1 COPING WITH A CONTROVERSIAL PUBLIC ISSUE Larry D. Sanders Sue Williams April 2011

2 INTRODUCTION u Background –More controversial issues –Content skills –Process skills u This session –Process skills –Framework & guidelines u Follow the signs to de- fusing controversy…

3 Summary of key concepts u Every issue tells a story; learn it’s evolution to improve your program u Objectivity not advocacy u Recognize your own role may vary u Framing issues constructively u Alternatives/consequences not pros/cons u Base programs on facts, be sensitive to public values, demythify the issue u Understand the politics of policy making with kings/kingmakers

4 HEADING OFF A CONFLICT u Know your user audiences &various publics u Earn confidence & trust u Monitor situations u DON’T DON’T DON’T ADVOCATE

5 DEAL WITH CONFLICT u Act quickly u Bring various sides/key actors together u Set the example to rise above differences u Take educational role; be objective u Let affected parties decide on action u Work with leaders to implement action plan u Encourage leaders to update news media

6 OPPORTUNITY CALLS u Anxious calls from citizens u News reports of event with negative results u Director seeks your assistance u You anticipate a potential conflict or issue u Voters and decision makers ponder public policy

7 Management Styles & Response Strategies in Conflict and Controversy Avoiding or Reactive Accommodate or Avoid* Observant and Introspective Compromise, Collaborate or Accommodate* Assertive and Persuasive Compromise or Collaborate* Aggressive and Confrontive Compete*

8 POTENTIAL CONTROVERSY? u Quality of life/standard of living u Personal health/safety u Environmental risk u Justice/equality u Party politics u Role of government

9 ISSUES EVOLUTION 1. CONCERN 2. INVOLVEMENT OF SOME PUBLIC 3. ISSUE DEFINED 4. IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVES 5. EVALUATE CONSEQUENCES 6. MAKE PUBLIC CHOICES 7. IMPLEMENT RULES/ REGULATIONS 8. EVALUATE POLICY 9. NEW SET OF CONCERNS

10 EXTENSION’S RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINED BY: 1. ISSUE EVOLUTION 2. RELATIONSHIP W/ISSUE 3. RELATIONSHIP W/STAKEHOLDERS 4. WHAT THE “BOSS” SAYS

11 ROLES FOR EDUCATORS 1. PRO-ACTIVE INTERVENTION VS. REQUESTED ASSISTANCE VS. IRRELEVANT SHADOW 2. EXPERT VS. FACILITATOR VS. “HONEST BROKER”

12 “DE-MYTHIFICATION” IS KEY TO IMPROVING PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS –Moving citizens from “cocksure ignorance” to thoughtful uncertainty”* –Moving citizens from Myths (sense & nonsense) to Facts –Moving citizens up the power pyramid –Insuring Kingmakers understand the Facts *R.J. Hildreth, 1987

13 Facts & Values & Science “… modern science is grounded in a sharp distinction between fact and value; it can only tell us how to do something, not what to do or whether we should do it.” --Morris Berman, The Reenchantment of the World, Bantam Books, 1984, p. 39 [italics added]

14 Anatomy of a Public Decision Facts: verifiable; measurable Myths: sense & nonsense; what people think is fact Values: what people think “should be”

15 KEY ACTORS & POWER POLITICS APATHETIC INTERESTED ACTIVE KINGS KINGMAKERS

16 EXERCISE: “Local Politics” Card Game Goal: get enough human resources to achieve community project –3-4 teams; each assigned issue –Aces: kingmakers –Kings: kings –Queens: actives –Jacks: interested –10-2: apathetics (descending order) –Diamonds: Transportation –Clubs: Economic Development –Hearts: Tourism & Area Beautification –Spades: Mainstreet Development –Jokers: unknown interest/allegiance –What can you do with the cards that are dealt you? –How do you transform your hand?

17 EXERCISE: Card Game--example 1. Assign issues: (1)econ development; (2) transportation; (3) tourism; (4) mainstreet 2. Deal cards (7-12 to each team) 3. Ask each team to assess whether 1.They have key people (based on cards) 2.They have consensus of issue 4. Ask what they can do to transform position (cards) to improve opportunity to rally community to take action on their issue

18 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS 1. Is there a “Problem”? 2. Is it a “Public” problem? 3. Can public discussion offer a solution? 4. Is there a window of opportunity for education? 5. Are there resources for education? 6. Are you willing & able to be neutral/objective?

19 FRAME THE ISSUE u Clarify or redefine the “problem” u Be sensitive to –perceived concerns –various groups u Include affected groups u Pro versus Con? –divisive & destructive u Alternatives and Consequences? –cohesive & constructive

20 COLLABORATION: WIN-WIN u PROBLEM RESOLUTION IS KEY u BE INCLUSIVE u INTERESTS, NOT POSITIONS u CREATE OPTIONS u OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT u COMMON GROUND

21 WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU AS A PUBLIC PROFESSIONAL u Personal Stress Management u Public Conflict Management u Credibility: Enhance Your Status in Community u Improve Time Management and Efficiency

22 WHAT’S YOUR NEXT STEP? u Skill & Comfort Zone Self-assessment u Resource Assessment u Issue Assessment u Alternatives & Consequences u Act!

23 Public Deliberation u A means to: –Help citizens make tough choices about public issues –Evaluate consequences of various options –Understand the views of others –Find a shared sense of direction—common ground for action

24 Core Values of the Public Issues Educator* u Education—objective, relevant u Inclusion—all stakeholders u Civil Dialogue—develop mutual trust u Innovative Solutions—willingness to negotiate, share power, explore collaborative action u Improving Communication/Decision-making Skills—getting better at skills you do well & strengthening/compensating for weaknesses *NOTE: Courtesy of “Public Issues Education: Increasing Competence, Enabling Communities”, working draft July 2002, developed by Public Issues Competencies Task Force

25 Other Resources Managing Public Controversy in Oklahoma -- 1-day OCES in-service workshop --Coordinator: Larry Sanders/Sue Williams --Ongoing program; may be follow-up programs at county/multi- county level Oklahoma Moderators and Recorders Academy u Professional development in public deliberation –Moderating –Convening –Recording/reporting forums u Contact Sue Williams

26 Summary of key concepts u Every issue tells a story; learn it’s evolution to improve your program u Objectivity not advocacy u Recognize your own role may vary u Framing issues constructively u Alternatives/consequences not pros/cons u Base programs on facts, be sensitive to public values, demythify the issue u Understand the politics of policy making with kings/kingmakers

27 In all endeavors, be optimistic… u Larry Sanders: