0 Participative Methods 2: Participatory Appraisal

Picture taken by APB-CMX, Bangladesh, 2004. The picture shows a PRA ranking exercise conducted by Kamal Kar. The participants were women members of a Farmer Field School organised by CARE.

Participatory appraisal (PA) developed in Africa where it was known as participatory rural appraisal and so it is sometimes called PRA.  Someone experienced PRA in Africa and brought it back to Humberside during the nineties and developed it into PA, an approach for urban communities in the UK.  It is essentially an approach that combines research with community development, recruiting everyone into building, owning and controlling their own information about their neighbourhoods.

Its big advantage is flexibility.  PA can be used indoors or outdoors, with small or large groups, informally (eg table to table in a pub or café or on the street) or formally at a meeting designed for the purpose.  It can be used with people of all ages and I’ve yet to find a minimum or maximum age!

The main disadvantage is you need training for your facilitators and they need lots of experience to do it properly.  They need to understand the tendency for groups drift away from a participatory approach, despite their best intentions. Think of PA as a video game.  Game over means you can restart and use what you have learned to progress further next time.  Very few of us really understand participation and so we learn by doing and reflecting.

Initial training typically takes five full days. I have posted about PA and courses available in the UK. The news is not good at present and I am not aware of any courses I can recommend.

Leaders tend to dominate meetings and impose their views upon others.  This applies to everyone including the practitioners of PA.  Therefore practitioners need to be alert to their own practice and when they start to be directive.  For this reason practitioners rarely work alone, so that at least one other can observe what is happening and discuss it afterwards.

I remember working with children in a class at a school.  A woman who was a powerful leader in her own community partnered me and we asked the children to draw a map of their neighbourhood.  We agreed I would interrogate the map.  When the children were ready my partner grabbed the pens and started to interrogate the map.  There was little I could do other than take on the observer support role.  At the end of the session my partner asked me what I thought of her performance.  I told her and gave examples of where she had been directive.  She was not impressed.  A couple of days later, at the end of the training course, she told me she had reflected on what I said and it had been helpful.

I tell this story to illustrate the honesty and trust required to make PA work but it is worth it.

The thing that attracts many people to PA is its tools.  These are approaches to helping people voice their concerns and ideas.  You can also develop your own tools.  Most tools use large sheets of flipchart paper and the idea is to make sure everyone has access to pens and uses them.  Some people claim they can’t draw and ask others to draw on their behalf.  I’ve generally found that once people get started they’ll get into it and then almost nothing will stop them.

The thing that will stop them is a dominant person, who can impose their authority on a group in seconds.  “We know the answer to that.”  So, the third essential following training and tools is experience.  You need to be able to see when people are domineering (and they’re often charming people) and work out ways to neutralise their effect.  So, in the classroom I mentioned earlier, one of the practitioners asked the teacher to draw a map.  We agreed this in advance.  The teacher claimed to know exactly what was going on but co-operated because it did stop her interfering and she wanted to hear the results as much as we did.  But note without our intervention she might have walked around the class and made comments.  We showed her how to be most helpful.  Some dominant people are sensitive and some aren’t.  Good luck!

Personally I like going out in the freezing cold with flipchart paper and pens and asking people to map their area.  For some reason I find it hard to persuade others to join me.  I don’t think it’s the cold that puts them off.  Listening to people is costly to start with but infinitely rewarding.

Most participative methods can be wrecked by charming leaders.  How have you helped them stand aside?  Are you aware of courses you can recommend?

0 Your Global Proposition

Your global proposition is a short, clear statement of your business purpose. Every business activity should meet the standard set by your global proposition.

If you are a social entrepreneur then it will bring together your social and business aims. This is just as true if you use a community organisation or a business as your vehicle.

Some social entrepreneurs begin with a cause and discover they have a business that funds their cause.  Sometimes such businesses set up as social enterprises. Typically they have Trustees / Directors who represent the beneficiaries of the cause, local residents for example.  Others might set up as conventional business.  This latter course has something to commend it as it allows an idea to be tested.  The time to move to a formal social enterprise is when a sole trader might consider incorporation.

Another route is where a local business begins with financial objectives, and later embraces social aspirations as its purpose. Local businesses may grow in solidarity as a network and in time understand its role in benefiting their locality.  The discovery that “I benefit when everyone else benefits” is the core experience at the heart of mutuality.

This type of business will typically be structured as a business where the owner does not have to refer to a committee for decision-making. As businesses become established and incorporated, they will have a Board of Directors, although a Chief Executive is likely to retain individual decision-making powers.

