Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
marine_colab:reflection_meeting [2016-02-15 11:17] – [FoAM's Lab Approach] maja | marine_colab:reflection_meeting [2017-01-11 23:50] (current) – maja | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Present: Louisa Hooper, Margaret Bolton, Esther Goodwin Brown, Vali Lalioti, Maja Kuzmanovic and Nik Gaffney | Present: Louisa Hooper, Margaret Bolton, Esther Goodwin Brown, Vali Lalioti, Maja Kuzmanovic and Nik Gaffney | ||
- | |||
==== CGF aims ==== | ==== CGF aims ==== | ||
- | Marine environment is complex, multi-stakeholder, | + | Marine environment is complex, multi-stakeholder, |
* Effective flows of knowledge (to deepen understanding of the role of the ocean on human wellbeing, as well as to better understand priorities for action and inspire others to act in new ways) | * Effective flows of knowledge (to deepen understanding of the role of the ocean on human wellbeing, as well as to better understand priorities for action and inspire others to act in new ways) | ||
* Improved collaborations and shared learning across borders, sectors and disciplines (to improve sharing and managing ocean resources) | * Improved collaborations and shared learning across borders, sectors and disciplines (to improve sharing and managing ocean resources) | ||
Line 17: | Line 16: | ||
Objectives: | Objectives: | ||
- | * identify | + | * identify |
* establish a cross sector platform, which would include: | * establish a cross sector platform, which would include: | ||
- | * programme of workshops between | + | * programme of workshops between |
- | * portfolio of projects; new, existing, joint, synergies with GOI [to foster collaboration and innovation and be enabled by flexible funding and evaluation schemes] | + | * portfolio of projects; new, existing, joint, synergies with GOI (to foster collaboration and innovation and be enabled by flexible funding and evaluation schemes) |
* an evolving, learning community | * an evolving, learning community | ||
* design an evaluation and dissemination plan | * design an evaluation and dissemination plan | ||
Line 27: | Line 26: | ||
==== FoAM's Lab Approach ==== | ==== FoAM's Lab Approach ==== | ||
- | To meet CGF's aims FoAM proposed a [[/ | + | To meet CGF's aims FoAM proposed a [[marine_colab/ |
* a lab/ | * a lab/ | ||
* a portfolio of projects/ | * a portfolio of projects/ | ||
- | The [[/ | + | The [[marine_colab/ |
=== Scoping phase === | === Scoping phase === | ||
Line 39: | Line 38: | ||
==Workshop 1: Questions, vision, co-creation [January 2015]== | ==Workshop 1: Questions, vision, co-creation [January 2015]== | ||
* Before the workshop collect a set of 'key questions' | * Before the workshop collect a set of 'key questions' | ||
- | * Begin the workshop from personal experiences related to the core question | + | * Begin the workshop from personal experiences related to the core question |
- | * Mapping what is know and what is unknown about valuing the oceans | + | * Mapping what is known and what is unknown about valuing the ocean in the group |
* Uncovering emerging trends important for the CoLAB [critical uncertainties: | * Uncovering emerging trends important for the CoLAB [critical uncertainties: | ||
* Designing four alternative scenarios and answers to the core question. All focused on connections, | * Designing four alternative scenarios and answers to the core question. All focused on connections, | ||
Line 48: | Line 47: | ||
* Look at current challenges the individuals and their organisations are facing, to uncover patterns in the sector | * Look at current challenges the individuals and their organisations are facing, to uncover patterns in the sector | ||
* Form hypothesis based on existing challenges and form groups to begin exploring them | * Form hypothesis based on existing challenges and form groups to begin exploring them | ||
- | * Design iterative experiments to test the hypotheses and learn about each other and the LAB approach in practice, through short [3 months] collaborations | + | * Design iterative experiments to (1) test the hypotheses and (2) learn about each other and the LAB approach in practice, through short [3 months] collaborations |
==Workshop 3: Experimentation, | ==Workshop 3: Experimentation, | ||
* Identify emerging themes [from current work and Marine CoLAB experiments]: | * Identify emerging themes [from current work and Marine CoLAB experiments]: | ||
* Continue developing existing experiments, | * Continue developing existing experiments, | ||
- | * Test experimental approach in a 'pre-enactment' [an experiential futures technique], a role-playing exercise with ' | + | * Test experimental approach in a 'prehearsal' [an experiential futures technique], a role-playing exercise with ' |
- | * Complete design of experiments and create implementation | + | * Complete design of experiments and create implementation |
==Workshop 4: Reflection, Looking back and looking forward [July 2015]== | ==Workshop 4: Reflection, Looking back and looking forward [July 2015]== | ||
* Clarify learning from [results and process of] experiments | * Clarify learning from [results and process of] experiments | ||
- | * Introduce collaborative processes for enabling scaling up experiments using an iterative approach | + | * Introduce collaborative processes for enabling scaling up experiments using an iterative approach, such as backcasting, |
* Evaluate the experiments and Marine CoLAB scoping phase [using the adaptive action cycle technique] | * Evaluate the experiments and Marine CoLAB scoping phase [using the adaptive action cycle technique] | ||
Line 70: | Line 69: | ||
* Field-work [proposed: learning journeys] | * Field-work [proposed: learning journeys] | ||
* Important: mix of formal sessions, field trips to the sea and different forms of socialising [joint meals, long bus ride, site visits, shared experiences [exhibition, | * Important: mix of formal sessions, field trips to the sea and different forms of socialising [joint meals, long bus ride, site visits, shared experiences [exhibition, | ||
- | * Begin co-creation | + | * Begin articulation |
- | * Mapping of MarCoLAB Incubator including existing projects by participants, | + | * Mapping of MarCoLAB Incubator including existing projects by participants, |
