07A1-00 - Stakeholder Profile Summary

During a Crisis, Postpone the Full Vision But Detail Actions and Their Anticipated Consequences Usually visionary leaders elaborate desired outcomes along with the actions needed to achieve them. A crisis, however, may require leaders to emphasize action without clear delineation of a desired future state. If old behaviors are not working and disaster is imminent, followers may wish leaders to prescribe new behavior, and they may even be willing to try that behavior without a full-blown vision of the outcome. Even then, a leader must soon link the recommended course of action to a “higher purpose” (Boal and Bryson, 1987). Establishing causal links between the new behavior and desired outcomes is also critical.

Adeptly Design and Use Forums The visionary practices listed so far take place in a forum, the setting where leaders and constituents debate various interpretations of public problems, assess potential solutions, and develop specific proposals for enacting favored solutions. The design and use of these settings have a major effect on which problem definitions and solutions are considered and on which proposals are developed. As noted in Resource D, the key considerations that leaders should consider in designing a forum are communicative capability, interpretive schemes, norms of relevance and pragmatic communication, media and modes of argument, and access rules. Leaders who are undertaking a major change effort must also think of numerous forums in relation to each other, orchestrating them as much as possible so they build on each other and generate momentum for change. This orchestration of forums is described more fully in Part Two of this book; here we focus on key design elements of a forum.

Communicative Capability Visionary leaders should consider, first of all, which stakeholders have the ability to make their voices heard in discussion of a particular public problem. We see this ability as the function of power and interest; those whose voices are most prominent are those who have considerable decision-making power as well as a sense of having an important stake in the problem. Those whose voices are least prominent are the ones with low decision-making power and a relatively minor stake in the problem.

A tool that can be useful in assessing this aspect of communicative capability is the “power versus interest grid” (Exercise 4.2). This exercise also sets the stage for several other stakeholder analysis methods that we recommend for visionary and political leaders. An individual or group can use the grid to place stakeholders in one of four categories (Eden and Ackermann, 1998, pp. 121–125, 344–346; see also Bryson, 2004):

Exercise 4.2. Using a Power-Versus-Interest Grid.

This exercise allows a planning group to map stakeholders in a public problem according to the stakeholder's amount of decision-making power and interest in the problem. A power-versus-interest grid typically helps determine which stakeholders' interests and power bases must be taken into account in order to address the problem or issue at hand. It also helps highlight coalitions to be encouraged or discouraged, what behavior should be fostered, and whose buy-in should be sought or who should be “co- opted.” Finally, it provides some information on how to convince stakeholders to change their views. Interestingly, the knowledge gained from such a grid can be used to help advance the interests of the relatively powerless (Bryson, Cunningham, and Lokkesmoe, 2002).

Directions for working with a group:

1. Tape four flipchart sheets to a wall to form a single surface two sheets high and two sheets wide.

2. Draw the two axes on the surface using a marking pen. The vertical axis is labeled interest, from low to high; the horizontal axis is labeled power, from low to high.

3. Participants brainstorm the names of stakeholders by writing names as they come to mind on a 1.5″ × 2″ (2.5 cm × 5 cm) self-adhesive label, one stakeholder per label. Guided by the deliberations and judgments of the planning group members, a facilitator should place each label in the appropriate spot on the quadrants. Labels should be collected in round-robin fashion, one label per group member, until all labels (other than duplicates) are placed on the grid or eliminated for some reason.

4. Labels should be moved around until all group members are satisfied with the relative location of each stakeholder on the grid.

5. The group should discuss the implications of the resulting stakeholder placements. If needed, develop strategies for increasing the power of stakeholders in the subjects category to make their views heard. If needed, develop strategies for increasing the interest of stakeholders in the context-setters category.

1. Players—stakeholders with high power and high interest

2. Context setters—stakeholders with high power and low interest

3. Subjects—stakeholders with low power and high interest

4. The crowd—stakeholders with low power and low interest

Visionary leaders are likely to have to figure out ways to enhance the power of people in the subjects category and how to enhance the interest of context-setter stakeholders in order to build a powerful coalition to achieve broadly beneficial change.

Since powerful social groups strongly influence what is widely held to be “rational,” an understanding of power distributions and relations helps account for the legitimacy of

rationales for the world as it is (Suchman, 1995; Flyvbjerg, 1998). Altering power distributions and relationships undermines the legitimacy of those rationales. Yet visionary leaders must be thoughtful as to how they go about such efforts, since in a game of power the powerful usually win. It's important to keep conflict at a moderate level so that alternative power relationships have a chance to develop, rather than being stifled at the outset by powerful groups who, if conflict is intense, will move strongly to protect their position.

Communicative capability also includes the skill of delivering a captivating, inspirational message through various media to diverse stakeholder groups. If they do not have all the needed skills themselves (and they usually don't), visionary leaders must recruit others who can craft the reports, write the speeches, plan and produce the videos, and rev up the crowd of demonstrators.

Frames and Interpretive Schemes Leaders pay attention to which broad frames and interpretive schemes are likely to be applied to the problem that concerns them, and to which interpretive schemes they want to emphasize in promoting a beneficial solution. They emphasize frames that help convince key stakeholders to join a coalition to promote good ideas worth implementing and that reduce the potency of any opposing coalition. In selecting frames, visionary leaders should attend to what they play down as well as to what they play up (Schön and Rein, 1994; Simons, 2001). For example, forums convened to advance the African American Men Project visibly demonstrated the strength and accomplishments of African American men, reinforcing the message that what is good for young African American men is good for the county. The forums presented African American men as contributors, not as a problem. The presence of county commissioners and other powerful people at these forums communicated the importance of the project.

The sustainable development frame adopted by WBCSD, meanwhile, has been a powerful impetus for coalition building among environmentalists, businesspeople, and economists because it merges two other frames—concern for the environment and economic progress—each of which has more narrow support. At the same time, some environmentalists have criticized the sustainable development frame for obscuring the need to reduce wasteful consumption in well-to-do societies (McKibben, 1996). Partly to blunt criticism that supporters of sustainable development are simply trying to protect the right of the affluent to maintain a high level of consumption, WBCSD emphasizes its commitment to conservation, alleviation of poverty, and economic development, which were promoted at the Johannesburg summit as the “three pillars” of sustainable development. One of the council's main programs is called “sustainable livelihoods”; it is developing case studies and pilot projects demonstrating how businesses can help people move out of poverty.