Both community and businesses are collaborative.  The difference is community organisations are usually collaborative internally, encouraging members to be actively involved in running the organisation.  This is why they tend to become bureaucratic and less able to relate to partners.  Local businesses are usually externally collaborative, seeking partnerships that establish a niche for the business in a supportive environment.  They typically depend on personal decision-making and so can lack transparency.

Your global proposition should work within any of these structures. Whether you see your work as primarily a business or a cause, your global proposition combines your business and social aims.

It is essential it does. The global proposition is public and you will return to it as your activities grow. Is this new activity or proposal in line with the social and business aims in the global proposition?

Like anything else, your global proposition is a tool, it helps you communicate the role of your business or organisation and keeps it on track. It can be reviewed without fear of losing its radical edge! If you have found a proposition that works for you, revisions in the light of experience will strengthen it and broaden its appeal.

My Global Proposition

This is a global proposition I drafted a few months ago:

I discover and share online marketing methods to help social entrepreneurs who are seeking sustainable approaches to finding their place in a localised economy.

Note the focus is on sustainable local economy, not accumulating personal wealth. Whilst I don’t take a view about the amount people earn, my clients will want to invest in supporting other local businesses or some cause. How they do this, eg with money, time or in other ways is something we can explore.

Whilst I am not unhappy with this statement my thinking has moved on. I have returned to my earlier idea of community development online.

I offer a full community development support service to social entrepreneurs in community and business organisations who aim to build and sustain their local economy, integrating traditional offline approaches with a constructive online presence.

This version places community development where marketing appeared formerly. It underlines my offer is to community and business organisations and emphasises I work both offline and online.

This post is an introduction to the global proposition.  Element 3 in the circuit questionnaire shall explore this in more detail.  I have recently found more information about how to write and use them.  I shall go into more depth when I get to element 3.

Do you think this works? Have you examples of your own global proposition?  How has it evolved?

0 Location is Everything

One of the insights that have kept me going as a community development worker is “it’s where your feet are!” Many claim it is our heart or mind that forms our role in the world. There is a degree of truth in this because it is certainly true that our values are important.  But what forms our values? Perhaps our geographical location, where our feet are? Certainly the relationship between place and values is complex.  It cannot be ignored, location is everything.

There is interplay between our online and offline practice in a parallel complex fashion. David R Bell in his book “Location is (Still) Everything: the Surprising Influence of the Real World on How We Search, Shop, and Sell in the Virtual One“ makes a valiant start at unpicking this relationship.

His interest is primarily in lessons for online marketers and so his emphasis is on the behaviour of customers in aggregate and not so much the behaviour of communities and economies. His perspective is that of a business owner who is seeking a market on a nationwide scale and then on the impact these decisions might have on a community, where many such decisions affect the lives of residents, without their knowledge or consent.

The book is full of helpful insights and we should be grateful for that. The question, as always is how we use the insights gleaned from such research. This work opens up a lot of questions and finding answers to some of them is one of the purposes of this blog.

Marketing GRAVITY

Bell uses an acrostic, GRAVITY, to organise his message across seven chapters.

• Geography is the foundational idea, that where we live to some degree determines our relationship with the online world. Your online interests may be determined by the goods and services available locally. Obviously if something is not available it is possible to find it online. But perhaps less obvious is the way we can explore local possibilities online and then travel to make a purchase.
• Resistance is where our economic activities encounter barriers, of which there appear to be two main ones. Distance is one. However attractive an offer may be, there is a limit to the distance customers will travel to take advantage of it. The second is ease of searching for a solution to a problem.
• Adjacency is about how sales tend to cluster in geographical areas because of the spread of the news of a product or service by word of mouth or example.
• Vicinity is where people with similar lifestyles and values live in very different places and how information passed between them.
• Isolation looks at behaviours in areas with varying degrees of provision of a particular commodity. Where demand is high, local shops will tend to stock more options than in places where demand is low.  So, are people who live in low demand areas, more likely to purchase online?
• Topography explores some of the complexities of relationships between what is available online and locally. It doesn’t follow that online information leads inevitably to online sales. It is possible to find out what is available locally online. This is all further complicated by the growth of mobile devices.
• You explores some of the implications of GRAVITY for developing businesses.

All of these are worth further consideration about their implications for local markets.

One final word of high praise for David R Bell. It is always invigorating to find a writer who knows how to use the word “nice” nicely.

