WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.928 align:middle line:90% [MUSIC PLAYING] 00:00:02.928 --> 00:00:15.295 align:middle line:90% 00:00:15.295 --> 00:00:16.670 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: One of the things 00:00:16.670 --> 00:00:20.300 align:middle line:84% I'm focusing on over these conversations 00:00:20.300 --> 00:00:23.880 align:middle line:84% is what I call facilitative leadership. 00:00:23.880 --> 00:00:27.140 align:middle line:84% I'm talking about facilitative leadership in the broad sense 00:00:27.140 --> 00:00:30.570 align:middle line:90% of skills and attitudes. 00:00:30.570 --> 00:00:35.570 align:middle line:84% A facilitative leader helps parties focus on issues, not 00:00:35.570 --> 00:00:37.590 align:middle line:90% their stand on the issues-- 00:00:37.590 --> 00:00:39.420 align:middle line:90% issues not positions. 00:00:39.420 --> 00:00:43.440 align:middle line:84% Credibility and authority for a facilitative leader-- 00:00:43.440 --> 00:00:48.680 align:middle line:84% credibility and authority-- derive from performance, not 00:00:48.680 --> 00:00:54.150 align:middle line:84% from entitlements bestowed by those in top positions. 00:00:54.150 --> 00:00:55.850 align:middle line:84% Your credibility and your authority 00:00:55.850 --> 00:00:59.190 align:middle line:84% as a facilitative leader are not given to you. 00:00:59.190 --> 00:01:03.430 align:middle line:84% They are earned in the face of the people you are working with. 00:01:03.430 --> 00:01:09.280 align:middle line:84% The goal is to look at a series of 10 micro skills 00:01:09.280 --> 00:01:11.290 align:middle line:84% that I'm going to assert, and that you 00:01:11.290 --> 00:01:16.060 align:middle line:84% will see are at the heart of facilitative leadership 00:01:16.060 --> 00:01:17.620 align:middle line:90% in the public sector-- 00:01:17.620 --> 00:01:21.110 align:middle line:84% micro skills like stakeholder assessment. 00:01:21.110 --> 00:01:23.770 align:middle line:84% How do you decide who should be involved 00:01:23.770 --> 00:01:27.680 align:middle line:84% in some effort at collaborative decision making? 00:01:27.680 --> 00:01:31.010 align:middle line:84% Agenda setting-- you've got a group, you've got a problem, 00:01:31.010 --> 00:01:34.360 align:middle line:84% but now you've got to lay out the work for the group. 00:01:34.360 --> 00:01:38.810 align:middle line:84% Ground rules-- how do you help a group work 00:01:38.810 --> 00:01:41.720 align:middle line:90% when it's not a corporation? 00:01:41.720 --> 00:01:44.830 align:middle line:84% It's not an organization where everyone has internalized 00:01:44.830 --> 00:01:47.090 align:middle line:90% the same set of understandings. 00:01:47.090 --> 00:01:52.420 align:middle line:84% It's an ad hoc collaboration that the public sector 00:01:52.420 --> 00:01:55.670 align:middle line:84% generates, causes to have happen all the time. 00:01:55.670 --> 00:02:00.060 align:middle line:84% And we're imagining you're either the person creating 00:02:00.060 --> 00:02:03.240 align:middle line:84% that context or you're in it and you're 00:02:03.240 --> 00:02:08.310 align:middle line:84% trying to help manage some ad hoc assembly toward a solution 00:02:08.310 --> 00:02:09.520 align:middle line:90% to a problem. 00:02:09.520 --> 00:02:13.080 align:middle line:90% You need ground rules. 00:02:13.080 --> 00:02:16.170 align:middle line:84% What do you know about formulating ground rules 00:02:16.170 --> 00:02:18.180 align:middle line:90% for such a context? 00:02:18.180 --> 00:02:21.480 align:middle line:84% Joint fact finding-- how do you get people 00:02:21.480 --> 00:02:24.060 align:middle line:84% with very different views of things, very different levels 00:02:24.060 --> 00:02:28.900 align:middle line:84% of capability, to engage together at analyzing, 00:02:28.900 --> 00:02:35.250 align:middle line:84% understanding before they seek to reach agreement on something? 00:02:35.250 --> 00:02:38.430 align:middle line:84% Mediation-- you're either being mediated upon 00:02:38.430 --> 00:02:40.420 align:middle line:90% or maybe you'll be a mediator. 00:02:40.420 --> 00:02:43.000 align:middle line:84% Maybe you'll be formally appointed the mediator. 00:02:43.000 --> 00:02:47.940 align:middle line:84% Maybe you're just the person who takes on the mediating function 00:02:47.940 --> 00:02:50.250 align:middle line:84% within a group because there isn't one, 00:02:50.250 --> 00:02:51.940 align:middle line:90% and nobody else is doing it. 00:02:51.940 --> 00:02:54.510 align:middle line:84% And somebody needs to help the group deal 00:02:54.510 --> 00:02:58.760 align:middle line:84% with the internal difficulties of a lot of people talking 00:02:58.760 --> 00:03:01.520 align:middle line:84% at the same time with very different ideas 00:03:01.520 --> 00:03:03.030 align:middle line:90% about what to do. 00:03:03.030 --> 00:03:07.550 align:middle line:84% Generating options for mutual gain-- 00:03:07.550 --> 00:03:09.950 align:middle line:84% anybody in a group can help a group, 00:03:09.950 --> 00:03:12.680 align:middle line:84% when they're trying to problem solve, generate 00:03:12.680 --> 00:03:14.820 align:middle line:90% proposals or options. 00:03:14.820 --> 00:03:19.020 align:middle line:84% Creating value in a problem solving context-- 00:03:19.020 --> 00:03:19.890 align:middle line:90% what does that mean? 00:03:19.890 --> 00:03:20.990 align:middle line:90% How do you do that? 00:03:20.990 --> 00:03:27.110 align:middle line:84% Using objective criteria-- it's a very specific idea 00:03:27.110 --> 00:03:29.940 align:middle line:84% for how to help people when they have a bunch of options, 00:03:29.940 --> 00:03:32.130 align:middle line:84% and they're trying to choose amongst them, 00:03:32.130 --> 00:03:34.320 align:middle line:84% and they all want different things. 00:03:34.320 --> 00:03:38.000 align:middle line:84% How can you help them argue for their view 00:03:38.000 --> 00:03:42.630 align:middle line:84% in a way that helps the group toward agreement 00:03:42.630 --> 00:03:46.710 align:middle line:84% and doesn't just make the discussion less difficult? 00:03:46.710 --> 00:03:49.340 align:middle line:84% Building consensus-- what does it 00:03:49.340 --> 00:03:53.090 align:middle line:84% mean to generate consensus, which is not 00:03:53.090 --> 00:03:58.890 align:middle line:84% the least common denominator, acceptable, bad alternative, 00:03:58.890 --> 00:04:01.820 align:middle line:84% but rather, an agreement on the best way 00:04:01.820 --> 00:04:04.290 align:middle line:84% of dealing with the differences that the group has? 00:04:04.290 --> 00:04:06.260 align:middle line:84% Helping a group learn from its mistakes 00:04:06.260 --> 00:04:08.370 align:middle line:90% or organizational learning-- 00:04:08.370 --> 00:04:13.370 align:middle line:84% I'm going to argue these are 10 microskills that somebody trying 00:04:13.370 --> 00:04:19.910 align:middle line:84% to facilitate in a leaderly way, in a public sector context, 00:04:19.910 --> 00:04:21.209 align:middle line:90% needs to have. 00:04:21.209 --> 00:04:26.840 align:middle line:84% So that's a set of general ideas, key concepts. 00:04:26.840 --> 00:04:31.020 align:middle line:84% And what I wanted to move to this evening, 00:04:31.020 --> 00:04:34.100 align:middle line:84% I'm suggesting there's a series of micro skills 00:04:34.100 --> 00:04:38.250 align:middle line:84% that you can use, draw on, build. 00:04:38.250 --> 00:04:43.460 align:middle line:84% When we think about what's taught in planning schools 00:04:43.460 --> 00:04:47.870 align:middle line:84% in general and the planning department here in particular, 00:04:47.870 --> 00:04:51.920 align:middle line:84% I'm afraid we're not naming these as skills 00:04:51.920 --> 00:04:53.370 align:middle line:90% that planners need. 00:04:53.370 --> 00:04:56.050 align:middle line:84% So I'm trying to fill a gap, because, I 00:04:56.050 --> 00:04:59.530 align:middle line:84% mean, you may have picked these skills up in your own work, 00:04:59.530 --> 00:05:02.620 align:middle line:84% in your education, because people here 00:05:02.620 --> 00:05:05.810 align:middle line:84% come from many different backgrounds and areas. 00:05:05.810 --> 00:05:09.200 align:middle line:84% But I want to say a word or two about each of these. 00:05:09.200 --> 00:05:15.910 align:middle line:84% And then I want to throw you into a situation, a role play 00:05:15.910 --> 00:05:17.360 align:middle line:90% simulation. 00:05:17.360 --> 00:05:20.350 align:middle line:84% When the negotiation starts, you will 00:05:20.350 --> 00:05:22.490 align:middle line:90% have a role assigned to you. 00:05:22.490 --> 00:05:26.510 align:middle line:84% I'll give you some general background about this. 00:05:26.510 --> 00:05:28.630 align:middle line:84% But the material you have in front of you 00:05:28.630 --> 00:05:32.950 align:middle line:84% is your confidential instructions for the role 00:05:32.950 --> 00:05:35.870 align:middle line:84% that you've drawn that you'll be playing. 00:05:35.870 --> 00:05:39.500 align:middle line:84% Every trio will be playing exactly the same game. 00:05:39.500 --> 00:05:41.590 align:middle line:84% And when we start, I will encourage 00:05:41.590 --> 00:05:45.670 align:middle line:84% you to take your chairs and find space for yourself 00:05:45.670 --> 00:05:48.230 align:middle line:84% out of earshot of the other trios, 00:05:48.230 --> 00:05:54.360 align:middle line:84% give you roughly half an hour to see if your three people can 00:05:54.360 --> 00:05:56.160 align:middle line:90% agree on three things. 00:05:56.160 --> 00:05:57.490 align:middle line:90% And then we will stop. 00:05:57.490 --> 00:05:59.560 align:middle line:84% Everyone will stop at the same time, 00:05:59.560 --> 00:06:02.670 align:middle line:84% whether you have reached a satisfactory conclusion 00:06:02.670 --> 00:06:04.930 align:middle line:90% from your standpoint or not. 00:06:04.930 --> 00:06:09.030 align:middle line:84% You need to get to a minimum score 00:06:09.030 --> 00:06:11.620 align:middle line:90% for there to be an agreement. 00:06:11.620 --> 00:06:17.190 align:middle line:84% So the idea is you can use these micro skills 00:06:17.190 --> 00:06:19.720 align:middle line:90% in this negotiation. 00:06:19.720 --> 00:06:23.860 align:middle line:84% The goal is to get a good result for yourself. 00:06:23.860 --> 00:06:26.500 align:middle line:84% There's no total score for the trio. 00:06:26.500 --> 00:06:28.330 align:middle line:90% There's a score for each person. 00:06:28.330 --> 00:06:31.440 align:middle line:84% We want to see what strategies people use 00:06:31.440 --> 00:06:33.010 align:middle line:90% to get a good outcome. 00:06:33.010 --> 00:06:34.920 align:middle line:84% I want to give credit to my friend, 00:06:34.920 --> 00:06:38.100 align:middle line:84% my very dear friend, John Foerster, who invented this 00:06:38.100 --> 00:06:40.030 align:middle line:90% with Bruce Stiftel. 00:06:40.030 --> 00:06:42.960 align:middle line:84% OK, stakeholder assessment-- there's 00:06:42.960 --> 00:06:46.290 align:middle line:84% a technique for getting the right people 00:06:46.290 --> 00:06:52.980 align:middle line:84% to the table when it is your job to convene stakeholders. 00:06:52.980 --> 00:06:57.150 align:middle line:84% City says, oh, we're thinking of changing policy. 00:06:57.150 --> 00:06:59.060 align:middle line:84% We want to have a public meeting. 00:06:59.060 --> 00:07:01.320 align:middle line:90% We want stakeholder engagement. 00:07:01.320 --> 00:07:02.690 align:middle line:90% Who? 00:07:02.690 --> 00:07:03.770 align:middle line:90% How? 00:07:03.770 --> 00:07:07.130 align:middle line:84% How do you assess who the relevant stakeholders are, 00:07:07.130 --> 00:07:10.500 align:middle line:84% and how do you get them to participate? 00:07:10.500 --> 00:07:15.080 align:middle line:84% Those of you who are involved in the renewable energy facility 00:07:15.080 --> 00:07:19.310 align:middle line:84% siting task force know that we have teams working 00:07:19.310 --> 00:07:22.490 align:middle line:84% with different communities trying to bring together 00:07:22.490 --> 00:07:25.730 align:middle line:84% the relevant stakeholders who are fighting about 00:07:25.730 --> 00:07:28.580 align:middle line:84% whether a renewable energy facility should or shouldn't 00:07:28.580 --> 00:07:32.630 align:middle line:84% be built. There's no point convening a process 00:07:32.630 --> 00:07:35.270 align:middle line:84% to build a consensus if you can't figure out 00:07:35.270 --> 00:07:38.610 align:middle line:84% who the stakeholders are and get them to be present 00:07:38.610 --> 00:07:40.910 align:middle line:84% and then figure out how to engage them 00:07:40.910 --> 00:07:44.540 align:middle line:84% in ways that take account of differences 00:07:44.540 --> 00:07:47.280 align:middle line:90% amongst them effectively. 00:07:47.280 --> 00:07:51.250 align:middle line:84% So stakeholder assessment is a process, and it's a product. 00:07:51.250 --> 00:07:55.100 align:middle line:84% It generates the agenda when you do it right. 00:07:55.100 --> 00:07:57.970 align:middle line:84% It generates the agenda with everybody's participation 00:07:57.970 --> 00:07:59.780 align:middle line:90% in setting the agenda. 00:07:59.780 --> 00:08:02.830 align:middle line:84% It also helps to set and legitimize 00:08:02.830 --> 00:08:06.800 align:middle line:84% ground rules for the group if the process is run properly. 00:08:06.800 --> 00:08:09.280 align:middle line:84% But the product of a stakeholder assessment 00:08:09.280 --> 00:08:13.850 align:middle line:84% is basically a matrix of actors down the side, 00:08:13.850 --> 00:08:17.300 align:middle line:84% stakeholder groups, and their interests across the top. 00:08:17.300 --> 00:08:21.800 align:middle line:84% And you fill in all of those cells in that matrix. 00:08:21.800 --> 00:08:25.070 align:middle line:84% And the only way to do that is to talk to lots of people. 00:08:25.070 --> 00:08:28.220 align:middle line:84% I'm arguing that stakeholder assessment is a skill. 00:08:28.220 --> 00:08:29.420 align:middle line:90% It can be learned. 00:08:29.420 --> 00:08:33.010 align:middle line:84% I hope that hearing about this this evening 00:08:33.010 --> 00:08:36.080 align:middle line:84% will encourage you to at least read about it, 00:08:36.080 --> 00:08:40.730 align:middle line:84% if not find a way to study it while you're here. 00:08:40.730 --> 00:08:44.020 align:middle line:84% Because planners are constantly asked 00:08:44.020 --> 00:08:47.250 align:middle line:84% to organize opportunities for stakeholder engagement, 00:08:47.250 --> 00:08:50.580 align:middle line:84% and nobody's talking about how you know whether you 00:08:50.580 --> 00:08:52.150 align:middle line:90% have the right people there. 00:08:52.150 --> 00:08:54.510 align:middle line:84% What's the point if you can't have 00:08:54.510 --> 00:08:59.850 align:middle line:84% a way of identifying the relevant stakeholder groups 00:08:59.850 --> 00:09:03.130 align:middle line:84% and who can speak either like them or for them? 00:09:03.130 --> 00:09:06.818 align:middle line:84% Generating options for mutual gain-- 00:09:06.818 --> 00:09:08.610 align:middle line:84% you're going to be in a situation-- there's 00:09:08.610 --> 00:09:10.140 align:middle line:90% three issues. 00:09:10.140 --> 00:09:15.090 align:middle line:84% There's specific options under those three issues. 00:09:15.090 --> 00:09:19.650 align:middle line:84% Those options were generated by earlier conversations 00:09:19.650 --> 00:09:22.990 align:middle line:84% amongst these parties and others in the city. 00:09:22.990 --> 00:09:29.790 align:middle line:84% Generating options in real life is getting people 00:09:29.790 --> 00:09:31.960 align:middle line:84% to have the equivalent of that score sheet. 00:09:31.960 --> 00:09:34.990 align:middle line:84% You say, come to an event or a task force. 00:09:34.990 --> 00:09:37.680 align:middle line:90% OK, participate. 00:09:37.680 --> 00:09:39.790 align:middle line:90% OK, we're talking about x. 00:09:39.790 --> 00:09:42.280 align:middle line:84% OK, I like it, or I don't like it. 00:09:42.280 --> 00:09:44.040 align:middle line:84% But what you really want is for them 00:09:44.040 --> 00:09:46.610 align:middle line:84% to have what you have in your score sheet, which is, 00:09:46.610 --> 00:09:50.280 align:middle line:84% here are the issues we're going to try to get agreement on. 00:09:50.280 --> 00:09:53.760 align:middle line:84% Here are the options under each issue that have, in a sense, 00:09:53.760 --> 00:09:57.450 align:middle line:84% been vetted for technical feasibility or plausibility. 00:09:57.450 --> 00:10:00.060 align:middle line:84% And here's where I stand on each option. 00:10:00.060 --> 00:10:01.820 align:middle line:84% If everybody comes with that, you 00:10:01.820 --> 00:10:05.520 align:middle line:84% have a chance of negotiating an agreement. 00:10:05.520 --> 00:10:06.930 align:middle line:90% It's when people show up. 00:10:06.930 --> 00:10:08.970 align:middle line:84% They don't know what their score sheet is. 00:10:08.970 --> 00:10:10.860 align:middle line:84% They haven't talked to their people. 00:10:10.860 --> 00:10:13.920 align:middle line:84% They don't know what the agenda subitems are. 00:10:13.920 --> 00:10:15.750 align:middle line:84% They don't know the options under it. 00:10:15.750 --> 00:10:18.420 align:middle line:84% If you're at the beginning of such a process, 00:10:18.420 --> 00:10:22.890 align:middle line:84% you want to try to help generate options for mutual gain. 00:10:22.890 --> 00:10:27.230 align:middle line:84% Knowing how to do that is a skill. 