Slhi aug 27 08 imple part 2

More about implementation…

August 27, 2008

Cassandra O’Neill

Wholonomy Consulting llc

www.wholonomyconsulting.com

Strengths based

assessment,

design, and

implementation

Strength based assessment, design and implementation

Discuss in Pairs

1. What is it?

2. How is it important?

3. How might it be different from traditional approaches?

Mechanical and Living Systems

In pairs discuss,

What do we know about each?

How are they different?

How does this affect our work in the social sector?

Review – a few slides…

The majority of implementation attempts are NOT successful

Implementation Attempts

• In business, change initiatives that are heavily dependent on people (reengineering, TQM, culture change) fail 80-90% of the time

R. W. Rogers, 2002

Implementation Attempts – slide 2

About 10% of what is taught in training gets transferred to the jobR. W. Rogers, 2002

Implementation Attempts – part 3

"Up to 70% of the failures in business are not due to poor strategy or a lack of good ideas, but to flawed execution." R. W. Rogers, 2002

What Does Not Work

Things that alone – are not enough for successful implementation:

Dissemination of information by itself does not lead to successful implementation (research literature, mailings, promulgation of practice guidelines)

What Does Not Work

Things that alone – are not enough for successful implementation:

Training alone, no matter how well done, does not lead to successful implementation

My aha, about the difference between implementing new program and implementing changes in existing programs, organizations, systems,

What paradigm are these traditional approaches in?

What paradigms do the solutions lie in?

Exercise 1

Situation – the majority of children in a village in Southeast Asia are malnourished

In pairs, what would a traditional response to this be?

Share with whole group

Exercise 1 part 2

In pairs, what would an alternative response be? What would a strengths based response be?

Report out to whole group

What was actually done

What Paradigm?

In pairs,

What paradigm are we thinking in with each response?

Awareness test

Play video now

What we find

Is often a result of what we look for

If time..

A few more situations..

Situation A. Student Achievement

Situation B. Teenage Pregnancy

Situation C. Child in preschool

What paradigm is the dominant paradigm?

What paradigm are we operating from?

21st Century Solutions lie within the intersection of

and interaction between

Sufficiency Paradigm

Dynamical Human SystemsNon linear

Brain/Neuroscience findings

Strengths and ResiliencyBuilding

21st Century Solutions DO NOT Lie within the intersection of

Scarcity Paradigm

Linear and Mechanistic SystemsDeficit Approach

Back to..

Strengths based assessment, design and implementation

How it might be different for us as consultants…

Typically who does assessment, design and implementation?

Traditional Funding

Funders – assess problems, design solutions and put out RFPs with the design of the solution

Grantees implement, often no way to influence design

Traditional Consulting

Clients – assess problems, identify solutions – put out RFP’s with the designed solution

Consultants implement, often no way to influence definition, assessment or design – which limits impact

And also results in having to implement a solution that is really a method – and frequently not the best method for achieving the actual desired outcome

Traditional Consulting

Is often in the deficit paradigm… examples include needs assessments, grant writing, strategic planning that asks for SWOT analysis… etc.

My recent aha about traditional approaches – the weasel card .. When you are in danger of being attached by an enemy.. Analyzing threats and weaknesses of both the “enemy” and your own group is important to survival

However..

When you are not in a war, if you apply that thinking to your organization.. You are treating your co-workers, clients, and staff..

The way you would treat an enemy

Strength based Consulting

What might strengths based consulting look like?.... Grounded in principles of strengths based collaboration…

Principles of strengths basedcollaboration

The solutions lie within the system, the best and most sustainable solutions come from the exploration and discovery of what is working with in a system.

When all levels in the system are participating and each person is bringing their strengths to the discussion of what the situation is and what people want to see happen (outcomes not methods) then strategies are co-created.

Traditional vs. Strengths Based Collaboration

Traditional Strength Based

Based on “perceived” need rather than strengths or assets

Ignore sustainability until it is too late – after implementation

Low-impact partnerships

Based in Scarcity Paradigm

Based in mechanistic paradigm, hierarchical, command and control

Driven by one organization, trying to impose ideas or message on others

Focused on finding more money to deliver services

Traditional vs. Strengths Based Collaboration

Traditional Strength Based

Based on “perceived” need rather than strengths or assets

Based on inquiry of strengths and assets that are available

Ignore sustainability until it is too late – after implementation

Design activities, programs, changes to be sustainable

Low-impact partnerships High-impact partnerships

Based in Scarcity Paradigm Based in Sufficiency Paradigm

Based in mechanistic paradigm, hierarchical, command and control

Based in alternative paradigm i.e. dynamical systems, human systems, self organization

Driven by one organization, trying to impose ideas or message on others

Attracted to a shared vision, to create outcomes only possible collectively

Focused on finding more money to deliver services

Focused on increasing impact

Reflection

What are we noticing ?

Strength based Consulting

What might strengths based consulting look like?.... Asset Mapping, Impact Assessments, Can do assessments – what can we do…

Strengths based strategic planning..

What is next?

October 16 meeting in Tucson – Azenet Tucson Cluster

November 18 – in Phoenix Strengths based evaluation and consulting

Group to modify and adapt Kentucky Tool?

Review more implementation resources, the CBAM model…

Remember this?

Community Readiness Model developed by Edwards, Jumper-Thurman, Plested, Oetting & Swanson (2000)

No Awareness

Denial

Vague Awareness

Initiation Stabilization

Preparation

Preplanning

A Resource

See handout – last page is titled Mapping System Change & Innovation

Is this an alternative which uses neutral or strengths based rather than deficit language?

What paradigm are we in ?

Quote…

Our traditional mind-set has focused on social, political, and ecological problems as lying outside of ourselves. As a result, we try to overcome problems by conquest or negotiation, which has the effect of reinforcing our perceptions of inherent separation..

Quote continued

From deep within that mind-set springs the violence that today dominates much of our consciousness. Look at the language we use to describe society’s problems. We declare war on poverty and addiction. Doctors use “aggressive” methods on the critical patient, drugs are described as magic “bullets,” and we are given “shots” to “fight” disease. Briggs and Peat Seven Life Lessons of Chaos: Spiritual Wisdom From the Science of Change