2 Participative Methods 1: General Principles

Of the three functions:

Setting up small groups around tables is not so difficult. You will be surprised how many can be accommodated!

General Principles

Information about these methods is hard to find practitioners pass them on through training.  Whilst this may be frustrating it is good to heed their warnings.  Here are a few things to consider when you set out to work participatively.

Helpful Links

I have previously written posts about participatory methods. Over the next few weeks I shall revisit them, considering how each is used in typical UK community development contexts.  These links are to the earlier posts.

Participative Methods

What is your experience using participative methods?  What difficulties have you met and what tips do you have for participative meetings?

2 Your Business Story

Your business story is not necessarily the same as your origin story  . It is about how your business came about, whilst your origin story is about you. Sometimes they are the same; you need to tell your origin story to explain your business story or else they are independent stories.

If the two seem independent, ask why that is. Has your business story no relationship with the event you believe to be central to your personal story?

Sometimes the story of your business is less interesting than your origin story.  It can be about the daily graft out of which a business slowly emerged.  But this does not mean the story is without value.  You were patient and stuck with it until the business worked.  Working out how to tell a story is just as important as finding the right story to tell.

My Business Story

I was made redundant a few years ago and found the lifestyle of self-employment attractive but I didn’t know what I could offer. I retrained as a web designer and discovered most web design agencies do not offer the support people need, particularly for the voluntary sector and local independent businesses. Technology has moved on and today it is possible to do for yourself work for which you previously paid agencies thousands of pounds. The problems groups encounter online are similar to real life problems pre-Internet and today! Lack of strategic insight is very common online just as it is offline;  and many groups do not co-ordinate their online and offline work. Anxiety about the technology still distracts from the human arrangements behind the website!

As a development worker I’ve learned how to support key people using situation analysis, project development, participatory methods, soft systems as well as dealing with challenging issues and the inevitable disasters! So, I am bringing together three insights:

The idea of “Community Development Online” has been growing over the last couple of years. It is still under development and includes these elements:

Community development online is complex and as I researched it, I saw the need for vision and not just an offer for technical support. I particularly want to help groups seeking sustainable local economies. The idea of social entrepreneur is just as valid online as off and so my focus is helping individuals and groups who want to build this approach.

Conclusion

My business story as it stands is not as dramatic as my origin story!  One reason I place the business story in a less important light than my origin story is that it is still under development.  It is harder to tell a story when I am so close to it and I don’t know how it ends!  Will it be a story of success?

It’s possible I will experience something that makes a good story.  At that point I would make my business story more prominent on my website.

The main point to take away is the difference between a business story and an origin story.  Perhaps the business story is essential in the sense that it may answer questions in the mind of site visitors and potential customers.  However, I agree with many others the origin story is important because it is an opportunity for site visitors to get to know you as a person.  It stands in for your personal presence (as far as it is possible).

Many people designing their site go overboard describing their business or organisation, presenting masses of detail about their mission, aims and objectives and the products and services they offer.  Whilst there is a need for some of this material, it is so easy to forget the human story behind your offer.  How do you get the balance right?

Do you have examples of origin and business stories?  It would be interesting to see some examples.  Why not put a url into comments and say why you think it’s a good example (or a bad example if that’s what it is)?

0 A Three Pillar Democracy

Last time I wrote about how “Motivation and Meaning” is behind all economic and political systems. In this third part of my review of “Change Everything” by Christian Felber, I shall consider his chapter about “Advancing Democracy”, wherein Felber suggests a three pillar democracy.

Sovereignty

The chapter describes an approach to democracy where the people are sovereign. Felber lives in Austria and many of the examples are from Central Europe. Quite how this idea goes down in the UK, with a monarch as  sovereign, is not yet known.  (Political parties opposed to membership of the EU, claim they believe in national sovereignty for the UK by which they presumably mean sovereignty of the monarch.  In the real world, Parliament has handed over sovereignty to the large corporations and I don’t suppose leaving the EU will make much difference to that.  This doesn’t make me optimistic that we’ll see a sensible or informed debate about sovereignty in this country.)

The September 2014 Scottish referendum is an example of how direct democracy can empower populations. Felber claims the sovereign people are usually more cautious than their politicians. The results of the referendum, show a significant majority voted to stay as part of the UK. However, the referendum radicalised the people and so in the General Election, May 2015, most seats went to the Scottish National Party (SNP).

