Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
marine_colab:workshop_20151125 [2015-11-27 09:36] – maja | marine_colab:workshop_20151125 [2015-12-01 11:55] – [Framing] maja | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | ==== Workshop | + | ==== Marine CoLABoration |
- | At the London Zoo | + | A [[start|Marine CoLAB]] workshop held at the London Zoo |
==== Participants ===== | ==== Participants ===== | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Facilitators: | Facilitators: | ||
- | ==== Framing ==== | + | This is the last workshop of the first year of [[start|Marine CoLAB]]. Louisa Hooper compared it to standing at the seashore at low tide, with rocks and mud emerging under water, so we can begin to see the peaks, as well as what underlies them. One of the biggest challenges for this workshop and the coming year is how to do less with game-changing effectiveness. It is important to look at the big picture as well well as the practicalities of the months and year(s) to come. |
- | This is the last workshop of the first year of Marine CoLAB. Louisa Hooper compared it to standing at the seashore at low tide, with rocks and mud emerging under water, so we can begin to see the peaks, as well as what underlies them. One of the biggest challenges for this workshop and the coming year is how to do less with game-changing effectiveness. It is important to look at the big picture as well well as the practicalities of the months and year(s) to come. | + | {{> |
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Framing ==== | ||
Maja Kuzmanovic looked back over the notes of the past year and distilled a few points from previous discussions on the future of Marine CoLAB, that can be used as a starting point or a point of discussion, when looking forward to 2016 and beyond. Marine CoLAB participants are keen to seize opportunities to reframe challenges and refresh whole systems. They do this by being a part of trusted collaborations and networks. After a year of working together, the facilitators added that the participants are very keen to and good at designing and working on projects. | Maja Kuzmanovic looked back over the notes of the past year and distilled a few points from previous discussions on the future of Marine CoLAB, that can be used as a starting point or a point of discussion, when looking forward to 2016 and beyond. Marine CoLAB participants are keen to seize opportunities to reframe challenges and refresh whole systems. They do this by being a part of trusted collaborations and networks. After a year of working together, the facilitators added that the participants are very keen to and good at designing and working on projects. | ||
Line 19: | Line 23: | ||
Over the course of several workshops, a range of challenges for Marine CoLAB were identified, including systemic change, public engagement, valuing (cultural dimensions) of oceans, perception of marine conservation, | Over the course of several workshops, a range of challenges for Marine CoLAB were identified, including systemic change, public engagement, valuing (cultural dimensions) of oceans, perception of marine conservation, | ||
- | Finally, before delving into the futures, mission, values and a range of experiments, | + | Finally, before delving into the futures, mission, values and a range of experiments, |
+ | |||
+ | ==== Agenda ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | In the morning the participants focused om Marine CoLAB as a whole. Beginning with reflecting on **Marine CoLAB so far**: what worked and what needs more work. Grounded in this experience they moved into a visioning process lead by Giles to clarify the overall **Marine CoLAB vision and mission**. At the end of the morning Sue took the group through a beautiful presentation and discussion of the **values based approach**, as a lens that can be used to shape and evaluate projects, experiments and the initiative itself. In the afternoon, the focus was on **Marine CoLAB project incubator**, | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ====Marine CoLAB so far==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | === What worked? === | ||
+ | |||
+ | == People == | ||
+ | * Supportive and energising group of people; Imaginative, | ||
+ | * Open - want to be doing this; Openness of everyone in embracing something new - nice people | ||
+ | * Enthusiasm, engagement and energy of members during LAB meetings | ||
+ | * Broad range of skills, expertise and organisation; | ||
+ | * Good balance of personalities | ||
+ | * Willingness to communicate | ||
+ | * Good size of group | ||
+ | * Good vibes! | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Time & space to explore === | ||
+ | * Flexibility, | ||
+ | * Time spent together without explicit xxx/ | ||
+ | * Thinking about issues from different perspectives | ||
+ | * Lack of territoriality and competition | ||
+ | * Building connections within the group | ||
+ | * Time, workshops to explore - facilitation has helped | ||
+ | * New dimensions brought in from CGF (e.g. other labs and communities) | ||
+ | * Workshops in stimulating environments - allowing us to think outside our daily / OP’s (?) | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Community building == | ||
