Current Shareware 1994 January/SHAR194.ISO/misc/effact14.zip/EFFACT.TX3

Text File | 1993-03-19 | 49KB | 752 lines

          SECTION  # 9:  STRATEGY ROLE PLAYING SESSION: KEY TECHNIQUE:

STRATEGY ROLE PLAYING SESSION:
        Gather your Core Group together for a Strategy Role Playing Session.
State your proposal and ask yourselves what is the strategy behind this
proposal?  What do you hope to accomplish?  Then go through each of the key
groups that you've identified for Role Playing and role play their reaction to
your proposal.  How would you react if you were them?  This means that you go
out of your way to look for the worst case scenarios because you'd rather find
problems in Role Playing than after you have already taken action.  The
Strategy Role Playing Session is designed to answer in detail the question:
 What will happen if we do this?
  ** Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y 13625 **
EXAMPLE: STRATEGY ROLE PLAYING SESSION:
        The low altitude flight Core Group proposed an action for
consideration in the Strategy Role Playing Session.  Proposal: the group will
come out opposed to the flight path and rally support to that position.  Each
of the Key Groups identified as likely to be involved in the issue were role
played for their reaction to this proposal:

RURAL NONFARM OUTSIDERS:
        It was decided by role playing that this key group would, in general,
strongly support the proposal.  In fact, some members of this group would want
to extend the position to outright opposition to the military in general.
This group, though highly motivated, made up a very small percentage of the
people in the flight path (perhaps less than 10 percent).
  **
RURAL NON FARM LOCALS AND FARMERS:
        These 2 groups accounted for the vast majority of the people in the
flight path.  Role Playing suggested that they looked to the military as a
source of educational and economic opportunity.  Many had relatives or friends
who had been in the military.  Early contact suggested that opposition to the
flight path would be interpreted as opposition to the military by members of
these groups.  If opposition to the flights was interpreted as opposition to
the military by a significant number of these people then the issue would
focus on the pro military vs anti military question instead of the effects of
the flights on the people in the flight path.  If the issue was raised in
these terms, then these 2 groups could be expected to strongly support the
military position.

GENERAL PUBLIC:
        People outside the flight path had strong leanings towards the
military for the same reasons (listed above) and not being in the flight path
the general public had even less concern for the effects of the flights.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box 222    Colton,  N Y  13625  **
THE PRESS:
        Role Playing suggested that the general approach in the media would be
to take the angle of stressing the more controversial aspects of the issue and
would, therefore, tend to frame the issue in terms of those opposing the
flights and those supporting the military.  This would add to the serious
problem of polarization in the community.

ADVERSARY:
        Fully expecting the pro and anti military angle to be taken on the
issue, the military would most likely define the issue as a test of support
for `our boys in the service' and their need to train.

GROUPS LEANING TOWARDS YOUR ADVERSARY:
        Veterans groups could be expected to fully support the military view
if the issue was raised in terms of the pro and anti military positions.
  **
STRATEGY ROLE PLAYING SESSION: EXAMPLE RESULTS
        The results of the Strategy Role Playing Session on the low altitude
flight issue was that the proposed position of coming out against the flight
path would be interpreted as a position of opposition to the military by the
vast majority of people in the communities involved.  This would be further
magnified by the press and military stressing this aspect of the issue.  Given
the preexisting conditions of strong support for the military in the region
for both economic and patriotic reasons, it was concluded that the proposal to
oppose the flight path would lead to an overwhelming opposition to the group
with the result that the real issue of the effects of the flights on the
residents of the flight path would be largely ignored.  CONCLUSION: There
would be almost no chance of success with the proposed position.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box 222    Colton,  N Y  13625  **
BEST STRATEGY DEVELOPED BY LEARNING FROM YOUR MISTAKES BEFORE TAKING ACTION:
        As you test a proposal in the Strategy Role Playing Session you begin
to identify problems and see unwanted consequences of your proposed action (or
position).  This process of testing and revising and testing again is how
strategy evolves.  Your original proposal is only the beginning of the
process. Most of the strategy evolves as you try to address the problems with
your early proposals.  After a number of Strategy Role Playing Sessions on
revisions of a proposal the final proposal may bear little resemblance to the
original one.  Good strategy develops through the process of Strategy Role
Playing as you revise and improve your proposals.
  **
REVISED PROPOSAL: EXAMPLE
        When a proposal goes through its first Strategy Role Playing Session
serious problems are often discovered.  Although initially discouraging to
some members, the insights gained in this session can lead to a better
proposal.
        For example, in the low altitude flight issue it was noted that many
people expressed concerns on the effects of the flights if it was not in the
context of the pro and anti military question.  There was, therefore, a basis
for common ground on the question of concern for the effects.  Because of the
overwhelming tendency by the press and the public to frame the issue in terms
of the pro and anti military question, it was decided that the group must
clearly state that they were not against the military and must acknowledge the
military's need to train.  At the same time, the group would state that they
felt strongly that their legitimate concerns on the effects of the flights
must be addressed before the flight path was sited.  In keeping with this
position, the group could then raise specific concerns on the effects of the
flights (on people, children, livestock, property values, etc.) and begin to
build a broad base of support in the community.  As it turned out this
approach proved to be very effective.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box 222    Colton,  N Y  13625  **
NEED TO KEEP THE CORE GROUP TOGETHER: EXPERIENCE VALUABLE:
        Strategy Role Playing helps you improve your strategy by using your
group's most valuable resource: your people.  As you develop strategy in your
Role Playing Session the experience of all of the members of the Core Group
will come into play.  As proposals are modified and revised, members come to a
better understanding of the situation.  Each member brings a different
background and point of view to the session and each session is a learning
experience and adds to the insight of each of the members.  It is in the best
interests of the group to make every effort to keep the Strategy Role Playing
Group (Core Group) together as your group evolves because this group is more
valuable as it gains experience.

