Placemaking Facilitation Game @ Hamar (Norway), Nov 2018

Placemaking Facilitation Game - workshop and report by Todor Kesarovski

‘Levende Lokaler’ Conference (Hamar, 1. November 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

1

Background

Recently developed as a ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’, the tool has its initial roots as an ‘Urban Development (Strategy) Facilitation’ workshop. It was originally developed and executed in May 2015 in Buenos Aires (Argentina) as ‘Urban-Environmental Scenarios for Lower Parana Delta’. Since then the workshop has been further developed through multiple implementations with specific tasks and evolved into a facilitation game – more specific, into ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’ in its latest edition (from the beginning of 2018).

The underlying concept of the workshop is organised around a game plot that involves collaborative work with the help of two main features (decks of cards). They are:

‘Persona Cards’ / ‘Stakeholder Cards’ A deck of cards, which represents a number of archetypical actors/stakeholders (8 in this case), who are part of most urban development projects that aim at socio-cultural and economic revitalisations.

‘Case Cards’ A deck of cards, transcribing particular cases, which represent standard challenges, opportunities and crticial cases that every facilitator (could) face during urban revitalisation projects.

case card

Placemaking facilitation game

What’s in it for me?’

Danny

This square could be a circle.

Casey

case card

Placema facilitat game

Can I create some Based on these two card decks, the workshop participants (separated in smaller groups, 4-8 life pers.)here? have to collectively resolve multiple

Game Plot

Less is more.

practical situations by drawing connections between the stakeholders, as well as, outlining specific engagement, cooperative and development strategies. Then each solution is presented and shared to all participants, providing the latter with the chance for reflection.

By implementing few rounds of this exercise, the workshop’s game plot guides the participants through the cycle of (1) connecting, alex laurenCe (2) co-solving, (3) sharing and potentially (4) co-innovating useful solutions for their own real-world challenges. In its essence, the workshop (facilitation game) serves as a practical tool for drawing and elaborating upon applicable strategies for specific contexts.

How I can make this works?

2

We must comply with the regulations.

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Goals and Outputs: - - -

Exchange of successful practices and contextual insights; Brainstorming and outlining practical facilitation strategies; Enhancing the collaborative nature of the ‘Levende Lokaler’ project.

The workshop’s core objective aims at supporting the development of a strategic urban planning initiatives and more precisely, the enhancement of specific stakeholders’ engagement and interests management. The eight personas / stakeholders represent prominent actors within the urban (re)development and are described especially from the perspective of their potential inclusion, as well as, impact on a hypothetical renovation initiative. By doing so, the game aims to link the diverse private, community and public interests while keeping the focus on managing the whole engagement / revitalization process as efficient as possible.

In addition, the workshop supports the exchange of professional experience among the participants (municipal representatives / urban developers), who have the opportunity to share successful initiatives and insights regarding particular issues in their own practice in the course of the game’s execution. This allows them to identify concrete trends, similarities and differences, while effectively collaborate on actual solutions to overcome the hypothetical challenges.

The ambition of the exercise is also to build upon the knowledge that is already existent and strengthens the collaboration between the different participants (municipalities) within a long-term perspective, inspired by the ‘Levende Lokaler’ project.

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

3

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

2

‘Levende Lokaler’ Adaptation

Based on available documentation regarding the project ‘Levende Lokaler’ and the experience of the three pilot municipalities, the content of the ‘Persona Cards’ and the ‘Case Cards’ was drafted. At later stage they were further discussed with professionals who are more familiar with the concrete contexts and cases from the initiative - Siri Holmboe Hoeibo (DOGA) and Lisbeth Iversen (Arendal Kommune). Then based on the received feedback, the card decks has been adapted, resulting in the identification of eight major archetypical personas / stakeholders and a set of cases.

Personas Each one of the eight personas are characterized by a special description, potential contribution that (s)he could add to an urban revitalization and motivation for her/him to get engaged in the process. It is vital to mention that these characteristics are identified through artificial simplification of each persona. It is not realistic to fully apply the specific descriptions, used in the game, to every actor representing a certain stakeholder in a real-life project development. In other words, the game plot does not intend to restrict the way each of the personas is perceived and analyzed but rather provides a simplified starting point for discussions, aiming at sharing experiences and drafting facilitation strategies.

Alex

Local Activist

Can I create some life here?

Profile She is an young, enthusiastic person who is highly influenced by new ideas and desire to support the (re)development of her neighbourhood but lacks specific knowledge and experience. contribution Local resources, new ideas, as well as, enthusiasm that seeks changes and transformations within the neighbourhood.

Drivers To live in a vibrant neighbourhood with high quality of life through driving positive change and implementing new ideas and injecting life in the area where she grew up.

Drew Let’s help each other.

