Blog Post #6 Potential Problems Working from a Macro Perspective

After reading through various pages of the Community Toolbox I have selected to focus on three potential problems associated with working from a macro perspective that I feel could have an impact on our specific community intervention project. 

 The first potential problem involves communication, both internally within the parameters of the group and externally, between the group and the target audience.  This particular section of the Community Toolbox discusses the need for developing a plan to ensure your word gets out.  A clear and detailed plan will help to target your audience more accurately, increase both effectiveness and efficiency and give structure to your group.  The planning stage allows for members of the group to brainstorm creative ways to get the message out, establish clear channels of communication so that members don’t feel excluded and instills a sense of ownership of the project for each of the members.   One important strategy for ensuring that communication channels remain open and there is a clean flow of information is to address problems immediately as they arise.  By tackling a problem as a cohesive team rumors can be forestalled and respect for everyone is maintained.  Of course, none of this is possible if feedback from the group is not solicited and acknowledged.  It is not enough to ask members for feedback about communication if the response is not addressed and responded to quickly.  I find there is an incredible potential for this problem to arise within our own class semester, but especially between the three classes involved in the project.  For this reason it is imperative that we meet in the early stages of the project to establish a clear plan for communication.  I think we have a good beginning plan in place, but that plan will need to be continued to be assessed and reevaluated to maximize efficiency and effectiveness.  We will need to solicit feedback, both positive and negative, from members of all three classes and use that feedback to keep the channels open without alienating any members.

The second potential problem that I thought could affect our project concerns the evaluation of our interventions.  The Community Toolbox addresses the need for ongoing and accurate program evaluation.  It is mentioned that you have to know what you are trying to measure and the method you will use to determine if a program is working effectively or not.  Not only can the group learn from any failures or negative results of the evaluation, but it could also serve to empower the group when the assessment results are positive.  Both positive and negative results will help to spur further action, adjust the program as necessary, and motivate the team to continue working towards a common goal.  Some reasons which are mentioned for groups choosing not to evaluate and measure program progress are the fear of revealing negative results, lack of time to see an evaluation through, fear of the evaluation process itself and a lack of awareness as to how to carry out an accurate and comprehensive assessment.  It is argued however, that a thorough evaluation can allow for a better perspective of the problem, encourage participant ownership and responsibility and uncover strategies that did or did not work.  If we can get the participants to “buy-in” to the project and commit to it, then the analysis can be used to celebrate the positives.  I believe for our project, an ongoing evaluation, even if an informal one, will help us to adjust our strategies, discarding those that don’t work and building upon the ones that do.  It will not work if we don’t buy into the project and commit to see it through to the end.  Imagine the feeling of accomplishment we will experience when the event goes off smoothly and awareness of the problem grows.

The third and final problem area I choose to examine was facing opposition or conflict.  There is again a need to develop a plan for addressing any potential opposition to our project.  We cannot just go into this project blindly believing that we will win everyone over to our cause.  There will always be some degree of opposition, and having a plan to counter it will be beneficial.  By addressing the resistance and responding effectively to potential barriers we will be better able to build collaborative partnerships with those who might otherwise oppose our project.  Waiting to address any opposition and then developing an intervention to that opposition would be counterproductive and waste time and resources.  However, establishing a plan to deal with any resistance will allow us to prevent it form occurring and be a more efficient use of out time and resources.  By responding to any potential attacks in a positive manner, we will be able to strengthen our group and develop a more favorable public opinion of our project.  I found it interesting when the Community Toolbox listed the “Ten D’s” to avoid: Deflection, Delays, Denials, Discounting, Deception, Dividing, Dulcifying, Discrediting, Destroy and Deal.  If we can avoid falling victim to all of these practices we should be able to enjoy a positive result from our project. 

WE DID IT!!!