READY TO TAKE ACTION:
        The Strategy Role Playing Session allows you to test your proposals
and be in a good position to anticipate the probable consequences before
taking action.
@
      SECTION 10: EXPANDED GROUP: INTEREST GROUP, LINKS, AND MOBILIZATION:

CORE GROUP: NEED TO INVOLVE INTEREST GROUP:
        Initially the Core Group (2 to 7 people) will be enough to set up the
group and to start to raise the issue.  As the work load increases, members of
the Core Group may need to ask a few individuals from the Interest Group
(people interested in your issue but not yet actively involved) to help with
special projects.
       In some situations, working with this limited number of people may be
enough to resolve an issue.  In other situations, the Core Group will need to
reach out to bring in the skills and energies of more people from the Interest
Group and organize them into Project Committees to help with the work.
  **
PROJECT COMMITTEES:
        The Core Group can form Project Committees (2 to 7 members) to work on
any kind of project.  The work of the committees may change as the
circumstances change or the committees may be standing committees (ie: Press
Committee).  Often Project Committees begin by gathering more information.
        For example, you may need more background information on your issue
(What are peoples concerns? What have others done?), or information on
regulations that apply to your situation, or information on key groups (your
Adversary, Decision Makers, other groups, etc).
  **
EXPANDED GROUP: STEERING COUNCIL (Core Group) AND PROJECT COMMITTEES:
        PROJECT COMMITTEES are set up by the Core Group around the work that
needs to be done.  The involvement of Project Committees marks the end of the
setup phase and a change in the structure of the group.  To reflect this
change the CORE GROUP becomes the STEERING COUNCIL.
        The Steering Council continues to make decisions related to strategy
(steering) and to test its proposals in Strategy Role Playing Sessions.  In
addition, it now takes on the responsibility of coordinating the activities of
its Project Committees.
        The structure of the expanded group (Steering Council and Project
Committees) allows more people to get involved in raising the issue while
still retaining the advantages of working in small groups and consensus
decision making.
  **
STEERING COUNCIL: NEED TO EXPAND ROLE OF PROJECT COMMITTEES:
        As the Project Committees become more involved in their work and gain
experience in their project areas, it is important for the Steering Council to
increase the Committees involvement in the process.
        For example: The Steering Council has decided that there may be a need
for working with the County Legislature.  A Legislature Project Committee is
established to gather more information.  Members of this Committee could
attend Legislature meetings to develop a good understanding of how the
legislative process works. (How do resolutions pass through the various
subcommittees of the Legislature?  What are the voting records and
personalities of individual members? etc.).  Once well established, the
Legislature Committee might be asked to Role Play proposals related to the
Legislature being considered by the Steering Council.  Or they might be asked
to work on the wording of a resolutions to be presented to the Legislature.
        When more input is needed, Steering Council members could meet with
Project Committees and report back to the Council or Project Committee members
could be asked to attend a Steering Council meeting (especially when
considering actions related to their project area).
  **
CRITICAL PHASE: CONTINUITY IN THE STEERING COUNCIL ESSENTIAL:
        The energy and enthusiasm that new people bring to a group is a great
asset, but it has to be balanced with the potential for problems that can
develop when people with less experience with the issue (ie: new people) and
with a narrow focus (ie: their project areas) come into the group.
        Members of the Steering Council need to stay together as a group
during this transition to keep the focus on the overall strategy of the group
while new people get adjusted to the process.
       Bring 1 or 2 Project Committees members into Steering Council meetings
as needed when considering proposals related to their project areas for their
input and to build on their experience.  When people are more experienced and
familiar with the process then some of the original Steering Council members
(formally Core Group members) may decide to take a different role (ie: work on
a Project Committee or be less active).  The Steering Council can then bring
new people in from the Project Committees to replace them.
        Throughout this process it is important to continue to maintain the
small group size (2-7) of the Steering Council and the Project Committees.
  **
STEERING COUNCIL SETS STRATEGY: PROJECT COMMITTEES CARRY OUT ACTION:
        As the Project Committees take on increased responsibility, the
Steering Council may decide to begin to involve the Committees in taking
action related to their project areas.
        For example, the Steering Council has worked with the Legislature
Committee on the wording of a resolution and on Role Playing the Legislature's
reaction to it.  The Steering Council could then decide to work jointly with
the Project Committee in getting the resolution passed through the legislature
or it might to decide to give the Legislature Committee responsibility for the
passage of the resolution.
        As time goes on and its responsibilities increase, the Steering
Council may decide to focus more of its energies on developing strategy and
decision making (Steering) and begin to rely more on the experience of the
Project Committees to carry out action to implement those strategies.  The
Steering Council needs to work closely with each of the Project Committees
(and the Project Committees need to work with each other) to keep the actions
coordinated.
  **   Mountain Vision Software    R # 1   Box 222   Colton, N Y  13625 **
DEVELOPING LINKS:
        Often it is necessary to establish contact with other key groups
involved in the issue.  A Project Committee gathering information on a Key
Group would be in a good position to begin to reach out to that group.  At
times this may involve establishing contact between groups that do not
normally work together and that may have very different points of view or
culture (ie: locals and outsiders, rural and urban, etc.).
        Developing Links involves finding people who have the experience and
background to serve as a bridge between the 2 groups.  You are looking for
people who are familiar with the customs, attitudes and feelings of members of
that group.  (ie: people who originally came from that group, people with
friends or relatives in that group, people who already have a working
relationship with that group, etc.)  For example, the low altitude flight
group found that an Amish community was in the flight path.  The flight group
chose one of its members who had worked with the Amish (cutting wood and
working at their saw mills) to serve as a Link.  His role was to translate
