Reflections

From the first days of this inquiry I found myself following the advice we give to clients and students - searching for a metaphor that seemed to accurately reflect the spirit of this ‘thing’ we were trying to get our heads around. I tried and discarded a few ideas - a public library (too sequential and too static), and a mirror (too fixed and too shallow).

One morning I stumbled across the metaphor of the reflecting pool - a deep (but not bottomless) pool of data into which users could look to see what they could see about our community. This felt like a perfect metaphor. Perhaps it was.

The metaphor started to teach me from the first moment I shared it. I enthusiastically extroverted the idea to David who reflected for a split second and said, “Narcissus?”

I immediately responded, “No, just a reflecting pool. Those who look into the pool will see whatever it is that they are looking for.”

A few short minutes later Kevin Scribner stopped by for an update. Again, with even more enthusiasm I shared my metaphor - this time extending it with an explanation about how this source could be a continually refreshed pool - not stagnant, polluted, or suffering from summer algae bloom and how users could draw data out without diminishing the source. I loved my metaphor even more this time.

Funny thing - The first words out of his mouth were, “Like Narcissus?”

Again, I explained that the metaphor was just a reflecting pool - which, by its nature is neutral. If someone approached the reflecting pool already in love with their reflection, they would find much that would reinforce that belief.

For me, the metaphor ‘stuck’. Like stepping on a piece of used chewing gum on a hot day, I couldn’t scrape it off.

On Thursday evening I remembered that metaphor as I reflected on the afternoon’s session, which we had designed to be a means by which the assembled community could look into our inquiry, and report back what they saw there.

I learned all too well that the metaphor that found me for this project continued to reflect true.

Will a reflecting pool of data about the community be built? Only time will tell.

What will it reflect back and how will those arrayed around that source interpret what they find? Will it be another source of division and unhealthy competition or will it provide the insight by which everyone of us and each of our organizations becomes the best we can be? Or will the initial reactions to my metaphor find themselves disturbingly prescient?

Only time will tell.

Clueless

Following Thursday's meeting, many people went back to what good Walla Wallans do best: whispering in the hallways, wondering what in the heck happened. Some sent emails. Others called. I made a few calls myself.

There's an old adage that says if the only explanation you can muster for another's behavior is that they're crazy or evil, you don't understand their perspective well enough to even complain about it. Well, I left Thursday's meeting deeply concerned that I didn't understand some of the perspectives nearly well enough, because a few people's perspectives seemed crazy or evil to me.

The easy path, one we're all too familiar with, is to cognitively shoot the upsetting messenger. This is what we do whenever we decide that another is crazy or evil, rather than continue to try to understand. I know the alternative is tough. It can be painful, especially when understanding means letting loose of some cherished certainty. But understanding doesn't mean you'll agree with anything they spout, just that you understand and accept their perspective as valid---not some variant on crazy or evil.

There is not, never was, and never will be any guarantee that such generosity will be reciprocated by anyone.

I am grateful for the many appreciations I've received for the transparency of this blog. I received only one off-the-record complaint about the transparency. (Irony intended.)

What will happen next? I believe, though I don't get to vote on this, that the Port will perfect their contract with EWU to make available data more public before year-end. And that the roll-out will be gratefully received.

I'm hopeful that this project will inspire Riding The Wave to operate in a more transparent way. I've learned over the last month that while most voiced unqualified support for Riding The Wave, none (not one!) were able to explain what it actually is without obliquely referring to a model everyone seems to have interpreted quite differently. While it's seductive for people like me to conclude that RTW must be crazy or evil, I intend to get more and better information so I can understand where they've come from and where they're going. I might not join them for the ride, but I'm certain I'm currently clueless about what they represent. I'd better put on my detective hat!

While the Port demonstrates transparency and RTW decides what they want to be, Amy and I are off to our next projects.

