6.Focus of the leadership facilitation for Citizen Enablement to ensure success

Our studies on hundreds of best practice cases, written up as part of the UPBEAT project (Generic Process A, page 26) and in subsequent documents by the 10 Universities who took part in the UPBEAT exercise, have shown Academic Enablers must not only show leadership, but those leaders must focus on some key processes taken in turn that drive the Citizens to: firstly to become Enabled for themselves to work out a solution to their problem or issue, and then become Empowered to ensure their development is enacted to becomes a meaningfully, sustainably and cost-effectively delivered in the real world. Such necessary and critical behaviours can be learned, but start with Enablers being totally supportive of the citizens, or their small business equivalents, in learning how to make necessary change, and then actually make the decisions for themselves and undertake actions that will lead to their chosen goals. In short, the Enablers need to be: hands ready to help, not hands on or seeming to be continuously worrying; active listeners and quick responders; particularly support positive steps undertaken by the citizens; enable them to self-evaluate their own progress; build collectively to their own conclusions and working solutions.

In order to help Enablers processes of supporting necessary change James developed a self-evaluation tools, known as UPBEAT (see Generic Process A, page 26), which is shown in more detail in a many of case seen in Part II, and was developed into an approach, by the PASCAL International Observatory on Life Long Learning. The overall approach known by them as PUMR (PASCAL Universities for a Modern Renaissance) is shown in another case – Generic Process B, page 31). It also uses the UPBEAT evaluator matrix to help Citizen Enablers properly develop the necessary collaborative skills in their citizen partners; this is shown most poignantly in two other case studies – Contraception the Board Game – and the PUMR approach in the UCLL Belgium case study (Generic Processes A & B and Case Studies  2 & 3, pages 26 & 31respectively). These Case Studies presently exist in Part II of this presentation, however the intention is to make them accessible from the text directly when it is presented in digital form.

These evaluation tools and general approach are extremely similar in nature to the work of parallel successful developments in support of citizens enablement known as ‘positive deviance’, where facilitators supported the cross-fertilisation local positive behaviours to other citizens with much, and lasting, effect. A good example of this is shown in ‘The Positive Deviance Approach’ (2013) where Christopher Eldridge shows,, through a behaviour-influence analysis how in a Vietmanese  community there were those who had uncommon, but successful, behaviours or strategies (the positive deviance) which enabled them enable them to find better solutions more common problems affecting their peers, at no extra cost.  In the following we have summarised what we believe the general focus of the approach we are suggesting, linking our original approach with key elements of the positive deviance model since they add useful information to amplify certain points and issues valuable in all contexts; for simplicity, clarity and to remove the need for continuous quoting references to a minimum, any statements we draw from the Eldridge summary work are shown in italics.

a) The first action in any development should be for the enabler to invite relevant citizens to work on the proposed joint development. Recognition and initiation are a key first step to ensure that: it is a project Citizens want to undertake for themselves; or after, active listening to the citizen’s needs by the Enablers, something the citizens would really like to learn to consider to change. So, all enquiries into such collaborative ventures should begin with an invitation from a community, or small businesses in another context (we assume from here on that when we talk about community henceforth we mean small businesses as well), that addresses an important problem they face, and not ones the Enabler just wants to work on themselves. This is an extremely important first step for ownership by citizens in the community of a process they must lead.

b) Define the Problem, and key Citizens to work on it, CLEARLY: It is the citizens themselves that must be at the centre of defining the problem for themselves, then lead the change development or at least learn to lead its development. This will often lead to a problem definition that differs from the outside “expert” opinion of the situation or those in control through their status in the existing power/authority structure who hold the resources required for an alternative enactment in any proposed alternative solution with which they don’t agree. A quantitative baseline can be established by the community in this way and this baseline provides an opportunity for the community to reflect on their problem, given the evidence at hand, and also gives them a measure of their progress toward their own goals. Ideally, they will find a solution, or near solution to their problem locally, of at least with like-minded citizens nearby from which they can copy good practices; and learn from those with whom they will more easily communicate. This is also the beginning of their overall development process so they also identify other stakeholders and decision-makers regarding the issue at hand. Additional stakeholders and decision-makers will be pulled in throughout the process as they are identified. It is also a time when citizen/community talent is recognised and the performances needed to enable a suitable and sustainable solution to be found prior to development; the citizens should also decide what skills they need help with from the Enablers and other academics, and what skills they need to learn to ensure eventual success with their project; interestingly thjis is the basis of how citizens juries or assembles operate with effect. The problem remains of what to do in these situations of the asymmetric distribution of the power and it’s where collective collaborative working the socio-political situation come to the fore; ways, means and people have to be found to unblock such a situation to enable power to be ceeded to the citizens and communities so they become proper stakeholder in their own futures; this is shown poignantly in Case Study 14. In the Cases shown in Part II almost 50% of the projects had to explore and solve difficult and sensitive socio-political issues. In particular Case Studies 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11,12 and 14 (on pages 34, 40, 46, 54, 57, 62, 66, 68 & 73 respectively) have strong political issues to confront which are discussed briefly in the cases themselves. However, one thing to stress is that finding the right people to help such empowerment changes to occur is vital in this respect if a project is to fully succeed.