00:10:27.230 --> 00:10:30.410 align:middle line:84% Creating value-- you're going to be 00:10:30.410 --> 00:10:33.810 align:middle line:84% talking with three people about three issues for 30 minutes. 00:10:33.810 --> 00:10:39.770 align:middle line:84% There are actually ways of framing packages of the three 00:10:39.770 --> 00:10:42.240 align:middle line:90% issues that create value. 00:10:42.240 --> 00:10:44.430 align:middle line:84% And either you know how to do that or you don't. 00:10:44.430 --> 00:10:47.010 align:middle line:84% The good news is I can teach you how to do that. 00:10:47.010 --> 00:10:49.310 align:middle line:84% The good news is you'll probably infer it 00:10:49.310 --> 00:10:52.440 align:middle line:84% from the result of this half hour exercise. 00:10:52.440 --> 00:10:55.970 align:middle line:84% But it is a skill to create value 00:10:55.970 --> 00:11:00.350 align:middle line:84% by helping multiple parties package 00:11:00.350 --> 00:11:05.490 align:middle line:84% multiple options under multiple issues in the right way. 00:11:05.490 --> 00:11:08.400 align:middle line:84% Make the pie larger through value creation. 00:11:08.400 --> 00:11:11.210 align:middle line:84% Building consensus comes off of that, which 00:11:11.210 --> 00:11:13.290 align:middle line:90% is you've got three people. 00:11:13.290 --> 00:11:18.180 align:middle line:84% They come with very explicit priorities and directions. 00:11:18.180 --> 00:11:21.630 align:middle line:84% You start with, in many cases, angry parties. 00:11:21.630 --> 00:11:24.488 align:middle line:84% You've got people who are there to protect their interests. 00:11:24.488 --> 00:11:26.030 align:middle line:84% You've got people there who are there 00:11:26.030 --> 00:11:27.480 align:middle line:90% to advance their interests. 00:11:27.480 --> 00:11:31.970 align:middle line:84% You have people who are there to sabotage the whole effort almost 00:11:31.970 --> 00:11:32.990 align:middle line:90% always. 00:11:32.990 --> 00:11:35.900 align:middle line:84% And you're trying to get agreement, 00:11:35.900 --> 00:11:38.670 align:middle line:84% because if you can get agreement, 00:11:38.670 --> 00:11:42.840 align:middle line:84% you can guarantee everyone that's what's going to happen. 00:11:42.840 --> 00:11:45.580 align:middle line:84% You were empowering everyone there 00:11:45.580 --> 00:11:48.980 align:middle line:84% by saying that the decision rules are consensus. 00:11:48.980 --> 00:11:52.310 align:middle line:84% In this case, this is an advisory process. 00:11:52.310 --> 00:11:55.060 align:middle line:84% Well, you want to have an effect as somebody 00:11:55.060 --> 00:11:56.660 align:middle line:90% in an advisory process. 00:11:56.660 --> 00:12:00.610 align:middle line:84% Get unanimity amongst all the advisors and then 00:12:00.610 --> 00:12:03.280 align:middle line:84% hand that to whoever the elected official was 00:12:03.280 --> 00:12:07.660 align:middle line:84% who said I'm creating this advisory process and say, 00:12:07.660 --> 00:12:09.890 align:middle line:90% we reached unanimous agreement. 00:12:09.890 --> 00:12:11.360 align:middle line:90% We hope you'll go along with it. 00:12:11.360 --> 00:12:15.100 align:middle line:84% But we are your constituents, all of us. 00:12:15.100 --> 00:12:17.120 align:middle line:84% And we have reached an agreement. 00:12:17.120 --> 00:12:21.560 align:middle line:84% You want to empower people, help them reach a consensus. 00:12:21.560 --> 00:12:23.980 align:middle line:84% When a process of public engagement 00:12:23.980 --> 00:12:28.940 align:middle line:84% is organized by some elected or appointed official or entity, 00:12:28.940 --> 00:12:33.610 align:middle line:84% they're trying to get ideas about what they can go forward 00:12:33.610 --> 00:12:37.640 align:middle line:84% with that people won't vote against them, won't fight them, 00:12:37.640 --> 00:12:39.170 align:middle line:90% won't bring litigation. 00:12:39.170 --> 00:12:42.780 align:middle line:84% That's a way to empower people through consensus. 00:12:42.780 --> 00:12:47.320 align:middle line:84% Using objective criteria in distributive negotiation. 00:12:47.320 --> 00:12:49.860 align:middle line:84% Whatever agreements you get are going 00:12:49.860 --> 00:12:52.500 align:middle line:84% to get different scores for each person. 00:12:52.500 --> 00:12:56.040 align:middle line:84% You're talking about an agreement that distributes value 00:12:56.040 --> 00:12:57.880 align:middle line:90% across the three of you. 00:12:57.880 --> 00:13:00.640 align:middle line:84% You each have some minimum you have to get. 00:13:00.640 --> 00:13:05.410 align:middle line:84% You have some goal you desire, and you have time limits. 00:13:05.410 --> 00:13:09.210 align:middle line:84% And if you get an agreement, it distributes value 00:13:09.210 --> 00:13:11.200 align:middle line:90% across the three parties. 00:13:11.200 --> 00:13:14.250 align:middle line:84% How do you make a case for the package 00:13:14.250 --> 00:13:17.850 align:middle line:84% that distributes the most value to you that you most want? 00:13:17.850 --> 00:13:21.210 align:middle line:84% You can't say, I like this one best, because it's best for me, 00:13:21.210 --> 00:13:24.420 align:middle line:84% and expect that to carry the day. 00:13:24.420 --> 00:13:26.320 align:middle line:90% What else should you say? 00:13:26.320 --> 00:13:28.950 align:middle line:90% So-and-so likes it. 00:13:28.950 --> 00:13:30.390 align:middle line:90% You could say that. 00:13:30.390 --> 00:13:33.330 align:middle line:84% Maybe some of the people would say, well, then, OK, I'll 00:13:33.330 --> 00:13:36.270 align:middle line:84% go with what you want, because so-and-so likes it. 00:13:36.270 --> 00:13:39.000 align:middle line:84% That's a pretty weak way forward. 00:13:39.000 --> 00:13:41.030 align:middle line:84% If I had an hour, I'd ask, what's 00:13:41.030 --> 00:13:43.650 align:middle line:84% your theory of practice at the moment? 00:13:43.650 --> 00:13:46.070 align:middle line:84% and ask people to tell me what you 00:13:46.070 --> 00:13:50.190 align:middle line:84% would say when you present the package that's best for you 00:13:50.190 --> 00:13:52.890 align:middle line:84% and you're trying to get the others to agree to it. 00:13:52.890 --> 00:13:56.840 align:middle line:84% One of the things that you can learn how to do 00:13:56.840 --> 00:14:01.460 align:middle line:84% is to argue on the merits for the option that's 00:14:01.460 --> 00:14:08.090 align:middle line:84% best for you by not making it a test of will with the other two 00:14:08.090 --> 00:14:15.890 align:middle line:84% parties, but rather, trying to focus on what the other two 00:14:15.890 --> 00:14:20.510 align:middle line:84% parties would agree any other neutral observer who 00:14:20.510 --> 00:14:22.520 align:middle line:84% knew everything that was going on 00:14:22.520 --> 00:14:24.960 align:middle line:84% would agree that that's the best option. 00:14:24.960 --> 00:14:26.940 align:middle line:90% That's an objective measure. 00:14:26.940 --> 00:14:29.490 align:middle line:84% It doesn't mean correct in the sense that objective. 00:14:29.490 --> 00:14:35.060 align:middle line:84% It means, what would any neutral or independent party say 00:14:35.060 --> 00:14:38.110 align:middle line:84% is the best outcome hearing everything? 00:14:38.110 --> 00:14:41.830 align:middle line:84% And I want to be able to refer to the prevailing 00:14:41.830 --> 00:14:47.980 align:middle line:84% norms or the past precedent that the same communities use, 00:14:47.980 --> 00:14:50.990 align:middle line:84% something that's not about, it's best for me, 00:14:50.990 --> 00:14:52.790 align:middle line:84% that's why you should go along with it. 00:14:52.790 --> 00:14:57.760 align:middle line:84% Something that refers to an objective standard independent 00:14:57.760 --> 00:14:58.970 align:middle line:90% of your interests. 00:14:58.970 --> 00:15:01.660 align:middle line:84% Mediation, you're going to see practice because one of you 00:15:01.660 --> 00:15:04.270 align:middle line:90% is a mediator in this exercise. 00:15:04.270 --> 00:15:07.690 align:middle line:84% One of you represents the homelessness task force 00:15:07.690 --> 00:15:09.230 align:middle line:90% appointed by the city. 00:15:09.230 --> 00:15:11.980 align:middle line:84% There's a task force, but only the head of the task force 00:15:11.980 --> 00:15:13.160 align:middle line:90% is coming. 00:15:13.160 --> 00:15:18.940 align:middle line:84% There's a group of neighbors in this area who are very, very 00:15:18.940 --> 00:15:22.120 align:middle line:84% concerned about the idea that there 00:15:22.120 --> 00:15:26.330 align:middle line:84% would be a homeless shelter down the street where they live. 00:15:26.330 --> 00:15:29.770 align:middle line:84% Part of the concern of the neighbors 00:15:29.770 --> 00:15:33.070 align:middle line:84% is what they think will happen in this shelter. 00:15:33.070 --> 00:15:36.680 align:middle line:84% Will people just have a place to sleep at night? 00:15:36.680 --> 00:15:39.030 align:middle line:84% Will it provide job training for people 00:15:39.030 --> 00:15:40.620 align:middle line:84% so they could go from the shelter 00:15:40.620 --> 00:15:43.830 align:middle line:84% if they're staying there to a job, or at least a job 00:15:43.830 --> 00:15:44.800 align:middle line:90% interview? 00:15:44.800 --> 00:15:46.410 align:middle line:90% How many beds? 00:15:46.410 --> 00:15:52.140 align:middle line:84% What mix of activities will go on in this shelter 00:15:52.140 --> 00:15:53.170 align:middle line:90% if it's built? 00:15:53.170 --> 00:15:57.280 align:middle line:84% You also have to decide when this shelter is going to open. 00:15:57.280 --> 00:16:00.490 align:middle line:84% It's perfectly usable in its current form, 00:16:00.490 --> 00:16:04.230 align:middle line:84% although a lot of people would like to fix it up 00:16:04.230 --> 00:16:07.260 align:middle line:84% in a variety of ways, depending on their idea of what 00:16:07.260 --> 00:16:10.680 align:middle line:84% the shelter is for and who it's for and how many people it's 00:16:10.680 --> 00:16:11.560 align:middle line:90% going to serve. 00:16:11.560 --> 00:16:15.060 align:middle line:84% But some people are really keen to get this thing 00:16:15.060 --> 00:16:18.180 align:middle line:84% to open right away, and other people 00:16:18.180 --> 00:16:22.540 align:middle line:84% wouldn't mind if it didn't open for a very long time. 00:16:22.540 --> 00:16:25.440 align:middle line:84% You have to agree on an opening date. 00:16:25.440 --> 00:16:30.460 align:middle line:84% You have to agree on how many beds, what's the mix of uses. 00:16:30.460 --> 00:16:33.150 align:middle line:84% And you all come with very strong views 00:16:33.150 --> 00:16:36.770 align:middle line:84% from the homeless task force or from the neighborhood 00:16:36.770 --> 00:16:39.500 align:middle line:90% about these issues. 00:16:39.500 --> 00:16:42.860 align:middle line:84% The third person there works as the city 00:16:42.860 --> 00:16:46.770 align:middle line:84% planning assistant director, works for the mayor directly. 00:16:46.770 --> 00:16:49.950 align:middle line:84% The mayor has a huge stake in this getting solved. 00:16:49.950 --> 00:16:53.750 align:middle line:84% But the city council has a very different idea 00:16:53.750 --> 00:16:55.760 align:middle line:84% from the mayor of what this should be 00:16:55.760 --> 00:16:58.890 align:middle line:84% and who it should serve and how it should be funded, 00:16:58.890 --> 00:17:00.270 align:middle line:90% and all kinds of stuff. 00:17:00.270 --> 00:17:04.940 align:middle line:84% The mayor would like credit for settling this and avoiding 00:17:04.940 --> 00:17:07.819 align:middle line:84% giving it to the council to decide. 00:17:07.819 --> 00:17:11.430 align:middle line:84% The person there for the mayor is the planning director, 00:17:11.430 --> 00:17:14.270 align:middle line:84% and the mayor has said, you be a mediator 00:17:14.270 --> 00:17:17.720 align:middle line:84% and help these two, who initially seemed to be at odds, 00:17:17.720 --> 00:17:21.390 align:middle line:84% and get an agreement, because I want there to be an agreement. 00:17:21.390 --> 00:17:26.270 align:middle line:84% So you'll see some form of mediation in action. 00:17:26.270 --> 00:17:30.740 align:middle line:84% I can't guarantee anything about the way the mediation will 00:17:30.740 --> 00:17:33.990 align:middle line:84% play out, but we'll talk about that, especially afterwards. 00:17:33.990 --> 00:17:38.430 align:middle line:84% The last two are not a big deal for us this evening, 00:17:38.430 --> 00:17:41.520 align:middle line:84% but I'm arguing they are really important skills. 00:17:41.520 --> 00:17:46.340 align:middle line:84% If you're in a setting where something goes on for a while 00:17:46.340 --> 00:17:49.190 align:middle line:84% and you don't help the people that you're 00:17:49.190 --> 00:17:53.600 align:middle line:84% trying to involve in this, understand what's happening 00:17:53.600 --> 00:17:57.170 align:middle line:84% as it's happening so that they can learn from, 00:17:57.170 --> 00:18:00.300 align:middle line:84% and modify their way of working together, 00:18:00.300 --> 00:18:01.740 align:middle line:90% you've failed as a leader. 00:18:01.740 --> 00:18:04.520 align:middle line:84% Organizational learning-- encouraging it 00:18:04.520 --> 00:18:06.540 align:middle line:90% is a leadership skill. 00:18:06.540 --> 00:18:09.570 align:middle line:84% Similarly, at the individual level, 00:18:09.570 --> 00:18:14.420 align:middle line:84% people engaged in some practice should take some time 00:18:14.420 --> 00:18:17.550 align:middle line:84% to reflect, even if they're angry at each other, 00:18:17.550 --> 00:18:19.740 align:middle line:84% even if they haven't reached agreement. 00:18:19.740 --> 00:18:21.620 align:middle line:84% They should try to learn something 00:18:21.620 --> 00:18:24.600 align:middle line:84% about how the way they're approaching things is working. 00:18:24.600 --> 00:18:27.230 align:middle line:84% People should be encouraged to reflect 00:18:27.230 --> 00:18:30.090 align:middle line:84% on their engagement in processes like this, 00:18:30.090 --> 00:18:34.030 align:middle line:84% and you, as the leader, need to encourage 00:18:34.030 --> 00:18:37.660 align:middle line:84% them to reflect either together or small groups 00:18:37.660 --> 00:18:40.460 align:middle line:84% or separately, so they get to be more effective. 00:18:40.460 --> 00:18:43.030 align:middle line:84% I would argue that's a leadership skill, 00:18:43.030 --> 00:18:47.470 align:middle line:84% helping people improve, modify their personal theory 00:18:47.470 --> 00:18:48.290 align:middle line:90% of practice. 00:18:48.290 --> 00:18:55.190 align:middle line:84% So each group has a number on your confidential instructions. 00:18:55.190 --> 00:18:58.280 align:middle line:84% So all three people in the group should have the same number. 00:18:58.280 --> 00:19:01.960 align:middle line:84% It will work better if you're not in earshot of each other 00:19:01.960 --> 00:19:04.420 align:middle line:84% doing exactly the same thing in a different way 00:19:04.420 --> 00:19:05.750 align:middle line:90% next to each other. 00:19:05.750 --> 00:19:10.250 align:middle line:84% So I want to give you half an hour, 30 minutes. 00:19:10.250 --> 00:19:12.140 align:middle line:84% You are the role you're assigned. 00:19:12.140 --> 00:19:14.030 align:middle line:90% Confidential means confidential. 00:19:14.030 --> 00:19:17.327 align:middle line:84% You can't show your piece of paper to the other person 00:19:17.327 --> 00:19:19.160 align:middle line:84% across from you and say, sure, I believe it. 00:19:19.160 --> 00:19:20.270 align:middle line:90% It says it right here. 00:19:20.270 --> 00:19:24.070 align:middle line:84% You can't prove something is the truth by pointing 00:19:24.070 --> 00:19:25.120 align:middle line:90% to a piece of paper. 00:19:25.120 --> 00:19:27.550 align:middle line:84% You can in a game, but you can't do it in real life. 00:19:27.550 --> 00:19:30.520 align:middle line:84% When you're done, if you want to share 00:19:30.520 --> 00:19:33.130 align:middle line:84% your confidential instructions, I'm fine with that. 00:19:33.130 --> 00:19:35.290 align:middle line:84% But that's when you're really done. 00:19:35.290 --> 00:19:37.800 align:middle line:90% OK, it's in your hands. 00:19:37.800 --> 00:19:40.665 align:middle line:84% So find a comfortable place for your trio to be. 00:19:40.665 --> 00:19:41.415 align:middle line:90% [ROLE PLAY BEGINS] 00:19:41.415 --> 00:19:44.090 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We're trying to get to a position of 00:19:44.090 --> 00:19:45.840 align:middle line:84% whether or not we can come to an agreement 00:19:45.840 --> 00:19:48.510 align:middle line:90% on getting a shelter developed. 00:19:48.510 --> 00:19:53.160 align:middle line:84% I am Mr. Goldsmith, the Planning Director. 00:19:53.160 --> 00:19:55.680 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: I've been around Westfield for 20 years. 00:19:55.680 --> 00:19:58.260 align:middle line:84% I remember the old social service 00:19:58.260 --> 00:20:00.730 align:middle line:90% center that's now unused. 00:20:00.730 --> 00:20:04.140 align:middle line:84% We are looking at how we could make sure 00:20:04.140 --> 00:20:08.280 align:middle line:84% that we agree to reopen this social center 00:20:08.280 --> 00:20:10.840 align:middle line:90% service to a shelter. 