Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
marine_colab:reflection_meeting [2016-02-15 11:39] – [CGF aims] nikmarine_colab:reflection_meeting [2017-01-11 23:50] (current) maja
Line 5: Line 5:
  
 Present: Louisa Hooper, Margaret Bolton, Esther Goodwin Brown, Vali Lalioti, Maja Kuzmanovic and Nik Gaffney Present: Louisa Hooper, Margaret Bolton, Esther Goodwin Brown, Vali Lalioti, Maja Kuzmanovic and Nik Gaffney
- 
  
 ==== CGF aims ==== ==== CGF aims ====
  
-Marine environment is complex, multi-stakeholder, views on its values diverge. Science and Economics dominates decision making, and CGF perceives the need to make issues 'human'. The long term aim of Marine CoLAB is to improve conservation and management of oceans for human wellbeing, as well as to make connections and build relationships that would increase capacity of the sector. CGF expects that this can be accomplished through:+Marine environment is complex, multi-stakeholder, views on its values diverge. Science and Economics dominate decision making, and CGF perceives the need to make issues 'human'. The long term aim of Marine CoLAB is to improve conservation and management of oceans for human wellbeing, as well as to make connections and build relationships that would increase capacity of the sector. CGF expects that this can be accomplished through:
   * Effective flows of knowledge (to deepen understanding of the role of the ocean on human wellbeing, as well as to better understand priorities for action and inspire others to act in new ways)   * Effective flows of knowledge (to deepen understanding of the role of the ocean on human wellbeing, as well as to better understand priorities for action and inspire others to act in new ways)
   * Improved collaborations and shared learning across borders, sectors and disciplines (to improve sharing and managing ocean resources)   * Improved collaborations and shared learning across borders, sectors and disciplines (to improve sharing and managing ocean resources)
Line 19: Line 18:
   * identify changemaking NGOs; participants, advisers, influencers, strategic partners, funders.   * identify changemaking NGOs; participants, advisers, influencers, strategic partners, funders.
    * establish a cross sector platform, which would include:    * establish a cross sector platform, which would include:
-    * programme of workshops between  2014  2016 (to build capacity of NGOs to deliver game changing initiatives) +    * programme of workshops between  2014 2016 (to build capacity of NGOs to deliver game changing initiatives) 
-    * portfolio of projects; new, existing, joint, synergies with GOI [to foster collaboration and innovation and be enabled by flexible funding and evaluation schemes]+    * portfolio of projects; new, existing, joint, synergies with GOI (to foster collaboration and innovation and be enabled by flexible funding and evaluation schemes)
     * an evolving, learning community     * an evolving, learning community
   * design an evaluation and dissemination plan   * design an evaluation and dissemination plan
Line 27: Line 26:
 ==== FoAM's Lab Approach ====  ==== FoAM's Lab Approach ==== 
  
-To meet CGF's aims FoAM proposed a [[/start|programme of workshops]] designed to enable a learning community and foster a development of:+To meet CGF's aims FoAM proposed a [[marine_colab/start|programme of workshops]] designed to enable a learning community and foster a development of:
    * a lab/platform/network for Valuing the oceans     * a lab/platform/network for Valuing the oceans 
    * a portfolio of projects/experiments/activities/    * a portfolio of projects/experiments/activities/
  
-The [[/start|programme]] was developed in two phases: a scoping phase and a transitional phase towards a self-guided CoLAB.+The [[marine_colab/start|programme]] was developed in two phases: a scoping phase and a transitional phase towards a self-guided CoLAB.
  