As my Uncle Bob used to say, "See ya in the funny papers!" david schmaltz

Shadow and Light

The Ass and His Shadow

A TRAVELER hired an Ass to convey him to a distant place. The day being intensely hot, and the sun shining in its strength, the Traveler stopped to rest, and sought shelter from the heat under the Shadow of the Ass. As this afforded only protection for one, and as the Traveler and the owner of the Ass both claimed it, a violent dispute arose between them as to which of them had the right to the Shadow. The owner maintained that he had let the Ass only, and not his Shadow. The Traveler asserted that he had, with the hire of the Ass, hired his Shadow also. The quarrel proceeded from words to blows, and while the men fought, the Ass galloped off.

Moral: In quarreling about the shadow we often lose the substance.

Aesop's Fables

Today's meeting attracted the right people, but then the right people always show up.

We outlined the proposal's history, revisiting EWU's story, True North's evaluation, and the Port's intentions. We framed the conversation, not around what the Port should do, but what the community might choose to do.

Then we opened the floor for comments. There seemed to be two "camps," one which lobbied for the Port to do nothing until Riding The Wave initiates and the other for the Port to run with this opportunity. I thought all present had fair opportunity to weigh in on their favored side, and those who spoke, did so eloquently (and well).

My most memorable comment in the session came at the end, when Dennis Hopwood of Key Technologies, a new-comer to the community and who also served for two years on Portland's Sustainability Indicator Project Board , said, "As a newcomer here, I want to congratulate you on how passionately you argue politics. I wonder, though, how much better it would be if that energy was focused on finding and retaining living wage jobs for the people who live here!"

Here's the handout from the session.

I'll make what will probably prove to be the last posting for this Blog a little later. I'm very tired.

david

Counting Chickens

Amy and I have been taking phone calls and responding to emails the last couple of days. People wanting the back story. People offering advice. Others wanting to know "what people think."

As I've told them, if I was a pollster (I'm not, nor do I aspire to be), I'd count up the comments and come to one conclusion. If I was a politician (again, not), I'd line up the influencers and lobby them to one point of view. If I was a spy, I might trust the one self-described clued-in informer. If I was a chicken farmer, I'd wait until the eggs hatched, then count the chickens.

We've relearned that every initiative really IS like the blind men and the elephant. Every person has their own perspective and no one can personally experience any other's point of view. When someone asks, "What does the community think?" no one can credibly respond.

I don't know what our community thinks.

We've received various reports about what the Riding The Wave Founding Board decided in their meeting this morning. I won't comment further. I understand that members of that Board will be present at tomorrow's meeting. Better that they speak for themselves.

I'm confident only that we now have a better informed consideration of this conundrum. I'm hopeful for chickens, but I'm not counting even one little red hen until I see what hatches in tomorrow's meeting.

Community

Famed Project Management Consultants Masters and Johnson claim that there are three ways to approach any project. One might do a project 'to' a community, 'for' a community, or 'with' a community.

So here's the dilemma: EWU has demonstrated technical capability, True North has project management capability, and the Port has some funding to build a community resource.

Does it make sense for the Port to proceed? If so, in what direction?

Of course, the Port, who holds some purse strings and took the initiative to share their vision, could decide FOR the community to do it TO the community, but where's the community in that?

So, the Port has called a public meeting for Thursday, July 19 at 1:00 at the Port offices. Dr Patrick Jones, Dr Linda Kieffer, and two other members of the EWU Indicator Initiative team will share their proposal. True North will share our findings from our inquiry. And those assembled will engage in open conversation about this initiative. Together, as a community.

Because, regardless of what famed project management consultants Masters and Johnson might say, I think there's really only one way to approach any project, and that's with a community. david@projectcommunity.com

What's In The News?

Jacksonville Community Council, Inc . Deputy Director Ben Warner (jcci.org) recently posted notice of our investigation on his Community Indicators Blog.

I spoke with Ben last week. Though his office told me he was on vacation, he returned my voice message within an hour. As I reported in an earlier post, JCCI hosted Dr. Partick Jones from EWU to attend their most recent conference. He was familiar with and supportive of EWU's approach as a good example of a process that's worked.