The problem was with the referendum itself. The politicians designed the question to meet their own interests. The ambiguities meant many who voted no in the referendum actually wanted change as we saw in the General Election results. If the results of the first ballot was a no to the SNP, the results of the second was a no to the Westminster élite. Is anyone planning to find out what the people actually want?

A Constitutional Convention

Felber would suggest establishing a convention, independent of the Scottish or UK parliaments. The people would elect members of the convention whose task would be to come up with a political solution acceptable to the people of Scotland. A referendum confirms their recommendations.

Under such a system, referendums would stop being the plaything of governments and become a genuine element of participative democracy.  I am not optimistic referendums can offer the public a free choice whilst politicians set the question.

Three-Pillar Democracy

Felber suggests a three pillar approach to democracy that mirrors my three function model for community development.

Representative Democracy

So, representative democracy at national level mirrors the representational role of community organisations. (This link is to the first of three.)  However, practical considerations limit the direct democratic involvement of people.  This is why we elect parliaments, councils, etc – we entrust politicians to act on our behalf.  That our politicians are not accountable between elections is one the major democratic challenges we face.  They write the manifestos and then can change them once they’re in power.  We get to vote for parties and can’t pick and mix policies between parties.  If we disagree with a decision made during a term of office, we have no way of communicating which policy we disagree with through voting.

Our politicians cannot be trusted to truly represent people’s views. They decide the agenda and have exclusive powers to draft legislation, treaties, etc. Their most powerful lobbies are the corporations. The politicians have given away too much power to these lobbies and ordinary citizens have nothing like equal power over the politicians they elect.

Direct Democracy

This is where the second pillar comes in, direct democracy. This mirrors the planning stage of my three function model. Locally, planning is an opportunity for community organisations to meet with other local interest groups such as the council, police, NHS and local businesses.

A convention would be equivalent to representatives of community organisation directly involved in negotiations.   The elected convention’s task is to draft treaties and other agreements, which act as frameworks for politicians, on behalf of the people. They would not normally draft legislation, their role is constitutional.  So, determination of the relationship between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, would include the roles of the Scottish and Westminster parliaments.  Parliaments make decisions about legislation within the constitutional agreement.  The convention would act in an open way, consulting with all interests and producing legislation for agreement at a referendum.

This would be for deciding constitutional issues, eg Scotland’s governance, the treaty with Europe (an international convention, perhaps?) and so on. Anything requiring a referendum would start with a convention.  The referendum would be to accept or reject the findings of the convention.

Participatory Democracy

Finally, participatory democracy is equivalent to the delivery function in my local model.  It is where people can be directly involved in their place of work, for example.

As these three pillars develop, they reinforce one another. As people find out about the enhanced power of participatory democracy, they are likely to increase their own involvement. With such political structures in place, we are likely to find they reinforce democratic involvement in our neighbourhoods and work places as well as at council and parliamentary levels. We will rediscover the political process in the marketplace.

The three local functions may seem weaker than the national democratic functions.  This is a product of contemporary national politics; national politics is more powerful and the weakness of local politics is part of the same system.  Introducing these three distinct pillars of democracy would strengthen local democracy people became more familiar with democratic participation.

0 Delivery Organisations

In my last post, I continued describing my three function model by looking at planning.  In this post, which completes this sequence introducing my three function model, I shall move onto the third function:

Things to understand about delivery.  It is:

The last bullet may be easier if the delivery organisation is home-grown.  External delivery organisations can be very good but some can be tied to binding contracts (often not public documents) and so their potential contribution may be limited or possibly not trusted.

The Vestry Hall in Burngreave, Sheffield was derelict for many years. Redeveloped by New Deal, it delivers training for local residents.

If a number of groups are likely to be invited to tender for implementation of a plan, they may not have been a part of the planning process.  The planning group will need to design a tendering process that tests them against the plan.  Make it known you want tenders that meet basic criteria and add value to it.

What are your experiences of project delivery and how have you approached local accountability?  Let me know through the comments.  I’d be happy to expand on some of the issues raised in this post, just let me know which ones interest you.

So far, I’ve offered a model that presents an ideal picture of what can be done locally to be effective in development work and local regeneration.  The representative function is most important for communities; get it right and the rest should be easier to follow through.  In the next post  I shall return to the topic of participatory methods for representative organisations.

2 Your Origin Story

The central and most important dimension to your brand is your origin story.

Think about the websites you visit. How many are full of tedious material lifted from their business plan? Do they tell you in great detail about their mission statement, aims and objectives? How do you react?  Many businesses have learned this lesson and don’t info dump from their filing cabinet onto their websites.  Third sector organisations are perhaps prone to this mistake, often because they do not have access to examples of good practice common in the business sector.