Community Leader Profile She has a strong attachment to the neighbourhood and cares about its positive (re)development but can try to acquire personal advantages by directing the attention to a specific, important for her issue. contribution Local resources, new ideas, as well as, enthusiasm that seeks changes and transformations within the neighbourhood.

Drivers General well-being of neighbourhood through resolving issues that are particularly important for her; maintenance of personal status within the local community.

4

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Danny What’s in it for me?’

Landlord / Property Owner Profile He is profit-oriented but still more flexible with arrangements because of he has an attachment to the area and the neighbourhood. contribution Real-estate assets and certain level of understanding when there is clarity in respect to different actors’ responsibilities.

Drivers Profit, occupancy, positive development of the neighbourhood in the long-term.

Kelly

Real Estate Agent / Investor

Keep your eyes on the price.

Profile As a representative of the real estate industry she is strongly driven by monetary profit, both corporate and personal. Although she brings fresh investments and financial support to the (re) development her sympathy towards the neighbourhood is expressed in securing higher revenues. contribution External financial investments and partnerships.

Drivers Monetary profit, both in short and long-term.

Frankie We must comply with the regulations.

Municipal Officer (Construction & Regulations) Profile As a representative of the governmental administration he has the obligation to work in favor of the public interest and local communities. However, as such actor he needs to, first of all, follow the formal regulations and technical requirements so getting out of the general guidelines tends to be challenging. contribution Access to many resources and formal support.

Drivers Enhancing the general liveability of the local inhabitants and executing successful (re)development urban projects to make the city more attractive for living, working and visiting.

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

5

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Jerry How I can make this works?

Entrepreneur (Small / Start-up Business) Profile He is trying to establish a start-up business, based on ambitious vision to become large and influential enterprise but at this early stage his venture faces high uncertainty and realistic possibility to fail. contribution External resources, enthusiasm, creativity and desire to develop.

Drivers Taking part in flexible and innovative economic models, cheap rent, good location, relation to fellow souls and co-creative spirit.

Casey This square could be a circle.

Artist Profile She possesses an unorthodox perspective towards the potentials of the built environment and tends to recognize specific qualities in buildings or urban areas. When clustered with fellow colleagues, she could deliver an influential impact on any urban (re)development process. contribution High level of socio-cultural capital and unorthodox perspectives.

Drivers Cheap rent, attractive location, cultural-historic heritage and social clusters.

Laurance Less is more.

Building Professional (Architect / Civil Engineer) Profile He is a professional in spatial design and/or construction who tends to focus on the beneficial prospects while supporting a particular project. Nevertheless, his richer professional expertise makes him less flexible in the decision-making process when is up to spatial design and appearance of the transformation. contribution Professional expertise regarding building transformations about design, regulations, sustainability and occasionally flexible funding.

Drivers Direct or non-direct financial benefits, experimental design, portfolio building, professional positioning.

6

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

3

Workshop Execution

The concrete workshop edition of the ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’ was designed to be executed for the duration of two hours during a two-day conference involving predominantly professionals in the field of urban (re)development, both architects and facilitators (mainly from municipal structures). The total amount of participants in the workshop were 24, separated in six groups by four people.

The separation in smaller groups was motivated by providing the attendees with enough possibility to interact and be active during the within-group discussions, stimulating them to share practical knowledge from their own experience. The workshop was organized in three major stages (warm-up, two rounds of case resolving and closure).

Before beginning the actual workshop the participants were familiarized with the game plot and the characteristics of each persona who they would interact with.

Warm-Up The initial stage of the workshop was consisted of an exercise during which all of the participants had the task of answering three introductory questions individually. The idea behind the exercise was to allow them to think about all of the introduced personas in the perspectives of the attendees’ personal professional experience.

Except of simply answering these questions every participants had to write down her reply on a specific color post-it and stick it on, previously distributed for this purpose, A4-pages representing each one of the actors. The duration of the exercise was 10 minutes.

The questions and their respective color code were: (1)

Which actor have you been working most with? Why? (green)

(2)

Which actor do you find most challenging to work with? Why? (orange)

(3)

Which actor would you like to work more with? Why? (pink)

During this exercise a first basic reflection was realized as few attendees introduced a new persona as part of the deck – Polly, the politician, either on local (neighborhood) or city scale. Respectively, they assigned to her some of the answers. After all of the participants concluded with the exercise their answers were collected, combined and exposed in front of everyone. These results were later addressed and discussed as part of the workshop closure.

It is worth outlining that already in this initial part of the workshop the participants started engaging in conversation about sharing experiences, while exploring the characteristics of the different personas although the exercise was designed to be executed completely individually.

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

7

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Round 1 After everyone got more familiar with the characteristics of each actor, the participants were prepared to proceed towards the core part of the workshop. It was consisted of two rounds of case resolutions where the attendees were encouraged to share practical experience and collaborate on particular strategies and / or managerial frameworks.