Transparency

“Politics is an honest effort to misunderstand one another.” ~ Robert Frost

It seems like almost everyone complains about the lack of transparency. We started this inquiry under the guiding ethic of transparency. We want anyone interested to know what we are up to, what we're thinking, and how we're thinking. The old adage counseling anyone living in a glass house to just get naked, seems good advice.

Anyone trying to do anything in any community lives in a glass house. Whether the curtains are opened or closed, there's little to hide behind. Might as well acknowledge that fact.

Those unaccustomed to living next to a glass house can find transparency a little shocking. And also perhaps more frustrating than opaqueness. Notice the window in the adjacent picture. It reflects what's outside rather than showing what's inside. Transparency can seem capricious, mirroring when you expected to be able to see right through it.

The posts here describe my experiences with this effort, they do not (could not) describe anyone else's experience. I trust my neighbors to understand that. I can only describe what I see out my window, not what anyone else sees.

Can you see the man standing behind the above transparency?

26 Reasons Why We Need Community Indicators

I came across a terrific justification for a community to maintain a set of indicators based upon data that has been collected under scientific rigor.

You see, we humans are prone to cognitive bias. Because we have brains that work the way they do, we can make the wrong choices believing they are the best of all possible ones. As this site explains, what we think is right, might well be wrong.

Because we are human, we seem to need objective references points to avoid what we humans naturally do. This says nothing about any individual's intentions, beliefs, or political affiliation.

It's very human for any leader to listen to his gut. But we're wise if we maintain some validating data to confirm what the living entrails suggest. Community Indicators are that kind of data.

Two Declarative Sentences

"All change rests on the full, albeit temporary acceptance of the way things are." Virginia Satir

Walla Walla City Council Member Barbara Clark sent an email yesterday afternoon, asking for two declarative sentences describing how the Port-sponsored Community Indicator Initiative is different from what Riding The Wave is doing.

Here's my response:

"The Port's initiative is about implementing an inclusive process for putting on public display, data representing the way it is (and has been). As I understand it, RTW is about using that data to change the way it is."

Proposal

Early this morning, Amy and I completed our proposal to the Port. As always, the level of scrutiny we subjected this initiative to was both extensive and inadequate. No amount of looking today will ever give anyone a clear view of tomorrow, much less a few months from now. Yet an initial inquiry can uncover patterns, what I call viscosity and velocity. How steep is the climb? How fast is anyone likely to make it to the top?

We concluded from our last two weeks' investigation that we can add value, given some conditions and explicit agreements. What these conditions and agreements are, I'll save for after the Port has reviewed our proposal. One of our options was to just forgetaboutit. It's important to consider not doing something before stopping becomes too difficult to do.

Every initiative starts as a bright idea. Bright ideas are bright, shiny, and wholly unmanageable. The purpose of the proposal process is to consider deeply what this bright idea might be, and what it might become. We refer to this work as 'designing the project.' Many projects are not explicitly designed, but emerge, bright and shiny at the beginning, into a world they are wholly unprepared to cope with. When these efforts get the sniffles, they fall apart.

A well-designed initiative does not lean upon 'flat earth, benevolent God' assumptions. Instead, it acknowledges the world as it is and considers how to cope with that world, rather than trying to flatten the topography or pleading for divine intervention. So, we looked at similar initiatives here. How they worked and how they didn't, and proposed a strategy designed to work here.

Every good proposal complicates, and often utterly changes, the originating bright idea. Then both the proposer and the proposee encounter a dedication test. Can I stomach these complications? If so, the initiative might succeed. In not, it can reasonably anticipate encountering one damned thing after another disrupting the flow.

When I stand at the base of a pinnacle, I want to see the view from the top. I might overlook the inevitably dangerous route that must take me there. I know that none of my proposals ever delight my sponsor. He wants his bright, shiny idea, not the smashed finger, scraped knee, and sunburned forehead we should both reasonably expect from a challenging climb. Will we delight in the view from the top even after the harrowing climb? Best that we ask that question before we begin.

What Data Does The Port Maintain Now?

We've had a lot of questions about what data the Port maintains now. Here's a link to the Port's economic data page. If you have some time, you can look through the separate files.