There is a place for this type of material on your website but that place is deep within it, where anyone interested can find it and where most people, not interested, can ignore it.  Someone intent upon making a purchase may wish to study the details.  For some the fact it’s there is reassuring, even if they don’t read it!

Your purpose at the front end of your website is to charm your visitors, so they may opt to stay in touch with you and ultimately make a purchase or support your cause. If you are not trying to reach people and stay in touch with them, what exactly is the purpose of your site?

What is Your Origin Story?

Your origin story can be central to your message. What is an origin story? It is the story that explains why you’re in your business. What experience led you into this business?

Why have an origin story?  If most of your customers meet you in person before purchasing your services, you may not need one on your website, although you might for public speaking.  If your website visitors don’t know you, your origin story can be the best way to help them know you better.

Your origin story can be presented in different versions. Shorter and longer versions can be used in different places on your website or in social media. It can be recorded as a video or audio account and of course it can also be presented in real life meetings. As you tell and retell the story you will receive feedback and so your story will evolve. You will get better at telling it!

Transformation

Your origin story need not necessarily show you in a positive light. If it is a story of transformation, it is likely to show you making a mistake. It doesn’t even need to show you solving the problem, just that you understand it.  My origin story is about an experience that was a professional triumph for me and a personal defeat. Many development workers have been in that situation (or at least the personal defeat part of it) and I want them to know I’m familiar with the territory. I know the toll this work can take on your health, your relationships, your self-esteem. I know how long it can take to recover from such setbacks. Many entrepreneurs know the same feeling.

When events go wrong are you going to be crushed by them or bounce back? Sometimes the bounce back can be painfully slow and this is when you need support. The entrepreneur (social or business) is perhaps someone who keeps going despite the pain of failure.

The best origin stories go beyond accounts of transformation and touch something deeper in the heart of its readers or hearers.  These are the stories that go viral.  A story passed on will bring visitors to your site.  This is why the call to action is so important.

1 Motivation and Meaning

From Economics to Politics

Christian Felber’s Change Everything is about economics but it soon becomes clear democracy is central to its proposals. If we are seeking a fair economic system, then we must improve our democratic or political systems.  This post focuses on his chapter: Motivation and Meaning.

History tells us humanity is very good at inventing unjust economic systems. Indeed the purpose of many political systems appear to be to legitimise injustice. Where there is justice it tends to draw little attention and can seem unstable. However, given most political systems prove unstable in the end, this does not mean justice is impractical.

It’s easy to forget the equitable purposes of institutions over time. For example, insurance used to be a means to share risk. If someone claimed, everyone’s premium would increase by a very small amount. These days if you make a claim, your premium increases by a large amount. We’ve forgotten the equitable principles underlying the original scheme.

There are many other examples; the carpetbaggers of the 1980s, who joined building societies with the intention to vote for their demutualisation. Demutualisation changed assets owned collectively into shares owned by each shareholder.

So, there is something more fundamental than either politics or economics. It is fundamentally to do with our spirituality, the values that we bring to the marketplace.

From Politics to Spirituality

Felber’s chapter Motivation and Meaning is a good place to start.

Survival of the Fittest

I have written in earlier posts about the mis-use of Darwinism by apologists for the current economic system. Felber writes on page 106, “the capitalistic, that is, social Darwinist image of humankind according to which human beings are primarily motivated by egoism and competition“.

Why do we attribute this view to Darwin? Presumably it alludes to the “survival of the fittest”, a term missing from the first edition of the Origin of the Species. Alfred Russell Wallace who proposed a similar theory of evolution to Darwin’s at around the same time, makes no reference to it.

Somehow survival of the fittest has become integral to the Theory of Evolution. Why is this? It seems likely competition was an important element of the worldview of the powerful at the time of Darwin and Wallace. They seized upon survival of the fittest as a way of demonstrating their approach as natural.

It is hard to think of a more blatant example of science being formed by society. The powerful wanted a theory of evolution that supported their way of doing things and that’s what we have. They say, “Our economic system is just like natural evolution where the powerful survive and the weak go to the wall.” This is perhaps one of the most damaging myths of our time.

