.
 +
 +### Where appropriate
 +
 +Acting together may be appropriate when:
 +
 +-   One party cannot achieve what they want on their own.
 +-   The various interests involved all get some extra benefit from
 +    acting together.
 +-   There is commitment to the time and effort needed to develop a
 +    partnership.
 +
 +Acting together is not likely to be appropriate when the following apply
 +(alternative stances in brackets):
 +
 +-   One party holds all the power and resources and uses this to impose
 +    its own solutions (1 or 2).
 +-   The commitment to partnership is only skin deep (1 or 2).
 +-   ​People want to have a say in making decisions, but not a long term
 +    stake in carrying out solutions (3).
 +
 +### Methods
 +
 +\
 + ​Consider the following methods from the [A-Z:​](AZparticl)
 +
 +-   ​Information giving methods to start the process.
 +-   ​Methods for deciding together to create a shared vision.
 +-   Team building exercises.
 +-   ​Design exercises.
 +-   ​Business planning exercises.
 +-   ​Interim structures like working parties and steering groups as a
 +    focus for decision making and accountability.
 +-   ​Longer-term structures through which you can work together.
 +
 +### Guidelines
 +
 +As for Deciding together, plus...
 +
 +-   Spend time getting to know and trust each other.
 +-   Plan for the long-term sustainability of any organisational
 +    structure that is needed to implement and maintain schemes.
 +-   Avoid staffing partnership organisations with people who are
 +    accountable to only one of the partners.
 +-   ​Develop a common language, shared vision and corporate
 +    accountability.
 +
 +### Possible problems
 +
 +*Early discussion focuses on constitutions*.\
 + The final structure should come last - after you have decided what you
 +are going to do, how to get the resources, what skills you need, and how
 +power and responsibility will be shared. Set up interim structures like
 +a steering group with clear terms of reference.\
 +\
 + ​*Conflicts arise in steering group meetings*.\
 + Spend more time in workshop sessions and informal meetings to develop a
 +shared vision and mutual understanding.\
 +\
 + *Some interests feel excluded*.\
 + ​Clarify who the stakeholders are, and what their legitimate interests
 +are. Again, run workshops rather than committees. Use an independent
 +facilitator.
 +
 +### Checklist
 +
 +Before taking up a '​acting together ' stance consider:
 +
 +-   Are you clear about what you want to achieve, and how flexible you
 +    are in pursuing that vision?
 +-   Have you identified potential partners?
 +-   Do you have any evidence that they share a similar vision, and are
 +    interested in a partnership with you to achieve it?
 +-   Do they trust you?
 +-   Do you have the time and commitment necessary to form a partnership?​
 +-   Are you prepared to share power?
 +
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +Stance 5: Supporting local initiatives
 +--------------------------------------
 +
 +Supporting independent community-based initiatives means helping others
 +develop and carry out their own plans. Resource-holders who promote this
 +stance may, of course, put limits on what they will support.
 +
 +### Basics
 +
 +-   This is the most '​empowering'​ stance -provided people want to do
 +    things for themselves. They may, quite properly, choose a lower
 +    level of participation.
 +-   ​Carrying through the stance may involve people in setting up new
 +    forms of organisations to handle funds and carry out projects or
 +    programmes.
 +-   The process has to be owned by, and move at the pace of, those who
 +    are going to run the initiative - although funders and others may
 +    set deadlines.
 +
 +### Where appropriate
 +
 +This stance may be appropriate:​
 +
 +-   Where there is a commitment to empower individuals or groups within
 +    the community.
 +-   Where people are interested in starting and running an initiative .
 +
 +It is not likely to be appropriate when the following apply (alternative
 +stances in brackets):
 +
 +-   ​Community initiatives are seen as 'a good thing' in the abstract and
 +    pushed on people from the top down. (1,2,3).
 +-   Where there is no commitment to provide training and support.
 +-   Where there aren't the resources to maintain initiatives in the
 +    longer-term.
 +-   Where time is very short.
 +
 +### Methods
 +
 +Consider the following methods from [*the A-Z*\
 +](AZparticl)
 +
 +-   An offer of grants, advice and support - perhaps conditional on some
 +    commitment being made by the other interests involved.
 +-   ​Workshops for helping community groups create a shared vision and
 +    plan their action.
 +-   Team building exercises.
 +-   ​Commitment planning.
 +-   ​Business planning exercises.
 +-   ​Workshops on design, fund-raising and publicity.
 +-   ​Visits to similar projects.
 +-   ​Interim structures like working parties and steering groups as a
 +    focus for decision making and accountability.
 +-   ​Longer-term structures controlled by community interests.
 +-   ​Development trusts.
 +
 +### Guidelines
 +
 +-   Be clear about your role and whether produces any conflict between,
 +    for example, controlling resources and helping community interests
 +    develop their own ideas and organisation.
 +-   If you are controlling resources make sure you have agreement from
 +    your colleagues and can deliver what you promise before you start.
 +-   If you are acting as a facilitator or trainer make sure the
 +    resource-holders are involved in the process. If possible run
 +    internal workshops with them.
 +-   Be realistic about the time the process will take.
 +
 +### Possible problems
 +
 +*Community interests find it difficult to get organised.*\
 + ​Provide support and, if necessary training. Arrange visits to similar
 +projects elsewhere. Treat people development as seriously as project
 +development.\
 +\
 + *The steering group or other body cannot make decisions.*\
 + ​Organise workshop sessions outside formal committees.\
 +\
 + ​*Little happens between meetings.*\
 + End each meeting with an action planning session. If funds are
 +available appoint a development worker. Keep in contact through a
 +regularly produced newsletter.\
 +\
 + ​*Community interests become committed to action, but resource-holders
 +can't deliver.*\
 + Run internal sessions to gain commitment within the supporting
 +organisations. Use the media.
 +
 +### Checklist
 +
 +Before taking up a 'we will support community initiatives'​ stance
 +consider:
 +
 +-   Do you understand the different interests in the community and their
 +    needs?
 +-   Have you contacted existing community and voluntary sector
 +    organisations?​
 +-   Will your colleagues support the stance?
 +-   Do you have skills and resources to offer?
 +-   Are you clear about the role you are playing?
 +
 +### [The next section: It takes time](time)
  
partnerships/guide/stance.txt ยท Last modified: 2017/06/12 10:20 (external edit)