Collaborative Problem Solving
A multiparty consensus-seeking process whereby representatives of
all parties significantly affected by a public policy issue or
decision craft a solution that meets the vital interests of all
parties, including the public interest.
Key Features
Focuses on an identified, complex problem or set of problems;
Requires extensive stakeholder education on legal, historical,
technical, contextual issues;
Requires representatives to be in continual communication with,
and accountable to, their constituencies and elected boards;
Requires active dispute resolution on ripe conflicts; and
Implementation is a negotiated step supported by multi-party
assurances.
Key Steps
Assessment & Planning. Conduct an
assessment and determine scope of issues, affected stakeholders,
the likelihood of a negotiated settlement, and the adequacy of
time and resources.
Organization. Create process ground rules,
communication systems, goals and objectives, and similar
organizational tools.
Education. Develop educational
opportunities to create shared meaning and understanding of
legal, historical, technical, contextual issues for all
participants.
Negotiation. Generate options, identify
best viable opportunities, and develop negotiated terms and
agreements.
Implementation. Link agreements to external
decision-making, and monitor implementation to ensure multi-party
compliance with agreements.
Conflict Resolution & Mediation
A voluntary negotiation process in which the parties are assisted
in reaching agreement by a third-party neutral.
Key Features
Mediation is most often used in situations of mature conflict
where the parties and key issues in contention have been clearly
identified.
Parties control the process through selection of the mediator,
agreement on funding and adoption of groundrules.
The process is voluntary, and any party can withdraw in
accordance with agreed groundrules.
The mediator helps parties to identify underlying interests, to
plan to meet needs for technical information, to invent options
for issue resolution and to draft agreements. The mediator also
ensures that all parties understand all aspects of potential
agreements, including implications of full implementation over
time.
Mediators have a professional responsibility to treat all parties
equally and impartially, to disclose any potential conflicts of
interest at the outset and to remain strictly neutral about the
substantive issues in dispute.
Key Steps
Assessment of Dispute. The mediator meets
with each party privately to determine the willingness to
negotiate, gain insight into underlying issues and interests,
adequacy of resources available and gather ideas about special
concerns that may affect the structure and design of the process.
Negotiation of Groundrules. All
participants agree on groundrules covering nature of agreement
sought, schedule of meetings, sequencing of issues, behavioral
rules, relations with press and issues relating to open meeting
laws.
Identification of Issues and Interests. The
mediator assists the participants in disclosing to each other key
objectives and interests and in clarifying areas of agreement and
disagreement.
Development of Technical
Information. Participants then identify needs for
technical information, agree on the methods for obtaining it and
jointly select the individuals or agencies that will provide data
and analysis.
Options for Resolution. The mediator helps
create a supportive atmosphere in which new ideas and options can
be considered. The options are evaluated for their ability to
satisfy key interests.
Drafting & Approving Agreement. The
mediator facilitates review of specific terms by all parties,
ensures there is common understanding of the implications of the
agreement and helps secure consensus.
Implementation & Monitoring. The agreement
should take into account the need for ratification by
constituencies and contain specific terms for implementation,
monitoring and mechanisms to resolve future disputes in the event
of changed conditions.
Feasibility Assessment
An investigation to understand a policy challenge and to
determine whether a collaborative approach would be useful and/or
how to proceed with a process for collaborative problem solving.
Assessments, whether for smaller/simpler or larger/more complex
collaborative processes, provide information at the beginning of
a process for working with stakeholders. Communication of the
findings will educate the stakeholders on mutual concerns,
highlight opportunities for seeking common ground and begin to
understand breadth and scope of issues to address. The interview
portion of an assessment is generally the first opportunity for
the mediator or facilitator to establish a rapport with the
stakeholders, and to introduce the individuals to the use of
collaborative problem-solving tools/techniques for the project.
Key Features
Involves gathering information, such as reviewing policy
documents, interviewing clients and interviewing a representative
sample of stakeholders to understand the issues and interests
involved in a policy matter;
Communication of findings to the client and/or stakeholders in
text, presentation or orally depending on the needs of the
situation.