The Vital Aging Network promotes a productive-citizen frame by demonstrating the economic and social contributions that older adults make through paid work; volunteer service; and caring for grandchildren or others who are sick, disabled, or isolated. Jan

Hively talks about tapping the resources of older adults to help over-stretched communities care for those “on both ends of the lifeline” (personal communication, July 2003).

It's important to be aware that some frames are likely to activate ideologies, which are extremely potent interpretive schemes. For example, a “green” ideology is likely to be evoked in ecologically minded people when the environmental protection frame is applied to an issue. They are then likely to use tenets of this ideology to assess the issue and recommendations for action. The challenge for visionary leaders is to help people draw on the best aspects of their ideologies to build bridges to diverse others (Gerzon, 1996).

Exercise 4.3 helps you analyze the main interpretive schemes connected to a problem that concerns you. Additional guidance about choosing which frames to highlight is in Chapter Seven.

Exercise 4.3. Analyzing Interpretive Schemes, or Problem Frames. This exercise can be completed by an individual or a group. If a group is involved, you may want to use the snowcard technique in Exercise 3.1 to organize the results.

1. Brainstorm ways of framing the problem that concerns you. Be sure to include frames that are commonly applied to public problems in general (for example, “not in my backyard”) or to problems like this one (for example, if your problem involves what you consider risky behavior—such as handgun use, smoking, unprotected sex— others might defend the behavior by invoking the “freedom of choice” frame).

2. Look at the list of stakeholders you generated in Exercise 4.2. Place a check beside the key stakeholders, those who are most affected or most central to resolving the problem.

3. Now consider the frames you identified in step one. Place a check beside the frame that you think is most closely tied to current solutions to the problem. Identify the stakeholder groups that are likely to support this frame.

4. Place a star beside the frame that incorporates or resonates with the type of solution you seek.

5. Star two or three additional frames that you think have substantial support among key stakeholders in the problem.

6. Now consider how stakeholders are likely to react to your proposals for change, given the different frames. Beginning with the frame that incorporates the changes you seek, array internal and external stakeholders on this diagram.

7. Now consider the other frames that you identified. How can you draw on those frames to develop a new, more comprehensive frame that builds on your own preferred frame but could encourage more key stakeholders to move into the strong- supporter quadrant and allow those who are strong opponents to at least move into the weak-opponent quadrant?

Norms of Relevance and Pragmatic Communication Visionary leaders must ensure that their messages meet the norms of relevance that prevail in key forums. Schmidheiny and his colleagues know that forums involving businesspeople often consider something to be relevant only if it affects their financial bottom line; thus they devote time to convincing these people that sustainable development is relevant for them. Cunningham and his colleagues recognized that they had to convince the powerful non–African American participants in key forums that measures to help African American men help themselves were important for achieving the non–African Americans' goals.

Visionary leaders need to recognize norms of pragmatic communication—that is, the expectation that a message will be comprehensible, sincere, appropriate to the context, and accurate (Forester, 1989, p. 36). Thus authors of the WBCSD reports acknowledge bad behavior by some businesses and lack of concern on the part of many. They note in the 2002 annual report that many nongovernmental organizations were suspicious of the business community's show of strength (described in the report as a thousand-person presence) at the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development. The annual report indicates, however, that the WBCSD dispelled some of the skepticism by teaming up with Greenpeace to call on governments to implement the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, and organizing a young managers' team that participated in closed and open sessions with nongovernmental representatives. Meanwhile, WBCSD leaders maintain credibility with the business community by having high-profile corporate CEOs in

leadership positions and by using language from the business lexicon, such as efficiency, market opportunities, and “business plan for sustainable development” (Holliday, Schmidheiny, and Watts, 2002, p. 12). WBSCD partnered with the International Chamber of Commerce to “project a single voice of business” at the Johannesburg summit, and the partners invited U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to keynote their Business Day at the summit (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2003, p. 2).

Media and Modes of Argument Visionary leaders are skilled in using multiple media to convey their arguments— speeches, reports, press releases, advertisements, public service announcements, editorials, books, videos, and Websites. They also time their arguments to connect these media with such highly visible forums as the Johannesburg Summit or the Vital Aging Summit. Although having many ways of communicating a message generally makes sense, it's possible to overdo. At the Johannesburg Summit, nongovernmental suspicion of business representatives may have been stimulated in part by the barrage of WBCSD- sponsored reports and events at the summit.

Visionary leaders should be skilled in using dialogical and persuasive modes of argumentation (the process of formulating reasons and drawing conclusions). Organizing dialogue among stakeholders with differing perspectives on a public problem is especially useful in developing beneficial, comprehensive problem frames and solutions. Several approaches to dialogue have been described. Wilfred Drath endorses using “relational dialogue” when stakeholders have divergent worldviews. Relational dialogue, he explains, is based on acceptance of the worth and validity of those worldviews and the realization that shared work is nonetheless needed. For the dialogue to work, participants must have some willingness to “hold their own truths lightly … and appreciate the capacity of other worldviews to make up truths as well” (Drath, 2001, p. 144). Listening to other views, participants can start to “see through their worldviews, understand them as useful, sensemaking, and truth giving, but incomplete, not the whole of reality” (p. 149). As noted in Chapter Three, Fletcher and Käufer (2003) suggest ways to foster generative dialogue, in which the members of a group stop seeing themselves as separate individuals and instead as selves in relationship who learn from each other. This type of dialogue is like a “‘spiral of growth’, in which mutuality, learning, and the creative activity of cocreating solutions, and shared understandings are shared by the collective” (p. 40).

