Creating an Infrastructure/Matrix to Organize Training, Skills, Resources in 4 Stages to Transition to Open Government Effective 

How do we get from Here to There? Transition: from Crisis to Resilience. I am suggesting that: 1- as a group of practitioners with so many techniques, methods, tools, the strongest, smartest position we could present to the Open Government initiative would be to create and infrastructure, a matrix which organizes the the various technologies as to when they are effective/appropriate, for whom.

The question we can address is: Where is There where is Here? "There" being Open Government-(participatory, self-organizing, self-reliant, resilient groups/ communities/ cities.) "Here," is where we start the process by considering the social climate, emotional states, skill level of the groups. Are they in Crisis or chaos or creating Security or Proactively coalescing in groups to work together or Resilient, self-organizing communities.

For example: A group in Crisis is not the best social setting for full participation dialog. People would need a more directed, tight, not too many, if any, choices, open ended processes. They could be very well supported by strong clear, simple visual graphics to direct people for what they need for survival and getting grounded. On the other end of the spectrum, when groups have good dialog skills, organized infrastructure and are more self-reliant, you would want social technologies to set a context for deepening their ongoing self-organizing. For resilient groups, highly directive technologies and structures would be resisted as not appropriate therefore ineffective.

The infrastructure/matrix could be a simple 4 stage approach. Some of the offerings could span all four stages, if it can be tailored to accommodate the stage of the population they are serving. eg. Open Space process would be designed very differently for a group in the crisis stage than one in the resilience stage.

2- Skills such as emergency response, dialog, deliberation, facilitation skills, Non-Violent Communication, various leadership knowledge.... could also be placed in the infrastructure matrix for the optimal stage for learning. Resources would be made available; books, research, webinars... to support learning.

3- We, in the field, facilitators/OD/coaches, knowing more about these offerings than Gov., would serve the project with a higher level of expertise for sorting out what can be done, when.

4. Infrastructure would also support scaling up or down. So many of us are single practitioners or have small orgs and associate with each other more in more of a network than a large company form. If we self-organize in a way that the Gov can easily utilize our knowledge of the field to contract with, we could get on the ground and engage quicker. (I think several of us are already doing and this suggestion could refine it to another level)

5. The basic 4 stages (Crisis, Security,Proactive, Resilient) are evolutionary therefore fluid and organic...groups/people can move backwards and forwards many times. It can also serve as a kind of curriculum.

6. We would have to work on developing, among other things;
-Assessment criteria for the Groups needing services, perhaps teams of Assessors;
-Gathering proposals & suggestions for each stage;
-Tracking results & stories from implementing various training or interventions
-Making the four stage definitions and criteria available for Managers, facilitators, OD, HR, and others

Creating an Infrastructure/Matrix for Training, Skills, Resources Effective in Four Stages for Transition to Open Government In 

How do we get from Here to There? Transition: from Crisis to Resilience. I am suggesting that: 1- as a group of practitioners with so many techniques, methods, tools, the strongest, smartest position we could present to the Open Government initiative would be to create and infrastructure, a matrix which organizes the the various technologies as to when they are effective/appropriate, for whom.

The question we can address is: Where is There where is Here? "There" being Open Government-(participatory, self-organizing, self-reliant, resilient groups/ communities/ cities.) "Here," is where we start the process by considering the social climate, emotional states, skill level of the groups. Are they in Crisis or chaos or creating Security or Proactively coalescing in groups to work together or Resilient, self-organizing communities.

For example: A group in Crisis is not the best social setting for full participation dialog. People would need a more directed, tight, not too many, if any, choices, open ended processes. They could be very well supported by strong clear, simple visual graphics to direct people for what they need for survival and getting grounded. On the other end of the spectrum, when groups have good dialog skills, organized infrastructure and are more self-reliant, you would want social technologies to set a context for deepening their ongoing self-organizing. For resilient groups, highly directive technologies and structures would be resisted as not appropriate therefore ineffective.

The infrastructure/matrix could be a simple 4 stage approach. Some of the offerings could span all four stages, if it can be tailored to accommodate the stage of the population they are serving. eg. Open Space process would be designed very differently for a group in the crisis stage than one in the resilience stage.