Every group (6 in total, 4 persons each) was assigned with randomly chosen case card, representing a particular situation (challenge, opportunity or critical case), and then they had 10 minutes available for discussing potential solutions and drawing causal relationships between the different personas. Then one representative of each group was invited to present the case and the respective resolution(s) that the group agreed upon to everyone else for 2 minutes. The rest of the participants were also provided with a possibility to reflect on the presented case/solution. On certain occasions these reflections tended to open valuable constructive discussions. Therefore, a follow-up comments and considerations were encouraged by the workshop facilitator.

Round 2 The second round of case resolving was executed in the same way as the previous one with the difference that participants were even more familiar with the game plot. This naturally made them feel more comfortable in the discussions (both in-group and with all workshop participants), as well as, drawing strategic connections between the different personas while drafting concrete resolutions.

As a result, they suggested another municipal actor who could be considered as a persona, part of the game plot – Municipal Business Manager. (S)he seemed to be particularly relevant actor in cases related to entrepreneurship and business investments.

Apart from this, it is worth mentioning that the workshop participants were processing the first part of the round (in-group discussion) faster while spending more time on reflecting other groups’ resolutions. Additional encouragement for provoking reflection was rarely needed during the second round.

8

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Closure As it was initially planned, as a focal point of the workshop closure was used the input, collected by the participants during the warmup exercise. When aggregated, the information underlined some predictable results but also outlined some intriguing suggestions. The full provided input is summarized in the table below.

Not surprisingly, considering the profile of the workshop participants and their profession, Frankie was determined as the most common co-worker but he was also defined as one of the most challenging actors to work with. On the contrary, most of the participants outlined that the actor who they would like to work more with is Alex. Despite the various mentioned reasons for this, it was predominantly agreed upon the statement that ‘there are never enough activists’ to join any urban (re)development project. Another essential conclusion was that according to the present professionals Danny is the most challenging actor to work with because he is profit-orientated, but in comparison to Kelly (also profit-orientated), landlords tend to be with very different profiles and specific drives.

Persona

Which actor have you been working most with? Why?

Which actor do you find most challenging to work with?

Why?

Which actor would you like to work more with? Why? 8

3 Alex Local Activist

(a) due to type of projects/work; (b) politicians are interested in supporting activists’ interests.

1 no specification

(a) informal support & new perspectives; (b) never enough activists; (c) easier to secure other resources when she is on board; (d) creativity, fun, solutionsorientated; (e) useful & relevant impact.

2 Drew Community Leader

4 (a) copes with project goals; (b) efficient collaborator.

0

(a) she has an inner motivation to change; (b) there is need more people like her, working with and within the municipality to co-create.

8 3 Danny Landlord / Property Owner

(a) due to type of projects/work; (b) he tends to engage in the urban (re)developments.

(a) because he is profit-orientated and hard to engage in long-term perspective (x2); (b) hard to identify one type; (c) either opposing to change or profit-orientated.

3 (a) because he is important; (b) big potential when match ambitions.

3 6 Kelly Real Estate Agent / Investor

1 she works directly with the planning department

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

(a) too profit-orientated (x3); (b) different drives: profit vs. liveability / profit vs. quality in projects (x2).

(a) due to type of projects/work, ownership structure; (b) she has high potential impact, brings inspiration and ambition in the mutual urban developments; (c) tends to prioritize a long-term vision, potential gatekeeper in realising urban liveability projects.

9

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

Persona

Which actor have you been working most with? Why?

Which actor do you find most challenging to work with?

Why?

Which actor would you like to work more with? Why?

6 10 Frankie Municipal Officer (Construction & Regulations)

(a) formal co-worker (x3); (b) challenges in planning and regulations (x3); (c) client; (d) research purposes.

(a) crucial mismatch between knowledge, design know-how and decision-makers; (b) he does not support change; (c) he is a formal actor who depend on others in the system; (d) it is hard to involve him in experimentations (x2).

(a) due to type of projects/work; (b) he is creative, innovative and experimental; (c) he is a great ‘networker’.

Casey Artist

2

he brings development focus

3

3 Jerry Entrepreneur (Small / Start-up Business)

1

0

2 (a) hard to find the right approach to collaborate with; she is the key for things to happen (b) lack of pragmatism.

(a) positive impact; (b) innovation-driven; (c) he is dependent on things to work out.

2 innovation-driven

3 3 Laurance Building Professional (Architect / Civil Engineer)

0

Polly* Politician

0

(a) dependent on regulations, often he is not very creative (x2); (b) he misses a will to fight against developments.

2 difficult to connect with

(a) he has a strong voice, influential upon society to develop cities in a sustainable way; (b) high self-drive, enthusiastic and easy to collaborate with when engaged; (c) innovation-driven when developing cultural areas and spaces.