Leaders should be aware of the profound discomfort likely to result from attempting to see through one's worldview and thus becoming “a morally ambiguous self,” according to Maxine Boler (1999, p. 182). A philosopher and teacher, Boler suggests that this discomfort may at least be diminished by recognition that it can be better than the pain of separation and alienation from fellow human beings. Participants in relational and generative dialogue may also be heartened by the mutual growth and learning they experience (Fletcher and Kaüfer, 2003).

Persuasion is used both as a supplement to dialogue and alone if dialogue is not feasible. Communication experts offer general guidance for structuring a persuasive argument, but they emphasize that the message must always be tailored to a specific audience. An argument must appeal both to people who assess the message using “cognitive shorthands” and to those who use “central processing”—that is, who ask probing questions about the message and consider additional information and arguments before making a judgment (Simons, 2001, p. 35). Visionary leaders should also prompt central processing as much as possible, since people who develop a policy stance as a result of such critical reflection are more resistant to counterargument (Simons, 2001).

Cognitive shorthand entails frames, association with a likable person or activity, the attractiveness of the person communicating the message, perceived rewards, grievances, and nostalgia (Simons, 2001; Gardner, 1995). For example, U.S. anti-AIDS campaigners scored a significant coup in the mid-1980s when they recruited Elizabeth Taylor to be a visible fundraising supporter. For many of those using cognitive shorthand to process messages about AIDS, her fame summoned up a positive association that would make the message recipients more sympathetic toward people with AIDS and more supportive of efforts to prevent and treat the disease. A similar effect could be counted on when Bill Clinton and Nelson Mandela agreed to cochair the International AIDS Trust. The Vital Aging Network invited Robert Bergland, a former congressman and U.S. commissioner of agriculture, to be cochair of the 2002 Summit. The seventy-eight-year-old Bergland, who also was a regent of the University of Minnesota, was a highly visible exemplar of vital aging.

Appealing to people who use central processing requires use of more formal logic relying on reasoning and evidence. The speaker has to show that a proposed policy change is needed, that it is workable and practical, that it avoids harm (or certainly that the benefits outweigh any harm), and that it is the best available solution (Simons, 2001). If there are well-founded concerns about the proposed change, the speaker should acknowledge and refute them, or concede what can't be refuted and explain why the change is a good idea anyway (Simons, 2001). (See also the elements of policy arguments listed in Resource D.) Even in using reason and evidence, visionary leaders should not lose sight of the story line (Throgmorton, 1991). As Karl Weick notes, “What is necessary in sense making is a good story” (1995, p. 61). Alice Walker adds, “Stories are how the spirit is exercised” (1999, p. 194). Ideally, the story helps listeners integrate the disparate bits of information they have already acquired about the issue at hand (Snyder and Edwards, 1997). Thus the final report of the African American Men Project is filled with evidence about difficulties faced by young African American men, about the achievements of African American men, and about initiatives that are already producing improvement. At the same time, the story line weaving through the report is of a community that is at a crossroads, choosing whether to continue down a destructive and divisive path of decline or down a more hopeful, inclusive path.

Visionary leaders also must shape arguments specifically tailored for the arenas in which policy makers will decide whether to adopt and implement the solutions developed in forums. They must ensure that their groups' good ideas are incorporated into proposals

and plans that are shown to be technically and administratively workable, politically acceptable, and legally and ethically defensible.

Access Rules Leaders ensure that forums are designed so that the right people have access to them. A forum must be held at a time and place that encourages participation by these people. Special services such as child care may be important. The forum should be accessible to people with disabilities. If the conveners are from the majority culture, they probably should ensure that minority members feel welcome. The organizers of the Vital Aging Website, for example, may need to develop an alternative strategy for reaching people who don't have access to the Web.

Helpful Tools An especially helpful visionary leadership tool is “future search,” developed by Marvin Weisbord and colleagues (see Resource E). Herbert Simons's Persuasion in Society (2001) and Terry Pearce's Leading Out Loud (1995) present useful advice for speech making and presentations. James Throgmorton (1991) presents elements of persuasive storytelling. You can also use Exercise 4.4 to assess the visionary leadership capacity of an individual, group, organization, or network.

Political Leadership Leaders need visionary skills to develop shared understanding of public problems, build support for beneficial solutions, and develop commitment to collective action. They need political skills to turn a proposed solution into a specific policy, program, or project adopted and implemented by decision makers in executive, legislative, and administrative arenas. These are the main skills of political leadership:

• Mediating and shaping conflict within and among constituencies

• Building a winning, sustainable coalition to convince decision makers to consider the proposed changes, as well as implement them once they are adopted

• Overcoming bureaucratic resistance during implementation

• Adeptly designing and using formal and informal arenas

Mediate and Shape Conflict Within and Among Constituencies Conflict is necessary and must be used carefully in a policy-making arena if policy makers are to consider multiple options for satisfying diverse constituencies (Burns, 1978; Nutt, 2002; Bryant, 2003); political leaders must possess transactional skills for dealing with

individuals and groups with conflicting agendas. Political leaders must bargain and negotiate, trading the things of value that they control for others' support and developing advantageous positions. These leaders, notes James MacGregor Burns, “use conflict deliberately to protect decision-making options and power, and even more, … use conflict to structure the political environment so as to maximize ‘constructive’ dissonance, thus allowing for more informed decision making” (1978, p. 410). Although Burns is writing mainly about top political officials, his advice is useful for any leader trying to build and sustain an advocacy coalition to affect policy making and implementation. An effective advocacy coalition has multiple channels of access that allow members' conflicts, tensions, and dilemmas to be aired and addressed on the way to full mobilization in support of policy decisions.

Exercise 4.4. Assessing Visionary Leadership Capacity. You may use this exercise to rate a group, an organization, or an interorganizational network. You may reword the questions to rate your own or another individual's visionary capacity.

If the exercise is done by a group, each member should do the ratings individually; the ratings can then be pooled to produce a group rating.

Respond to the questions by checking one of the three boxes after each.

When you are done with the ratings: For Working Alone

1. Develop a list of the visionary strengths of the individual, group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the visionary weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Also note which aspects of the items rated OK/Acceptably need improving.

4. Identify specific actions you can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

For Working in a Group 1. Develop a list of the visionary strengths of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that most group members rated Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the visionary weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that a majority of the group ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Identify and discuss aspects of other items that need improvement.