00:20:10.840 --> 00:20:13.700 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: So you said job counseling, a soup kitchen, 00:20:13.700 --> 00:20:14.200 align:middle line:90% what else? 00:20:14.200 --> 00:20:18.690 align:middle line:84% And medical care, along with housing or pets 00:20:18.690 --> 00:20:21.900 align:middle line:84% for people who would otherwise be in the street. 00:20:21.900 --> 00:20:24.780 align:middle line:90% Now, it's already December. 00:20:24.780 --> 00:20:26.830 align:middle line:84% It will take six months, we understand, 00:20:26.830 --> 00:20:29.070 align:middle line:84% to rehabilitate the center to get 00:20:29.070 --> 00:20:33.830 align:middle line:84% it to open, but would like this to be open as soon as possible. 00:20:33.830 --> 00:20:35.130 align:middle line:90% PARTICIPANT: I'm Jane Woods. 00:20:35.130 --> 00:20:37.970 align:middle line:90% I'm part of Neighbors Together. 00:20:37.970 --> 00:20:40.320 align:middle line:84% I'm really glad that we are here having this meeting. 00:20:40.320 --> 00:20:43.110 align:middle line:84% I've been living here in the same house for 18 years, 00:20:43.110 --> 00:20:46.700 align:middle line:84% and so I understand the history of the multi-purpose social 00:20:46.700 --> 00:20:47.600 align:middle line:90% center. 00:20:47.600 --> 00:20:51.150 align:middle line:84% There was a daycare, before that, a teen counseling center. 00:20:51.150 --> 00:20:53.220 align:middle line:84% Neither of those stayed in the area. 00:20:53.220 --> 00:20:58.227 align:middle line:84% My concern is that homelessness is a systemic national problem. 00:20:58.227 --> 00:20:59.810 align:middle line:84% It's a big problem, but it's not clear 00:20:59.810 --> 00:21:01.310 align:middle line:84% that turning buildings into shelters 00:21:01.310 --> 00:21:03.510 align:middle line:84% would do anything about the problem itself. 00:21:03.510 --> 00:21:06.230 align:middle line:84% It's addressing a symptom, not a cause. 00:21:06.230 --> 00:21:08.750 align:middle line:84% So my question is, will the task force 00:21:08.750 --> 00:21:11.180 align:middle line:84% consider job creation strategies that will help 00:21:11.180 --> 00:21:12.770 align:middle line:90% these people earn an income? 00:21:12.770 --> 00:21:16.070 align:middle line:84% The homeless task force claims to have reviewed 00:21:16.070 --> 00:21:18.450 align:middle line:84% all the available sites in our city, 00:21:18.450 --> 00:21:21.660 align:middle line:84% but has only taken six months to do so. 00:21:21.660 --> 00:21:24.200 align:middle line:84% So I'm just slightly confused as to how 00:21:24.200 --> 00:21:26.810 align:middle line:84% you can have such a comprehensive review 00:21:26.810 --> 00:21:28.220 align:middle line:90% in such a short period of time. 00:21:28.220 --> 00:21:32.110 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: I think it'd be fantastic to set some grounds 00:21:32.110 --> 00:21:33.260 align:middle line:90% for this discussion. 00:21:33.260 --> 00:21:35.510 align:middle line:84% Thank you both for your introduction. 00:21:35.510 --> 00:21:37.510 align:middle line:84% I think it's going to be really important for us 00:21:37.510 --> 00:21:41.260 align:middle line:84% to just recognize that we all have 00:21:41.260 --> 00:21:42.792 align:middle line:90% interests in this community. 00:21:42.792 --> 00:21:44.500 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: The Neighborhood Association 00:21:44.500 --> 00:21:47.440 align:middle line:84% does not have a problem with opening beds. 00:21:47.440 --> 00:21:50.440 align:middle line:84% The problem is with the services to us 00:21:50.440 --> 00:21:52.660 align:middle line:84% to make sure that people are not going 00:21:52.660 --> 00:21:56.150 align:middle line:84% to stay here for a long time so we address the homelessness 00:21:56.150 --> 00:21:56.650 align:middle line:90% issues. 00:21:56.650 --> 00:21:57.640 align:middle line:90% Is that right? 00:21:57.640 --> 00:21:59.680 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We want a limited amount of beds. 00:21:59.680 --> 00:22:00.640 align:middle line:90% PARTICIPANT: A limited amount. 00:22:00.640 --> 00:22:01.348 align:middle line:90% PARTICIPANT: Yes. 00:22:01.348 --> 00:22:03.590 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: So before we continue, 00:22:03.590 --> 00:22:06.500 align:middle line:84% maybe we can spend some time recapping your timeline. 00:22:06.500 --> 00:22:09.050 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We were told that it would take until May. 00:22:09.050 --> 00:22:11.540 align:middle line:84% And I think if we work together on this, 00:22:11.540 --> 00:22:15.790 align:middle line:84% along with the residents on trying to help them get jobs, 00:22:15.790 --> 00:22:19.270 align:middle line:84% we want to make sure that a, we do some work together 00:22:19.270 --> 00:22:22.870 align:middle line:84% to try and reduce homelessness, providing more jobs. 00:22:22.870 --> 00:22:25.720 align:middle line:84% But b, we also have the capacity next year 00:22:25.720 --> 00:22:27.960 align:middle line:90% to make sure no one is homeless. 00:22:27.960 --> 00:22:30.360 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We're concerned about the long term impacts 00:22:30.360 --> 00:22:34.680 align:middle line:84% that this have on the people in the neighborhood, property 00:22:34.680 --> 00:22:35.560 align:middle line:90% values. 00:22:35.560 --> 00:22:38.520 align:middle line:84% And why can't this energy be poured 00:22:38.520 --> 00:22:42.930 align:middle line:84% into creating more affordable housing in the city? 00:22:42.930 --> 00:22:45.090 align:middle line:84% Why are we not exploring these options 00:22:45.090 --> 00:22:48.810 align:middle line:84% and having a more comprehensive, like official probing 00:22:48.810 --> 00:22:52.020 align:middle line:84% into what sites are better, as well as companies 00:22:52.020 --> 00:22:55.500 align:middle line:84% by employment creation opportunities 00:22:55.500 --> 00:22:59.550 align:middle line:84% and relying on already existing medical facilities, 00:22:59.550 --> 00:23:02.448 align:middle line:84% instead of building something new, wasting all of that time. 00:23:02.448 --> 00:23:03.990 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: It's going to be helpful 00:23:03.990 --> 00:23:06.600 align:middle line:84% for me to do some mirroring so that we 00:23:06.600 --> 00:23:10.470 align:middle line:84% are all on the same page of what was stated so that we can 00:23:10.470 --> 00:23:14.460 align:middle line:84% identify where there are key tension 00:23:14.460 --> 00:23:17.100 align:middle line:84% points between each other and how we can 00:23:17.100 --> 00:23:19.080 align:middle line:90% address some of those points. 00:23:19.080 --> 00:23:20.850 align:middle line:84% Thankfully, we're all on the same page 00:23:20.850 --> 00:23:23.140 align:middle line:84% that we want to find a solution for homelessness. 00:23:23.140 --> 00:23:25.257 align:middle line:84% A point that Ms. Woods is bringing up 00:23:25.257 --> 00:23:27.340 align:middle line:84% is, there hasn't been enough community engagement. 00:23:27.340 --> 00:23:30.240 align:middle line:84% Their request also is that can they 00:23:30.240 --> 00:23:33.850 align:middle line:84% get some more statistics on what the exact need is? 00:23:33.850 --> 00:23:36.900 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: If we have a capacity of 60 bed-- 00:23:36.900 --> 00:23:38.460 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: An addition of 60 people 00:23:38.460 --> 00:23:41.430 align:middle line:84% into the neighborhood that just found out about this 00:23:41.430 --> 00:23:42.900 align:middle line:90% seems a little bit absurd. 00:23:42.900 --> 00:23:48.780 align:middle line:84% We are very concerned about what this will do to our property 00:23:48.780 --> 00:23:49.690 align:middle line:90% values, as well. 00:23:49.690 --> 00:23:52.920 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: Can we agree to conduct additional engagements 00:23:52.920 --> 00:23:57.090 align:middle line:84% with the community over the next spring? 00:23:57.090 --> 00:23:58.650 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: And we will be providing 00:23:58.650 --> 00:24:02.010 align:middle line:84% the support necessary to make sure this consultation happens 00:24:02.010 --> 00:24:03.297 align:middle line:90% as soon as possible. 