3 they are the ultimate decisionmakers (x2)

It was notified that Kelly (who similar to Danny brings economic assets) was also identified as an actor who is challenging to work with due to her profit-orientated nature; once on board though, she is acknowledged for her impact, expertise and ambition. Laurance was identified simultaneously as not very creative (dependent on regulations) and innovative-minded persona. This indicates the notion that building professionals are having a contradictory character in the real practice of urban revitalization. According to the workshop participants Jerry and Drew are two personas who strongly recognized as positive actors and not challenging to work with.

Furthermore, the attendees were encouraged to discuss and identify missing personas from their practice. As earlier notified, it was confirmed by all that the politician (Polly) is essential to be included because she represents the ultimate decision-maker and it is vital to draft strategies regarding her involvement. The other persona mentioned during the workshop, the municipal business manager, was also confirmed as a valuable actor, who can be added in specific cases during the game but involved more in real-life projects.

10

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

Placemaking Facilitation Game [report]

When encouraged to think about more influential stakeholders, the participants outlined another two: (1) municipal playmaker / internal innovator, who is capable of pulling strings and experiments within the work of formal structure to support social innovation and (2) the researcher, analyst (data scientist), who can provide empirical facts to assist a favoring decision-making process. Most of the participants identified themselves as the former actor, while notifying that the latter needs to be involved more in the urban redevelopment processes in order to favor more innovative transformation because unorthodox approaches are hard to accept by actors and traditional decision-makers. Numbers and empirical facts can ease this process.

4

RESULTS AND REFLECTION

The minimum goal of provoking the participants to share professional experience was positively achieved. This was occurring at any stage of the workshop even in the warm-up session, which was originally designed to be executed individually. The workshop also successfully supported the collaborative nature of the ‘Levende Lokaler’ project. The achievement of this goal was particularly pursued during the rounds of the case resolutions and their presentations. Furthermore, the follow-up reflections by other participants tend to lead to intriguing statements that open constructive discussions based on practical experiences. It is worth considering that this seemed to be the case because all of the involved attendees in the workshop represented actual professionals in the field with sufficient amount of hands-on expertise.

However, it can be notified that for elaborating practical strategies and getting more applicable input while using the tool, it seems necessary to involve the participants for a longer workshop or additional workshop session, where they can propose challenges and critical cases from their actual (current) projects. The set of case cards includes blank options where specific situation can be added directly in a workshop environment but to execute this appropriately the participants need to be fully familiar with the game plot.

Following this line of thought it can be stated that the format of two rounds of case resolving seems to be sufficient for the participants to get fully aware of the game plot; at least, when the workshop involves participants with experience in the field of urban (re)development.

In the particular workshop they even got too comfortable with their case resolution(s) during the second round and therefore, in a single occasion it was mentioned that the group did not use their 10 minutes discussion time appropriately. This supported another feedback discussed as part of the workshop closure that it might be useful to introduce an extra deck of ‘crisis cards’ that would potentially add a complementary condition regarding the case; e.g. ‘a major investor pulls out of the project’, ‘a major supporter of the project in the municipality is re-positioned due to formal restructure’ etc.

Furthermore, it is worth outlining the recognized potential of the ‘warm-up exercise’ which was also a focal point of the workshop closure. Interestingly enough, the task that was originally aiming to familiarize the participants with the different personas allow them to reflect effectively on their practical experience and work. When all individual answers were combined and the results were visible to all, multiple directions of a group elaboration arose. However, the way this particular workshop was designed did not allow the participants to have a substantial amount of time to keep this strong focus on the personas and their characteristics. This could have provoked a fruitful discussion, as well as, deeper analysis on the stakeholders in the urban (re)development process. Due to this reflection, it is worth considering developing further this exercise as a larger workshop session, part of the ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’.

In any case, it can be concluded that if executed with building professionals / city developers the ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’ can be used as an effective tool for provoking participants to share particular experiences from their practice even in a workshop operated for just two hours. For achieving more structural results of outlining concrete urban (re)development strategies, it seems necessary to execute a longer workshop, an extra session or assign an individual facilitator for every workshop group in order to guide the discussions and extract specific outcomes.

To summarize, the core objectives of the workshop, identified prior to its execution, were achieved but it has been also mentioned that certain elements of the ‘Placemaking Facilitation Game’ can be further develop in order to foster specific outcomes. That said, it is fair to claim that the tool possesses even further untapped potential to be used more effectively with professionals and urban developers.

Levende Lokaler (Hamar, 1. Nov 2018)

11

|In|Formal - Placemaking Facilitation Game Workshop: |In|Formal | Facebook.com/InFormal.BG/ Photos & Illustrations: Bylab Hamar & |In|Formal

November 2018