emergence

Vector set of faceted 3d crystal colorful shapes

Reliably evaluating program engagement across large participant communities has become easier. New technology doesn’t overcome the need for good program planning and management and evaluation using indicators, but it takes monitoring and evaluation of the social dimensions to a whole new level.

Capturing participant voice

I was recently introduced to SenseMaker , a ‘pattern detection’ software. As a sophisticated decision-support tool, it ensures social narrative as collected source data is not altered by significant levels of subjective filtering by the social researcher’s analysis. It allows insight into people’s perspectives, attitudes, and values in the domain of researcher interest.

Having worked in both International Development Aid and natural resource management – where community engagement is applied to resolve the complex issues which arise from the need to effect broad-scale social change within complex systems –  the value of such tools is immediately apparent.

Access to mass data sets

The software facilitates the ‘mass capture’ of the experiences and perceptions of research participants engaged in programs working within complex systems. It stores the meanings they attribute to those experiences in narrative form, and these response can be used to informs responsive engagement and inclusion strategies. It enables continuous program improvement.

Timely program response to emergent changes

The software detects weak signals, emergent opportunities or threats –  which gives insight into change as it emerges and allows for ongoing program adjustments and responses in real time. The evidence-based qualitative and quantitative data it generates is both directly and quickly accessible.

Sense-making of complexity enables timely responses to emergent patterns in fragmented social data from multiple sources and interactions.

The software features both statistical analysis and multiple visual displays of the patterns of perceptions so program managers  can compare critical elements of a complex system in real time. When applied to complex human social systems, the impact of a new engagement or inclusion initiatives can be tracked and adaptations responsively undertaken.

Probing complexity

‘Testable nodes’ where social and physical elements intersect within complex systems can be ‘probed ‘-  i.e. key management interfaces of social and natural landscapes or the patient and service delivery points within a health system – where human data is captured and analysed in real time using this software tool. Overall management system health and the effectiveness of the engagement interventions applied become understandable…making sense of complexity.

Adapt Strategic Communications: www.adaptstrategic.com.au

team paper

  • Are you a team member or a group member?
  • Is your group forming, storming, norming or performing?
  • Do you make participative decisions and get things done?

Collaborating with people in groups can be energizing and fun.
For some years I was lucky enough to engage interesting and inspiring people to work together in groups in an extensive citizen science program I established in the World Heritage water catchments of Far North Queensland. These people became effective teams of collaborators able to partner with other stakeholders to resolve environmental issues.

Over the years I learned much about the diversity of people’s opinions, understandings and behaviour in groups. Making a difference by working with people in groups should be fun and worthwhile – for everyone involved.

Supporting groups so they can develop and work effectively involves some key considerations…

1. Be purposeful and purpose-clear.

Does everyone agree on why you’re a group and what you want to achieve?
Establish a sense of shared identify and purpose at the outset.
Invest time in scoping and bedding it down whilst the group is ‘forming’.

2. People make things happen.

Members bring valuable skills, knowledge and approaches to teamwork.
Get to know your membership at the outset – everyone has something of value to contribute to the group.
Each member should be interested in knowing who they’re working with and what each person contributes to achieving group outcomes.

3. A group’s capabilities should reflect those of its members.

Groups are a unique – each expresses the diversity of the individuals whose collaboration makes them work.
People come from diverse backgrounds, worldviews and positions on the topic, issue or project, so as individuals their group participation style varies. Sometimes it’s useful, sometimes it’s not.
In the ‘forming’ stage, a facilitator can create a ‘safe’ environment for the group to establish itself and begin to work collaboratively. Members need to develop and own a set of ‘ground rules’ for participation… and stick with them.

4. Effective group communication is critical to success.

There may be some initial ‘storming’ amongst participants as the group establishes itself as a working group.
Members will challenge others ideas and opinions, some individuals will tend to dominate in time, voice or decision-making. Groups can lose their way, lose members and reputation if this stage is allowed to become destructive.
By establishing and facilitating clear processes of both face-to-face and mediated communication, everyone can voice their feelings and opinions as well as their ideas.
Whilst all members should have equal voice, achieving balance between group productivity and individual need, requires some skill in group moderation.

5. Eventually a shared set of ‘norms’ – a ‘group culture’- emerges.

Behaviour, language and how the group relates to the rest of the world is uniquely shaped by its members.
It now has the potential to be a team, provided it doesn’t slip back into the storming phase.
The group has a ‘collective’ life of its own and is moving as a cohesive, ‘norming’ group.
Mutual accountability for the group’s achievements is becoming understood by all in the group.

6. Performing’ occurs when the group is effectively working towards its goals.

A team has emerged.
Information and ideas are being contributed, elaborated and clarified. Opinions are freely given, options generated, prioritized and tested. Plans are being developed, decisions made, tasks attended to and strategies delivered and adapted. Problems get solved and work gets done.
Achieving all this requires group cohesiveness and an intelligent use of the abilities and aptitudes of individual members.
Skilled group facilitation remains a priority. It prevents the group from returning to previous stages of development, maintains the group momentum, disrupts the convergence of ‘group think’ and manages unhealthy conflict or the dominance of individuals.

7. Group ‘ego’ needs to be healthy to maintain and sustain.

Through shared ‘social learning’, a mature team emerges.
It is capable of independently making the decisions which progress it towards its goals and these goals can be re-evaluated. It can constructively review its processes and approaches – and make adjustments and changes as required to get the job done.
A self-aware, sociable, inclusive and relevant team will be one that others want to join.

Nicola Wright is a communications professional who works with projects, programs, and organisations who deliver social and environmental value. ADAPT Strategic Communications custom-builds strategies to sustain your stakeholder engagement and achieve key performance objectives. Find her on www.adaptstrategic.com.au