00:24:03.297 --> 00:24:05.130 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We're just concerned about what 00:24:05.130 --> 00:24:07.080 align:middle line:90% this will mean for us, as well. 00:24:07.080 --> 00:24:10.260 align:middle line:84% We want to support our homeless neighbors, 00:24:10.260 --> 00:24:13.905 align:middle line:84% but also make sure that we're OK. 00:24:13.905 --> 00:24:15.280 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: With the city, we're 00:24:15.280 --> 00:24:18.480 align:middle line:84% going to work with this community to try and address 00:24:18.480 --> 00:24:21.681 align:middle line:84% the issues of homelessness, and not just host them, but try 00:24:21.681 --> 00:24:22.790 align:middle line:90% to get people jobs. 00:24:22.790 --> 00:24:25.190 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: It would be worthwhile 00:24:25.190 --> 00:24:29.540 align:middle line:84% discussing whether or not additional services will 00:24:29.540 --> 00:24:35.690 align:middle line:84% alleviate the concern about the longterm issue. 00:24:35.690 --> 00:24:38.150 align:middle line:84% We agreed to an engagement process 00:24:38.150 --> 00:24:40.320 align:middle line:84% to be conducted until next spring, 00:24:40.320 --> 00:24:44.030 align:middle line:84% and we agreed that we can start that discussion of 20 beds 00:24:44.030 --> 00:24:48.260 align:middle line:84% with additional services of workforce programming 00:24:48.260 --> 00:24:51.770 align:middle line:84% and agreed that this facility can be used 00:24:51.770 --> 00:24:57.770 align:middle line:84% and should be used for other services to support homeless. 00:24:57.770 --> 00:25:01.100 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We also agreed that we would engage very soon. 00:25:01.100 --> 00:25:03.070 align:middle line:84% PARTICIPANT: We'll pick this up next. 00:25:03.070 --> 00:25:03.570 align:middle line:90% Thank you. 00:25:03.570 --> 00:25:05.270 align:middle line:90% PARTICIPANT: Thank you. 00:25:05.270 --> 00:25:07.130 align:middle line:90% PARTICIPANT: All right, great. 00:25:07.130 --> 00:25:09.704 align:middle line:90% All right, excellent. 00:25:09.704 --> 00:25:11.030 align:middle line:90% [ROLE PLAY ENDS] 00:25:11.030 --> 00:25:13.070 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: This is a scattergram 00:25:13.070 --> 00:25:18.450 align:middle line:84% of the possible agreements when people follow the rules. 00:25:18.450 --> 00:25:22.610 align:middle line:84% The numbers are just a list of the possible agreements. 00:25:22.610 --> 00:25:26.420 align:middle line:84% This is Hutter score along the bottom and Wood score this way. 00:25:26.420 --> 00:25:29.150 align:middle line:84% The mediator's score isn't plotted here. 00:25:29.150 --> 00:25:34.940 align:middle line:84% You can see that the high score is 157 for Wood. 00:25:34.940 --> 00:25:37.750 align:middle line:90% Hutter gets 105. 00:25:37.750 --> 00:25:45.740 align:middle line:84% And the high score for Hutter, 165, when Wood gets 120. 00:25:45.740 --> 00:25:49.520 align:middle line:84% And then there's a bunch of other possible agreements. 00:25:49.520 --> 00:25:54.490 align:middle line:84% So all eight groups got agreement in the limited time 00:25:54.490 --> 00:25:55.580 align:middle line:90% available. 00:25:55.580 --> 00:25:58.700 align:middle line:84% But the agreements were different. 00:25:58.700 --> 00:26:02.410 align:middle line:84% This scattergram is designed to show 00:26:02.410 --> 00:26:08.180 align:middle line:84% that it's possible to create different amounts of value 00:26:08.180 --> 00:26:13.270 align:middle line:84% and distribute them differently, all within the same frame 00:26:13.270 --> 00:26:14.930 align:middle line:90% of allowable agreements. 00:26:14.930 --> 00:26:17.980 align:middle line:84% All of these are legitimate given the minimum 00:26:17.980 --> 00:26:20.060 align:middle line:90% that each party had to have. 00:26:20.060 --> 00:26:27.730 align:middle line:84% And yet, some pairs were able to generate a high score, 00:26:27.730 --> 00:26:30.940 align:middle line:84% and some only were able to get a low score-- 00:26:30.940 --> 00:26:34.900 align:middle line:84% all legitimate agreements following the rules. 00:26:34.900 --> 00:26:37.680 align:middle line:84% I'm showing you what the maximum is in your role 00:26:37.680 --> 00:26:41.310 align:middle line:84% that you could have gotten while your counterpart got 00:26:41.310 --> 00:26:44.070 align:middle line:90% an acceptable amount for them. 00:26:44.070 --> 00:26:48.070 align:middle line:84% And so the question is, were you just satisfied with less, 00:26:48.070 --> 00:26:52.110 align:middle line:84% or was the way you approached it destined 00:26:52.110 --> 00:26:54.840 align:middle line:84% to get you less than what the maximum is 00:26:54.840 --> 00:26:56.140 align:middle line:90% you could have gotten? 00:26:56.140 --> 00:26:58.570 align:middle line:84% There's no way to really compare it to anybody else 00:26:58.570 --> 00:27:01.920 align:middle line:84% unless you have all the score sheets and all 00:27:01.920 --> 00:27:04.180 align:middle line:84% of the confidential instructions. 00:27:04.180 --> 00:27:11.140 align:middle line:84% There are a lot of possible agreements in this same context. 00:27:11.140 --> 00:27:16.690 align:middle line:84% Almost all of the Goldsmith roles got over 100 points. 00:27:16.690 --> 00:27:20.910 align:middle line:84% I overheard one group where both the parties said, yeah, sure, 00:27:20.910 --> 00:27:22.620 align:middle line:90% we'll give you 20 points each. 00:27:22.620 --> 00:27:26.750 align:middle line:84% And then the person in the Goldsmith role 00:27:26.750 --> 00:27:30.030 align:middle line:84% said, well, I do have to tell you, I had a hidden agenda. 00:27:30.030 --> 00:27:31.680 align:middle line:90% I was working for the mayor. 00:27:31.680 --> 00:27:36.300 align:middle line:84% The mayor insists that this not open until next winter. 00:27:36.300 --> 00:27:39.500 align:middle line:84% Now, this person is passing themselves off 00:27:39.500 --> 00:27:41.880 align:middle line:90% as a neutral mediator. 00:27:41.880 --> 00:27:44.940 align:middle line:84% But the fact of the matter is, they have an agenda. 00:27:44.940 --> 00:27:51.320 align:middle line:84% They also have a personal agenda of wanting one group 00:27:51.320 --> 00:27:55.290 align:middle line:84% to do better, do as best as possible, 00:27:55.290 --> 00:27:57.780 align:middle line:84% even at the expense of the other group. 00:27:57.780 --> 00:27:59.550 align:middle line:90% That's not neutrality. 00:27:59.550 --> 00:28:05.120 align:middle line:84% We typically define mediation as neutral or non-partisan 00:28:05.120 --> 00:28:08.580 align:middle line:84% assistance to parties in a conflict. 00:28:08.580 --> 00:28:13.410 align:middle line:84% Mediation and facilitation are functions. 00:28:13.410 --> 00:28:14.460 align:middle line:90% They're tasks. 00:28:14.460 --> 00:28:17.250 align:middle line:84% They're services that can be provided. 00:28:17.250 --> 00:28:21.010 align:middle line:84% We happen to have this sort of analytic backdrop 00:28:21.010 --> 00:28:27.700 align:middle line:84% where we can see oh, the mediator had a bias. 00:28:27.700 --> 00:28:29.830 align:middle line:84% The source of the bias, in this case, 00:28:29.830 --> 00:28:31.250 align:middle line:90% was they worked for the mayor. 00:28:31.250 --> 00:28:34.460 align:middle line:84% And the mayor said, you're my person at this thing. 00:28:34.460 --> 00:28:37.180 align:middle line:84% I don't want this to fail because I 00:28:37.180 --> 00:28:39.580 align:middle line:84% don't want to give my city council 00:28:39.580 --> 00:28:43.000 align:middle line:84% counterpart the opportunity to take over this issue 00:28:43.000 --> 00:28:46.160 align:middle line:84% and run it the way that he wants to run it. 00:28:46.160 --> 00:28:49.090 align:middle line:84% On the other hand, you should help 00:28:49.090 --> 00:28:51.160 align:middle line:90% the parties reach agreement. 00:28:51.160 --> 00:28:56.620 align:middle line:84% So the mediator had a struggle with their mandate 00:28:56.620 --> 00:29:03.370 align:middle line:84% and their personal beliefs and the perceptions of the parties. 00:29:03.370 --> 00:29:10.510 align:middle line:84% So, Claudia, you got the high score. 00:29:10.510 --> 00:29:13.570 align:middle line:84% I'm curious what your counterparts have 00:29:13.570 --> 00:29:19.630 align:middle line:84% to say about your way of working with them, 00:29:19.630 --> 00:29:24.480 align:middle line:84% since you've got the highest score, substantially 00:29:24.480 --> 00:29:25.980 align:middle line:90% higher, 157. 00:29:25.980 --> 00:29:29.200 align:middle line:84% Did she seem to be pushing you around? 00:29:29.200 --> 00:29:32.670 align:middle line:84% She did something to end up with the highest 00:29:32.670 --> 00:29:36.060 align:middle line:90% possible score in that role-- 00:29:36.060 --> 00:29:40.080 align:middle line:84% same information, same cards dealt, different result. 00:29:40.080 --> 00:29:42.280 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: As a mediator, just, yeah, 00:29:42.280 --> 00:29:44.193 align:middle line:84% you need to adjust those numbers on mine. 00:29:44.193 --> 00:29:45.610 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: What should it be? 00:29:45.610 --> 00:29:46.648 align:middle line:90% STUDENT: 68. 