Port Economic Data link here

What will be different after the Community Indicators Site is up? Look at a sample page from Spokane's site here. See the difference for yourself.

1. The same old data will be displayed more accessibly. God Bless Adobe Acrobat, but damn the download time. Currently, each data series has to be separately selected, downloaded, and opened in Reader (or, heaven forbid, your browser's Reader emulation). This makes clunky look streamlined! The replacement presentation will allow rapid browsing, and downloading only if you choose to use the data for something more, as well as easier updating.
2. Currently, once you download a .pdf file from this page, you have essentially a virtual paper page. Can't load the data into a spreadsheet for further analysis. The Community Indicator Initiative site will allow downloading into spreadsheet format for further manipulation.
3. The Port will have out-sourced a routine update of their data to a process designed and focused upon maintaining the data. This will off-load work from staff better focused upon economic development.
4. Notice how the Port's page focuses upon economic data. The CII site will include quality of life data not directly related to the Port's interest. Like this.

For an analysis of what data chosen by the Spokane CII effort might be presented on a Walla Walla CI site, see this spreadsheet. It also shows what of that data the Port currently tracks. Link here

This seems like a giant step forward. Please check it out for yourself. Make comments.

Green Light!

Long, busy day Wednesday.

Still wrestling with how this initiative might happen here.

Made a lot of phone calls. Spoke with Larry Duthie, Publisher of the Walla Walla Union Bulletin, who apologetically chewed on me a bit for apparently replicating what he understood Riding The Wave is already doing. I explained that the issue was not quite as simple as that. We've been talking with Riding The Wave principals since our earliest inquiries, and remain in touch.

Larry was concerned with exactly what we have been concerned about. That this Port-sponsored initiative not replicate, complicate, or fragment what Riding The Wave is already doing. Amen. This is an opportunity that, if properly positioned and well-managed, might amplify what RTW and others are already doing and aspiring to do. That's what we're aiming for!

Larry confided that UB Editor Rick Doyle had something that sounds like this initiative on his special projects list, so I emailed him about that. (He replied early this morning to say that he thought his idea was a little different, but that he'd passed my inquiry on to his business reporters.)

Riding The Wave's new board was meeting while I chatted with Larry, and later, Cathy Schaeffer, Watershed Planning Director for Walla Walla County's Watershed Planning Department and principal with the Riding The Wave group, called to explain that Riding The Wave's Board was, as we'd heard Tuesday, still forming and not yet constituted to get actively involved with this initiative, though individuals would certainly want to be involved. After a healthy and lengthy cross examination, where we heard ourselves starting to speak more clearly about what this initiative might be, Cathy agreed to carry a message back to RTW's Board, asking for their sanction and support. We want any question, like Larry's, to be easily resolved. "RTW is behind this 100%." We hope to be able to say that following their next meeting, next Wednesday.

I spoke with Rev. Doug Barram, who had just returned from a Commitment To Community Board meeting, where, surprise-surprise, the Port's CI Initiative was discussed. Doug, who describes himself as "an on the street" kind of guy, suggested I speak with someone more policy-minded on the CTC board. I connected with Liz McDevitt - Executive Director of the United Way in Walla Walla. She explained that at the prior CTC meeting, concerns were raised about the inclusiveness of the CI Initiative, and CTC had been preparing to complain. But after Tuesday's meeting, which Liz attended, it appeared that the process would include others besides just the economic indicator-interested. Liz says that the United Way will be very active in identifying indicators.

(Teri Barila, another RTW principal and CTC board member, returned my call just now and told her take on the story. She counsels that we carefully position this initiative so that the public understands we are not stealing RTW's ground.)

Late morning, Dr. Jones from EWU sent an email, suggesting his team visit next Thursday. I fussed about this request for a couple of hours, not feeling ready yet. I finally called Jim Kuntz, who is out of town, explained the situation and asked if he would be free Thursday. He agreed to Amy and I coordinating the EWU visit as an extension of our charter, so I started calling people who might be interested in visiting with this group. (Send me a note if you'd like to be involved.) They'll arrive at 10:30, meet at one in the Port's small conference room, and are agreeable to staying through the dinner hour.