+ | * Listening and finding out about different ways we create change | ||
+ | * A clearer sense of each other and the interests from our organisations | ||
+ | * We are trying to understand each others’ strengths and see how working together could add value | ||
+ | * Building a sense of vision and ambition | ||
+ | * The team is becoming more confidently creative and innovative - sharing and talking more - developing a TRUSTED network; Trust each other to share ideas, thoughts strengths and weaknesses - no territoriality | ||
+ | * Self-organising - members of the team are taking the lead on aspects of work - shared leadership | ||
+ | * Individual initiative starts the ball rolling (e.g. Heather - Plastics, Giles - Vision/ | ||
+ | * Finding a common project (e.g. Plastic pollution) to get our teeth into a specific challenge, that uses existing skills and interests - sum bigger than parts. | ||
+ | * Mix of work and social | ||
+ | * Developing new networks and relationships; | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Support == | ||
+ | |||
+ | * CGF: Hands-on engagement, support and guidance of Louisa and CGF, their agility and responsiveness (e.g. supporting conference attendance(? | ||
+ | * Facilitators: | ||
+ | * Connections of the group to ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | === What needs more work? === | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Time! == | ||
+ | * Time to deliver our potential of all ideas and projects | ||
+ | * Finding enough time to engage outside of project ideas are not core business | ||
+ | * More time thinking and developing a framework for evaluation | ||
+ | * Retain energy over longer term; retain energy once in project delivery mode | ||
+ | * Communication between meetings; time to do things and connect between meetings (though it is happening); Embedding CoLAB work between workshops - last minute flurry of preparation for each one. | ||
+ | * Information overload - not always possible to digest what is shared | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == CoLAB == | ||
+ | * Define a sense of direction | ||
+ | * Clarity of vision and objectives | ||
+ | * Application of value frame to other work | ||
+ | * Come back to CGF’s aim valuing the oceans and thinking about strategies to tackle this directly - not getting caught in the " | ||
+ | * Developing ideas/ | ||
+ | * Identify the best skills and input a Marcolab project can give to specific needs | ||
+ | * Bringing in more of an "arts + culture" | ||
+ | * Articulation of where Marine CoLAB fits with other initiatives | ||
+ | * Structure to support without becoming burdensome machine | ||
+ | * Need to figure out how to enable effective communication (between individuals, | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | == Communication and stakeholder engagement == | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Clearly communicating what the Marine CoLAB is and does | ||
+ | * Connecting beyond the LAB, both with LAB organisations and other orgs. | ||
+ | * Promotion of ideas and approaches to wider community | ||
+ | * Connecting to other things happening at CGF: other projects and areas of work CGF supports + learning from other work CGF supported | ||
+ | * System to enable dissemination of thoughts and approaches and coalesce (?) | ||
+ | * (fishermen, mpa’s, pollution) | ||
+ | * Ability to integrate others in some aspects, without losing cohesion of the group | ||
+ | * Creative communications - communicating complex concepts, training… | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Connect to organisations == | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Dedicated staff | ||
+ | * In-house skills and capacity for four group projects | ||
+ | * Us as individuals in CoLAB vs us as organisation; | ||
+ | * Understanding how to manage and maximise positive feedback into participating organisations | ||
+ | |||
+ | === What can we improve? === | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Get better at knowing "who we are, where we go and how we do it". | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Organisational buy-in == | ||
+ | * Engage not just individuals, | ||
+ | * Clarifying the strategic lines of work of Marine CoLAB (3 lines?) | ||
+ | * Offering value add (e.g. building effective collaborations) | ||
+ | * Try to find a common agenda that all organisations would be interested in | ||
+ | * If Marine CoLAB activities can fit into day-to-day agendas of existing work in the participating organisations, | ||
+ | * Think about the structure of the collaboration and how it could overlap with organisational missions, activities and strategies. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Sustainability == | ||
+ | * innovation | ||
+ | * collaboration | ||
+ | * projects | ||
+ | * Core funding is likely to be needed for Marine CoLAB as a whole, as some of the organisations are only funded on a project basis, so do not have the capacity to offer people’s time. While it is important to get Marine CoLAB projects funded, the benefit of the collaboration needs the CoLAB as a whole funded as well. | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Communication == | ||