* Implementation plan for the proposal to the OAK Foundation. | * Implementation plan for the proposal to the OAK Foundation. | ||
==Workshop 6: Marine CoLAB past, present and future [November 2015]== | ==Workshop 6: Marine CoLAB past, present and future [November 2015]== | ||
- | * Evaluate | + | * Evaluation |
* Clarify mission and vision of Marine CoLAB | * Clarify mission and vision of Marine CoLAB | ||
- | * Dig into the values connecting people and oceans [and the values based approach] | + | * Delve deeper |
* Map existing and emerging MarCoLAB incubator projects, with in-depth discussions of SUPB Free London and Game On | * Map existing and emerging MarCoLAB incubator projects, with in-depth discussions of SUPB Free London and Game On | ||
Line 84: | Line 83: | ||
* Mission | * Mission | ||
* Lab strategy (action learning cycle) | * Lab strategy (action learning cycle) | ||
- | * Incubator of experiments [including an update on SUPB Free London] | + | * Incubator of experiments [including an update on SUPB Free London] |
Line 106: | Line 105: | ||
==Strengths== | ==Strengths== | ||
* group -> team | * group -> team | ||
- | * adaptive collaboration | + | * adaptive collaboration |
* multi-day residential trips | * multi-day residential trips | ||
* connecting people | * connecting people | ||
* drive to embrace big ambitions | * drive to embrace big ambitions | ||
- | * not just doing, but being | + | * not just doing (experiments, |
==Challenges== | ==Challenges== | ||
- | * moving | + | * moving |
- | * over commitment and lack of time | + | * shortage |
* (divergent) values (based approach) | * (divergent) values (based approach) | ||
==Learning== | ==Learning== | ||
- | * Hypothesis: playful co-creation brings people together (proven) | + | * Hypothesis: playful co-creation brings people together (established) |
- | * Hypothesis: multi-day | + | * Hypothesis: multi-day site-specific |
* Hypothesis: systems change | * Hypothesis: systems change | ||
* maybe it would help if the 'lab approach' | * maybe it would help if the 'lab approach' | ||
- | * this is a longer process than expected, with more resistance | + | * this was a longer process than expected, with more resistance |
* it helps to have an environment in which it is safe to experiment, but this takes a lot of time to create | * it helps to have an environment in which it is safe to experiment, but this takes a lot of time to create | ||
* the participants had difficulty to design experiments in iterative ways | * the participants had difficulty to design experiments in iterative ways | ||
* possibly due to experts preferring to avoid getting out of their comfort zone, especially when they don’t know each other | * possibly due to experts preferring to avoid getting out of their comfort zone, especially when they don’t know each other | ||
* Hypothesis: Ambitious projects can be gradually reduced in risk through iterative, experimental, | * Hypothesis: Ambitious projects can be gradually reduced in risk through iterative, experimental, | ||
- | * learn form failure | + | * learn from failure |
- | * never have to go back to scratch | + | * not have to go back to scratch |
- | * needs appropriate documentation and evaluation | + | * requires |
- | * Hypothesis: 2nd cycle will transition | + | * Hypothesis: 2nd cycle will facilitate |
* facilitators should become redundant | * facilitators should become redundant | ||
- | * group takes more ownership of the process | + | * group takes more ownership of the process, become collectively engaged, |
- | * Hypothesis: there needs to be continuous evaluation and adaptation (proven) | + | * Hypothesis: there needs to be continuous evaluation and adaptation (established) |
* Hypothesis: lab approach can get to an operational plan quicker than using other methods (to be tested and compared with other initiatives) | * Hypothesis: lab approach can get to an operational plan quicker than using other methods (to be tested and compared with other initiatives) | ||
- | * Hypothesis: being able to take lab learning back into organisations (to be evaluated more formally; it appears to be happening from the testimonials and informal conversations) | + | * Hypothesis: being able to take lab learning back into organisations (to be evaluated more formally; it appears to be happening from testimonials and informal conversations) |
Line 141: | Line 140: | ||
Methods that CGF and/or FoAM have experience with: | Methods that CGF and/or FoAM have experience with: | ||
- | * In general, trying to find ways of using logic and planning tools 'in reverse' | + | * In general, trying to find ways of using logic and planning tools 'in reverse' |
* Direct feedback; listening circle, step-in step-back, Japanese post-its, debriefing, reflecting in a group | * Direct feedback; listening circle, step-in step-back, Japanese post-its, debriefing, reflecting in a group | ||
* Written reports: Evaluation templates, qualitative evaluation | * Written reports: Evaluation templates, qualitative evaluation | ||
Line 149: | Line 148: | ||
* Adaptive Action Cycle (what, so what, now what) | * Adaptive Action Cycle (what, so what, now what) | ||
* Ethnographic approaches: participant-observer, | * Ethnographic approaches: participant-observer, | ||
- | * Theory of change (both as design/ | + | * Theory of change (both as design/ |
* Outcome mapping | * Outcome mapping | ||
* 'Most significant change’ | * 'Most significant change’ | ||
Line 161: | Line 160: | ||
* ' | * ' | ||
* User / developer research (interviews, | * User / developer research (interviews, | ||
- | * Evaluating unknowns (the black animals ( swan, elephant, jellyfish)) | + | * Evaluating unknowns (with the black animals (swans, elephants & jellyfish)) |
- | * The ' | + | * The ' |
Challenge: finding appropriate ways of evaluating dynamic aspects of an initiative; the dynamics has to be present in the evaluation model as well. | Challenge: finding appropriate ways of evaluating dynamic aspects of an initiative; the dynamics has to be present in the evaluation model as well. | ||
Line 173: | Line 171: | ||
* [[http:// | * [[http:// | ||
* [[http:// | * [[http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
| | ||