We had 30 people involved in the actual process. There were 3 kindergartners, 8 primary (1st & 2nd grade) children, 7 intermediate (3rd & 4th grade), 4 upper intermediate (5th grade), 3 paraprofessionals, 4 teachers, and 1 principal (me). The whole school gave us the information that we worked on (8 different suggestions). It was a three month process but it worked really well. The youngest children were Kindergarten (5 and 6 year olds). The only assistance they needed was in reading some of the points in the sheets that they were voting on and to help them record their comments. They could fill in the dots and sign their names. We did an explanation to everyone at the beginning describing the 5 choices or "Confused". When we did our Dotmocracy session, we had the 8 statements & Dotmocracy sheets on separate tables and each group had an adult to help with reading and writing for the younger children. We rotated when we knew that each group was done with the statement that they were looking at. We thought about posting but we found the rotation of the tables worked well. Attached below is the Power Point presentation created by the kids who participated.

I followed Dotmocracy exactly. I posted all our old goals and objectives on charts around the meeting room, along with the laws and policies that drive our TRCC. I posted Dotmocracy voting sheets next to them with related questions and proposed objectives. Due to the size of the group, in the end I had two breakout groups prioritize action items for our annual strategic plan update, using the completed Dotmocracy voting sheets and process. Two of us monitored the groups to keep them in the Dotmocracy process. I found it interesting that both breakout groups added objectives during the process. As a side observation, the group process also brought the disciplines closer together by discussing and solving mutual problems within the Dotmocracy structure. Each breakout group them made a presentation to the entire committee, which I tasked reconcile the lists and vote on the final. I started the process at the end of one meeting day, let it cook overnight, and brought them back to the process the following morning. Total elapsed time was probably about four hours.

As far as I know, it is the first time the group ever agreed on anything this complex in any amount of time, and the back end also identified some folks with leadership potential, and an expressed (1) surprise that they had the power to do these things, and (2) a desire to continue with the process in the future, which they memorialized as action item #10 in our strategic plan.

There are a lot of group facilitation plans out there. I stumbled on Dotmocracy in a Google search because I wasn't comfortable with others I've used. The well developed Dotmocracy process controls I credit most; in our disparate group of engineers and cops, the controls went a long way to keep focus in the group(s) without alienating anyone.

14 ideas were posted for answering question A, and 13 ideas for question B.

Approximately 30 people participated in the process over the period of about 1.5 hours.

Below are the compiled most popular and interesting results as interpreted by the facilator:

a) What are some most useful tips for dialogue and deliberation facilitators?

Collective agreement, in order of popularity:

• Set a tone and concept for discovering, curiosity, deep listening, in group conversations / dialog
  Comment: How?

• Remember to use silence to provide space for people to reflect during process
  Some comments: easy, personalize/internalize learning, promotes 'wisdom' , transformation if harvested

• Validate all group participants' ideas by annotation / documentation without value-laden input (i.e. with neutral stance)
  Comments: ...this works, ...small groups sometimes are more spontaneous

• Listen and support listening (by [non-violent behavior])
  Comments: Listen - learn, extraordinary power

• Find a co-facilitator or support person (system) when you are taking on much emotionally, complexity
  Comments: For back-up / support? diversity, assists in meeting progress, ...adds it's own complexity

• Very specific question ideas - Classify a short list of probable outcomes
  
  
  

Not enough dots to recognize popularity:

• Involve those with different views in framing / reframing the issue for dialogue or deliberation

• Remember to give space for 'voice' that are not nessarily verbal, linear, etc ([e.g.]. time to 'tune in' ground, with a natural object, etc.)

• Learn nonviolent communication

• Verify input and show you are listening well with 'what I hear you saying is...' statements where you summarize input. Then write it in a list.
  Concern: Let people say what they mean - don't always interpret.

b) What can be done to get more leaders to adopt dialogue and deliberation?

Collective agreement, in order of popularity:

• Show leaders an example that has [it] working Comment: Mentor and train people / build capacity

• Explore with them how it meets their interests

• Have them participate in an ongoing positive process to learn and care for others.
  Some comments: ..build openness..., Make it fun - sneak it in Concerns: willingness to participate, the won't take time to do this.

• Demonstrate and document outcomes in realted or similar environments.

• Demonstrate (statistically) how much time is save in council / meetings / staff time
  Some comments: ...show $ value of D & D, Will this move the leaders?, Too bureaucratic not a dialogue.

• Identify funding from foundations for govt's to engage in D & D.
  Weaknesses: Identify alone - enough? Show value, money follows, Need to get them engaged.

Not enough dots to recognize popularity:

• Demonstrate potential for leaders to appear in media

• Develop a dynamic video presentation showing D & D in action and benefits, distribute to leaders.

• Pester them! Kidnap, Blackmail, mail overload, paparazzi style invasion

• Deveop lots of communication with people to establish a dialogue