+ | |||
+ | (within organisations, | ||
+ | * Focus outwards | ||
+ | * Create a thought piece explaining something like "this is the benefit of 12 months of Marine CoLAB", | ||
+ | Communicate how it affected ways of working, what effects it had on specific projects, potential long term value for oceans, etc. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ====Future of Marine CoLAB==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | ====Mission / MIX==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | ( cross reference w. Giles' notes ) | ||
+ | |||
+ | * network focused on values based solutions to protect & restore the ocean | ||
+ | * a collective is a powerful means to address the urgent need for humans to value the oceans & drive change | ||
+ | * we aim to achieve a shift in how the ocean is valued by individuals and society to improve ocean health | ||
+ | |||
+ | * recognising existing values, rather than changing or creating ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * we tackle the issues by collaborating, | ||
+ | |||
+ | * s/ | ||
+ | * values based -> USP | ||
+ | * requires time-frame? | ||
+ | |||
+ | * we aim to achieve | ||
+ | * organisations all have a theory of change, glue is the values based piece... | ||
+ | * as a lab, how do we experiment with strategies? | ||
+ | * economic shift? perceptual shifts? | ||
+ | |||
+ | * clearer ideas for methods to ' | ||
+ | * behaviour shift as a result of uncovering existing values, finding where values & behaviour are at odds. | ||
+ | * something for 2016 -> values based campaigning (chris rose ? also NEF) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Values based approach==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | |||
+ | There is a need to find a language all Marine CoLAB participants understand, paying attention to jargon. There is a difference between the term " | ||
+ | |||
+ | In order to uncover deeper values, we need to start with basic connectedness (of people and places, different disciplines, | ||
+ | |||
+ | * developing a shared language based around values we can use to communicate within the group | ||
+ | * ' | ||
+ | * uncovering existing values, aligning values | ||
+ | * issue based theory of change -> value based | ||
+ | * bringing various voices, with various values into discussion | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Project Incubator==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | |||
+ | (cross reference with Aniol' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * ways to identify strategic lines of work | ||
+ | * list of relevant projects | ||
+ | * marine safe | ||
+ | * coastal partnership network | ||
+ | * Thames river academy (educational projects) | ||
+ | * beach watch | ||
+ | * capturing the value of our coast (citizen science, data collection) | ||
+ | * capacity building at FFI (new educational programmes, masters, adult ed. etc) | ||
+ | * strengthening NGO capacity in Portugal (aniol) | ||
+ | * common ground (community voice project followup, biz case for marine resource mgmt) | ||
+ | * MPA programme (increase in capacity for creating marine protected areas) | ||
+ | * (FFI co-management approach) | ||
+ | * sustainable seafood in Portugal (MCS & Client Earth - reducing unlawful fishing) | ||
+ | * ocean schools (ocean awareness as part of general knowledge, general education) | ||
+ | * # | ||
+ | * Blue New Deal | ||
+ | * diverting EU marine funding to 'good things' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * three main groupings | ||
+ | * opportunities around MPA & spatial planning, policy related | ||
+ | * schools, training & educational projects | ||
+ | * exporting knowledge & support / capacity building | ||
+ | * (global wave conference) | ||
+ | * capturing the value of our coast -> possible focus for various experiments, | ||
+ | * rethinking projects in terms of value lens, changes of impact with contributions from other partners | ||
+ | * time-line and potential interactions between projects (dependencies....) | ||
+ | |||
+ | * next steps | ||
+ | * find specific ways for marine colab to inform existing and new projects, either as advisers, | ||
+ | * write up value space for each project -> further mapping | ||
+ | * Aniol to compile & reformat existing info by end of the week | ||
+ | * edits, additions and value prompt to be submitted by Dec. 4th | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Game On!==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | |||
+ | * (cross reference with Sandy' | ||
+ | * ideas that have surfaced / developed | ||
+ | * challenge; how/when to engage the pubic to change rules / process | ||
+ | * concluded that the first experiment was not so game focused, perhaps more suitable as a training tool | ||
+ | * perhaps better to focus on more general 'ocean awareness' | ||
+ | * two main options | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * influence exiting game devs or filmmakers / ocean ' | ||
+ | * current strands | ||
+ | * coached lab space to develop game(s) and/or app(s) | ||
+ | * develop add ons to existing games | ||
+ | * develop games as tie ins to other games/ | ||
+ | * BBC docos, google ocean, natgeo, etc | ||