Spent time on the phone with Randal Son of Many Waters , who might know more about community indicators than anyone else in the valley. We discussed existing networks and how those might be invited into indicator discussions.

I spoke with Jeffrey Townsend of Fancy Logo about the color palatte for the cloned website.

Also sent a note to Robert Rittenhouse of Walla Walla 2020 , inviting them into the conversation.

---- ---- --- ----

Okay, the initiative is coming into focus. Our sense that this would have to be broadly community-based has been validated. (I know we haven't finished our conversations yet. If we haven't spoken with YOU, and we should, contact us.) RTW can't convene the groups for the indicator conversations. This initiative will seek broad participation. We want every organization's seal of approval! We can get the process in place with the speculation that a local steward will emerge, as will the funding to support that stewardship.

Today, we will finalize our detailed proposal for how True North might add real value to this initiative. I'd better get working on that.

Ride the Wave

Yesterday's Ride the Wave group meeting was useful for us. It provided an opportunity for us to tell the story of this proposal and engage in a dialogue with some clearly interested people. Lots of good questions and helpful comments.

One question was, "Could the Ride the Wave group be the steward of the Community Indicators Initiative here?" No one could definitely say because the board is reconstituting. And the new board would need to decide. That process will take time. Michael Davidson, President and CEO of Tourism Walla Walla, was enthusiastic about the site. Dr VanAusdle, President of WWCC, suggested that a few key indicators just get posted immediately.

We were looking for a steward, concerned about governance. Before we give birth to it, we will be well-served to consider the responsibilities parenthood brings. And I'm informed by the Spokane CII, which found its own way without grand strategy or clear objectives. This seems to be the nature of emergent processes. They start where ever they start. They roam where they roam. Later, after an obvious success has been achieved, it's easy to conclude that grand strategy or clear objectives guided the success. Not! Not with emergent processes.

It might not matter how this initiative starts, who initially stewards it, what colors the freaking site palatte projects. Maybe this initiative just needs to ditch the inertia of rest in favor of the inertia of motion, believing that momentum will present opportunities as well as difficulties. Perhaps that will provide the perfect context for the real steward to appear. Once the baby's falling, someone's going to try to catch it. Or not.

Seal of Approval

Amy and I visited Dr. Patrick Jones and Dr. Dr. Linda Kieffer at Eastern Washington University yesterday to better understand how the Spokane Community Indicator Initiative (SCII) and its website works. We found their process and their site as pure as, well the adjacent glob of Schmaltz! (Seriously, this is my highest seal of approval!) Very nice work!!

There are some slippery complications with Walla Walla replicating what the SCII has been doing.

First, notice that I didn't say, "what the SCII has done." I chose this form because SCII isn't done yet, and, frankly never expects to be done. Starting a community indicator website is one of those forever events that might require only a small step to get inside, but has no exit. Their website calls what they are doing "a process, not a product." It's a fine process. With fine results. We should enter knowing there's no exit.

Second, the SCII was, and still is, an emergent effort. It started by accident. Continued through voluntary choice. Expanded through fortunate circumstance. Seemed to attract the support and funding it needed. And resulted in a satisfying result. The process by which that result was achieved isn't repeatable. This is no criticism, but an acknowledgment of how it was, and is. SCII is a happy marriage of convenience, but marriages of convenience are not anything like a certain ticket to paradise. How will our emergent process appear here?

Third, SCII has a champion in the person of Dr. Jones. This isn't a job assignment for him, but a resonance of his personal interests, passion, and professional skill. This means he doesn't count the hours, begrudge the difficulties, or sweat the complications. For him, doing this process is being who he is. Having such a champion is communicable and convenient. Others are inspired by someone so engaged. Effort is not contingent upon funding or scheduling. Stuff just gets done. How will stuff just get done here?

