Effective Strategy for Addressing
Public Issues
Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
IEEA Spring Conference
Nashville, IN – April 29, 2014
Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.
• Present insights from research on the effective development and
implementation of strategies to address community-based public
issues
• Explore how to incorporate findings into Extension community-based
public issues work
What to Expect From This Session
The Great and the Near
Great in the White River
Country
by Z. M. Horton
The Baxter Bulletin
Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Dec 31, 1915
S. J. Hutcheson, a well known farmer and stockman of
Norfork, roping a calf
White River Ferry at Norfork, Arkansas, circa 1900
Norfork,
Arkansas
(pop. 550)
Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES
✔
✔
✔
✔
Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES
Research
Question
Why are some strategies
for addressing
public
Better understand
he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
successful
Considerissues
ways to move
a collaborations toand
the next level
others…not so much?
1. Literature review
2. Interviews
3. Surveys
A grounded theory exploration
using a sequential mixed method
approach beginning with a
qualitative phase in which semistructured interviews resulting were
conducted with a purposively
sampled panel of experts resulting
in data that was open coded using
the data spiral analysis method
followed by a quasi-experimental
quantitative phase in which two
contrasted groups of purposefully
sampled, randomly assigned
participants were surveyed,
resulting in data that was analyzed
using Spearman’s rho to determine
correlation coefficients.
Answering the Question
Problem
Statement
• Literature gap regarding factors
contributing to effective strategy in the
context of public issues like economic
development (Kwon, Berry, & Feiock,
2009).
Better
understand
he nature
of collaboration
• Civic
leaders
face
daunting tasks of
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
developing and implementing
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
strategies to address these public
issues (Markey, 2010).
• Very little research-based information
to guide decisions about effective
strategy-development processes.
• Evolution of public issues
• Institutionalization
• Locus of control
• Increasing complexity
• Tools for managing public issues
• Early tools
• Evolving tools
• Emerging tools
• Contributing theories
• Strategy formation
• Collaborative governance
• Social innovation
Conducted as part of the grounded
theory data collection process
(McGhee, Marland, and Atkinson,
2007).
Conducted to provide
contextualization (Dunne, 2011) and
orientation to the phenomenon
(Pozzebon, Petrini, de Mellow, and
Garreau, 2011).
Insights from the Literature
Institutionalization
Evolution of
How We
Deal with
Public Issues
• Pre-institutional (Pre- WW2)
• Institutional (1950-1990)
• Multi-Institutional (1990 to today)
Better understand he nature of collaboration
Locus of Control
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
• Control
theahands
of the to
“elite”
(Perrucci
Consider
ways to in
move
collaborations
the next
level &
Pilisuk, 1970).
• Most economic & community development
issues are “Type 3 Public Problems” and
control is shared by a group of “nonexperts”
(Heifitz and Sinder, 1988).
Complexity
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.
•Social Organizations – economics, education,
politics
•Individual Human – language capacity,
knowledge accumulation, design and use of
tools
•Animal – mobility, information processing
•Plants – viability
•Open Systems – matter, energy
•Cybernetics – computers
•Clockworks – engines
•Frameworks – buildings, cells
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
14
The Extension Economist Vs. The Rocket Scientist
15
Complexity
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.
• Social Organizations – economics, education,
politics
• Individual Human – language capacity,
knowledge accumulation, design and use of
tools
• Animal – mobility, information processing
• Plants – viability
• Open Systems – matter, energy
• Cybernetics – computers
• Clockworks – engines
• Frameworks – buildings, cells
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
16
Complexity
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.
• Social Organizations – economics, education,
politics
• Individual Human – language capacity,
knowledge accumulation, design and use of
tools
• Animal – mobility, information processing
• Plants – viability
• Open Systems – matter, energy
• Cybernetics – computers
• Clockworks – engines
• Frameworks – buildings, cells
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
17
Complexity
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.