4. Agree on specific actions the group can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

The trick is not to be immobilized by conflicting agendas and to maintain the integrity of the vision that is inspiring the proposed policy changes. Burns emphasizes that political leaders play a “marginal” role, avoiding complete assimilation by any one group in order to deal with conflicts outside as well as inside their constituencies: “Their marginality supplies them with a double leverage, since in their status as leaders they are expected by their followers and other leaders to deviate, to innovate, and to mediate between the claims of their group and those of others” (p. 39).

Thus a public official like Stenglein or public manager like Cunningham must encourage numerous constituencies to supply them with their views of what's important, what their needs are, with whom they can work and with whom they can't, and what they can contribute to the change efforts. In working together to improve outcomes for young African American men, they can trade access to Hennepin County's policy-making process for resources (information, expertise, votes, connections to other groups, endorsements) that other individuals and groups control. As a member of the County Board, Stenglein also has a vote on all matters before the board that he can use as leverage to obtain concessions or support from other commissioners. As the head of a county department, Cunningham can direct staff to organize meetings or studies that community groups request.

Bargaining and negotiating have two main desirable outcomes: compromise and copromotion. In compromise, each participant gives up some of his or her desires in exchange for achieving the remainder; everyone, in a sense, loses something but also gains something. In copromotion, or what Leigh Thompson (2001) calls “integrative negotiation,” the participants find ways to help each other achieve all or most of each other's aims, and possibly go beyond the parties' initial aims. Copromotion has obvious advantages, but compromise is usually needed too. In its final report, the Steering Committee of the African American Men Project emphasized copromotion as the way forward, rather than setting up a win-lose struggle between ethnic groups. Obviously, some compromise was made as project events and publications were put together, but the overarching approach is copromotion. Of course, total victory by one side is also possible, though hardly advisable because losers may feel so mistreated that they will be more determined and more vicious in future conflict.

Political leaders know that conflict in an arena can generate a lot of heat; policy making at its most basic level is about who gets what, how, how much, when, and where. The what can be money, services, contracts, access to opportunity, status and recognition, or campaign contributions; it can also be protection from competing entrepreneurs, corruptors, criminals, and others. Political leaders should never underestimate the ferocity of competition in an arena; those who benefit from the status quo will fight hard to keep and enhance their privileges and those who don't will fight hard for equity.

Political leaders must also be prepared to deal with opponents who reject any gain-gain approach and pursue a win-lose strategy. In such cases, political leaders should develop their own strategies for winning and for returning to a gain-gain strategy at the earliest opportunity. They need to use the resources they have (including credible threats such as leaving the negotiation) to protect their interests (see Bolman and Deal, 2003).

Leaders may have to magnify the voices of a group that is typically ignored or excluded from policy discussion. They must nurture citizen engagement, or what Harry Boyte and Nancy Kari (1996) call “public work.” Too frequently, citizens view political conflict as an ugly and unseemly battle over narrow interests, and certainly they have many causes to do so. In a democratic system, however, political conflict is also a means of producing policies that meet a broad array of needs and strengthen community. Citizens cannot leave policy making and implementation to elected and appointed officials and expect this to happen. We would all do well to heed former Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey's call for citizen action: “Quit sitting on the sidelines, whistling and jeering at the people down on the playing field. Get out there and get roughed up a bit and see what it's like to live in this world of reality” (Connell, 1983).

Build a Winning, Sustainable Coalition The foundation for marshaling a coalition to support a proposed policy change is laid by visionary leadership (see, for example, Hall, 1996). The individuals and groups included in forums focusing on problem definitions and solutions are the potential members of an advocacy coalition (Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith, 1993) that will press policy makers to adopt and implement specific proposals emerging from the forums. If the forums have been well designed and wisely used, key stakeholders will contribute to crafting the problem definition, choosing optimal solutions, and shaping the animating vision for change. They help shape the specific proposals that are to be introduced into the policy-making arenas. As attention shifts to arenas, leaders may seek to formalize the coalition. A formal network with a name and identifiable membership can be an attractor for other interested parties. It can make support for the proposed change seem more formidable than it is, and it amounts to a coordination tool through the signaling and attention that a name provides.

Thus, as WBCSD President Björn Stigson and his colleagues prepared for the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, they joined the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in organizing Business Action for Sustainable Development (BASD), a coalition of WBSCD and ICC organizations (both of which are themselves coalitions). BASD then became “the single voice of business at the summit,” organizing a Business Day and a

virtual exhibit area at the summit (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2003, p. 2).

A coalition may be less formal. In the African American men case, a steering committee of community leaders along with Hennepin County commissioners and staff, academic researchers, and community organizations collaborated on the African American Men Project. This formal group acted as an informal coalition that developed the recommendation for a permanent African American Men Commission, consisting of “African American men and community, business, religious, academic, nonprofit, and government leaders.” The board was to “provide leadership and advice to policy makers, foundations, nonprofit, organizations and the overall community on issues, programs and policies that impact the lives of young African American men” (Hennepin County, 2002, p. 75). It could be expected to be an attractor for individuals, groups, and organizations supporting particular initiatives that it recommends. It is often easier for public officials or public managers to be part of such an informal coalition since they must emphasize their concern for a multitude of constituencies.

Leaders in a formal coalition should help members develop one or more agreements:

• What each will contribute in the way of information, funds, staff and member energies, and connections

• What each will receive from involvement in the coalition

• General time frame for the coalition's work

• Decision making and coordination methods

• General strategies

One challenge for coalition leaders is to keep the coalition intact or growing once the initial burst of enthusiasm for a campaign or project wears off. Among the applicable strategies are regular, well-run meetings or work sessions, continuous progress reports, periodic conferences and other public events, and sustaining media coverage of the effort to win proposal adoption. To the extent possible, coalition members should be actively involved in the campaign, either by attempting to influence policy makers or by implementing what can be done without policy makers' approval. Once a new policy or program is adopted, coalition members may decide it's time to declare victory and move onto something else, but astute political leaders know that more battles lie ahead in the implementation process. Therefore they try to involve coalition members, whether directly in implementing the policy or indirectly through monitoring and assessing how well implementation is carried out.