between the 2 cultures and be involved in any role playing of that group. (The
more diverse the groups, the more important it is that all communication
between the groups be through the Link.)  Finding people to serve as a Link is
critical to working with other groups because it allows even groups with
widely divergent points of view to work together in areas of common interest.
  **
MOBILIZATION: REACHING OUT TO THE WIDEST GROUP:
        Mobilization is an important aspect of the expanded group.  It
involves reaching out to include in some action (ie: attend a public meeting,
write letters, etc.) the maximum number of people who have some interest in
the issue.  (Often they are people who are interested in the issue but have
limited time, so it is very important not to appeal for a Mobilization until
it is really needed.)
        When calling on people to become involved, make sure they can see some
effect of their involvement so they will have a strong incentive to come back
into action when needed again.  For example, the Steering Council has decided
to call a Mobilization of people to show support for the group's resolution at
the next meeting of the Legislature.  The Steering Council, Legislature
Committee, and Press Committee could all work together on the project to make
sure the people are Mobilized and know exactly what they are trying to
accomplish.  A well attended Legislature meeting would have good coverage in
the press and those attending could see some results for their effort.  Be
aware of the dangers involved in Mobilizing large groups of people (see Show
Of Strength).
  **
SPECIAL CASE: RAPID MOVEMENT OF NEW PEOPLE INTO YOUR GROUP:
        Ideally the Steering Council would bring new people into the Project
Committees as the need arose.  However, there may be times when a number of
new people move to become involved in an issue almost all at once.
        Two common occasions of rapid movement of new people into a group are:
1) right after the group starts up when many people realize they may be
involved in the issue and  2) after the group has been established for a while
and has made some progress or has some high profile coverage in the media (ie:
Public hearings).  Right after a group just starts up is often the most
demanding case because the group is still in the process of setting up.  The
key in both cases is to make it clear that your group is defined by its
strategy of raising concerns without framing the issue in terms of sides (See:
Moderate Concerned Position).
        When many new people suddenly become interested in your group it is
often advisable to consider having an Information Meeting.
  **
INFORMATION MEETING: 3 GOALS:
        1) EXCHANGE INFORMATION:  The purpose of an Information Meeting is
to exchange information.  (No decisions are made and no action is proposed.)
Your group presents the information you have and listens to what people think
and feel about the issue (Make a list of their concerns).
        2) PRESENT YOUR POSITION:  Your goal in forming your group is to raise
concerns about the issue and to reach out to build a broad base of support in
your community to have those concerns addressed.  You have decided the best
way to do this is to avoid framing the issue in terms of sides because you are
trying to avoid polarizing people and alienating potential supporters by
forcing them to choose sides.  Instead you want to bring together everyone who
has any concern about the issue into a powerful base of support to insure that
you concerns will be addressed.  If a more definitive position on the issue is
needed in the future (ie: an issue requiring a yes or no decision) you will
wait until it is necessary to take that position, and it will be based on how
well your concerns have been addressed. (see: Choosing A Position).
        3) IDENTIFY PEOPLE WILLING TO WORK:  Have a sign up sheet and identify
people who would like to work on Project Committees.  Find out what aspects of
the issue they are most interested in and what project areas they might be
willing to work on.  Find if they have special skills that may be needed by
your group.
  **
INFORMATION MEETING: PROBLEM AREAS:
    RESISTANCE TO YOUR GROUPS POSITION:  Often when people are directly
impacted by an issue they are emotionally involved and feel the need to take a
strong stand.  It is expected by the time of the Informational Meeting, the
Core Group has already come to grips with its emotional reaction to the issue
and has decided on the clear advantages of a Moderate Concerned Position.  Be
patient with those who want to take a strong position and encourage them to
work with your group to raise concerns without polarizing people into taking
sides.  Often even people strongly committed to a confrontational approach
will begin to see the advantages after working with your group.
    If people are still strongly committed to taking sides and confrontation
and show no signs of being willing to change then it might be necessary to
acknowledge this clear difference in your views and suggest that they may feel
better starting a new group based on their position.  Raising concerns from
their own point of view would be preferable to continuing with your group
because this basic difference in approach could be very disruptive.
    STRONG INTEREST IN SPECIFIC AREAS: When gathering people to work on
Project Committees, if people have very strong interest in certain areas then
it may be better to encourage them to work in their areas of interest rather
then trying to move them into areas outside their interest.  Even if not
needed immediately, their work may be useful in the future.
  **
EXPANDED GROUP: AN OVERVIEW:
         At some point, the Core Group may need to create Project Committees
so that more people can help with the work.  This marks a transition to the
EXPANDED GROUP.  The CORE GROUP now becomes the STEERING COUNCIL and PROJECT
COMMITTEES provide a new focus of work.
        The Steering Council needs to work closely with (and listen carefully
to) the Project Committees and, as time go on, the Committees can be given
more responsibility (ie: gathering information, role playing, giving input,
taking action to carry out strategy, etc,). It is especially important for the
Steering Council to stay together as a group to maintain focus on overall
strategy while new people get adjusted to the process.  After the Project
Committees are well established, Steering Council members may decide to take a
different role and can be replaced by Project Committee members.
        As the Committees gain experience, the Steering Council can decide to
focus more of its energy on Strategy (Steering) and give the Committees more
responsibility in carrying out action in their project areas. The key to the
Expanded Group is to keep group size small (2 to 7) to maintain the advantage
of working in small groups and consensus decision making while involving more
people.  When reaching out to other groups, work through Links (people with
experience and background that enable them to work with that group).  Mobilize
when necessary to bring the maximum number of people together for action.
@
                                 SECTION # 11:

