Todd Suomela's Library tagged dialog →  View Popular

Assume that someone recognizes that we have a wicked problem at hand and persuades the relevant stakeholders to gather to discuss it and develop an approach for moving forward. Assume further that the stakeholders acknowledge that they will need to collaborate in order to develop that approach (I realize that these are actually fairly big assumptions). More often than not, even with all the best of intentions, the meetings will produce lots of frustration and little satisfying progress. Our default practices for managing discussions in meetings can’t accommodate wicked problems, which is one of the reasons we find meetings so frustrating.

“Dialogue Mapping” takes a notation for representing wicked problems, IBIS (short for Issue-Based Information System) and adds facilitation practices suited to the discussions that occur with wicked problems. The IBIS notation was developed by Rittel in his work with wicked problems in the 1970s. It is simple enough to be largely intuitive, yet rich enough to capture conversations about wicked problems in useful and productive ways.

The building blocks of a dialogue map are questions, ideas, arguments for an idea (pros), and arguments against an idea (cons). These simple building blocks, together with what is effectively a pattern language of typical conversational moves, constitute “dialogue mapping.” The following is a fragment of a dialogue map that might get captured on a whiteboard in a typical meeting:

There are many ways government officials and community leaders can engage the public around the myriad issues that affect people's lives.  It is our stance that quality public engagement must take into consideration seven core principles if it is to effectively build mutual understanding, meaningfully affect policy development, and inspire collaborative action among citizens and institutions.

The following seven principles overlap and reinforce each other in practice.  They serve both as ideals to pursue and as criteria for judging quality.  Rather than promoting partisan agendas, the implementation of these principles generates authentic engagement in public problem-solving.




The Seven Core Principles





1. Preparation - Consciously plan, design, convene and arrange the engagement to serve its purpose and people.
2. Inclusion - Incorporate multiple voices and ideas to lay the groundwork for quality outcomes and democratic legitimacy.
3. Collaboration -  Support organizers, participants, and those engaged in follow-up to work well together for the common good.
4. Learning - Help participants listen, explore and learn without predetermined outcomes -- and evaluate events for lessons.
5. Transparency - Promote openness and provide a public record of the people, resources, and events involved.
6. Impact - Ensure each participatory effort has the potential to make a difference.
7. Sustainability - Promote a culture of participation by supporting programs and institutions that sustain quality public engagement.