The steering committee of the African American Men Project basically ensured continuation and expansion of the project coalition by successfully recommending to the Hennepin County Board that a successor group, the African American Men Commission, should be set up and $500,000 in seed money provided for the next phase of the project. The entire 130-member commission meets quarterly, and an executive committee meets

monthly. Additionally, all members are expected to take part on active committees and participate in biweekly training sessions.

More guidance on the care and feeding of coalitions is in Chapter Ten. You may also want to use Exercise 4.5 to help an initial group of change advocates develop a plan for building and sustaining an advocacy coalition to tackle the public problem that concerns you.

Exercise 4.5. Laying the Groundwork for a Winning Coalition.

1. Return to the list of stakeholders generated for Exercise 4.2. For each one, fill out this worksheet. In doing so, the group should pay attention to perspectives and needs differing by gender, ethnicity, physical ability, age, religious preference, and other characteristics as relevant. (This is essentially the same worksheet used in Exercise 3.3. If worksheets from that exercise are relevant, simply review and revise as needed for this exercise.) Stakeholder Worksheet

How do they influence us?

What do we need from them?

How important are they?

□ Extremely

□ Reasonably

□ Not very

□ Not at all

2. From the worksheets and the power-versus-interest grid produced in Exercise 4.2, generate a list of potential coalition members. For each, answer these questions:

• What can the stakeholder contribute to the coalition?

• What might the stakeholder get from the coalition?

3. Use insights about problem framing from Exercise 4.3 to generate ideas for persuading stakeholders to join the coalition.

4. Develop strategies for organizing the coalition and keeping it intact or growing.

• How will we deal with power differences among coalition members?

• Which person or organization can coordinate the coalition?

• How can we keep members informed and engaged in ongoing activities?

Based in part on Bryson, J. M., and Alston, F. Creating and Implementing Your Strategic Plan: A Workbook for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Overcome Bureaucratic Resistance During Implementation Implementation of major policy change usually requires the cooperation of bureaucratic institutions. Bureaucracies have intricate rules and procedures and entrenched personnel who may hamper any change. A prime mover in one of the cases featured in this book noted, “There are three women in charge of the budget stuff, who compete with each other to protect [the top decision maker] from the risk of making any decision that might result in an expenditure. They are protecting the importance of their jobs….”

Political leaders must constantly find ways to enlist bureaucrats in their cause—for example, by appealing to a shared vision or goals (Behn, 1999). George Frederickson suggests that civil servants may respond favorably to such appeals, since they are more concerned about social justice than the general population is (Frederickson, 1997).

Institutional rules, procedures, and personnel may have to be changed, or new parallel or auxiliary organizations created as part of the implementation process. When necessary, political leaders find a way to appeal over the bureaucrats' heads to the broader public or other powerful stakeholders who support the change. For example, the advocacy coalition fighting for increased attention to AIDS on the part of U.S. public health officials in the early 1980s faced considerable barriers within the federal public health bureaucracy; they

were, however, able to obtain a much more sympathetic hearing from members of Congress, and congressional pressure did force federal agencies to channel considerable resources toward AIDS research, treatment, and prevention.

Adeptly Design and Use Formal and Informal Arenas The political practices described so far are connected to arenas in which leaders and constituents seek decisions from policy makers that will lead to effective implementation of their proposed solutions. The design and use of arenas determine both which proposals are placed on the policy-making agenda and which are incorporated into new laws, rules, regulations, projects, and programs. As noted in Resource D, the key considerations that leaders should include in their strategies for designing and using an arena are decision- making capabilities; domains; agendas; planning, budgeting, decision making, and implementation methods; and rules governing access to participation.

Decision-Making Capabilities Political leaders identify and build relationships with the people who have clout (that is, key capabilities) in the executive, legislative, and administrative arenas that can supply the decisions they desire. These capabilities might include holding elected office, occupying a top position, showing proven ability to sway votes, or possessing the authority to approve budgets or personnel. For example, as Hively worked to secure funding for the Vital Aging Initiative, she had to ensure she sold the project to the dean of the college where she was working and to the university's provost, who could approve funds for the project. She conducted research to find out which individuals and foundations might approve grants for the initiative and presented her proposal to the appropriate decision makers. Depending on the decision maker, she recruited particular community leaders or role models to support the proposal.

Schmidheiny wanted to affect decision making in businesses, so he recruited chief executives to serve on the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Moreover, the council has issued specific models and guidance for business leaders who want to improve their practices; guidance also is tailored for certain industries and company sizes. The council is developing learning modules that can help member companies “embed sustainable development issues” in their core business practices (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2003, p. 15). Council representatives have presented their views to U.N. policy makers who are establishing global mechanisms and standards for fostering sustainable development. At the Johannesburg Summit, WBCSD President Stigson joined with Greenpeace Director Steve Sawyer to visibly urge heads of state to agree on an international framework for tackling global climate change that would be based on the Kyoto Protocol—an event clearly calculated to get worldwide mass media coverage and put public pressure on national governments. The council also is attempting to influence the next generation of business leaders by setting up Young Manager Teams that can participate in WBCSD events and help shape the council's future.

Political leaders should also remember to establish connections with powerful people who are opposed to the changes they support. Communicating with these people— Greenpeace leaders, for example, in the case of WBCSD—can reveal areas of agreement at least on procedures for hammering out solutions. As political leaders try to adjust their strategy to ongoing competition in an arena, they should keep working to find a way to tap the interests of opponents or find a way to neutralize them.

Domains Political leaders consider carefully the domain of any arena to which they submit their proposed policies and projects. In submitting the final report of the African American Men Project, Cunningham and Milligan noted that the recommendations were directed at policy makers in many institutions whose domain included Hennepin County's young African American men. County government was first on the list, but they also named the “State of Minnesota, the City of Minneapolis, foundations, other nonprofits, businesses, and educational systems” (Hennepin County, 2002, p. 5).

