AJD
|
Re:charles style nominees - 2007/03/08 16:41
As author of "blinkered" I would like first to thank you for your thread. Lewes Matters can only survive with continual input from all shades of opinion.
I should also confirm that my "grump" is with the managers of the visioning process, not with any of the stakeholders, even those where I doubt the wisdom of their inclusion.
Our problems with the visioning process stem from the simple fact that LDC and several of the stakeholders have very different understandings of the meaning of the word "vision" when used in conjunction with public consultation.
Here is a definition provided by an experienced professional facilitator:
Visioning & public consultation
"Visioning is a process that draws on imagination, inspiration and aspiration to define and achieve a desirable future. Its focus is not on what has gone on in the past, but draws on the best that participants can imagine for the future. Visioning is a means of creating inclusion and collaboration in a diverse group, while helping to guide change, the development of strategy and long term plans.
It is an open process where the outcome is not pre-determined. Instead, the way forward is produced as a result of the process. It is only possible when contributors approach it in the spirit of cooperation, when each has an equal voice and personal agendas are set aside.
Visioning is used when: an integration of a wide variety of ideas is required; a range of potential solutions are needed; participation for developing a long-range plan is wanted; a democratically derived consensus is desired."
The visioning process we have seen so far appears to be a process where preconceived plans may be given the "visioning rubber stamp of approval".
I hasten to add that this comment is mine as an individual, rather than as spokesman for Lewes Matters
|