 === Scoping phase === === Scoping phase ===
Line 39: Line 38:
 ==Workshop 1:  Questions, vision, co-creation [January 2015]== ==Workshop 1:  Questions, vision, co-creation [January 2015]==
   * Before the workshop collect a set of 'key questions' and select one core question to guide the group through the session   * Before the workshop collect a set of 'key questions' and select one core question to guide the group through the session
-  * Begin the workshop from personal experiences related to the core question ["worldchanging experiences] +  * Begin the workshop from personal experiences related to the core question ("worldchanging experiences") 
-  * Mapping what is know and what is unknown about valuing the oceans in the group+  * Mapping what is known and what is unknown about valuing the ocean in the group
   * Uncovering emerging trends important for the CoLAB [critical uncertainties: climate change and growth economy]   * Uncovering emerging trends important for the CoLAB [critical uncertainties: climate change and growth economy]
   * Designing four alternative scenarios and answers to the core question. All focused on connections, gaps, values and innovation   * Designing four alternative scenarios and answers to the core question. All focused on connections, gaps, values and innovation
Line 48: Line 47:
   * Look at current challenges the individuals and their organisations are facing, to uncover patterns in the sector   * Look at current challenges the individuals and their organisations are facing, to uncover patterns in the sector
   * Form hypothesis based on existing challenges and form groups to begin exploring them   * Form hypothesis based on existing challenges and form groups to begin exploring them
-  * Design iterative experiments to test the hypotheses and learn about each other and the LAB approach in practice, through short [3 months] collaborations +  * Design iterative experiments to (1) test the hypotheses and (2) learn about each other and the LAB approach in practice, through short [3 months] collaborations 
  
 ==Workshop 3: Experimentation, connection to work of organisations [May 2015]== ==Workshop 3: Experimentation, connection to work of organisations [May 2015]==
   * Identify emerging themes [from current work and Marine CoLAB experiments]: systems change, changing perceptions, public engagement   * Identify emerging themes [from current work and Marine CoLAB experiments]: systems change, changing perceptions, public engagement
   * Continue developing existing experiments, add new ones that specifically address emerging themes   * Continue developing existing experiments, add new ones that specifically address emerging themes
-  * Test experimental approach in a 'pre-enactment' [an experiential futures technique], a role-playing exercise with 'antagonistic stakeholders' +  * Test experimental approach in a 'prehearsal' [an experiential futures technique], a role-playing exercise with 'antagonistic stakeholders' 
-  * Complete design of experiments and create implementation plan+  * Complete design of experiments and create implementation plans
  
 ==Workshop 4: Reflection, Looking back and looking forward [July 2015]== ==Workshop 4: Reflection, Looking back and looking forward [July 2015]==
   * Clarify learning from [results and process of] experiments   * Clarify learning from [results and process of] experiments
-  * Introduce collaborative processes for enabling scaling up experiments using an iterative approach [backcasting, outcome pathways, six ways of thinking [six thinking hats]+  * Introduce collaborative processes for enabling scaling up experiments using an iterative approach, such as backcasting, outcome pathways, creative thinking [six thinking hats]
   * Evaluate the experiments and Marine CoLAB scoping phase  [using the adaptive action cycle technique]   * Evaluate the experiments and Marine CoLAB scoping phase  [using the adaptive action cycle technique]
  
Line 70: Line 69:
   * Field-work [proposed: learning journeys]   * Field-work [proposed: learning journeys]
   * Important: mix of formal sessions, field trips to the sea and different forms of socialising [joint meals, long bus ride, site visits, shared experiences [exhibition, Oceanario, lighthouse...]   * Important: mix of formal sessions, field trips to the sea and different forms of socialising [joint meals, long bus ride, site visits, shared experiences [exhibition, Oceanario, lighthouse...]
-  * Begin co-creation of Marine CoLAB as a platform [melting pot, Marine Innovation Exchange, CoLAB...] +  * Begin articulation of Marine CoLAB as a platform [melting pot, Marine Innovation Exchange, CoLAB...] 
-  * Mapping of MarCoLAB Incubator including existing projects by participants, as well as Marine CoLAB experiments, such as the SUPB Free London. +  * Mapping of MarCoLAB Incubator including existing projects by participants, as well as experiments originated in Marine CoLAB, such as the SUPB Free London. 
   * Implementation plan for the proposal to the OAK Foundation.   * Implementation plan for the proposal to the OAK Foundation.
  