2- Skills such as emergency response, dialog, deliberation, facilitation skills, Non-Violent Communication, various leadership knowledge.... could also be placed in the infrastructure matrix for the optimal stage for learning. Resources would be made available; books, research, webinars... to support learning.

3- We, in the field, facilitators/OD/coaches, knowing more about these offerings than Gov., would serve the project with a higher level of expertise for sorting out what can be done, when.

4. Infrastructure would also support scaling up or down. So many of us are single practitioners or have small orgs and associate with each other more in more of a network than a large company form. If we self-organize in a way that the Gov can easily utilize our knowledge of the field to contract with, we could get on the ground and engage quicker. (I think several of us are already doing and this suggestion could refine it to another level)

5. The basic 4 stages (Crisis, Security,Proactive, Resilient) are evolutionary therefore fluid and organic...groups/people can move backwards and forwards many times. It can also serve as a kind of curriculum.

6. We would have to work on developing, among other things;
-Assessment criteria for the Groups needing services, perhaps teams of Assessors;
-Gathering proposals & suggestions for each stage;
-Tracking results & stories from implementing various training or interventions
-Making the four stage definitions and criteria available for Managers, facilitators, OD, HR, and others

A Whole Systems Training Approach: Leadership for Four Stages of Transition from Crisis to Resilience 

Many of the suggestions for creating Open Government advocate for open forums for dialog and deliberation. How do we get there from here?

Let's consider some of the factors that contribute to where we are before we can talk about where we're going: We are having a financial meltdown affecting every person, community and state in this country. We are spending at least half of our budget on war and all its components and don't have enough funds for domestic needs. Our schools and infrastructure are a huge mess, on the verge of disaster in many places. Climate change is causing more natural disasters. Our political system and its citizens are polarized. We are in crisis or heading that way. Another challenge to implementing Open Government is that our history and culture is one of domination, by class, by authority, by race, religion, gender. We don't have the cultural habits of mutual respect, working for mutual benefit, consideration, cooperation, inclusion, generosity, and kindness. All among the qualities needed for true democracy.

We will be more successful by approaching the transition to open government by understanding the stages of culture from a state of crisis to the potential of building a resilient true democracy. By learning to recognize the stage the group or individuals are in facilitators can use the most effective leadership strategies and support the needs of the situation.

We can expand the corps of leaders, public, government and private, knowledgeable in 1. crisis management, 2. creating security, 3. helping groups become proactive and 4. building resilience though dialog. Educating people to facilitate communities, organizations, business, and individuals to emerge from the trauma of crisis to becoming self-reliant, self-organizing, innovative and resilient are the building blocks of true democracy.

People often resist or ignore the effects of crisis or the need for transition until it becomes a no choice choice. They can become either helpless, a hindrance or helpful. Prepared facilitators, leaders, managers and citizens can guide the changes to move beyond crisis to becoming self-reliant and whole.

To guide the process it's helpful to:

• Know where you are:
Recognize the characteristics and objectives of each of the stages of transition from crisis to resilience.

• Know who you’re dealing with:
Identify psychological, social and behavioral profiles of the participants.

• Know what to do:
Learn the interventions and facilitation strategies that are most effective to meet needs.

• Know what NOT to do:
Avoid unintended consequences and misunderstandings and shift ineffective strategies.

• Know when to move on:
Learn the factors that signal optimal time to transition.

Being the Most Effective Together

This framework can be used to map a whole system of the many processes and tools presented in this forum and beyond— across four stages indicating when they can achieve optimal effectiveness. For example; Visual Recording would be very effective in Stage 1- Crisis, to make very clear, large visual aids for quick comprehension, and in Stage 2 - coordinating basic security for mapping services. Processes that create a context for dialog and deliberation could be used when people are in Stage 3 & 4- as they are ready to participate in groups.

This is from my experience as a facilitator and organizational development professional.

For more information http://crisis2resilience.com, feel free to contact me. Hina Pendle, PhD, Hina@uspartners.com