TYPOLOGY of Group Decision-Making

Transcription

1 TYPOLOGY of Group Decision-Making An Index of Characteristics, Dimensions, and Components (For Use By Community Decision-making Entities) DRAFT: FPSI and CSSP -- May 2003

2 Collaborative Decision-Making TYPOLOGY An Index of Characteristics, Dimensions, and Components (For Use By Community Decision-making Entities) How to Use the TYPOLOGY: The typology is a comprehensive index of characteristics, dimensions and components of collaborative decision-making processes. The typology was designed to collect information about the scope and depth of structural and performance characteristics of collaborative entities that were developed to improve results for children, families and communities. The typology attempts to take a snap shot of a collaborative s depth, capacities, performance and sustainability as a apparatus for monitoring conditions, implementing locally defined strategies and improving results, overtime. The index of characteristics examines, for example, an entities level of power, influence, type of support, focus on results and use of data. PART A: PART B: Is a one-page tool, which lists the structural and performance characteristics in the left column of the page with a corresponding continuum or span of dimensions and components to the right. The user is to make a selection along the continuum on the right which best depicts where that collaborative is in its structure or performance. If you need help determining where the collaborative line-up on the continuum, refer to Part B. Provides descriptions of each of the structural and performance characteristics, provides a continuum of scope and examples to guide the user with defining where a collaborative massy fall along the continuum of choices.

3 Typology of Group Decision-Making An Index of Characteristics, dimensions and Components Structural Characteristics Continuum of Dimensions and components Geography Level of Focus Community/Neigh City County Ser Sys Area Region State Purpose Whole Population Results Service System Agency/Program Organization Age < 1 year 1-5 years -10 years >10 years Initiation Formal Assisted Self-Created Representative-ness Balance Seeking Balance Selective Power Control Resources Influence Resources Advisory Connections to Public Agencies Active Participation Moderate None Legitimacy Strong Moderate/Developing Ad Hoc/Short Term Performance Characteristics Continuum of Dimensions and components Credibility Respected Gaining Respect Not Respected Stability Stable Becoming More Stable Many New Starts Participation in Decision Making Process Inclusive/Diverse Actively Seeking Exclusive Leadership Support High/Well-Developed Moderate Low/Undeveloped Leadership Participation Active/Fully Engaged Moderate Not Active Resources Many Sources Moderate None Results Driven Results Driven Developing Results Focus Process Oriented Part A

4 Data Driven Data Driven Lacking Data Capacity Anecdotes Areas of Focus Many One Scope of Strategies Community-Wide/ Comprehensive/Integrated Broad Targeted Narrow Action-Oriented, Continuous Improvement, Ambitious Track Record Active/Learning Process Developing Capacity Stalled/Dormant Demonstrated Improvement in Results or Service System Building a Record No Results Yet Part A

5 Collaborative Decision-Making Typology I. Structural Characteristics Geography: Defines the geographic area of focus or jurisdiction; State; Region: County; City; Service system catchment area (e.g. School District); Community/Neighborhood. Purpose: Groups have one or both purposes: Whole Population: The purpose of the group is the well-being of a whole population or subpopulation in a geographic area. Examples of whole populations include: all children in the county, all children 0 to 5 in the state, all citizens of the region. The work of the group may involve establishing a set of results and indicators, creating a report card on family and child well-being and sponsoring action tables to improve results. Service System or Agency/Program: The group focuses on the work of a particular program, agency or service system. The work of the group may involve oversight of the performance of these systems and services, coordination of service delivery and reform of service delivery structures to make them more customer friendly and effective. Initiation: Formal: Established by legislation or executive order or by the formal action of an established public or private sector entity. (e.g. Family Connections Councils in Georgia and Maryland s Local Management Boards were established pursuant to state legislation. Impact Councils have been established by many United Ways.) Assisted: Established by neighbors or citizens with the active involvement of service providers, or established by service providers with the active involvement of citizens. May be seeking formal authority. Self-Created: Established by neighbors, citizens (and/or service providers) in an ad hoc, spontaneous way to address a condition or result they want to change without formal sanction or authorization. (e.g. Mothers Against Drunk Driving started this way.) Part B 1

6 Representativeness: Balance: Provides adequate representation from many different parts of the community, including balance between service providers, residents and private citizens, and balance by ethnicity, age, gender and socio economics. Seeking Balance: Prefer single-focus on one group or another or with token representation. Selective: Comprehensive representation is not a part of its purpose. Dominated by one group or another. Some participants may be token representatives. Power: Control Resources: Formal authority over the allocation and use of substantive core dollar spending for services and supports. Influence Resources: Respected and influential in budget, legislative and/or other formal decision making processes. May not have the resources but can decide how they are spent. Advisory: Lacks influence, sole role is to provide advice which may be ignored. Legitimacy: Legitimacy means the collaborative is formally recognized by key constituents, government and the broader community as the entity accountable for assessing conditions, implementing strategies, and monitoring results. Strong: Formally recognized by key constituents, government, and the broader community as the entity accountable for assessing conditions, implementing strategies and monitoring results. Moderate/Developing: Not formally established, but may be generally recognized as the responsible entity. Recognition may be improving, or legitimacy may be eroding. Ad Hoc/Short Term without formal recognition or long-range activities. Part B 2