• Social Organizations – economics, education,
politics
• Individual Human – language capacity,
knowledge accumulation, design and use of
tools
• Animal – mobility, information processing
• Plants – viability
• Open Systems – matter, energy
• Cybernetics – computers
• Clockworks – engines
• Frameworks – buildings, cells
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
18
Dealing with the Complexity
Early Models
• 1960s in universities, schools, municipalities (Hamilton, 2007)
• Late 1980s/Early 1990s first economic development strategic plans
(Blackerby & Blackerby, 1995)
• Borrowed from industry models (Blair,2004)
Evolving Models
• Recognition that corporate models are less effective (Bryson and Roering,
1987).
• U.S. Economic Development Administration’s CEDS; Cooperative
Extension Service’s Take Charge (Hein, Cole, & Ayres, 1990); Asset-Based
Community Development, (Kretzmann and McKnight, 1996; Community
Capitals, Flora, 1992)
Emerging Models
• Effectiveness of strategic planning in business questioned (Mintzberg,
1994).
• Effectiveness of strategic planning in economic & community development
questioned ( Blair, 2004; Robichau, 2010; Morrison, 2012)
• Organic Strategic Planning (McNamara, 2010, Open Source Economic
19
Development (Merkel, 2010), Strategic Doing (Hutcheson, 2008;
Public issues
are complex
Complexity =
Messes
Complex
environment
understand
he
Institutions
emerged to
deal with the
complexity
Better
nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
No single
institution is
“in charge” of
most public
issues
There are lots
of
institutions
Contributing Theories
• Social Innovation
• Strategy Formation
• Collaborative Governance
21
Social innovations…
• are best designed and implemented in networks
• emerge from heterogeneousness (diversity)
• are framed using existing assets
• are products of co-creation
• are the result of collective action
• should have decentralized implementation
• ,when implemented should focus on tangible results
Bland, Bruk, Kim, and Lee (2010); Bouchard (2012); Mulgan, Ali, Tucker and Sanders (2007);
Neumeier (2012); Oliveira and Breda-Vazquez (2012)
Social Innovation
Strategies…
• are formed intuitively
• are iterative
• must be designed to account for unanticipated variables
• must take into account contextual values, assumptions,
beliefs, and expectations
• must be flexible
• should be designed collaboratively
• and best developed as an intra-organizational activity
Feser, 2012; Johanson, 2009; Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg, 1978; Parnell, 2008; Rindova, Dalpiaz, and
Ravasi, 2011; Sminia, 2012; Tapinos, Dyson, and Meadows, 2011
Strategy Formation
Collaborative governance…
• takes advantage of network structures
• connects existing assets
• focuses first on small wins
• Requires decision making to be made by consensus
• works when there is trust among participants
• is efficient
• involves successful management of both internal and external
stakeholders
Ansell and Gash, 2008; Chiclana et al., 2013; Clarke, Huxley, Mountford, 2010; Emerson, Nabatchi, and Balogh, 2012;
Gibson, 2011; Johnston, Hicks, Nan, and Auer, 2011; Kwon, Berry, and Feiock, 2009; Merkle , 2010; Olberding, 2009;
Ospina and Saz-Carranza, 2010; Pammer, 1998; Poister, 2010
Collaborative Governance
These Things
Matter
• Organizational Structure (hierarchy,
network, etc.)
• Framework (asset-based, deficitbased)
• Processes (planning and
Implementation
and distinct,
Better
understand he natureseparate
of collaboration
planning
and
Identify
what stage
yourimplementation
collaborations are in integrated
Consider
to move aetc.)
collaborations to the next level
andways
iterative,
• Timeframe (focused on longer-term
goals, focused on shorter-term goals,
etc.)
• Implementation (tasks centralized with
one organization, tasked disseminated
among multiple organizations)
The Qualitative Data
• Population of scholars and practitioners who design
curricula, teach, and/or practice strategy development for
addressing public issues (economic development,
community development, community health, etc.)