Political leaders often realize the need for altering the domain of an existing arena or establishing a new arena that encompasses all or part of the public issue at hand. In a way, the African American Commission that was recommended by the final report as an advisory group to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners would expand the board's domain to aspects of African American men's lives that were outside the scope of the county's traditional social service and public safety responsibilities.

Agendas Political leaders understand how the decision-making agendas are set in the arena that they hope will consider their proposal, and they work to ensure that their proposals are advantageously placed on the agenda. This might require building a relationship with the powerful committee chair, who decides what proposed policy or legislation is considered by the committee. It might require working with the chairperson's aide or secretary. Political leaders recognize that their proposal must compete with other issues for a decision maker's attention; thus they emphasize why their proposal should be on the agenda (the issue is urgent, the decision makers' constituents support the proposals, the proposals fit the decision makers' priorities, the mass media are clamoring for action, and so on). Placement on the agenda can be quite important; for example, advocates of a policy proposal may want to have their proposal considered early in a meeting, so that it receives plenty of attention, rather than at the end when everyone is tired and just wants to finish the meeting.

To achieve a spot on the provost's agenda, Hively could point out that aging baby boomers represent a business opportunity for the university. She could offer research indicating that older Minnesotans are seeking opportunities for self-development, and she could present work plans that offer a promise of success and accountability. She could also show how the proposal builds on work the university has already supported and show that external funders will supplement university resources.

Planning, Budgeting, Decision Making, and Implementation Methods Political leaders understand how to fit their proposal into the planning and budgeting process of the appropriate arena. They carefully consider what amount of money and other resources to request and when and what type of program or staffing arrangements are likely to be viewed favorably in light of those plans and budgets.

Political leaders consider whether decisions are to be made by consensus, majority vote, or executive order, and in closed or open meetings. They need to know whether preliminary decisions are made by committees before moving to a larger policy-making group. They must be aware of decision-making time frames. They must think through the merits of expanding or reframing the issue that concerns them to include other issues that are on the decision makers' agenda. They have to know which kinds of influence technique (lobbying, strategic voting, and the like) are acceptable. They must anticipate the moves and countermoves of others who are competing for decision makers' attention and votes.

The implementation plans included in a policy proposal must take account of decision makers' expectations and their institutional arrangement for handling a new program or a change in an old one. For example, a university administrator will expect results to be measured and reported, and that a new program is assigned to a department that handles similar programs.

As proposals are altered in the decision-making process, political leaders need to pay constant, even obsessive, attention to ensure the new proposals are technically and administratively workable, politically acceptable, and legally and ethically defensible, and that they encourage collective and individual behavior anticipated by the vision that animates their coalition.

As needed, political leaders also work for reform in planning, budgeting, decision- making, and implementation methods. For example, corruption may have to be rooted out, decision making made more transparent, and a committee system reshaped.

Access Rules Political leaders understand the rules that govern who becomes a decision maker in an executive, legislative, or administrative arena and who is permitted to play another role in the arena (observer, advocate, expert). They must often change the rules or the decision makers for their groups to gain access to policy-making positions or to the process. A constitution may have to be amended, or at least new structures put into place. For example, young African American men traditionally have had little access to the deliberations of the Hennepin County commissioners, because the formal and informal rules governing their meetings advantaged the well-educated, well-informed professional or middle-class taxpayer. Creation of the African American Men Commission, however,

provides an official conduit to the commission for young men who would not normally set up appointments with county commissioners or attend their meetings.

The Vital Aging Network has launched an advocacy leadership program in cooperation with several sponsors. The program helps participants gain the capacity to advocate influentially for policies that promote vital aging.

Helpful Tools David Chrislip and Carl Larson's Collaborative Leadership and Chrislip's Collaborative Leadership Handbook offer guidance for building and sustaining a coalition (Chrislip and Larson, 1994; Chrislip, 2002). The Wilder Foundation furnishes detailed advice for lobbying state and local government policy makers in the United States (Avner, 2002). Additional advice on building a coalition as well as lobbying can be found in Kevin Hula's Lobbying Together (1999) and Rinus van Schendelen's Machiavelli in Brussels (2002), and on the Website of the National Coalition Building Institute (www.ncbi.org). You can use Exercise 4.6 to assess the political leadership capacity of an individual, group, organization, or network.

Ethical Leadership Once policy makers have enacted new policies, passed new laws and regulations, set up new programs and projects, or refused to do so, the policy makers' decisions are likely to be debated in a formal or informal court. Here, ethical leaders help constituents apply general rules to specific cases; resolve conflicts among competing ethical principles, laws, rules, and norms; and reward or punish the conduct of individuals and groups. Of course, all types of leadership have ethical aspects, but we define ethical leadership as sanctioning conduct and adjudicating disputes in court, because in this process the fundamental concern is with what is ethical and legitimate. These are the main skills of ethical leadership:

Exercise 4.6. Assessing Political Leadership Capacity. You may use this exercise to rate a group, an organization, or an interorganizational network. You may reword the questions to rate your own or another individual's political leadership capacity.

If the exercise is done by a group, each member should do the ratings individually; the ratings can then be pooled to produce a group rating.

Respond to the questions by checking one of the three boxes after each.

When you are done with the ratings: For Working Alone

1. Develop a list of the political strengths of the individual, group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the political weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Also note which aspects of the items rated OK/Acceptably need improving.

4. Identify specific actions you can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

For Working in a Group 1. Develop a list of the political strengths of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that most group members rated Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the political weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that a majority of the group ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Identify and discuss aspects of other items that need improvement.

4. Agree on specific actions the group can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

• Educating about ethics, constitutions, other laws, and norms

• Promoting awareness of how ethical principles, constitutions, other laws, and norms apply to specific cases

• Adapting principles, laws, and norms to changing times

• Resolving conflict among principles, laws, and norms

• Understanding the design and use of formal and informal courts

Educate About Ethics, Constitutions, Other Laws, and Norms In court decisions, legal treatises, editorials, sermons, memos, and other communications, ethical leaders emphasize the importance of abiding by and critiquing ethical principles, laws, and norms. They explain how ethical principles, constitutions, other laws, and norms do or do not contribute to communal well-being. They specifically emphasize the ethical principles, laws, and norms that legitimate their desired policies and that can evoke broad support among stakeholders.

