Wisdom of the People Forum

Wisdom of the People Forum
A Case Study in SDP

The case study in Structured Design Process (SDP) that I selected from Christakis’ book Harness Collective Wisdom and Power, was the study discussed in Chapter 16 titled “Wisdom of the People Forum”. This event occurred in Washington DC, September 16-18, 2002. This form consisted of 40 Indigenous leaders from the Americas and New Zealand, as well as a number of non-Indigenous experts. The intent of the form was to create a foundation that would strongly encourage and help to establish an ever-expanding, interconnecting set of relationships and cooperation between Indigenous peoples that would be transnational and yet grassroots in nature, within a framework allowing for the integration of what they termed as “intangible” traditional core values into modern life.

With that said, the first order of business was to examine the current state of transnational interaction between Indigenous leaders and then devise effective methods to strengthen existing ties and establish new ones – this in light of current and projected levels of globalization. To accomplish this, existing barriers to this effort needed to be identified and addressed. This was achieved through what was termed as “true dialogue” or “open deliberations”, exercised through the use of the Comanche circle, where members share their “medicine”, or source of inner strength and personal power with the group – primarily relating their ideals and reverence for the Earth, their ancestors and desire for peaceful co-existence among all living creatures.

In an effort to analyze the “Wisdom of the People Forum” (WPF) case study; I will classify the various methods and components of the SDP approach utilized by the members of the form, identifying how they were specifically employed. By this I mean that I will identify what of the 31 component constructs across the 7 modules comprising the SDP methodology, did the members of the conference employ and how.

Module A – Consensus Methods
Of the 6 consensus methods comprising the first module, WPF employed a combination of methods, namely the Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and Options Field methods. Specifically, ISM was used to create an influence tree to identify the crucial root sources among a collection of observations making up a Problematique. In this case, the Problematique is the set of 79 barriers that the group felt stood in the way of worldwide cooperation between Indigenous peoples. Included in this set were barriers that if overcome would exert the most leverage in overcoming other barriers.

On the second day of the conference, the co-laboratory answered the following trigger question: “What are action options which, if adopted and implemented by the community of stakeholders, will help in meeting the system of barriers?” From the question, the group developed 49 action options, posting them on the wall, creating an Options Field representation; its use indicting the employment of the Options Field consensus method.

Module B – Language Patterns
Of the 7 possible language patterns available, the WPF utilized 3 language patterns: (1) Problematique, as demonstrated by the initial definition of set of 79 barriers that they believed stood in the way of worldwide cooperation between Indigenous peoples, including those barriers that if overcome would exert the most leverage in overcoming other barriers; (2) Influence tree patterns, used to determine the those barriers to interconnectivity in light of globalization; (3) Options field pattern, as illustrated by the use of the Options Field representation of the 49 action options diagramed on the wall.

Module C – The 3-Application Time Phases
All three Application Time Phases (Discovery, Designing, and Action) were of course transitioned through during the 3-day conference, culminating in 8 consensus actions included in the Consensus Action Scenario.

Module D – The 3-Key Role Responsibilities
Though not specifically identified, WPF conference employed all 3 key roles. The case study highlighted the Content – Stakeholders/Designers role and their actions in its description.

Module E – The 4-Stages of Interactive Inquiry
The description of the WPF case study keyed on 2 of the 4 stages of interactive inquiry, namely, the 2nd stage Design of Alternatives, and the 4th stage, the Action Planning. The Design of Alternatives stage was described by the construction of the Influence Tree of the barriers in context of globalization, and the Action Options exercise used to identify the items comprising the resulting Consensus Action Scenario.

Module F – Collaborative Software and Faculty
Interestingly enough, there was no mention of the use of collaborative software in this case study. There could be a couple of reasons for this, ranging from the fact that its specific mention and/or use was of no importance to the case study; or that the very nature of the case study involving Indigenous peoples implies a certain disdain for its use – though I doubt if this was the case in light of the fact that part of the intent of the WPF was to review the current state of collaboration in light of globalization, which is heavily tied to technology and by implication that the beliefs of Indigenous peoples is still relevant in the modern world.

The Module G – The 6 Dialogue Laws
The 6-Dialogue Laws of SDP consist of Requisite: (1) Variety, (2) Parsimony, (3) Saliency, (4) Meaning and Wisdom, (5) Authenticity and Autonomy, and (6) Evolutionary Learning. Of these, laws (1) and (4) are the strongest factors during the WPF conference; namely, (1) The law of requite variety, which demands that diverse perspectives and their stakeholders MUST be appreciated to effect a favorable outcome to a complex problem; and (4) The law of requisite meaning, which states that meaning and wisdom result ONLY when participants seek the understand of those relationships of similar characters; e.g. priority, influence, type, etc. This is abundantly evident in the WPF case study, where variety or diversity and the seeking for common ground, was the cornerstone of the gathering.

Conclusion
Though the “Wisdom of the People Forum” case study in Christakis’ book Harness Collective Wisdom and Power is the shortest of the case studies, it illustrates key elements of the Structured Design Process (SDP) and their successful application in a unique setting.