Key Steps
Developing Assessment Protocol. Understanding the issues
involved by reviewing available policy documents, talking with a
small set of stakeholders in order to develop a stakeholder
interview protocol.
Stakeholder Interviews. Usually confidential one-on-one
interviews with stakeholders to understand the range of interests
and concerns.
Qualitative Analysis and Reporting. Analyzing data to
develop and communicate findings. May include an internal review
with the client, or a small group of stakeholders, prior to
circulating to all stakeholders.
Feasibility Assessment
An investigation to understand a policy challenge and to
determine whether a collaborative approach would be useful and/or
how to proceed with a process for collaborative problem solving.
Assessments, whether for smaller/simpler or larger/more complex
collaborative processes, provide information at the beginning of
a process for working with stakeholders. Communication of the
findings will educate the stakeholders on mutual concerns,
highlight opportunities for seeking common ground and begin to
understand breadth and scope of issues to address. The interview
portion of an assessment is generally the first opportunity for
the mediator or facilitator to establish a rapport with the
stakeholders, and to introduce the individuals to the use of
collaborative problem-solving tools/techniques for the project.
Key Features
Involves gathering information, such as reviewing policy
documents, interviewing clients and interviewing a representative
sample of stakeholders to understand the issues and interests
involved in a policy matter;
Communication of findings to the client and/or stakeholders in
text, presentation or orally depending on the needs of the
situation.
Key Steps
Developing Assessment
Protocol. Understanding the issues involved by
reviewing available policy documents, talking with a small set of
stakeholders in order to develop a stakeholder interview
protocol.
Stakeholder Interviews. Usually
confidential one-on-one interviews with stakeholders to
understand the range of interests and concerns.
Qualitative Analysis and
Reporting. Analyzing data to develop and
communicate findings. May include an internal review with the
client, or a small group of stakeholders, prior to circulating to
all stakeholders.
Organizational Change Management
A process to assist an organization in achieving key goals by
defining effective new methods and systems.
Key Features
Assumes the end goal is fixed, predetermined and knowable but
that historic methods or systems will not be effective to achieve
the goal;
Requires individual and oftentimes shared institutional
willingness to create new methods or systems to achieve the
prescribed goal, rather than relying on historic methods or
systems;
Focuses on a prescribed “change” as the intended outcome, rather
than defining the change itself.
Key Steps
Define Change. Create clear definitions and
communicate what the change actually is.
Define Steps. Define how change will make
life different for affected individuals and/or organizations.
Assessment. Define and describe the steps
used to create new systems.
Define Implications. Assess and define the
benefits and risks.
Scale/Scope. Define the system implications
of the change to determine what parties must be part of the
change process and when they should become involved.
Stakeholder Role. Define the scale / scope
of the change.
Methods & Outcomes. Utilize stakeholders to
improve both the methods and intended outcomes of the change.
Strategic Planning
A process to assist an organization or consortium of
organizations in creating a systematic strategy to meet
long-range goals, objectives, and needs.
Key Features
Assumes the future can be created by intentional action taken now
and provides direction and energy to move towards that future;
Characterized by organizational or system self-examination,
confronting difficult choices and setting priorities;
Produces realistic clear goals, objectives, targets and
timeframes;
Creates actions to attain a planned future state;
Creates a funding plan to support the targeted actions;
Plans for orderly growth and progress, yet allows flexibility for
contingencies and changed conditions.
Key Steps
Values and Environmental Scan. Discover and
document facts and values in the operating environment likely to
affect future work.
Mission. Create a shared, achievable
mission.
SWOT Analysis. Identify strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and threats.
Gap Analysis. Conduct gap analysis to
determine the difference between current state and desired state.
Goal Setting. Create realistic, measurable
goals to achieve meaningful results over time.
Planning. Create functional plan(s) to
close the gap between the present and the desired future.
Prioritize. Prioritize and emphasize
actions best supporting the future state.
Implement and Monitor. Implement plans and
monitor trends to determine the need for shifts in the
implementation approach.
Visioning
Creation of a robust description of a desired optimal end state
that will be used to drive action planning and implementation.
Visioning can also mean the identification of more than one
future end state, sometimes called scenarios, followed by the
selection of an optimal future from among the various end states.