00:29:46.648 --> 00:29:47.440 align:middle line:90% LARRY SUSSKIND: OK. 00:29:47.440 --> 00:29:50.160 align:middle line:90% Now I understand. 00:29:50.160 --> 00:29:51.910 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: Jennifer was great to speak with. 00:29:51.910 --> 00:29:53.760 align:middle line:84% I think she had really clear goals 00:29:53.760 --> 00:29:57.210 align:middle line:84% and was also really amenable to working with the housing task 00:29:57.210 --> 00:29:57.790 align:middle line:90% force. 00:29:57.790 --> 00:29:58.770 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:29:58.770 --> 00:30:02.020 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: She's very firm advocating for the residents, 00:30:02.020 --> 00:30:08.470 align:middle line:84% and she also is very clear about coming to an agreement, 00:30:08.470 --> 00:30:13.530 align:middle line:84% like I kind of feel I need to giving some the things I 00:30:13.530 --> 00:30:16.290 align:middle line:90% want in order to reach. 00:30:16.290 --> 00:30:18.390 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: Your score is perfectly fine. 00:30:18.390 --> 00:30:21.450 align:middle line:84% It just happens to be less than it 00:30:21.450 --> 00:30:27.720 align:middle line:84% could have been because your counterpart got the most 00:30:27.720 --> 00:30:29.100 align:middle line:90% possible. 00:30:29.100 --> 00:30:32.430 align:middle line:84% And I'm trying to see whether there was anything 00:30:32.430 --> 00:30:38.280 align:middle line:84% that she said, did, that made you feel like you should lower 00:30:38.280 --> 00:30:39.880 align:middle line:90% your expectations. 00:30:39.880 --> 00:30:44.200 align:middle line:84% Or do you feel like your expectations were met, so fine? 00:30:44.200 --> 00:30:46.090 align:middle line:84% So she got a higher score-- so what? 00:30:46.090 --> 00:30:47.940 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: I feel like the way she said 00:30:47.940 --> 00:30:53.860 align:middle line:84% it helps us to empathize a lot with the residents. 00:30:53.860 --> 00:30:55.420 align:middle line:90% I think that's why. 00:30:55.420 --> 00:30:57.990 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: Yeah, I think Jennifer was really clear on the fact 00:30:57.990 --> 00:30:59.615 align:middle line:84% that-- it sounded like the neighborhood 00:30:59.615 --> 00:31:02.010 align:middle line:84% that you were part of had frustrations in the past 00:31:02.010 --> 00:31:05.410 align:middle line:84% and that you didn't want this to recur. 00:31:05.410 --> 00:31:07.380 align:middle line:84% And you were, I think, really clear 00:31:07.380 --> 00:31:10.860 align:middle line:84% about the impact that had on you and your constituents. 00:31:10.860 --> 00:31:13.280 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: So you've got the high score 00:31:13.280 --> 00:31:14.930 align:middle line:90% at the other end of the-- 00:31:14.930 --> 00:31:16.230 align:middle line:90% 150. 00:31:16.230 --> 00:31:19.640 align:middle line:84% What's the reaction of your partners 00:31:19.640 --> 00:31:23.100 align:middle line:84% to hearing that whatever it was you said or did 00:31:23.100 --> 00:31:25.410 align:middle line:84% got you the highest possible score? 00:31:25.410 --> 00:31:27.000 align:middle line:90% You didn't get a bad score. 00:31:27.000 --> 00:31:28.320 align:middle line:90% It's just the low score. 00:31:28.320 --> 00:31:32.870 align:middle line:84% STUDENT: I think we maximized the winning of the both parties, 00:31:32.870 --> 00:31:34.135 align:middle line:90% of the three parties, even. 00:31:34.135 --> 00:31:35.760 align:middle line:84% LARRY SUSSKIND: I appreciate the point. 00:31:35.760 --> 00:31:40.640 align:middle line:84% I mean, in this context, people have a minimum score. 00:31:40.640 --> 00:31:44.090 align:middle line:84% If they get the minimum score, they can go back to their group 00:31:44.090 --> 00:31:46.970 align:middle line:90% and say, we got what we wanted. 00:31:46.970 --> 00:31:51.260 align:middle line:84% But you can create more value than just the minimum 00:31:51.260 --> 00:31:55.580 align:middle line:84% for each side depending on how you proceed. 00:31:55.580 --> 00:31:59.040 align:middle line:84% If you presume that your goal is your minimum, 00:31:59.040 --> 00:32:04.100 align:middle line:84% then you're not going to look for possible trades that 00:32:04.100 --> 00:32:07.410 align:middle line:84% will create more value for both sides. 00:32:07.410 --> 00:32:09.740 align:middle line:84% And the other person isn't going to say no, 00:32:09.740 --> 00:32:12.160 align:middle line:84% because you're offering something better 00:32:12.160 --> 00:32:14.210 align:middle line:84% than what they would otherwise get. 00:32:14.210 --> 00:32:16.280 align:middle line:84% And you're getting more for yourself. 00:32:16.280 --> 00:32:21.580 align:middle line:84% This is about creating trades for mutual gain. 00:32:21.580 --> 00:32:26.380 align:middle line:84% And the only way to do that is to play the game of what if. 00:32:26.380 --> 00:32:30.950 align:middle line:84% And I didn't listen in to your tables. 00:32:30.950 --> 00:32:35.510 align:middle line:84% But usually the way you find your way, 00:32:35.510 --> 00:32:38.080 align:middle line:84% if you imagine that everybody's starting 00:32:38.080 --> 00:32:40.990 align:middle line:84% down here at a bare minimum and you 00:32:40.990 --> 00:32:43.670 align:middle line:84% want to go as far to the Northeast, 00:32:43.670 --> 00:32:47.020 align:middle line:84% you can presume there's a Pareto curve, which 00:32:47.020 --> 00:32:50.270 align:middle line:84% is the list of options that go across the top. 00:32:50.270 --> 00:32:51.800 align:middle line:90% So you're starting down here. 00:32:51.800 --> 00:32:54.970 align:middle line:84% And you want to move as far as you possibly can 00:32:54.970 --> 00:32:55.880 align:middle line:90% to the Northeast. 00:32:55.880 --> 00:32:59.170 align:middle line:84% You don't know how far you can get because you don't have 00:32:59.170 --> 00:33:00.680 align:middle line:90% all the scores ahead of time. 00:33:00.680 --> 00:33:02.570 align:middle line:90% But you want to move that way. 00:33:02.570 --> 00:33:05.740 align:middle line:84% So if I say, well, if you offer me 00:33:05.740 --> 00:33:11.640 align:middle line:84% 7, agreement 7 down at the bottom, it's barely acceptable-- 00:33:11.640 --> 00:33:16.990 align:middle line:90% 107 for Wood, 105 for Hutter. 00:33:16.990 --> 00:33:20.320 align:middle line:84% And then I say back to you, if I'm Wood, 00:33:20.320 --> 00:33:25.770 align:middle line:90% how about if we go to 13? 00:33:25.770 --> 00:33:28.050 align:middle line:90% You get more. 00:33:28.050 --> 00:33:30.160 align:middle line:90% I do too, but you get more. 00:33:30.160 --> 00:33:33.220 align:middle line:90% I'm moving from 7 to 13. 00:33:33.220 --> 00:33:36.480 align:middle line:84% And I'm looking for a package where 00:33:36.480 --> 00:33:41.910 align:middle line:84% I offer you more by making a change on the list of which 00:33:41.910 --> 00:33:45.060 align:middle line:84% option I'm agreeing to under one of the issues that 00:33:45.060 --> 00:33:50.040 align:middle line:84% seemed important to you if you will move to a different option 00:33:50.040 --> 00:33:52.890 align:middle line:84% on another issue that's most important to me. 00:33:52.890 --> 00:33:57.420 align:middle line:84% The two parties do not value the three issues the same. 00:33:57.420 --> 00:33:59.620 align:middle line:90% They have different priorities. 00:33:59.620 --> 00:34:05.370 align:middle line:84% If you can't discover that, then you can't offer a "what if." 00:34:05.370 --> 00:34:08.989 align:middle line:84% So understanding the other side's interest 00:34:08.989 --> 00:34:14.280 align:middle line:84% is the first step in creating value for mutual gain. 00:34:14.280 --> 00:34:15.350 align:middle line:90% And so what if? 00:34:15.350 --> 00:34:16.800 align:middle line:90% It's a trade. 00:34:16.800 --> 00:34:18.210 align:middle line:90% It's a package. 00:34:18.210 --> 00:34:21.320 align:middle line:84% And I don't know what to offer until I know what's 00:34:21.320 --> 00:34:22.889 align:middle line:90% important to the other side. 00:34:22.889 --> 00:34:25.020 align:middle line:84% I won't know that if I don't ask. 00:34:25.020 --> 00:34:30.739 align:middle line:84% And I'm exploring all the possible "what if"s until I get 00:34:30.739 --> 00:34:34.980 align:middle line:84% to the putative, but I don't know where it is exactly, 00:34:34.980 --> 00:34:40.969 align:middle line:84% Pareto frontier, which is this outer edge from top to bottom 00:34:40.969 --> 00:34:41.909 align:middle line:90% of scores. 