+ | * mainstream marine conservation game (cf. beyond (..?) rising tide - maxis?) | ||
+ | * games can also be used as fund-raising vehicles | ||
+ | * simple experiments to test ides -> scale | ||
+ | * possible direction | ||
+ | -> sim city like versions of initial scenarios (workshop 1) | ||
+ | * three existing options for progress / requiring feedback | ||
+ | * small lab games (c.f fish hackathon) | ||
+ | * advantage; existing format, easier to test assumptions with small games, process based learning | ||
+ | * disadvantage; | ||
+ | * full on game | ||
+ | * advantage; AR tech becoming cheaper & easier to create, existing research from BBC on AR in education, potentially wide audience, amplification. | ||
+ | * disadvantage; | ||
+ | * questions; target audience? SIM-MPA? | ||
+ | * marine game/film leadership | ||
+ | * advantage; might be scope for a 'think tank' with more general (less issue/ | ||
+ | good time for BBC Oceans, influence through others. how to maintain contact with influencers | ||
+ | * disadvantage; | ||
+ | * ZSL project, virtual Chagos, funding during 2016. British, controversial, | ||
+ | * interest | ||
+ | * giles, testing assumptions, | ||
+ | * heather, perhaps as a masters project for students {Exeter uni, Chagos project) | ||
+ | * mirella, perhaps more preliminary research to see which option is most promising | ||
+ | * MSC, existing contacts (octonauts) potential test audience. | ||
+ | * next steps; | ||
+ | * potential research questions, masters topics. | ||
+ | * sandy, sue & heather draft a few paragraphs re. research scope etc. "next week" | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ====Plastics project==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{> | ||
+ | |||
+ | * successful funding proposal | ||
+ | * mayoral election in may 2016 | ||
+ | * focus as a marine project rather than just about ' | ||
+ | * " | ||
+ | * closer look at what has failed, expected backlash, sustainability, | ||
+ | * required; project implementation plan, timeline, external deadlines. kickoff meeting (before xmas) | ||
+ | * collaborative structure; | ||
+ | * 2 ppl full time - project mgmt at ZSL (via Project Oceans), narrative & communication TEP | ||
+ | * FF interns & some staff for research & background, active mapping process | ||
+ | * governance? overview committee, advisory group | ||
+ | * connections with existing NGOs working in ' | ||
+ | * Emma Cunningham re. stakeholder interviews, industry, NGOs, etc | ||
+ | * how to ensure 'best advice' | ||
+ | * strategy for mayoral candidates | ||
+ | * establish list of allies, existing contacts and relevant conversations, | ||
+ | * any upcoming 'big things' | ||
+ | * start compling hideous facts about single use bottles | ||
+ | * potential case studies (selfridges, | ||
+ | * how do we explicitly test values based research? | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Planning 2016==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 10 days of time is covered per organisation | ||
+ | * how best to structure the time? | ||
+ | * smaller, structured meetings around particular topics/ | ||
+ | * aggregating projects (mapping), specific project (plastics) | ||
+ | * discuss learning which emerges from projects | ||
+ | * what can we teach each other | ||
+ | * sometime for thinking about wider issues, larger context, incubation of vague ideas. | ||
+ | * time to proactively communicate, | ||
+ | * better integration of partners into project proposals -> more explicit collaborations | ||
+ | * clarify evidence base for the lab, both process and projects | ||
+ | * collaboration as an improvement over competition for limited resources | ||
+ | * how can new/other partners get involved in the future? | ||
+ | * more focus on strategy, strategy work team, external communication | ||
+ | * 4~6 days of meetings of entire group | ||
+ | * (cf. global strategy for sharks) | ||
+ | * added value of open thinking space, facilitated structure | ||
+ | * further work required on values, strategy, project updates, planning, evaluation. | ||
+ | * circulate set of objectives, further ideas | ||
+ | * what does a lab community look like? | ||
+ | * strategy for engagement? | ||
+ | * clear criteria for 'a lab project'? | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====Next Steps==== | ||
+ | * project mapping | ||
+ | * write up value space for each project -> further mapping | ||
+ | * Aniol to compile & reformat existing info by end of the week | ||
+ | * edits, additions and value prompt to be submitted by Dec. 4th | ||
+ | * Game On! | ||
+ | * potential research questions, masters topics. | ||
+ | * Sandy, Sue & Heather draft a few paragraphs re. research scope etc. "next week" | ||
+ | * Plastics | ||
+ | * schedule next meetings, brainstorming, | ||
+ | * project implementation plan, timeline, external deadlines. kickoff meeting (before xmas) | ||
+ | * establish list of existing contacts and relevant conversations, | ||
+ | * 2016 and further | ||
+ | * write a few paragraphs about how Marine CoLab has changed/ | ||
+ | * circulate set of objectives, further ideas | ||
+ | * each participant to write a one page year in review by xmas -> send to louisa |