Fourth, SCII is fortunate to be working in such close association with Eastern Washington University. The website design and construction work was done by a grad student, with minimal supervision. The data detective work was (and is) accomplished by Mark Wagner, a data analyst on Dr. Jones' Institute for Public Policy and Economic Analysis staff, with grad student assistance. Lisa Capoccia, program coordinator on the IPPEA staff, facilitated meetings, coordinated contacting participants, and resolved a thousand complications. The focus groups and website development work was supported by what ultimately became a six figure grant. Part of the convergence this process experiences is the convergence between EWU's strategic objectives, IPPEA's passionate director and capable staff, EWU's Center for Digital Media Design and Development, and a supportive funding source. What will Walla Walla's process be like? Who will be our staff?

Fifth, the SCII process is fairly tightly coupled. The relationships are mind-reading close. This means that Dr. Jones can intuit meaning from focus group intention and, working with his staff, translate that into acceptable results. I'm wondering how, in the absence of Dr. Jones, meaning will be interpreted here.

Sixth, IPPEA is really offering two things to Walla Walla.

1. data detective services. We provide the question, for instance, how is the population distributed here? They search for sources and choose the most authoritative source, then feedback the resulting data series.
   
2. if the series is found acceptable, they format it and load it into the site. (This is a fairly simple process and requires no intervention from the Computer Science staff.)
   

What do we provide? We choose what questions are important and describe why they are important to us. (This description gets loaded onto the website, too.) Who will say what questions are important here? Who will verify that a given data series is acceptable? Who will write up the explanations?

I could go on. The challenge here is to create, not replicate, an emergent, self-sustaining, long-lived process for initiating and maintaining a community indicators website. The initiating activities will, as with all emergent processes, deeply influence the later life of the process. This means that the initial implementation of the site cannot be accomplished by out-of-long-term-context subcontractors without incurring some long-term reconfiguration costs, but seems to need a deeply caring steward. Someone willing, even anxious, to make this effort a part of their life's work.

The process is relationship sensitive. The trust elicited in the sessions to decide what's important will be leverageable only if the relationships continue. Switching in and out will hamper the long-term viability.

The Port has proposed funding the initial creation of the site and agreed to funding EWU's site hosting and data maintenance fees, but the funding for the staff required to maintain the process here is missing. This isn't a full time job, but it is a long-term commitment. Not something that a volunteer committee, for instance, can likely satisfy.

This opportunity seems to present a larger opportunity for Walla Walla to decide that a Community Indicators process is an essential part of life here, and to fund the full ramifications of that decision with a passionate director and adequate staff. Otherwise, I'd classify this as an alluring bright idea with few long-term prospects.

The site architecture is excellent. Dr. Kiefer's insistence that her students engage in real-world development work with real clients has resulted in a world-class website. I have no reservations about utilizing this technology to display indicators here. We brought Tom Heavey, formerly the IT guy for Spokane's Hoopfest and now an IT manager at Avista (Spokane's electric utility), and one of the architects of Spokane's Hot Zone, to our meeting with Dr. Kiefer. He found the website architecture appropriately conservative, exceptionally well designed, and robust.

Likewise the data detective services. These are world-class. I have no reservations in recommending these both for their resourcefullness and for the quality of their results. They know what they are doing and do it very well.

Beginnings: Checking In and Checking Out

Amy and I learned from the Port minutes published in the Union Bulletin on Sunday 7/01 that the Commissioners had approved True North and EWU working on the Community Indicators Project the prior Thursday. A later note from Executive Director Jim Kuntz confirmed that notice and asked for time Thursday 7/05 to talk about the details. (He's traveling, working on a HUGE deal...)

I'm anxious to get moving, so I started calling some of the likely community.

No right place to start except where you start.

Amy and I visited with Port Commissioner Schneidmiller this morning (7/02) on another subject, but the Community Indicators Project crept into the conversation. I spoke on the phone with Blue Mountain Community Foundation Executive Director Lawson Knight and organizing committee member with the Ride The Wave group, Mary Campbell. All were effusively supportive of the opportunity this project provides.

Mary invited us to attend the Riding the Wave meeting Tuesday the tenth at the Chamber of Commerce. We accepted.

I left several other messages, but it's a big vacation week with Independence Day in the middle.