                     >>> GUIDELINES FOR EFFECTIVE ACTION <<<
                         -------------------------------

                        * SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY *
        Rise Above Personal Involvement And Get The Detached Overview:


                             * FOCUS ON KEY AREAS *
 To Gradually Improve Your Situation And Move Towards Addressing Your Concerns


                                * TAKE ACTION *
                              Based On A Strategy


                               * BUILD ON GAINS *
                              By Leaving A Way Out
  **
                       * SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY *
        Rise Above Personal Involvement And Get The Detached Overview:

        Size up your current situation.  Look at it from different angles.
What do you see happening now and where is it headed?  Look for opportunities
as well as problem areas.
        Have each member of your Steering Council give their view of what you
are facing.  Make a summary of the most important aspects of your current
situation.  Re-evaluate as conditions change or as new information comes in.

   You are trying to see your situation clearly without reacting emotionally.



 EXAMPLE: A project that could have serious impacts was proposed for a rural
area.  By the time people first found out about it, there were only a few days
left in the official comment period.  Although the issue had the potential
for involving a large number of people, there was not enough time to organize
<clear overview>.
  **
                             * FOCUS ON KEY AREAS *
 To Gradually Improve Your Situation And Move Towards Addressing Your Concerns

        In any situation there are a number of forces at work.  Some aspects
are working towards improving your situation (ie: in the limited comment
period example, the potential for a lot of people becoming involved could work
to improve your situation).  Other forces may be working against improvement
(ie: time running out in the comment period could seriously limit your ability
to mobilize your support).  A change in the balance of these forces could move
the situation in a new direction.
        In a Strategy Role Playing Session look for key areas to focus on that
could change the balance.  Be creative.  Play with many different approaches
(Often even impractical ideas can lead to insights that may be useful for
developing more practical ones).  Look carefully at the probable consequences.
        You have limited energies and resources so you will want to focus on
key areas that have a realistic chance of improving your situation over time.

