Involving external stakeholders in decision-making has become more common place. The Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) began its preparations in 2004. What might be learned from their approach for creating a change-resilient learning culture?
Consider your own situation. On a scale of 1 to 10:

1. How turbulent is your environment when considering stakeholders - peer agencies, employees, civic organizations, clients, politicians, advocacy groups, contractors, regulators, employers, citizens, etc.?
2. How clear are your strategies for obtaining input from the stakeholders above, balancing their interests and utilizing their diverse ideas to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of your services?
3. When you consider staff at all levels, how strong is their capacity to listen, learn from and respond to stakeholders in ways benefiting the entire organization and not simply their own area?

In most cases, turbulence (#1) exceeds strategic clarity (#2) and organizational readiness (#3). According to a recent study of strategic performance management in government and public sector organizations, external turbulence encourages some leaders to keep strategies vague. Only 54% had clearly articulated outcome objectives. The two most important factors for performance success were strategic clarity and creating a positive learning culture (Marr, 2008, 10). The National Academies and authors of The Change Handbook also noted strategic clarity and learning as two essential elements for success (Dietz and Stern, 2008, page 95-109), (Holman, Devane and Cadey, 2008, 59 - 69).

Organizations often develop #2 with senior leadership and may not give consideration to #3. SRS executives began by focusing on #3 with a microcosm of SRS, and then used the microcosm to develop #2. How did they arrive at that choice? What was their thinking? SRS executives identified change resiliency as essential for being successful with #2 and #3. The Prevention Initiative launched in 2005 was actually a change initiative dressed in prevention clothes. OPI provided training for thinking and acting in new ways.

Creating a Container for Initiating and Sustaining Change

• Appreciation for what is Shared in Common
• Intention to Learn Ways to Enhance Performance
• Both/And Thinking (Holding Ambiguity)
• Openness to Discovering the Unknown
• A Common Data Base informed by Diverse Perspectives
• Balance between Advocacy, Inquiry and Reflection
• Shared Meaning & New Insights
• Focus on Leverage Points & Action Planning
• Support Systems & Success Measures
• Trust, Ownership & Accountability
• Communication including Social Media
• Feedback Loops for Continuous Learning

SRS and OPI co-created the design by translating theory into practice based on SRS's unique circumstances. Multiple disciplines informed our thinking: public participation, dialogue and deliberation, leadership development, systems thinking, organizational learning, performance management, appreciative inquiry, knowledge management, whole-scale change, scenario planning, complexity science, change theory, etc.

Providing a Solid Foundation for Change: Set the Context

From OPI's perspective, setting the context involves aligning beliefs, intentions, and actions to achieve desired outcomes. Leaders co-create robust strategies by exploring each aspect in detail from multiple points of view, challenging assumptions and linking ideas to actual data. SRS leaders developed the Learning Template below to put the Prevention Initiative in context.

SRS Prevention Initiative Strategic Architecture 2005

A Prevention Logic Model and Charter provided the Initiative with clarity on two levels. First, regarding operations, SRS executives developed four client-center goals along with expectation for more efficient and effective use of resources; improved customer service; increased cross agency collaboration, and more proactive interactions with customers. Secondly, executives outlined the intention to create a change-resilient learning culture. The charter included the scope of learning, how it would be applied and the results executives expected to see within organization systems from the learning. Prevention Initiative participants were held accountable for applying these tools and sharing the details into a common database. Senior managers also learned and utilized the tools.

Viewing Change through a System Lens

According to one study, organizations who visually map their strategy into meaningful cause-and-effect maps tend to have a significantly better understanding of strategy, are able to extract more value from their performance management system and most importantly, perform better. Only 10% of public sector organizations create maps. (Marr, 2008, 11) OPI's strategy map informed the SRS design process.

Implications for the Public Participation Field

Three blind men encounter an elephant. The first, grasping an ear, exclaims, It is a large rough thing, wide and broad, like a rug. The second, holding the trunk, retorts, I have the real facts. It is a straight and hollow pipe. And the third, touching a front leg, says, It is mighty and firm, like a pillar. - an old Sufi Tale

Who sees the elephant? In terms of relative truth, each blind man is accurate. However, none of the blind men are complete in their understanding of the entire elephant. Likewise, diverse stakeholders sometimes hold firmly to a relative and, therefore, limited view of reality. In isolation from others, each can see clearly. However, just like the three blind men, there is no clear collective understanding of the elephant - how an issue is interwoven among all stakeholders. Adding to the complexity, issues are a living elephant - continually changing. Interestingly, the Sufi tale concludes by observing Given these men's way of knowing, they will never know an elephant. Fortunately, the methods for learning and collaborating together are widely available. Yet translating theory to practice is an art form, not a science. For instance, best practices tackle complex challenges by tapping into the collective wisdom of stakeholders. Yet how is their wisdom translated into operational decisions? What are best practices for bridging between a stakeholder microcosm and the organizational hierarchy? How can everyone own the process? Our best chance for making wise design choices will come from sharing our experiences and learning together as we go.

References

Dietz, T., & Stern, P. C. (Eds.) (2008) Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Homan, Peggy and Devane, Tom and Cady, Steven (2007) The Change Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today's Best Methods for Engaging Whole Systems; Second Edition. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Marr, Bernard (2008) Strategic Performance Management in Government and Public Sector Organizations. A Research paper by Bernard Marr, Advanced Performance Institute; Co-Sponsored by CIPFA Performance Improvement Network and Actuate.