Later in the week, we visited with Kevin Scribner, who works with the Watershed Alliance, and Dr. Steve VanAsdle, President of Walla Walla Community College. Friday morning, we visited with Jim Kuntz and left that meeting clear that we have not yet reached agreement on the scope of this project. There are some complications to consider. Jim gave us the go-ahead to visit with Dr. Jones at EWU, and we're scheduled to meet with him on Monday in Spokane. Also scheduling a visit to the Computer Science group in Cheney who are responsible for maintaining (and also designed) the Spokane Community Indicators site.

I connected with a technical guru in Spokane to get his take on the EWU-designed Spokane site. We'll take him along with us when we visit Cheney.

Also spoke with Ben Warner at the Jacksonville Community Indicators Initiative. He had sent a link to this blog to Mary Campbell on Monday. He has some background with the Spokane group and the Walla Walla Ride the Wave folks. JCCI hosted Dr. Jones on a visit to Jacksonville. JCCI was impressed with the architecture of the SCCI site, since Ben says that a lot of communities are building their own sites without coordinating that effort with other communities, which will use essentially the same data. Displaying similar data in various ways creates a kluge knot.

Ben also counsels that the Port should not get deeply involved in defining what data will appear on the WWCI site, but focus instead upon providing the architecture for display. The Ride the Wave folks are making progress on identifying meaningful indicators and their efforts can be leveraged.

Also spoke with Kim Zentz, now the Executive Director of SIRTI in Spokane. She was the Executive Director of the Spokane Transit Authority when the Spokane Community Indicator Initiative started, and participated in early focus groups. Her comment was that Dr. Jones was very proud of his operation, and should be. Community interest is high. Ditto with satisfaction.

-----

What are we doing here, visiting with people before we even have our thirty second elevator-ride blurb about this project? We're checking in: To confirm that we're on the case. To listen to what others think, feel, and believe about this opportunity. Every conversation informs us and helps us craft a more responsive effort. We're also checking out: looking for where the edges might be. We're clear that we're not clear yet, but out of this initial uncertainty something remarkable might well hatch.

Those projects confident and certain at the beginning have more to defend and much more to unlearn before their real project can ever occur.

Starting Questions

The start of every project brings more questions than answers. Projects are actually conversations seeking to answer questions more than they ever are scripted performances.

In this spirit, the following questions (from the True North Project Development Workbook) seem germane:

1. What is this project's success criteria? How will the community measure the success of this project as it unfolds and after it's completed?
   
2. What is the nature of this project and how does this nature fit with the preferences of the project's community? Do we need to go slower than we'd prefer? Faster? Can we be sloppy and still succeed or do we need to be careful and precise? Can we make public mistakes without being vilified? How perfect is good enough?
3. What mindsets surround this effort? Is the community skeptical? Optimistic? Generous? What mindset will best serve this project?
4. How clear is the purpose? How stable the goals? How adequate the resources (time, money, material, people)? How flexible is the schedule? How familiar is the technology? How many points of focus? How stable are the internal and external environments? How many customers must be satisfied? How dispersed is the community, physically and emotionally? This project seems more information-intensive than stuff-intensive, which means that it can't be managed as if it were a construction project coordinating stuff in space and time.
   
5. What are the technical, administrative, and people leadership requirements and who will satisfy these. (It takes a community to lead a project.)
6. What are the characteristics of the key organizations involved in this project? What's the informal organization chart? Who gets to say who gets to say? What local customs must the project learn to comfortably mirror?
   
7. How does this project relate to the Port's values? EWU's values? Constituent values? What business priorities does this project directly/indirectly support?
8. What happened the last time the Port sponsored a project like this? History can inform us about likely future patterns.
9. Where did the idea for this project come from? Who's idea was it?
10. What will this project be as an end result? Why is that important? How will we know the project is completed, in objective and measurable terms?
11. What product or service will the project deliver expressed in terms of major functions and features?
12. When MUST the project be completed?
13. What quantity of the product or service will be delivered?
14. What macro-level resources are needed to complete this project? (Money, raw materials, people, equipment?)
15. What end result must the project satisfy?
16. What are the critical success factors? (Fewer than ten, stated positively!)
17. What are the certain uncertainties with potential for disrupting the project (risks)? How will these be ameliorated?
18. Who's in this project's community? (Include everyone who can effect or be effected by this effort!)
19. What support does this project need from each community member? What's their project within this project? What's the strategy for getting the support you need?
    
