Colorado City Visioning Project

There are many examples of communities that have faced highly complex issues and reached their goals through sheer determination and a collaborative spirit. These communities succeeded in large part because they underwent an extensive, sometimes difficult planning process and persevered throughout the plan’s implementation. All sectors—government, business, nonprofit, and the citizens themselves—participated in the development of a common agenda. In addition, the community at large received ample opportunity to provide input. Because all sectors of these communities were involved in the creation and ongoing development of programs for the future, such programs received widespread support and encountered minimal resistance.

Some communities allow the future to happen to them. Successful communities recognize the future is something they can create. These communities take the time to produce a vision of the future they desire and employ a process that helps them achieve their goals. Achieving the future you desire is hard work. Yet successful communities understand that the things they dream about will only come true through great effort, determination and teamwork.

One way of achieving these community goals is through a community-visioning project. Such a process brings together all sectors of a community to identify problems, evaluate changing conditions, and build collective approaches to improve the quality of life in the community. The participants must define the definition of a community. Some projects define their community as a neighborhood; others a whole city or town; many projects have focused on regions that include multiple cities, towns, and counties.

COLLABORATION AND CONSENSUS ARE ESSENTIAL

Successful community efforts focus on ways in which business, government, nonprofits, and citizens work together. In reviewing successful collaborative efforts around the country, it has been found that all possess the following ingredients:

• People with varied interests and perspectives participated throughout the entire process and contributed to the final outcomes, lending credibility to the results.

• Traditional "power brokers" viewed other participants as peers.

• Individual agendas and baggage were set aside, so the focus remained on common issues and goals.

• Strong leadership came from all sectors and interests.

• All participants took personal responsibility for the process and its outcomes.

• The group produced very detailed recommendations that specified responsible parties, timelines, and costs.

• Individuals broke down racial, economic, and sector barriers and developed effective working relationships based on trust, understanding, and respect.

• Participants expected difficulty at certain points and realized it was a natural part of the process. When these frustrating times arose, they stepped up their commitment and worked harder to overcome those barriers.

• Projects were well timed—they were launched when other options to achieve the objective did not exist or were not working.

• Participants took the time to learn from past efforts (both successful and unsuccessful) and applied that learning to subsequent efforts.

• The group used consensus to reach desired outcomes.

These ingredients make up the essence of collaboration itself. True collaboration brings together many organizations, agencies, and individuals to define problems, create options, develop strategies, and implement solutions.

Because they typically involve larger groups, collaborative efforts help organizations rethink how they work, how they relate to the rest of the community, and what role they can play in implementing a common strategy. Many times it becomes clear that no single organization has the resources or mandate to effectively address a particular issue alone. A group effort can help mobilize the necessary resources and community will. Effective collaboration requires that decisions be made by consensus. In A World Waiting to Happen, M. Scott Peck describes consensus as:

a group decision (which some members may not feel is the best decision, but which they can all live with, support, and commit themselves not to undermine), arrived at without voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all members feel they have been adequately heard, in which everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees of influence by virtue on individual stubbornness or charisma are avoided so that all are satisfied with the process.

Though a consensus-based decision-making process takes more time on the front-end, it can save time during the back-end of the implementation phase of a visioning project where blocking ordinarily occurs. If citizens are provided a forum in which their ideas and opinions are heard, seriously considered, and incorporated into the action plan, they will be less inclined to resist or ignore new initiatives. Community “ownership” of a plan and willingness to assist in its implementation often corresponds directly with the public’s level of participation in the plan’s development. As a result, projects can be completed in timely fashion through the consensus-building process.

Stay tuned…