The purpose of this webpage is to document the process that was used to design, manage and evaluate the fourth ParEvo exercise, known as 2020. Through the comments facility below it will also provide an opportunity for participants to add their views on the process. Please feel free to add any comments or questions below.
I will structure reporting on the process using the 12 stages outlined on the Start Here page of this website, which describe how to go about planning and implementing and evaluating a ParEvo exercise.
1. Clarifying the aim of a ParEvo exercise
The purpose of this ParEvo exercise was to give a wide range of people an opportunity to see how ParEvo worked. If the exercise works as well as intended I hope a number of the participants will then look for opportunities where they can use ParEvo in their own area of work, with themselves playing the role of facilitator rather than myself.
With this aim in mind, I had to find a topic that was likely to be of interest to a wide range of people. Climate change seemed to be an ideal topic.
As explained on the start here page, there are two possible types of purposes. One is a content objective, in this case, it’s to learn about different perspectives on what might happen to global warming from the year 2020 onwards. The other is a process objective. In this case, it’s to observe how people participate in the construction of these different storylines about climate change and to show participants how they can analyse this kind of data when they themselves are facilitators of a ParEvo exercise.
The start here page also makes a distinction between forecasting and backcasting. In this exercise we are doing forecasting because we have no particular end goal in mind, it’s an exploration of possibilities and we don’t know exactly where that exploration will take us.
Lesson 1: Give a ParEvo exercise that will grab peoples attention. “2020” was not ideal. Perhaps “Climate Change 2020” or something like this might have been better.
2. Identifying who will be involved
At this stage (24/08/2019) there are 12 participants from 11 countries. Their names will not be disclosed because an important part of the ParEvo design is to focus on the content of people’s ideas not the identity of those expressing those ideas. Based on past experience of this kind of exercise I expect that some of the participants may drop out, in which case I will recruit additional participants from the same source. That source was the membership of the MandE News email list which I manage.
Query 1: Is there a case for offering incentives for people to keep participating once they join in exercise? Perhaps a donation by the facilitator to a particular relevant charity or one identified by the participants themselves?
3. Describing the starting point of the process
The starting point of a ParEvo process is the development of a seed paragraph of text, which becomes the basis of all storylines which are developed by participants thereafter. All the participants will see this seed text as soon the ParEvo process begins and they are invited to make their first contribution, to be added to that seed text.
4. Defining the endpoint
Because this is a forecasting exercise, rather than a backcasting exercise, there is no endpoint which the storylines need to be orientated towards.
But another kind of endpoint has been defined and that is the number of iterations that this exercise will go through. At this stage, it is planned to go through at least 10 iterations. In each iteration, the participants will have the opportunity to review the developing storylines up to that point and to decide which of those storylines they want to add a new bit of text extending that storyline.
5. The facilitator provides guidance to participants
At the top of the ParEvo webpage which participants will have access to, showing the development of this 2020 exercise there will be a short body of text written by the facilitator. That text will provide guidance to the participants about their contributions. In some cases that guidance might be tailored specifically to the immediate iteration underway.
6. Participants make their contributions
Lesson 2: Peoples’ contributions in the first iteration varied in the span of time they covered. Facilitators need to remind participants that there are 10 iterations and so they need to “pace themselves” i.e. not compress too big a span of time into the first few contributions.
Lesson 3: The facilitator may want to define each iteration as covering a specific span of time, rather than an undefined period of time.
Some other desirables: contributions would ideally refer to countries, organisations, people, times and places. Though some physical events might not necessarily involve people.
An open questions: To what extent should encouragement be given to develop specific types of storylines, versus just let whatever is there evolve in what ever direction is preferred? I now worry that I may have given overly limiting guidance in my 2nd iteration email.
7. Developing storylines are shared
How long should I wait before closing an iteration and sharing those contributions, so that they can be commented on? I have played with 48 hours, to allow people from all over the world to contribute in sufficient time. but if I hurry people up too much I may loose valuable participants. More participants, rather than less, is best at this early concept testing stage
8. Re-iteration of 5, 6, 7
“Hello From the Year 2050. We Avoided the Worst of Climate Change — But Everything Is Different” by Bill McKibben, in Time magazines. https://time.com/5669022/climate-change-2050/?amp=true&xid=tcoshare&__twitter_impression=true