 EXAMPLE: To deal with the pressing problem of the limited comment period, a
group formed and focused a major part of its energies into trying to find some
way to get the comment period extended <improve situation>.
  **
                                * TAKE ACTION *
                              Based On A Strategy

        Make decisions based on accurate and well documented information.
Because taking action often involves a series of steps, you will need to work
to develop a strategy (plan of action) that can move you step by step towards
your goal of changing the balance in a key area.  Carefully test your
proposals in a Strategy Role Play Session to find the best plan.  Revise and
retest your proposals until you are confident they will have the desired
results before taking any action.



 EXAMPLE: After researching regulations related to public involvement in the
review process, the group found that a copy of the Environmental Assessment
for the project should have been available locally and was not.  After a
Strategy Role Playing Session, they decided to raise this issue in the press
and work with local and state agencies <strategy> to put pressure on the
Siting Agency to grant an extension of the comment period to comply with the
law.
  **
                              * BUILD ON GAINS *
                             By Leaving A Way Out

       Your goal is to work (through incremental gains) to move your Adversary
(and/or the Decision Makers) into a position where they will have to deal with
your concerns (that is, into a position where they will realize that it is
more in their interest to work with your group to address your concerns than
to continue as adversaries) (see Resolution By Strength).  When they reach
this point, it is to your advantage to make it easier for them by working to
give them a (face saving) way out (see Resolution By Negotiation).
       Once you've made gains in one area, you can begin the process again
(Guidelines) as you move towards having more of your concerns addressed.

 EXAMPLE: With the support of the local government, the involvement of State
agencies, and wide coverage in the local press <gains> the Agency proposing
the project had little choice but to grant an extension of the Comment Period
<way out>.  Not only did the group gain the time they needed to begin to raise
their concerns, but they also gained recognition and credibility by having the
public involvement issue resolved in their favor <build on gains>.  Focusing
on a key area, they were now in a strong position to raise concerns.
  **
 EXAMPLE:            REGIONAL OFFICE (Decision Makers):
 >> SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY: A group had made repeated attempts to raise
concerns related to an environmental issue with the Regional Office of the
Environmental Department but made no progress.
 >> FOCUS ON KEY AREAS: After reevaluating their situation and contacting
other groups involved in the issue, it was learned that the decisions related
to this issue were being made at the Department Headquarters in the State
Capital and not at the Regional Office.  The group worked to find the people
in charge of the issue at the Headquarters and refocused their efforts on the
people actually making the decisions.
 >> TAKE ACTION: Following this new approach, the group concentrated on
developing a good working relationship with the people in the Department
Headquarters <strategy> and got specific answers to their questions <gains>.
 >> BUILDING ON GAINS: After focusing on and working closely with the people
making the decisions, the group was able to make real progress towards
increasing public involvement by getting public hearings and a comment period.
  **
 EXAMPLE:           SOLID WASTE ISSUE (Need To Refocus):
 >> SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY: The County Legislature was proposing a
trash incinerator as a solution to the County's solid waste problem.  A group
formed to raise concerns because they thought too little effort was made in
considering alternatives.
 >> FOCUS ON KEY AREAS: At first the group focused on health related issues
concerning the incinerator emissions.  But information related to the health
effects was inconclusive and the community did not respond to these concerns.
After re-evaluating their situation, the group decided to refocus on the issue
of the cost of the incinerator and the long term indebtedness that the county
would have to incur.  Weren't there more cost effective alternatives?
 >> TAKE ACTION: Raising the cost issue struck a responsive chord in the
community.  In addition, it was found that the contracts to run the
incinerator also required that the county would have to guarantee certain
levels of trash (for years into the future) or pay large penalties.  (This
could discourage recycling efforts.)  These issues were raised in the press
and before the Legislature <strategy>.
 >> BUILD ON GAINS: With serious questions about cost, long term indebtedness,
and the need to guarantee waste levels, the group worked to get the
legislature to vote to delay the bonding for the project until more cost
effective alternatives could be explored <way out>.
  **
 EXAMPLE:         SITING COMMISSION (Early In The Process):
 >> SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY: A commission had begun the process of
siting a Nuclear Waste facility.  The criteria for siting the facility were
being publicly evaluated before any specific site was chosen so when the
final site was chosen no comments could be made on the site selecting
criteria.  A few people in a remote rural area (a likely site), decide to get
together to try to lessen the likelihood that it would be put in their area.
 >> FOCUS ON KEY AREAS:  Since moving Nuclear Waste to remote sites would
involve more travel on secondary roads and more exposure to road hazards, the
group decided to focus on transportation issues.  Review of siting criteria
showed risks associated with transportation may have been underestimated.
 >> TAKE ACTION: The group worked through people with a background in science
to present the position that no site could be considered safe unless it was
rated safe in both on-site and transportation factors.  To widen support, the
group worked with local government agencies to raise these issues.
 >> BUILD ON GAINS: Based on the information presented, the Siting Commission
changed criteria making transportation factors a more important consideration
in site selection <way out>.  By focusing on key areas early in the process,
the group was able to influence critical aspects of site selection.  This
resulted in a better selection process and excluded many areas (like theirs)
with poor road access <gains>.
  **
 EXAMPLE:  LOW ALTITUDE FLIGHTS (Let Your Adversary Organize For You):
 >> SEE CURRENT SITUATION CLEARLY: The low altitude flight group realized that
they would have a serious problem organizing people who were widely scattered
in a number of rural towns in the flight path. The group needed a method of
letting people know they would be in the flight path and of getting them
motivated to take action.
 >> FOCUS ON KEY AREAS: In Strategy Role Playing Sessions, testing a number of
different approaches, they came up with the idea: if the people in the flight
path could be overflown and experience the effects of the flights (while the
comment period was still open) then a lot more people would become involved.
 >> TAKE ACTION: The group worked with the County Legislature to ask for a 2
week period of test flights so people could comment on the real effects of the
Flights before the project was approved (rather than commenting on a study of
the probable effects of the flights in the Environmental Assessment).  The
group also worked to raise the issue in the press.
 >> BUILD ON GAINS: After increased pressure, the military eventually agreed
to a 2 day period of scheduled and announced demonstration flights <way out>.
These flights lead to a massive reaction by people in the proposed flight path
with the result that many more people became involved in the issue <gains>.
@
                SECTION #12:  SHOW OF STRENGTH:  BALANCE NEEDED:

YOUR CURRENT POSITION: RAISING CONCERNS AND NOT TAKING SIDES:
        Up to this point you have been raising concerns and working towards
building a broad base of support in your community to have your concerns
addressed (see Choosing A Position).  As you get closer to the Resolution
Phase, you will begin to draw on the base of support that you have been
building so you can mobilize strength for your position on the issue.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
EVALUATE YOUR STRENGTH IN TERMS OF YOUR POSITION AND BASE OF SUPPORT:
        Your position is that the concerns you have raised need to be
addressed.  Do you have a good solid case for your position on the issue or at
least certain aspects of the issue?  What are the strongest points in your
position?  The weakest?  Be as realistic and objective as possible so you can
focus on your real strengths and be ready to defend yourself where you are
weakest.
        Evaluate your base of support?  Do you have a broad base of support in
your community to have your concerns addressed?  Identify the areas where your
support is strongest, where it is weakest.  Can you reach out to strengthen
support where it is weak? What part of your base of support will be most
easily mobilized if a show of strength is necessary?
        Begin to look at what aspects of your position and base of support can
be combined to increase your strength.  What aspects are best to avoid?  How
would you rate your overall strength in terms of your position and your base
of support?
  **
EVALUATE YOUR ADVERSARY'S STRENGTH: WHAT ARE YOU UP AGAINST?
        Look realistically at the strengths and weaknesses of your Adversary's
position on the issue, not only in terms of whether they are in compliance
with all regulations but also in terms of `fairness'.  Is your Adversary's
position open to criticism from the perspective of a fair and reasonable
observer?  What are the strong points of their case? What are the weak points?
        Next look at your Adversary's base of support in terms of support in
the community.  Do segments of the public strongly support your Adversary's
position?  Where is their support strongest?  Where is it weakest?  Make a
detailed list.
        Role play their situation.  If you were them how would you view their
situation?  Are they aware of their own strength?  Are they aware of their
weakness?  How would you be getting ready for resolving the issue if you
were them?
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
TIMING: NOW OR LATER:
        The timing on when the resolution of an issue takes place can often be
influenced to some degree.  Look at your situation and decide how timing could
play a role.
        For example, if your group's present position and base of support
looks about as strong as it will ever get and your Adversary seems to be
gaining support then it is in your interest to consider working to come to the
Resolution Phase as soon as possible.  On the other hand, if it looks like you
will gain strength with more time or your Adversary's strength will weaken
over time (more than yours) then working for a delay would be an approach to
consider.  If you need to slow down the process, the discovery of new
information related to the issue or a serious lack of available information
can often be used to justify a delay.
  **
FOCUS EFFORTS ON INFLUENCING 2 KEY GROUPS: ADVERSARY AND DECISION MAKERS:
        Besides your Adversary, there is another key group you will want to
focus your efforts on influencing: the Decision Makers.
        Decision Makers are those people who make decisions that may effect
the outcome of the issue.  They may be regulatory agencies, government bodies,
(town boards, county legislatures, state agencies, federal agencies, etc.), or
they may be members of the public (as in a referendum, proposition on the
ballet, or an election).  Occasionally your Adversary is also the Decision
Maker.  Use your influence in your community to make both your Adversary
and/or the Decision Makers aware of your concerns.
        Even if the public is not directly involved in the decision, public
opinion has a strong influence on many decisions, especially on decisions
involving elected officials.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
ARE YOUR ADVERSARY AND/OR THE DECISION MAKERS TAKING YOU SERIOUSLY?
        In a Role Playing Session, role play your Adversary.  How would you
view your group if you were them?  Based on their recent actions and position
and your knowledge of them, decide if they are taking your group seriously.
Are they really aware of the strengths of your position and your base of
support in the community to have your concerns addressed?  Are they aware of
the support you have outside of your group?  Often you will discover that
there are aspects of your strength that your Adversary may not be fully aware
of.  Do the same role playing for any Decision Makers.
  **
NEED FOR A SHOW OF STRENGTH:
        As you begin to get ready for the Resolution Phase, you may need to
look for ways of making your Adversary and/or the Decision Makers more aware
of your strengths as a group.
        For example, if your role playing has revealed that your Adversary
(and/or the Decision Makers) are not taking you seriously then you may decide
to look towards an action or a position to make them aware of the fact that
your group's concerns must be addressed.  Sometimes this may call for a some-
what strong move to `get their attention' (see Confrontation).  Other times it
may only require looking for ways to gently remind them of your strengths.
        It may be that a show of strength is called for.  Perhaps what is
needed is an overwhelming turn out at a public hearing (to show that many
people are concerned with your issue), or it may be that all that is needed is
a series of letters to the Editor of the local paper from respected community
members (to show that you have a broad base of support outside your group).
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
FOCUS ATTENTION ON THE STRENGTH OF YOUR POSITION AND YOUR BASE OF SUPPORT:
        Making your Adversary and/or the Decision Makers aware of your
position on the issue is an important part of the process.  Often, even more
important is making them aware of your base of support for having your
concerns addressed.
        All decisions are influenced to some degree by public opinion and
often your concerns are taken more seriously when they have a broad base of
support or support by key elements of the community.