00:34:41.909 --> 00:34:44.690 align:middle line:84% Now, you can be, in economic terms, 00:34:44.690 --> 00:34:47.610 align:middle line:84% at the outer edge you're super efficient. 00:34:47.610 --> 00:34:50.780 align:middle line:84% You've used up all the value because you've 00:34:50.780 --> 00:34:55.199 align:middle line:84% moved out to this frontier, this surface across the top. 00:34:55.199 --> 00:34:56.750 align:middle line:84% But there's a lot of places that you 00:34:56.750 --> 00:35:00.630 align:middle line:84% could be that curve goes all across the whole spectrum. 00:35:00.630 --> 00:35:02.430 align:middle line:90% It's no more about efficiency. 00:35:02.430 --> 00:35:05.430 align:middle line:90% It's about equity. 00:35:05.430 --> 00:35:08.410 align:middle line:90% Anything on that curve-- 00:35:08.410 --> 00:35:11.350 align:middle line:90% no more value left to split. 00:35:11.350 --> 00:35:15.530 align:middle line:84% But I can move along the curve where I do better, 00:35:15.530 --> 00:35:16.880 align:middle line:90% you will do worse. 00:35:16.880 --> 00:35:21.050 align:middle line:84% When you're talking about a Pareto efficient curve, 00:35:21.050 --> 00:35:24.170 align:middle line:84% you are talking about a zero sum situation. 00:35:24.170 --> 00:35:27.260 align:middle line:84% There's a maximum amount of value. 00:35:27.260 --> 00:35:31.400 align:middle line:84% And as long as I go to the Northeast and hit that curve, 00:35:31.400 --> 00:35:34.550 align:middle line:84% I haven't wasted any possible value. 00:35:34.550 --> 00:35:38.170 align:middle line:84% I've explored enough "what if"s, understood enough about 00:35:38.170 --> 00:35:41.720 align:middle line:84% our differing interests, that I can move. 00:35:41.720 --> 00:35:44.570 align:middle line:84% But where on that curve I end up, 00:35:44.570 --> 00:35:47.960 align:middle line:84% that's not about using all the value. 00:35:47.960 --> 00:35:49.610 align:middle line:90% That's about who gets what. 00:35:49.610 --> 00:35:51.670 align:middle line:84% In the process of building consensus, 00:35:51.670 --> 00:35:56.620 align:middle line:84% in any effort to create value, in any effort 00:35:56.620 --> 00:36:01.030 align:middle line:84% to generate new options, packages, for mutual gain, 00:36:01.030 --> 00:36:03.190 align:middle line:84% we're both advantaged by the more 00:36:03.190 --> 00:36:05.290 align:middle line:90% we move out to that surface. 00:36:05.290 --> 00:36:09.490 align:middle line:84% So for people who read books about win-win, 00:36:09.490 --> 00:36:14.100 align:middle line:84% it's an illusion because there are constraints on both sides 00:36:14.100 --> 00:36:17.170 align:middle line:84% relative to what issues they can agree to or can't. 00:36:17.170 --> 00:36:20.020 align:middle line:84% Or there are legal limits or there are time limits. 00:36:20.020 --> 00:36:23.530 align:middle line:84% You can see how you did relative to the extremes. 00:36:23.530 --> 00:36:25.360 align:middle line:84% First of all, you got an agreement. 00:36:25.360 --> 00:36:26.200 align:middle line:90% So that was good. 00:36:26.200 --> 00:36:28.720 align:middle line:84% Now, within the frame of agreement, 00:36:28.720 --> 00:36:32.970 align:middle line:84% did you set your goals too low and, thus, 00:36:32.970 --> 00:36:37.200 align:middle line:84% accept a deal that was fine, but not 00:36:37.200 --> 00:36:39.510 align:middle line:84% the maximum you could have gotten if you 00:36:39.510 --> 00:36:41.590 align:middle line:90% had been more aggressive? 00:36:41.590 --> 00:36:46.530 align:middle line:84% Did you set your goals too high, hit a wall with the other side, 00:36:46.530 --> 00:36:51.682 align:middle line:84% and collapse down to a barely acceptable agreement 00:36:51.682 --> 00:36:53.640 align:middle line:84% from both of you because there was no more time 00:36:53.640 --> 00:36:54.850 align:middle line:90% to create value? 00:36:54.850 --> 00:36:57.660 align:middle line:84% I'm talking about the context in which these kinds 00:36:57.660 --> 00:37:00.310 align:middle line:90% of micro skills come into play. 00:37:00.310 --> 00:37:04.200 align:middle line:84% The more confident you are in what 00:37:04.200 --> 00:37:08.830 align:middle line:84% you're doing when you're doing these, the more you will feel, 00:37:08.830 --> 00:37:12.000 align:middle line:84% yes, I should keep posing more questions to understand 00:37:12.000 --> 00:37:13.390 align:middle line:90% their interests better. 00:37:13.390 --> 00:37:15.550 align:middle line:84% Because if I don't understand their interests, 00:37:15.550 --> 00:37:18.000 align:middle line:84% I'm never going to propose something good for them 00:37:18.000 --> 00:37:20.040 align:middle line:84% and great for me, because I can't 00:37:20.040 --> 00:37:22.780 align:middle line:84% do the first part because I haven't asked enough questions. 00:37:22.780 --> 00:37:27.210 align:middle line:84% So the more confident you are about the search for value 00:37:27.210 --> 00:37:31.020 align:middle line:84% creation, the more you're going to ask questions, 00:37:31.020 --> 00:37:33.790 align:middle line:84% not just for the sake of counting how many questions, 00:37:33.790 --> 00:37:36.870 align:middle line:84% but for the sake of understanding the other side's 00:37:36.870 --> 00:37:37.780 align:middle line:90% interests. 00:37:37.780 --> 00:37:40.680 align:middle line:84% And the more confident you are, the more 00:37:40.680 --> 00:37:45.340 align:middle line:84% you'll search for unexpected trades, unexpected what-ifs. 00:37:45.340 --> 00:37:49.570 align:middle line:84% The more confident you are about this underlying structure, 00:37:49.570 --> 00:37:54.490 align:middle line:84% the more assertive you will be about your interests, 00:37:54.490 --> 00:37:58.030 align:middle line:84% the more focused you will be on the other side's interests, 00:37:58.030 --> 00:38:01.860 align:middle line:84% the more confident you will be about suggesting packages 00:38:01.860 --> 00:38:03.840 align:middle line:90% and options for mutual gain. 00:38:03.840 --> 00:38:08.220 align:middle line:84% So it's not just about learning what these micro skills are. 00:38:08.220 --> 00:38:14.070 align:middle line:84% It's also about being able to use them with confidence. 00:38:14.070 --> 00:38:15.980 align:middle line:84% I want you to take away the sense 00:38:15.980 --> 00:38:19.280 align:middle line:84% that there's micro skills you can work on to advance 00:38:19.280 --> 00:38:22.760 align:middle line:90% your leadership capacities. 00:38:22.760 --> 00:38:29.330 align:middle line:84% Next time we meet, I want to be able to talk with you 00:38:29.330 --> 00:38:32.930 align:middle line:84% and get as many individuals as I can 00:38:32.930 --> 00:38:38.060 align:middle line:84% to say, oh, what do you see as your own strengths 00:38:38.060 --> 00:38:41.820 align:middle line:84% and weaknesses relative to facilitative leadership? 00:38:41.820 --> 00:38:44.720 align:middle line:84% Because what I want to provoke is your plan 00:38:44.720 --> 00:38:46.350 align:middle line:90% for what you're going to do. 00:38:46.350 --> 00:38:48.770 align:middle line:84% And I want to put that in the context of being 00:38:48.770 --> 00:38:53.250 align:middle line:84% here in the department and in the degree program you're in. 00:38:53.250 --> 00:38:56.300 align:middle line:84% How are you going to enhance your capabilities? 00:38:56.300 --> 00:38:59.310 align:middle line:84% The answer is going to be personal and different. 00:38:59.310 --> 00:39:01.600 align:middle line:84% I'm also expecting some people to say, 00:39:01.600 --> 00:39:04.220 align:middle line:84% I'm not so worried about being in a leadership role. 00:39:04.220 --> 00:39:07.210 align:middle line:84% I'm content to be part of a team and be working on something 00:39:07.210 --> 00:39:08.120 align:middle line:90% I believe in. 00:39:08.120 --> 00:39:11.050 align:middle line:84% And the leadership doesn't appeal to me, 00:39:11.050 --> 00:39:13.040 align:middle line:90% or I don't see myself that way. 00:39:13.040 --> 00:39:15.080 align:middle line:84% If that's how you think, I hope you'll say that. 00:39:15.080 --> 00:39:17.620 align:middle line:84% I want to be sure you've asked and answered it 00:39:17.620 --> 00:39:22.450 align:middle line:84% in a thoughtful way so that you can use the time you have here 00:39:22.450 --> 00:39:25.990 align:middle line:84% appropriately to the extent you want to take 00:39:25.990 --> 00:39:28.450 align:middle line:90% facilitative leadership roles. 00:39:28.450 --> 00:39:31.240 align:middle line:84% So I'll see everybody next Thursday, 00:39:31.240 --> 00:39:33.720 align:middle line:90% and dinner, once again. 00:39:33.720 --> 00:40:00.000 align:middle line:90%