WBCSD President Stigson and his colleagues exhibited ethical leadership when they joined Greenpeace at the 2002 Johannesburg Summit in emphasizing the importance of international treaties and protocols that can give businesspeople and other stakeholders consistent standards and timetables for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. In appealing to the court of public opinion in Hennepin County, Minnesota, Milligan, Cunningham, and their colleagues are emphasizing the norms of community and inclusion, personal responsibility and security, and equal treatment. Hively, Hal Freshley, Darlene Schroeder, and their supporters are appealing to the court of public opinion throughout Minnesota by emphasizing norms of self-determination, self-sufficiency, community involvement, productivity, intergenerational mutuality, and nondiscrimination.

Obviously, it's important that ethical leaders uphold the principles, laws, and norms they espouse in their own behavior. When protestors appeared at Shell's annual shareholders meeting in 2003 to criticize the company's environmental record, they indicated that company chairman and WBCSD leader Phil Watts and his colleagues at Shell need to do more to walk their talk. You may want to complete Exercise 4.7 to identify your role models for ethical leadership and develop ideas for overcoming barriers to it.

Promote Awareness of How Ethical Principles, Constitutions, Other Laws, and Norms Apply Ethical principles such as the importance of respecting human dignity offer only general guidance. A constitution is usually a broad framework establishing basic organizational

purposes, structures, and procedures. Laws, though more narrowly drawn, still typically apply to broad classes of people or actions; moreover, they frequently emerge from the legislative process containing purposeful omissions and generalities that were necessary to obtain enough votes for passage (Posner, 1985). Therefore, ethical principles, constitutional provisions, and other laws (including formal codes of ethics) require authoritative interpretation in order to decide whether and how they apply to a specific case. Judges, jurors, attorneys, and other interested parties all contribute to that interpretation. Outside the formal courts, leaders must typically apply norms rather than laws. Norms may be written (as in a published code of ethics) or unwritten.

Exercise 4.7. Identifying Ethical Role Models, and Overcoming Barriers to Ethical Leadership.

1. Who are your role models for ethical leadership?

2. What ethical principles do they espouse or live out?

3. What draws you to these people?

4. What are the main barriers to practicing ethical leadership?

5. How can you overcome these barriers?

Ethical leaders also consider how sanctions should be applied in a specific case. Laws often make available some guidance about (or a range of punishments for) violation of the law; they may even guarantee rewards (such as tax breaks) for those who comply with the law. Ethical leaders make the case for specific sanctions that are needed to give force to principles, laws, and norms.

Adapt Principles, Laws, and Norms to Changing Times Although principles, laws, and norms have lasting force, they are the product of historical social issues and forces (when historical includes the recent past). As conditions change, new issues emerge and old ones change. Thus existing principles, laws, and norms must change, and ethical leaders help constituents understand the need for change and the type of change needed. Mounting evidence of global climate change caused by greenhouse emissions calls into question a regime of disparate national laws regulating polluters—a regime based on principles of national sovereignty. WBCSD officials are calling on national government officials to cede some of their sovereignty to an international body that would set global standards for reducing greenhouse emissions and increasing use of renewable energy.

Often, as in the WBCSD example, ethical leaders are urging policy makers in an executive, legislative, or administrative arena to alter the law. However, the leaders often must ask a formal court to mandate a change because vested interests that tend to oppose change hold sway over the executive, legislative, and administrative arena (Van Horn, Baumer, and Gormley, 2001). (This assumes that the court is reasonably independent of the arena.) In

the area of constitutional law, in particular, the courts—as the “keepers” of constitutions— are usually the most legitimate venue for reinterpreting a constitution in light of societal changes.

Resolve Conflicts Among Principles, Laws, and Norms When applied to a specific case, principles, laws, and norms often conflict with each other. Ethical leaders help constituents decide how to resolve such conflict. They can make a case for why one principle, law, or norm should trump another. For example, if a law contravenes a constitutional provision, they emphasize the need to uphold the constitution above all other laws. They can offer a balancing approach; for example, by guaranteeing business owners considerable autonomy in how they achieve government-mandated emission controls. Thus the principle of liberty is balanced with the principle of environmental stewardship. Ethical leaders also are able to reinterpret conflict to suggest how competing principles, laws, or norms might be reconciled. For example, WBCSD members remind businesspeople that they will have neither autonomy nor security if the world's natural resources are destroyed. Thus environmental stewardship is cast ultimately as a way to guarantee business viability.

Understand the Design and Use of Formal and Informal Courts The setting for the ethical practices described here is a formal or informal court. Ethical leaders know that the design and use of these settings critically affect which policies and behaviors are subjected to judicial scrutiny and which sanctions are meted out. Courts often determine which adopted policies, programs, and projects are actually implemented and which are halted entirely or rendered ineffectual. As noted in Resource D, the key considerations that leaders should include in their strategies for designing and using courts are conflict management and sanctioning capabilities, rules governing conflict resolution, jurisdiction, conflict management methods, and rules governing access.

Conflict Management and Sanctioning Capabilities Ethical leaders identify those (including themselves) who have the authority and skills needed to resolve residual conflict and make binding decisions about applying ethical principles, laws, and norms as well as sanctioning conduct. They may consider these judges' record of wise and fair decisions or their level of training in strategizing about whether and how to attempt to argue a case before them. Ethical leaders may need to work for increased judicial authority—for example, the ability to levy higher fines or sentences for violations of a law. They may need to help some publics (customers of polluting industries, for instance) apply the sanctions they control (such as purchasing power). They may need to help people in their coalition apply peer pressure or acquire additional skills in conflict management or legal procedures. The organizers of the African American Men Project are relying on the sanctioning capacity of the African American community itself to affect the behavior of young African American men. The

project planners are sponsoring a Dream Assessment Initiative, in which “dream assessors” encourage students in grades five through twelve to define their dreams and aspirations, and develop a plan to make their dream a reality. Additionally, the project is working with Brother Achievement, which is training hundreds of mentors to work with young African American men.

