Differentiators

Thoroughness and rigor are hallmarks of our work

Ten unique and powerful features designed to support your planning and problem solving

Your poor experiences with participatory or stakeholder engagement processes in the past left you a little jaded and somewhat resistant to trying something new. You also know you need to find a participatory process that works – there is untapped wisdom you must harness, and its reinforces the culture you want to build.

Our implementation of Structured Democratic Dialogue is unique because:

  1. You and the stakeholders are responsible for context knowledge (knowing the environment in which your problems exists), and providing the content within the design from start to finish – we control the process
  2. We perform thorough analyses to identify and involve all the required, diverse stakeholders – whatever solution is designed will fail without representation from all of the needed perspectives
  3. Everyone at the table is equal – positional power dissipates because each idea matters regardless of who authored it
  4. The entire group owns the model they collectively create of the system – a strong social contract is built
  5. The dialogue is supported by software that makes the process possible – with its algorithms, people think clearly and efficiently find the systemic relationships that exist
  6. The discovery of how ideas influence or enhance each other truly define the points of systemic leverage – only knowing the importance people place on ideas leads to erroneous priorities
  7. Nothing is lost – each idea, each voting result, each explanation is preserved
  8. Nothing is cast in stone – everything can be modified as people learn more
  9. The methodology was honed and documented over 40 years of research from a variety of academic and social sectors
  10. It works!!!

A taste of the depth backing up the top 10 features

In our work, groups will inevitably construct a systems map that will point toward deep drivers of opportunity or challenge.  Unlike methods which seek to focus a group on a small set of items receiving the highest vote count, our methodology presents all favored ideas in a map.  Participants do not vote on items to “anoint” them the deep drivers. In our work, the group makes a series of decisions about significant relationships between pairs of items. At the conclusion, participants then “discover” the deep drivers when the computer displays the systems map generated by these small decisions.

By recording strong agreement within a group and assuring that strong agreement will be structured as a systems map, consensus emerges rather than having it forced upon the group.  This unique feature of our practice has powerful implications for situations where implementation of solutions requires authentic collaboration.