7 II. Performance Characteristics Credibility: Respected: Recognized by a broad citizenry or constituency as being an effective, useful and productive organization that has achieved results or gained momentum. Gaining Respect: Achieve results previously. Now losing/gaining respect. Convened for a purpose that has never been (or is no-longer being) fulfilled. Not respected yet. (See Rodney King) Stability: Stable: Long term regular membership and participation by key stakeholders. Consistent involvement and growth in role and capacity. Becoming More Stable: Increasing or decreasing stability, in the process of development. Stability may be subject to occasional threats or periods of uncertainty. Many New Starts: Frequent turnover of membership and staff with irregular attendance and participation. Participation in Decision Making Process: Inclusive/Diverse: Participation truly reflects the area represented. Actively seeks out all residents and frequently engages new stakeholders. Decisions are made in an open consensus process. Actively Seeking: Groups actively seek out and include diverse participation, and honestly uses diversity to strengthen organization and decide on action. Decisions are made in an open consensus process. Exclusive: Decisions are made in a closed process, by a powerful small group made up of people traditionally or regularly involved. Part B 3

8 Leadership Support: High/Well-Developed: Key leaders visibly support the group s work. Support is broad and adequate to sustain the organization when individual leaders change. May include public officials, public or private agency leaders, opinion-makers, or others with authority and influence. Moderate: Support of key leaders is increasing or developing, however leadership support is concentrated in a few individuals or groups. May be vulnerable if individual leaders change. Low/Undeveloped: Key leaders ignore or even discount the groups work. Leadership Participation: Active/Fully Engaged: Key leaders directly and routinely participate regularly in the work of the group. They are broadly representative of stakeholders and have authority to make decisions within their stakeholder groups. Moderate: Key leaders participation is inconsistent. They may rely on low or mid-level representatives. Not Active: Key leaders do not participate at all and/or rely on low or mid level representatives. Maybe ignored or even discounted by leaders. Resources: Commitment of time, energy, and money devoted to carrying out the mission, purpose and goals. Can be from none to many. Results Driven: Results Driven: The group is action oriented and uses a clear plain-language articulation of (population or customer) end conditions of well-being as the starting point for identifying means and creating an action plan. Developing Results Focus: In the process of identifying (population or customer) end conditions of well-being, refining indicators, and/or developing action plans for achievement of results. Process Oriented: Focuses on process or indicators do not measure progress toward results. Does not have clearly articulated results, measurable indicators, or results-focused action plan. Endless talk and no action. Part B 4

9 Data Driven: Data Driven: Uses population indicators and/or program, agency or service system performance measures to assess progress and make decisions. Defines success as progress measured against baseline and not point-to-point improvement. Uses descriptions of accomplishments and stories of how peoples lives are better to complement the story told by the data. Lacking Data Capacity: Use of data is not systematic or routine. May be developing capacity to collect or use data. May not have established baselines for all indicators or may measure progress point-to-point rather than comparing to the baseline. Anecdotes: The group does not use data in any disciplined way and relies only on stories or anecdotes to describe progress. Scope of Strategies: Community-Wide/Comprehensive/Integrated: Group strategies are crafted to create significant change at the community, service system, or cross-sector level. Focuses on a range of quality of life issues. Strategies reflect thinking across agencies, service systems, service sectors, and levels of government; involve multiple actions, formal and informal resources, and a range of programs. Broad Targeted: Focused on a few strategies that may not reflect the quality of life concerns of all stakeholders. Strategies are not comprehensive across all levels and utilize a limited range of resources. Limited approach may be intended to and viewed as laying the foundation for more comprehensive, integrated strategies. Narrow: The group is focused exclusively on the implementation of one project, the delivery of one service or the functioning of one program or agency. Action-oriented, Continuous Improvement, Ambitious: Active/Learning Process: The group continuously seeks to improve its understanding of the population community, or customer conditions of well-being, and its knowledge of what works to improve those conditions. And the group uses this new knowledge to regularly assess and improve its action plan. Developing Capacity: Headed in the right direction, but struggles to develop the capacity needed to keep pace with stakeholders ambitions. May be facing significant challenges, but sees that as part of the learning process. Part B 5

10 Stalled/Dormant: Often unable to move from talk to action. May be stalled, temporarily dormant or permanently inactive with few goals, unclear scope or little capacity. E.G., produces a document that stakeholders never use. Track Record: Demonstrated Improvement in Results or Service System: The group has convincing evidence of its contribution to improving the lives of children and families and/or improvements in the performance of programs, agencies and service systems. Building a Record: Developing capacity and evidence of improvement. May be too new to have evidence, but is working on it. May have anecdotal evidence and confidence of stakeholders, but lack ability to document progress. Working to develop the necessary capacity to track progress. No Results Yet: No record of progress, improvement or better results. Efforts to collect or document progress are not evident. Part B 6

11 USER NOTES Geography - Levels of Focus Purpose Organization Age Initiation Representative-ness Power Connections to Public Agencies Legitimacy Credibility Stability Participation in Decision Making Process Leadership Support Leadership Participation Resources Results Driven What do you think about the Typology? Send us your comments. Contact: Phyllis R. Brunson at Phyllis.Brunson@cssp.org or Mark Friedman at XFPSI@aol.com

12 USER NOTES Data Driven Areas of Focus Scope of Strategies Action-oriented, Seeking Continuous Improvement Track Record