• Sample: N=12
• Semi-structured interviews (IRB-approved, anonymity)
• Verbatim transcripts, data spiral analysis with three levels
of coding: open, axial, selective using qualitative analysis
software
• 56 single-spaced pages/over 31,000 words of data
Insights from the Panel of Experts
Findings from the Interviews
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Network organization structures
Asset-based Frameworks
Iterative planning/implementation process
Inclusion of shorter-term goals
Decentralized implementation
Metrics to learn what is working
High levels of trust among participants
Readiness for change in community
27
Variables
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Network organization structures
Asset-based Frameworks
Iterative planning/implementation process
Inclusion of shorter-term goals
Decentralized implementation
Metrics to learn what is working
High levels of trust among participants
Readiness for change in community
Dependent Variable = Effectiveness
Independent
Variables
28
Effectiveness
For the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how
would you describe its level of effectiveness:
• Completely effective
• Significantly effective
• Somewhat effective
Measuring
the Variables
Ineffectiveness
For the ineffective strategy initiative you have in mind, how
would you describe its level of ineffectiveness:
• Somewhat ineffective
• Significantly ineffective
• Completely ineffective
Organizational Structure, etc.
Hierarchical, with a clear top
and bottom
Network, with a hub and
spokes
The Quantitative Data
• Population of individuals who have participated in
community-based strategy initiatives to address public
issues (economic development, community development,
community health, etc.)
• Sample of 300 (plus those reached by use of snowball
sample) participants were randomly selected from PCRD
contact database (N=209). Assured that Indiana was not
over represented
• IRB-approved survey constructed using the factors
identified in phase 1, participants randomly assigned to two
contrasting groups
Insights from Participants
Findings from the Surveys
Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses
31
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.
Dependent Variables
Correlation
Effectiveness Continuum
Completely
Effective
Significantly
Effective
Somewhat
Effective
Significantly
Ineffective
Somewhat
Ineffective
Findings from the Survey
Completely
Ineffective
Findings from the Surveys
Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables
33
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.
• Have a network organizational structure
• Frame strategies primarily around
building on existing assets
• Have a planning and implementation
processes that is iterative
• Include short-term, easy-win goals
• Decentralize responsibilities for
implementation among multiple
organization
• Use metrics to learn what is working and
to make adjustments along the way
• Build high levels of trust among
participants
• Assure that participants are ready to
change
Recipe for EFFECTIVE Strategies
Recipe for INEFFECTIVE Strategies
• Have a hierarchical organizational
structure
• Frame strategies primarily around
addressing problems or deficits
• Have a planning and implementation
process that is linear and sequential
• Include only long-term, transformational
goals
• Centralized responsibilities for
implementation with one organization
• Uses metrics primarily for
accountability
• Proceed even though there are low
levels of trust among participants
• Proceed although participants are not
ready for change
Improving Our Practice
Addressing
Public Issues
• Think about public issues differently
• Accelerate the collaborations needed to
address them
• Develop and implement agile, asset-based
strategies to meet a progressive series of
clearly defined strategic objectives
Framing
Community
Conversations
Exercise One: Reframing Public Issues
Choose one of the following problem-centered
statements about public issues and reframe it as an
opportunity-centered question.
1. Somebody needs to do something about the graffiti on our
downtown buildings
2. We can’t keep our smartest kids here. We’re suffering from “brain
drain.”
3. In the good old days we had great manufacturing jobs that paid a
great wage.
4. People are not eating enough fruits and vegetables.
5. Our kids are not getting the math and science skills they need.
39
The Collaboration Continuum
Trust
Co-Creation
Co-Execution
Turf
Sharing
Resources
Sharing
Information
Mutual
Awareness
Acknowledgment
Exploration
Cooperation
Collaboration
Innovation
TIME
Adapted from Collaboration Continuum from ACT for Youth
Exercise Two:
Accelerating
Collaboration
1. Consider a collaboration that
is important to your work
2. Ask yourself what stage on
the continuum is that
collaboration in now?
3. Think of specific steps you
could take to move the
collaboration to the next
level
Thank You
Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
765-479-7704
hutcheson@purdue.edu
www.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/
www.twitter.com/jshutch64
www.facebook.com/scott.hutcheson
Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.