Key Features
Focuses on creating a new optimal solution, rather than fixing an
existing problem;
Requires a shared willingness to create new systems to achieve
the optimal future condition rather than relying on historic
systems.
Key Steps
Understanding the Past. Establish a common
information base / shared history.
Future Trends & Drivers. Discuss trends and
driving issues that will impact the future.
Responses. Identify current and optimal
responses to the matter(s) under consideration.
Optimal Future. Discuss what is currently
being done, what should be done, and what should be discarded.
Implementation. Create systems to achieve
the optimal future.
Training Services
Design and delivery of highly interactive, customized learning
experiences for the purpose of sharing knowledge and building
participant skills and abilities to design and manage
collaborative processes.
Key Features
Customized for a specific audience and a specific purpose;
Utilizes adult learning techniques;
Contains a mix of knowledge sharing, experiential learning, and
application of concepts and skills to participants’ lives;
Brings forward the existing experience and knowledge of
participants;
Engages participants in creating shared meaning;
Provides opportunities for the practice and integration of new
skills.
Key Steps
Assessment. Define audience and assess
needs of participants.
Development of program and
materials. Design an interactive program and
materials to share knowledge and develop skills to apply that
knowledge.
Delivery. Present training program and
supporting materials.
Evaluation. Evaluate effectiveness of the
training to help participants achieve the learning objectives.
Research Services
Collaborative Policy Research
Contributions to the body of knowledge on the practice and
outcomes of collaborative policy making and public engagement.
Key Features
Contributes to the body of knowledge on collaborative policy
practice, with particular attention to the roles of facilitators,
conveners, stakeholders, and contextual influences on process and
outcomes;
Empirically scrutinizes the conventional wisdom regarding best
practices;
Emphasizes research questions that have practical applications
while contributing to the testing and development of one or more
theoretical frameworks;
Pluralistic regarding guiding theories and research methods
(quantitative and/or qualitative);
Emphasizes reliable, valid, and replicable methods of data
collection and analysis;
Serves and invites peer-review from multiple audiences including
facilitators, stakeholders, and scholars.
Key Steps
Scoping. Identify important research
questions and an empirical setting ripe for either exploratory
field research or testing of hypotheses.
Grant Writing. Identify suitable
foundations, agencies, or clients. Submit a formal proposal
describing research questions, literature review, research
design, field methods, budget, timeline, and deliverables. Apply
for California State University, Sacramento approval or waiver
for use of human subjects.
Final Design. Convene a focus group or
advisory committee to refine research questions, approach, and
field methods.
Field Research. Collect data using
interviews, surveys, focus groups, content analysis, or other
appropriate methods.
Analysis. Describe the data and draw valid
inferences using statistical techniques appropriate for the data,
research question, and audience.
Discuss Findings. Communicate research
results through workshops, conferences, seminars, newsletters,
and academic journals. Solicit feedback from informants,
stakeholders, and other researchers. Scope new research.
Evaluation
Collection of information about a collaborative process, either
during the process (a “formative” evaluation designed to inform
mid-course corrections), or at completion of the process (a
“summative” evaluation designed to assess its effectiveness and
inform future practice).
Key Features
An evaluation may be formative (produces information that is fed
back during the process to help improve it) or summative (carried
out at completion to provide information about effectiveness, and
to inform future processes).
Improves accountability to clients and stakeholders.
Improves decision-making regarding midcourse corrections,
continuing or ending a process, testing a new idea, choosing the
best of several alternatives, or deciding whether to continue
funding.
Improves organizational learning by providing feedback to
practitioners, recording a process or program history, or
highlighting program and process goals.
Uses a theory of change to focus on program or policy inputs,
activities and dynamics, interim outcomes, and desired end
results.
Key Steps
Plan and design the evaluation
Develop measures for evaluation criteria
Collect data
Analyze and interpret the data
Prepare and disseminate the results
Five Stages Of Collaborative Decision Making
As practiced by the Center, collaborative policy making typically
involves five stages:
Assessment/Planning
Organizational
Educational
Negotiation/Resolution
Implementation
See the Full Five Stages Diagram
DIAD Network Dynamics
See the Network Dynamics Diagram