20. How will the project be designed? Major philosophy and stages.
21. What high-level milestones must be met?
    
22. What are the discrete task assignments?
23. Who's responsible for what?
24. How much will this project cost to complete, including administration, materials, travel, and time?
    

Straw Dogs

Much of the material presented here will be in the form of what we call "Straw Dog." A straw dog is a sample, intended to try something out, not to clearly define. The straw dog sorta-kinda looks like a dog, but no one expects it to fetch anything.

Why do we post straw dogs? Usually because we don't definitively know yet, but need to get something down to get your feedback or just to see the idea in print. Sometimes, though we never intend this, some people might feel offended by our straw dogs. Please don't take offense. If you can't help but feel offended, please understand that offense is not our intention. If you feel your blood pressure rising, please comment. We need your feedback.

Maybe the real purpose of every straw dog is to fetch your feedback. If you feel compelled to comment, the dog has done his/her work. The second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth draft might approach a solid statement. Until then, we'll proceed with a straw dog guiding our path.

Envisioning

What IS the Walla Walla Community Indicator Project?

As of today, it's a bright idea, not yet a project.

Before it can become a project, it needs some definition, a little envisioning. I like to start with the end in mind. What will the Walla Walla Community Indicators Project leave behind when it's done? What will it specifically NOT create.

The WW See Eye (CI for Community Indicators. Get it?) Project, when completed, will leave a web site, fashioned after Spokane's Community Indicators site, which displays data chosen by interested citizens of Walla Walla to represent certain aspects of Walla Walla. The data will be, like the data on Spokane's site:

Comprehensive, or important to large numbers of the community

Ideally predictive, or at least outcome-oriented and not focused on inputs

Valid measurements of real phenomena, as defined by good science and social science

Understandable to a lay audience

Benchmarkable to other communities

Available repeatedly over time to allow trend analysis

Sourced from credible sites

Asset-based; that is, describing trends around a positive definition whenever possible.

WW See Eye will also leave a community capable of managing the site. Managing will include:

• Hosting the site
• Monitoring site use, including data download volumes and site traffic
  
• Updating the data displayed on the site
• Adding, deleting, and changing the data displayed

The project will leave a community interested in and capable of using the site's data. Also a process for getting additional indicators displayed on the site, including a means for managing the request queue and funding update requests.

The project will also leave behind an enhanced public image for the Port of Walla Walla.

What will this project NOT produce?

It won't produce a community dashboard. Dashboards are interpreted summaries of data. This project will NOT INTERPRET DATA—it will not decide the meaning of any data series.

This project will not fracture or further fragment the community. Many groups in Walla Walla have been working on creating the means to measure what's going on here. This project will seek to aid these groups to achieve their goals, not insist that others merely serve our goals. We want this project to bring us together into deeper consideration.

Background

In May 2007, Eastern Washington University’s Institute for Public Policy and Economic Analysis (IPPEA) submitted a proposal to assist in the creation of a Walla Walla Community Indicators web site—fashioned after IPPEA’s Spokane Community Economic Indicators site—to Port of Walla Walla executive director Jim Kuntz.

Jim reported on this proposal at the Port's May 22 Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) meeting, asking for feedback. At the following Port Commissioner meeting, Amy Schwab and David Schmaltz of True North reported their support and concerns regarding this proposal. Following that meeting, Amy and David met privately with Jim to provide more details of their evaluation. On June 15, Jim and David conducted a conference call with D. Patrick Jones, Ph.D., Executive Director, and Lisa Capoccia, Program Coordinator, of IPPEA. In that conversation, Jim asked IPPEA to amend their proposal to reflect changing preferences and for David to submit a proposal from True North.