200 likes | 272 Views
This working group review agenda includes presentations, exercises, and a focus on building consensus using tools like Nominal Group Technique and Affinity Diagrams to turn subjective input into objective actions. Participants are guided by a code of conduct for productive discussions. Consensus does not require complete agreement but aims for alignment on the best path forward. Presentations, exercises, and appendix materials help facilitate understanding and decision-making.
E N D
Glendaruel Projects Working Group Review 14/12/11
Agenda • Introduction • Presentation 1 • Presentation 2 • Presentation 3 • Exercise 1 • Exercise 2 • Conclusion
Introduction • Purpose - Review progress to date - Share information and insight - Identify common ground • Approach - Use established techniques to build consensus and identify practical actions
Tools • Nominal Group Technique • Quality Function Deployment • Affinity Diagrams Turn subjective “wants and needs” into…. - Objective assessment - Quantifiable impact - Tangible actions
Code of Conduct • This is not a chaired meeting. • This is a facilitated exercise There is a big difference… You are here to participate in an exercise to build consensus.
Code of Conduct (continued) • Each group will have an opportunity to provide an update with conclusions and recommendations • Following this update, there will be an opportunity to ask clarifying questions • You may not interrupt • You may not talk over anyone who is already speaking • One person talks – everyone else listens
Consensus • Does not mean that everyone agrees. • Does mean that there is agreement about the best path forward
Presentations (Optional) • 5 minutes • State purpose/objective • Present key findings • State conclusions • Make recommendation
Exercise 1 • List “Wants & Needs” • Then translate to objective requirements Example: Convert The bike needs suspension to I need a more comfortable journey Starting at the higher level generates a more open assessment of options…
Exercise 2 • Build a common understanding on priorities Agree on 5 – 6 criteria for evaluation Force rank the criteria List out ideas and suggestions Rate each idea/suggestion against the criteria • Use a 1, 3, 9 scale
Appendices • Original output from CGDT • Strategic Aims • “Critical To” Trees • “Force Field” Analysis