Leaders recognize that policy makers (whether on a board, in a legislature, or administrators or executives) act as judges when they consider whether or not a recipient of funds is complying with policies and contracts. They can apply sanctions, as in giving more money or refusing to do so. Thus the African American Men Project and Vital Aging Network have included accountability mechanisms in their work programs to help funders judge their accomplishment and accept them as legitimate.

Rules Governing Conflict Resolution Ethical leaders analyze the rules (such as due process) that govern the courts acting on the cases that concern them. They help constituents develop strategies for taking advantage of the rules or altering them. For example, WBCSD officials are helping shape a number of Voluntary Environmental Initiatives (see Christmann and Taylor, 2002) that serve as an informal court judging whether a corporation is living up to agreed-upon environmental standards. WBCSD recognizes the importance of using independent verification of company reports so that the findings of a court will be seen as legitimate. An obvious impetus for establishing voluntary initiatives is the desire to avoid litigation in many national courts, where rules require or allow a lengthy and costly process, and sanctions can be severe.

The African American Men Project is working with the Hennepin County courts system to alter formal and informal rules that make it difficult for young men involved with the criminal justice system to escape it. For example, the project advocates developing or continuing educational programs and networks to help these young men become productive citizens. The project is also working with the National Leadership Institute on a process for expunging the criminal records of men who have been released from prison and completed probation and parole.

Jurisdiction Ethical leaders recognize that a dispute over the legitimacy or application of an enacted policy will be channeled to courts on the basis of jurisdiction (that is, whether the authority of the court covers the substance or location of the dispute). They may have to move through a hierarchy of courts, in which successive courts have authority over the ones below them. They may strive to alter a court's jurisdiction or create a new court (such as the Voluntary Environmental Initiatives just mentioned) that will have jurisdiction over the cases that concern them.

Conflict Management Methods

In designing and using courts, ethical leaders strive, if possible, to use the conflict resolution methods that are most likely to produce outcomes that are the intended objectives of the policies, programs, and projects they support. For example, relying on legal findings by formal judges or members of a jury may be highly effective, if the judgment is legitimate and enforceable. Leaders also recognize the merit of using other methods, such as mediation, to avoid some of the cost (to pocketbooks and relationships) of adversarial proceedings. Members of the African American Men Project are working with a committee of judges, corrections officials, and others to develop a community response to “liveability crimes,” such as street corner drug sales and prostitution, in poor neighborhoods. The solutions might include informal sanctions by community residents, mediation among neighbors, or restitution agreements.

Rules Governing Access A formal court usually has precise rules about selecting judges and juries, qualifications of lawyers and other officers of the court, types of cases it will consider, and in what format. Informal rules, such as a requirement that substantial funds be devoted to arguing a court case, also determine who has access to a formal court. Ethical leaders help constituents alter or take advantage of these rules so they can obtain a favorable verdict for their policy or program.

Helpful Tools We recommend two exercises for helping you or your group practice ethical leadership. Exercise 4.8 helps you analyze the ethical principles, laws, and norms that apply to the policies you support. Exercise 4.9 helps you assess the ethical leadership of an individual, group, organization, or network.

Exercise 4.8. Analyzing Ethical Principles, Laws, and Norms.

1. What ethical principles bestow legitimacy on the policies supported by our group or coalition?

2. How are these principles connected to “higher law,” such as widely shared religious beliefs, or international treaties and protocols?

3. What are we doing to enact these principles in our own words and deeds?

4. What laws and court decisions support our desired policies?

5. What norms might we expect key stakeholder groups to apply in support of our desired policies?

6. What conflicts exist among ethical principles, laws, and norms that are applicable to our desired policies?

7. How might we deal with these conflicts?

8. How might pertinent ethical principles, laws, and norms need to be reinterpreted or updated to apply to the current issues that concern us?

Exercise 4.9. Assessing Ethical Leadership Capacity. You may use this exercise to rate a group, an organization, or an interorganizational network. You may reword the questions to rate your own or another individual's ethical capacity.

If the exercise is done by a group, each member should fill in the ratings individually; the ratings can then be pooled to produce a group rating.

Respond to the questions by checking one of the three boxes after each.

When you are done with the ratings: For Working Alone

1. Develop a list of the ethical strengths of the individual, group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the ethical weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Also note which aspects of the items rated OK/Acceptably need improving.

4. Identify specific actions you can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

For Working in a Group 1. Develop a list of the ethical strengths of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that most group members rated Good/Well. Note a few of the reasons these items were ranked highly.

2. Develop a list of the ethical weaknesses of the group, organization, or network on the basis of the items that a majority of the group ranked Poor/Poorly. Note a few of the reasons these items were given a low ranking.

3. Identify and discuss aspects of other items that need improvement.

4. Agree on specific actions the group can take to build on the identified strengths and overcome identified weaknesses.

Summary Visionary leaders focus on creation and communication of shared meaning in formal and informal forums. To do this, they seize opportunities to be interpreters and direction givers in

a situation of uncertainty or difficulty, offer a compelling vision of the future, postpone a full-fledged vision during crisis, and adeptly design and use forums. Political leaders focus on making and implementing legislative, executive, and administrative policy decisions in formal and informal arenas. They mediate and shape conflict within and among constituencies; build winning, sustainable coalitions; overcome bureaucratic resistance; and adeptly design and use arenas. Ethical leaders educate others about ethics, constitutions, other laws, and norms; promote awareness of how ethical principles, constitutions, other laws, and norms apply to specific cases; adapt principles, laws, and norms to changing times; resolve conflict among principles, laws, and norms; and adeptly design and use courts.

The next chapter turns to the work of policy entrepreneurship—coordination of leadership tasks in the course of a major policy change effort. We also focus on discerning the common good.

(Crosby 120)

Crosby, Barbara C., John Bryson. Leadership for the Common Good: Tackling Public Problems in a Shared-Power World, 2nd Edition. John Wiley & Sons P&T, 08/2006. VitalBook file.

The citation provided is a guideline. Please check each citation for accuracy before use.