PRESENTING YOUR POSITION: THE PUBLIC CASE:
        There are 2 aspects to the presentation of your concerns. First, and
often most important, is the case you present to the public.  You are
presenting your concerns to `the court of public opinion' by appealing to
standards of reason and fairness.  You are asking people to put themselves in
your shoes and answer the questions: `Do you have legitimate concerns and are
they being addressed? `Are you being treated fairly?'.
       Often the court of public opinion can render a judgement that can more
impact than a legal case.
  **
PRESENTING YOUR POSITION: THE LEGAL CASE:
        Often there may be legal aspects of your issue. Legal cases can
involve either regulatory agencies or the courts.  Do you have a legal case?
Is there compliance with relevant regulations?  If you think you have good
grounds for raising legal aspects of the case then you could consider seeking
limited low cost legal advice.
        You may decide to raise the legal issues as part of your case to the
public.  Unless your legal case is overwhelming you are often better off using
it indirectly rather than as a primary effort.  Raising legal issues can often
be used to support your main strategy of raising concerns and developing a
broad base of support to influence your Adversary and/or the Decision Makers.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
LIMITED USEFULNESS OF A LEGAL CASE:
        Many groups are tempted to see the legal route as the solution to all
their problems.  This is rarely the case because there are a number of serious
disadvantages in relying too heavily on `going to court':
        1) THE ODDS ARE AGAINST YOU WINNING:  Only a few grassroots groups
have been able to resolve their issue in the courts.
        2) A LEGAL CASE IS OFTEN VERY EXPENSIVE:  The cost of taking a case
through the legal process of resolving an issue is often beyond the
fund raising ability of a grassroots organization.
        3) FUND RAISING FOR A LEGAL CASE CAN DO SERIOUS DAMAGE TO YOUR GROUP:
People who were willing to spend time and energy in working with others to
resolve your issue can rapidly lose interest after a few unsuccessful
attempts at fund raising for a legal case. The sense of enthusiasm that comes
from knowing that you are having an effect on your issue can disappear when
the power to resolve the issue leaves your group and is placed in the hands of
others (ie: lawyers and judges).
        4) YOUR ADVERSARY CAN `TIE YOU UP IN COURT':  Rather than resolving
the issue in court, your Adversary may decide to delay and extend the legal
process so that you will run out of money before the issue is ever legally
resolved.
  **
EFFECTIVE USE OF A LEGAL CASE:
        A legal case can be used to advantage in certain situations:
        1) TO BUY TIME: Often cost effective legal measures can be found to
gain delays or extensions in the process of resolving an issue.
        2) TO RAISE THE ISSUE IN THE MEDIA: Cost effective legal moves can be
made to bring attention to the legal aspects of your position without
necessarily resolving the legal case.
        3) TO GO TO COURT WITHOUT PAYING THE COSTS:  If your legal case looks
very promising and has the potential for setting legal precedents or has the
potential for winning money in damages then some legal organizations may be
interested in taking on your case for no fee or payment only if you win
damages. (Note: check carefully the background and reputation of any
organization you are considering to represent your group.)
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
PRESENTING YOUR POSITION: COMBINED PUBLIC AND LEGAL CASE:
        Often the best presentation of your position is a combination of the
public and legal case.  Cost effective legal measures to buy time and
emphasize aspects of your case can be used to strengthen your case before the
public.
        In presenting your position to the public remember to avoid obscure
legal and overly technical aspects of the issue and instead emphasize a clear
common sense approach.  Often it is most effective to use your legal case to
support your public case in order to put more pressure on your Adversary and
the Decision Makers to address your concerns.

