Transcript Slide 1

The Partnership Way:
Blueprint Development Session
Joanne Cashman
Director, The IDEA Partnership At NASDSE
Luann Purcell
Executive Director, CASE
Stacy Skalski
Dir. of Professional Policy & Practice, NASP
Purpose of Our Meeting
• Design a Blueprint that will help guide
replication of the Partnership Way at the local
and state levels.
• Develop self-assessment rubrics to help guide
reflection and self-evaluation of the three
critical elements of this way of working:
Adaptive/Human Side, Technical Side,
Operational Side
IDEA 1997 Required Technical,
Operational and Adaptive Change
 Access to the general curriculum
 Participation in large scale assessments
 Evidence based practice
 Placement neutral funding
 We had knowledge and skill gaps
….but most importantly…
 We had relationship gaps with the partners we
needed to accomplish the new vision
 With this understanding was born…The IDEA
Partnership
The Ongoing Challenge: Humans
 Learning that technical solutions are
necessary but often not sufficient
 Knowing when a persistent problem needs a
adaptive (human) solution
 Building adaptive (human) skills as a part of
strategy
Two Routes to Policy Decision Making
Dimension
Who
Expert Model


How



Why


Senior administrators drive
policy decisions
Designated specialists
Stakeholder Model


Invite interested participants to a 
meeting.

Participants who attend have

some input.
Administrators chart path, make
decisions, empower others to
take action.
The buck stops with the
chief…thus, they get the most
say.
Leader driven




Representative cross stakeholder
group
Facilitator convenes; group has
authority to guide actions and
decision making
Leading by convening
Decisions by consensus
Utilize creative agreement
strategies to bring the group to
consensus
Desire buy-in across groups
Grassroots investment engages
participants and empowers action
Sustainable after current leaders
have moved on
Broader spectrum of possible
solutions and perspectives
Critical Elements
Adaptive
Focuses on the consensus building that is needed as a prerequisite to teamwork. People have to agree to proceed.
How do they come to agreement? Requires understanding
and a willingness to make behavior changes.
Technical
Focuses on the building of the infrastructure that is
necessary to proceed to implementation. What tools do
you need? What policies and procedures will guide you?
Who will participate in decision making? How often will a
group meet? Requires information, knowledge or tools.
Operational
Focuses on operational steps to implementing the
Partnership Way.
Reference: Heifetz and Linsky, Leadership on the Line, 2002
A Framework for
Stakeholder Engagement
Stakeholder Engagement: The IDEA Partnership Way
New kinds of leadership
Translate complex challenges
into ways that individuals can
contribute
Focus on the work and the
relationship
Recognize Individual
pursuits and shared goals
Leading by
convening
Doing work
together
Coalescing
around issues
Ensuring relevant
participation
Shared Concerns
What will bring people together?
The right mix of stakeholders
Who must be involved to ensure
changes in practice?
Infrastructure
for Engagement
A New Framework for
Stakeholder Engagement
Leading
by
Convening
Ensuring Relevant
Participation
The Partnership Way
• Coalesce around issues
Ask yourself: Who cares about this issue and why?
• Ensure relevant participation
Ask yourself: What work is already underway?
• Do work together
Ask yourself: What shared work could unite us?
• Lead by convening
Ask yourself: Can you successfully lead on this issue
without your stakeholders?
Our Process for our Work Together
– Review Agenda
– Working on a team focusing on one quadrant at a
time
• Groups balanced across stakeholder groups
• Stay focused on your quadrant
• We will work together on quadrant 4 (Leading by Convening)
– Record and save your work on a computer in the
worksheets provided
– Monitor your time so that your work addresses each
step needed
Critical Elements
Assessment Group
Coalescing around
Issues
Adaptive-Human
Ensuring Relevant
Participation
Technical
Admin
Rich Barbacane/NAESP Pat Guthrie/CASE
Family/Advocate
Suzanne Fornaro/LDA
Policy Maker
Bill McQueary/CoPPost Secondary
Transition-AZ
Practitioner
Kevin Murphy/Co PSchool Behavioral
Health-NH
Mary Beth Klotz/NASP
Deborah AdamczykDixon/ASHA
Sharon Shultz/NEA
Staff
Diane Ogelsby
Patrice Linehan
Mariola Rosser
Diane Autin/RPTAC4
Michael
Graham/AACLD
Frank Podobnik/SDSEMT
Doing Work Together
Operational
Kevin Murphy, NH MH
CoP
Helene Fallon/LIFT
Carrie Heath –
Phillips/CCSSO
Off site review
Admin
Family/Advocate
Policy Maker
Practitioner
John Nori, NASSP
Mary Summers,
AASA
Aurelia Carter ,
National MH CoP,
Family PG
Debra Gay, SD SP Ed,
GA
Linda Marsal, CEC
David Lavender,
Lakeview SD, MI
Melissa Patsche, Big
Spring SD, PA
Patti Solomon, GA
SPDG, CAFÉ Process
Beth Hanselman, SD Katey Mc Gettrick,
SP ED , IL
CCSSO
John Riley, NEA
Lisa Thomas, AFT
Patrice Linehan
Mariola Rosser
Sandy Schefkind,
AOTA
Staff
Diane Ogelsby
“In theory, there is
no difference
between theory
and practice …in
practice…
there is….”
YOGI BERRA
Questions? Discussion?