Questioning Competition

Is it true competition solely motivates people? 80% of new business start-ups fail. Obviously there are many reasons they fail and some ideas deserve to fail. But how many fail because they believe in competition? They believe not only that they have to protect their business against competition but that they have to work alone, never in partnership. I suspect it is those businesses that understand businesses survive when they collaborate that do in fact survive (assuming they are viable). Viable businesses fail when they are badly managed and a mindset that is competitive to other businesses and bullying to its staff is likely to be poor at management.

On page 113 Felber writes,

“Thus the root of the problem lies in inwardly impoverished people who are incapable of investing their own lives with meaning; they lack the self-confidence needed to recognise themselves as being ultimately responsible for their own lives and their own decisions.“

Competition pushes the reason for my failure onto someone else. It motivates me and maybe in the short-term winning the competition means business success. But in the end it seems “those who live by the sword perish by the sword”. The original Greek does not use ‘die’ but ‘perish’. The difference is intentional, to live in this way causes the person to perish, to lack meaning or purpose other than to triumph in competition. We confuse perish and die because to perish is to die from the inside out. Most of the world’s religions recognise this.

Competition and Meaning

If we are planning to change everything, to change economic systems towards something more collaborative, equitable and sustainable, it is necessary to change our political systems and to change our political systems we need to change ourselves. It’s a tall order and one that has been known for centuries. If we’ve been trying for centuries and failed, why should we be successful this time?  If only competition motivates us, what does this say about the meaning of our activities?  Is it true the “business of business is business”?

Who says we’ve failed? Perhaps the times and places where there is justice appear rare. Often they are communities within a larger economic system they oppose, perhaps by having a profound impact. The retail co-operative movement, which because it was successful inspired many other experiments into mutuality and education, had an impact in the fine-grain of our lives in many ways we don’t notice unless we know some history. We don’t see it because our attention is rarely drawn to it. This is what happens when you have a single prevailing economic worldview.

0 Planning

My last post about community planning, completed a sequence about the representation function of my three function model and so it is time to move onto the second:

The last post about Community Planning emphasised why it is important not to confuse your local plan with the plan agreed with your partners.

Some formal planning meetings are somewhat daunting!

When you meet with partners from the local authority, police, NHS, local schools, local businesses and so on, they will each have their own plans.  Their plans are worth no more than your local plan, although they might have spent more money on it and so may like to think theirs is more important.

So your role is negotiation, aiming for agreement to as much of your plan as possible.  Remember you won’t get all of it or even necessarily the parts you would most like.  Perhaps the people of Maltby would have prioritised a by-pass over everything else.  They were never going to get a by-pass but other chapters in their plan were very successful.

So, you need to think about how you can increase your plan’s credibility.  First, consider your methods.  How did you write the plan?  How many people did you involve in the planning?  I estimate the Maltby plan included material from over 400 people.  The plan itself included by-lines from people who didn’t necessarily agree with the main argument.  An uneven plan can be more credible because it shows the plan is not the product of one small group of people.

Think about how you’re going to present your local plan.  Negotiations may involve several meetings with partners.  Who will take part and how will you support them?

Some groups send different people to each meeting.  This may show wide support for the plan but it sacrifices continuity.  Consider a small group that meets between the meetings with partners to debrief the last meeting and prepare for the next.  You can then send one or two members of the group to each meeting.  Thus you preserve continuity whilst demonstrating wider support.

I would normally send at least two people to meetings with partners.  More than two might be difficult to accommodate.  With two people present, one can be the main representative and the other take notes and make suggestions from a less pressured perspective.  They can rotate these two roles.

Such arrangements, so long as they are not too complex, can appear impressive.  A consistent line represented over several meetings by a small group may appear more credible than the same line represented by one spokesperson.

Remember you won’t have a lot of money or assets compared with other partners so you need to show you are an organised and disciplined group.

Pay attention to the plans of your other partners; get hold of copies and read them.  In your planning group, divide their proposals into four groups. Proposals that

1. support what is in your local plan.
2. address issues not covered in your local plan.
3. could be tweaked to line them up with your plan (or where your plan could be tweaked to line up with their proposals).
4. you cannot agree to.

Work out what you want to support, what you think could be changed and what you oppose.  Some things you may oppose but be willing to trade for other parts of your plan.

Keep your powder dry!  Don’t go in and simply state what you support or don’t support.  You may be able to gain support for your priorities from partners who appreciate your support for theirs.  You’re likely to lose some arguments and so plan ahead!

And finally, don’t sacrifice your integrity, be consistent and don’t walk out if you can possibly avoid it.

These negotiations can be fraught with difficulty.  I’d love to hear your stories about how they’ve worked out, positive or disastrous!