OCIC 2006

OCIC 2006 Group Dotting

in
OCIC 2006 Group DottingWe had three walls full of posted ideas. It seems you can never have too much wall space.

OCIC 2006 - sheet taped to a sheet

in
OCIC 2006 - sheet taped to a sheetHere the authors cut out their original draft idea and taped it to the dotmocracy sheet. This seemed to work well and saved them time, although it makes archiving the orginal sheet a bit more awkward.

OCIC 2006 - Example of "Confusion"

in
OCIC 2006 - Example of "Confusion"Here you can see most participants were not clear on the meaning of the written idea. A facilitator could remove such an idea from dotting to keep from wasting more participant time, and potentially ask for the author to write a revision that clarifies the idea.

2006 Ontario Council for International Cooperation (OCIC) Youth Symposium

in
Summary: 
Dotmocracy process was used at the end of a two-day symposium to find agreement on a concrete project the group could move forward on.
Date / Time: 
February 2006, 2 hour portion of a meeting
Name of Facilitator(s): 
Jason Diceman
Total number of ideas dotted: 
98
Number of participants: 
45
Preamble: 

ROUND ONE: Resources and Results


1. What are the resources, stengths and opportunities available through out your network?
2. What are the results your network could achieve to help eradicate extreme poverty and hunger within the next 4-8 months?


ROUND TWO: Project Ideas

1. What projects should your network take on to achieve these results?

Details: 

In February 2006 Co-op Tools facilitated a two hour dotmocracy process among 45 high school student leaders and a few NGO representatives for the Ontario Council for International Cooperation (OCIC) Youth Symposium. The group produced a total of 98 ideas, including 24 agreed Results they think are achievable, 30 agreed Resources they have at their disposal and 16 Projects they agree would worth initiating. The final Projects were then turned into an online survey where participants voted to give direction for a decided single hybrid project.

See images from the event

Learnings: 

Originally I had planned two additional rounds:

ROUND THREE: Organizing Plans (one break-out group per a project)
1. What are the organizating structures required for each selected project?
How are decisions made? How is collaboration orchestrated? How are efforts managed? How do
participants communicate with eachother? What are the key required roles?

ROUND FOUR: Commitment
1. Each selected project is post on chart paper and participants are invited to sign up under various
roles, e.g. steering committee, technician, campaigner, supporter, funder.

But once the process was underway, I realized this was not realistic within the limited time. People also started leaving to catch trains and beat traffic.

I'm not sure the first round was that helpful either. It might have been better to just go straight to project ideas, assuming that participants would already know what projects would make effective use of their potential to achieve results, or maybe including defined resources and results in the preamble.

I also found the participants were quite tired from a long two days of group activity. We used an erergizer excerize that helped, but ideally the process would have been done earlier in the day.

 

Syndicate content