FOR A SHOW OF STRENGTH MOBILIZE YOUR BASE OF SUPPORT IN KEYS AREAS:
        Besides presenting your position to influence your Adversary and the
Decision Makers, you will want to increase awareness of your base of support.
For a show of strength, mobilize from keys areas: your group, other groups and
influential people, the Press and public opinion.
  **
KEY AREAS FOR MOBILIZATION:
        YOUR GROUP:  Get the members of your group active in carrying out your
group's current strategy.  Find people to work on key projects.  Build more
support for your group.  Let members know know how important it is to be
available when you need to `mobilize the troops' for a show of strength.
        OTHER GROUPS AND INFLUENTIAL PEOPLE:  Reach out to other groups and
respected members of your community to support your concerns to show that
support for your concerns extends beyond your group.  Be especially aware what
groups and individuals may have the most impact on your Adversary and the
Decision Makers.
        THE PRESS AND GENERAL PUBLIC:  There are few groups in a democratic
society that can ignore public opinion. When you appeal to the public to view
your issue in terms of reason and fairness, many people can identify with your
situation even if not directly involved. Raise your issue in the press.  For
example, sending a carefully thought out letter to the editor of your paper
could spark a debate in the letters to the editor column.  This could lead to
an editorial on the issue that could lead to more public involvement.
  **  Mountain Vision Software   R # 1   Box  222   Colton,  N Y  13625  **
EXAMPLE: MOBILIZATION OF A KEY GROUP:
        The low altitude flight group was careful to stress that they were not
`against' the military and that their concerns were the effects of the
flights. Because of this approach, they were able to reach out to other groups
in the community.  They were even able to work indirectly (through Links) with
a local Veterans' Group to raise an important issue.  Because many Vietnam
veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome had moved to rural areas to avoid
the startle effect of loud sudden noises, the Veterans Group came out publicly
raising concerns that the startle effect of low altitude flights could have
serious effects on Vietnam veterans in the flight path recovering from this
syndrome.
        Having this issue was raised by a Veterans' Group had much more impact
on the military and the public than would have been possible by raising the
same issue by the low altitude flight group.
  **
SHOW OF STRENGTH: BALANCE NEEDED:
        In the Resolution Phase, you are trying to balance a show of strength
(to make sure your concerns are taken seriously) with an effort at finding
common ground (so you can work with your Adversary and/or the Decision Makers
to address your concerns).  You may need to move back and forth between these
2 positions (show of strength and finding common ground) while addressing
different aspects of your issue.  The key is balance: to use just enough
pressure to have your concerns taken seriously, while not doing permanent
damage to the potential for a working relationship with your Adversary and the
Decision Makers to resolve the issue.

GOAL OF A SHOW OF STRENGTH: HAVING YOUR CONCERNS ADDRESSED:
        Remember that your goal of a show of your strength (in position and
base of support) is to have your concerns addressed.  You are trying to put
your Adversary (and/or the Decision Makers) in a position where they will have
to address your concerns. You want to do it in a way that they will still be
willing to work with you in addressing those concerns when the time comes.
@