 ==Workshop 6: Marine CoLAB past, present and future [November 2015]== ==Workshop 6: Marine CoLAB past, present and future [November 2015]==
-  * Evaluate of Marine CoLAB's first year [what worked, what needs work, what can we improve]+  * Evaluation of Marine CoLAB's first year [what worked, what needs work, what can we improve]
   * Clarify mission and vision of Marine CoLAB   * Clarify mission and vision of Marine CoLAB
-  * Dig into the values connecting people and oceans [and the values based approach]+  * Delve deeper into the values connecting people and oceans [and the values based approach]
   * Map existing and emerging MarCoLAB incubator projects, with in-depth discussions of SUPB Free London and Game On   * Map existing and emerging MarCoLAB incubator projects, with in-depth discussions of SUPB Free London and Game On
  
Line 84: Line 83:
   * Mission   * Mission
   * Lab strategy (action learning cycle)   * Lab strategy (action learning cycle)
-  * Incubator of experiments [including an update on  SUPB Free London]+  * Incubator of experiments [including an update on SUPB Free London]
  
  
Line 106: Line 105:
 ==Strengths== ==Strengths==
   * group -> team   * group -> team
-  * adaptive collaboration w/ funders & participants+  * adaptive collaboration with funders & participants
   * multi-day residential trips   * multi-day residential trips
   * connecting people   * connecting people
   * drive to embrace big ambitions   * drive to embrace big ambitions
-  * not just doing (a lab), but being (a lab, a community)+  * not just doing (experiments, initiatives), but being (a lab, a community)
  
 ==Challenges== ==Challenges==
   * moving from big projects to agile experiments   * moving from big projects to agile experiments
-  * over-commitment and lack of time+  * shortage of time, due to other commitments
   * (divergent) values (based approach)   * (divergent) values (based approach)
  
 ==Learning== ==Learning==
-  * Hypothesis: playful co-creation brings people together (proven+  * Hypothesis: playful co-creation brings people together (established
-  * Hypothesis: multi-day on site workshops contribute to community building (proven)+  * Hypothesis: multi-day site-specific workshops contribute to community building (established)
   * Hypothesis: systems change  experiments (lab approach) lead to increased innovation (needs work)   * Hypothesis: systems change  experiments (lab approach) lead to increased innovation (needs work)
     * maybe it would help if the 'lab approach' itself would be tested as a 'toy system': introduce model by making, testing rather than just talking about it     * maybe it would help if the 'lab approach' itself would be tested as a 'toy system': introduce model by making, testing rather than just talking about it
-    * this is a longer process than expected, with more resistance in the beginning.+    * this was a longer process than expected, with more resistance than expected at the beginning.
     * it helps to have an environment in which it is safe to experiment, but this takes a lot of time to create      * it helps to have an environment in which it is safe to experiment, but this takes a lot of time to create 
     * the participants had difficulty to design experiments in iterative ways     * the participants had difficulty to design experiments in iterative ways
       * possibly due to experts preferring to avoid getting out of their comfort zone, especially when they don’t know each other       * possibly due to experts preferring to avoid getting out of their comfort zone, especially when they don’t know each other
   * Hypothesis: Ambitious projects can be gradually reduced in risk through iterative, experimental, phased approach. (the hypothesis works when applied, but it has proven difficult for the participants to design experiments rather than projects)   * Hypothesis: Ambitious projects can be gradually reduced in risk through iterative, experimental, phased approach. (the hypothesis works when applied, but it has proven difficult for the participants to design experiments rather than projects)
-    * learn form failure +    * learn from failure 
-    * never have to go back to scratch +    * not have to go back to scratch 
-    * needs appropriate documentation and evaluation +    * requires appropriate documentation and continuous evaluation 
-  * Hypothesis: 2nd cycle will transition into self sufficiency +  * Hypothesis: 2nd cycle will facilitate transition to self-sufficiency (established) 
     * facilitators should become redundant     * facilitators should become redundant
-    * group takes more ownership of the process to become more self sufficient +    * group takes more ownership of the process, become collectively engaged, become more self sufficient 
-  * Hypothesis: there needs to be continuous evaluation and adaptation (proven)+  * Hypothesis: there needs to be continuous evaluation and adaptation (established)
   * Hypothesis: lab approach can get to an operational plan quicker than using other methods (to be tested and compared with other initiatives)   * Hypothesis: lab approach can get to an operational plan quicker than using other methods (to be tested and compared with other initiatives)
-  * Hypothesis: being able to take lab learning back into organisations (to be evaluated more formally; it appears to be happening from the testimonials and informal conversations)+  * Hypothesis: being able to take lab learning back into organisations (to be evaluated more formally; it appears to be happening from testimonials and informal conversations)
  