c) Determine any individual citizens, or groups in the community, that are already practicing a working solution, and thereby showing positive deviance: ideally the community will establish that there is positive deviance in their midst, and potential problems they can learn from and copy. Alternatively, citizens with their own new situation might learn from other contexts, by like-minded citizens or thinkers, of imaginative ideas that they can reposition in their own context for solving their own identified problem. This is partly why so many Case Studies were presented in Part II to show there are a plethora of solutions that can be copied, or repositioned, with effect, and there are indeed many other examples of similar successes by those using the principles of ‘positive deviance’. In this context, that when borrowing a best practice from elsewhere, it is important to recognise that what works in one place may not in another because of different conditions, circumstances and contexts; this is where the value of academics can come in to play  as they can help translate ideas more easily as it’s part of their make-up. However, this sort of approach can then become a sensible citizen’s foresight to enable them to understand their own problem better and thus undertake the work necessary to form their own successful and sustainable solutions. The citizens have to understand this for themselves, and in their own language and ways, that what they will attempt to do is entirely possible. They also need to build capability in their own development team with the skills and structure to ensure a workable enterprise. Showing those in power that real, meaningful, sustainable and cost-effective example have been made to work elsewhere is a good way of convincing them to ceed their authority to an alternative solution which they can then learn to own as their constructive alternative. However, getting such cultural change is far from being easy, as this present approach continues to stress.

d) Discover uncommon practices or behaviours: This is what occurs in all Positive Deviance Inquiries. If the community finds other best practices and identifies positive deviants, it can set out to use the relevant other behaviours (and attitudes or beliefs) to allow their use of this in their approach, thereby giving it a chance to The focus in all developments should be on successful strategies, not on making a hero of the person using the strategy. One important aspect is that where possible, positive deviants should be part of the delivery to the community needing change. This self-discovery of people/groups ‘just like me/us’ who have found successful solutions constitutes “social proof” that this problem can be overcome now, without the need for outside resources; where it’s not a matter of resources, it may still be necessary to consider what are legitimate acts within the prevailing political legal system. So the citizens might need to explore best practices and behaviours from complementary areas, applied research or citizen centred studies; all the time they need to develop solutions that do not alienate at least one of those who might be affected by any solution, and they can often do this by designing a constructive workable series of alternatives. Then they need to find ways and means of convincing those likely to be negative to any of their proposals that what they are suggesting can actually work for them. But again, this is often the most difficult part of any development. However, good data and appropriate observations using a language common to normal people, reflecting their normal ways of living and working, can make all the difference.

e) Project design: Once the community has identified successful strategies, they must decide which ones they would like to adopt, and then design activities to help others access and practice these uncommon, positive, behaviours. Project design is not focused on professional spreading “best practices” but helping community members “act their way into a new way of thinking” through hands-on activities with their own best practices. They will also learn, with the help of the Enabler/Facilitator, how to develop relevant capabilities to achieve efficient and effective enterprise operations and how to continuously improve these working practices and solutions development by getting adequate feedback on their successes and positive developments.

f) Monitoring and evaluation is key to success: The UPBEAT tools (Generic Process Study A, page 26) will enable the monitoring and evaluation of their project through a participatory process and support decision making in planning, designing and overseeing their progress in project developments; these have been incorporated into an overarching schema detailed in Generic Process B (page 31). These tools and their associated approach provides a clear and systematic guide for both Enablers and Citizens working together to properly understand their progress; it is similar in nature to the suite of techniques required  for evidence-based decision-making  which is now an established part of local democracy in the UK. Evaluatory feedback also helps development teams understand how to share, review and finalise their relationship with other stakeholders involved in their project. These include those in local regional and national authorities, especially key politicians and the tools give guidance on how to begin to deal with socio-political, as well as geo-environmental issues. Where possible this monitoring will be decided on and performed by the community and the further tools they create will be appropriate to their particular setting; see Cases Studies 1, 2, 3, 4,12,13 and 14 (on pages 34, 40, 46, 50, 68, 71 & 73 respectively). This can allow even illiterate community members to participate through pictorial monitoring forms or other appropriate tools; they may well be academically unqualified people but many of them are still extremely bright. Such evaluations allow the community to see the progress they are making towards their goals and reinforces the changes they are making in behaviours, attitudes, and beliefs. Acquiring the new skills necessary for the whole process of development, but particularly evaluation, requires time and effort from all parties in a collaboration. Not only to learn the skills but also to apply them. Such actions are particularly time-hungry and this must be borne in mind for citizens who may be time-poor as well as lacking other resources, including social capital.

g) Cascading Improvement: As each citizen focused project develops, the citizens should strive to gain mastery over the role each of them plays in the team, gaining confidence, ease and elegance in the handling of complexity and the unexpected that will always come with any project development. They should then seek to use their own developing and creative leadership skills to inspire others, driving excellence for ‘real improvement’. At its highest level they should seek to become stewards of good practice acting with integrity and mutual respect, always striving for continuous improvement.

h) Scaling up: The scaling up of our Citizen focused project may happen through many mechanisms: the “ripple effect” of other communities observing the success and engaging in this project itself, through the coordination of NGOs, or organizational development consultants. Whatever the way in which the project is scaled up, the process of community discovery of positive deviants in their midst remains vital to the acceptance of new behaviours, attitudes, and knowledge.

Using such a focus to the leadership, spelled out in more detail in the PUMR web site http://pumr.pascalobservatory.org should ensure Enablers can help Citizen design and develop high quality solutions to existing problems which become workable and sustainable solutions.