Through the links on this page we can explore what makes Processes tick and how they compare with each other. With such understandings we may be better equipped to use them more successfully and flexibly and to design Multi Approach Programs.
As practitioners work toward a useful analysis and rating system for dialogue and deliberation based on the four items mentioned above, the issue of power needs special attention. While we may see ourselves as experts, we are most authentically participants.
In most participatory practices, theorists and practitioners are interested in power shifting, away from experts who "facilitate" groups and do "research on" people, toward a more peer to peer practices. Some believe a more just practice of research and group process facilitation arises out of co facilitation and co research by all members. While this is not possible in all cases, the issue of power does need to be included explicitly.
Three suggestions for ratings to be included in a tool while help rating how power is dealt with in a method:
1. A data collection tool that is broadly used by facilitators and participants.
2. Some accounting/rating for the level of expert facilitation and some kind of justification and rating for that choice.
This also has implications on the value of outcomes.
3. A rating of axiology (function) that expresses the greater purpose of the research (especially as it applies to power dynamics) also needs to be included. Much great learning comes simply from learning how not to do it!