  
Line 141: Line 140:
  
 Methods that CGF and/or FoAM have experience with: Methods that CGF and/or FoAM have experience with:
-  * In general, trying to find ways of using logic and planning tools 'in reverse' or parallel as evaluation tools+  * In general, trying to find ways of using logic and planning tools 'in reverse' or in parallel as evaluation tools
   * Direct feedback; listening circle, step-in step-back, Japanese post-its, debriefing, reflecting in a group   * Direct feedback; listening circle, step-in step-back, Japanese post-its, debriefing, reflecting in a group
   * Written reports: Evaluation templates, qualitative evaluation   * Written reports: Evaluation templates, qualitative evaluation
Line 149: Line 148:
   * Adaptive Action Cycle (what, so what, now what)   * Adaptive Action Cycle (what, so what, now what)
     * Ethnographic approaches: participant-observer, visual (documentaries), interviews, stories, collecting and evaluating participant reports     * Ethnographic approaches: participant-observer, visual (documentaries), interviews, stories, collecting and evaluating participant reports
-  * Theory of change (both as design/planning and evaluation method) aka ToC. ToC can be used as  learning object, providing a specific focus for feedback, evaluation and discussion around outcomes and assumptions. However, it has been critiqued as too static. +  * Theory of change (both as design/planning and evaluation method) aka ToC. ToC can be used as learning object, providing a specific focus for feedback, evaluation and discussion around outcomes and assumptions. However, it has been critiqued as too static. 
   * Outcome mapping   * Outcome mapping
   * 'Most significant change’   * 'Most significant change’
Line 161: Line 160:
   * 'Counterfactuals'   * 'Counterfactuals'
   * User / developer research (interviews, observation, (sensor) data i.e correlation of subjective and objective reports)   * User / developer research (interviews, observation, (sensor) data i.e correlation of subjective and objective reports)
-  * Evaluating unknowns (the black animals ( swan, elephant, jellyfish)) +  * Evaluating unknowns (with the black animals (swanselephants & jellyfish)) 
-  * The 'ethanol' method +  * The 'ethanol method'
  
 Challenge: finding appropriate ways of evaluating dynamic aspects of an initiative; the dynamics has to be present in the evaluation model as well. Challenge: finding appropriate ways of evaluating dynamic aspects of an initiative; the dynamics has to be present in the evaluation model as well.
Line 173: Line 171:
   * [[http://www.fsg.org/publications/evaluating-complexity|Evaluating Complexity]]: Propositions for Improving Practice by Hallie Preskill, Srikanth "Srik" Gopal, Katelyn Mack, Joelle Cook   * [[http://www.fsg.org/publications/evaluating-complexity|Evaluating Complexity]]: Propositions for Improving Practice by Hallie Preskill, Srikanth "Srik" Gopal, Katelyn Mack, Joelle Cook
   * [[http://www.fsg.org/publications/guide-evaluating-collective-impact|Guide to Evaluating Collective Impact]] by Hallie Preskill, Marcie Parkhurst, Jennifer Splansky Juster   * [[http://www.fsg.org/publications/guide-evaluating-collective-impact|Guide to Evaluating Collective Impact]] by Hallie Preskill, Marcie Parkhurst, Jennifer Splansky Juster
 +
 +
 +{{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/24415935053}}
      
  
  
  • marine_colab/reflection_meeting.1455536391.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2016-02-15 11:39
  • by nik