Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:57:29 AM: Amy Sebring: Welcome to the EIIP Virtual Forum Round Table! Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:57:38 AM: Amy Sebring: For the benefit of our first-timers, when you see a blue Web address, you can click on it and the referenced Web page should appear in a browser window. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:57:46 AM: Amy Sebring: After the first one, the browser window may not automatically come to the top, so you may need to bring it forward by clicking on a button at the status bar at the bottom of your screen. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:57:55 AM: Amy Sebring: Right before we begin the discussion portion we will review how to submit questions/comments. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:58:05 AM: Amy Sebring: Today, we are pleased to welcome another EIIP Partner, the Marasco Newton Group, Ltd., which is an employee-owned consulting firm located in Arlington, Virginia founded in 1990. See http://www.marasconewton.com/main.htm Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:58:25 AM: Amy Sebring: It is my pleasure to introduce Ms. Kim Fletcher, recently promoted to Vice President of the company and lead of the Management Solutions cluster. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:58:36 AM: Amy Sebring: She has over 20 years experience in emergency management and operations using continuous improvement methodologies Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:58:47 AM: Amy Sebring: and practices in designing, managing, and implementing Federal emergency management and communication programs, both as a private consultant and as a Federal employee. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:59:13 AM: Amy Sebring: Her previous experience includes serving as the Senior Planner for Special Preparedness Programs within EPA's Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Prevention Office (CEPPO) where ... Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:59:24 AM: Amy Sebring: she was responsible for Continuity of Operations, National Security Emergency Preparedness and Federal Response Planning as well as serving as the Crisis Management Team Director during operations. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:59:41 AM: Amy Sebring: She also served as a lead member of core inter-agency teams that designed and implemented the emergency response plans and procedures for EPA, as well as the National Response Team and the Regional Response Teams during presidentially declared disasters. Tue Dec 14, 1999 11:59:53 AM: Amy Sebring: She joins us today to tell us about Marasco, and also will discuss some ideas for preventing and resolving disputes that may arise during disaster response. Welcome Kim, and congratulations on your promotion. Kim Fletcher: Good afternoon/morning everyone. It is indeed a pleasure to take part in this week's EIIP Roundtable discussion. I am glad that so many of you will be joining me for the next hour or so. Kim Fletcher: As a partner to the EIIP Project, the Marasco Newton Group, Ltd., is proud to support the efforts by the EIIP in promoting effective and efficient information sharing on current emergency and crisis management issues. The EIIP values and mission are very similar to those of our firm. Kim Fletcher: Many of our employees have been active in previous EIIP activities, including the WEBEX Disaster Exercise 2 weeks ago. We appreciate the opportunity to provide support to these cutting- edge processes and new ways of looking at the more traditional aspects of emergency management. Kim Fletcher: Now perhaps I would like to give everybody a little background information on our company. As a good starting point, our website, while needing some updates, contains a lot of background information on our corporate culture, capabilities, and client base. The address for our website is http://www.marasconewton.com Check it out. Kim Fletcher: In a nutshell, the Marasco Newton Group, Ltd. is a medium-sized employee-owned management consulting firm in Arlington, Virginia (suburban Washington, D.C.). Our 315+ employees represent a very diverse group of professional trainers, engineers, environmental scientists, facilitators, emergency and crisis managers, information managers, and communications specialists. Kim Fletcher: Our original focus was on environmental and transportation programs and information technology. As we continue to expand, we have diversified our projects to include disaster and emergency management, dispute resolution, conflict management, facilitation and meeting planning, strategic planning and others. Last year we did over $25 million in sales and now have nine prime contracts with various federal agencies. Kim Fletcher: MNG (as part of its Management Solutions Division) manages the nation's largest collaboration and dispute resolution contract. Our emergency management clients include the U.S. Treasury Department, EPA, US Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and the District of Columbia Office of Emergency Management. Kim Fletcher: Today, I would like to start a discussion on using collaborative processes during emergency operations. Several of our staff have experiences being engaged in operations at the federal, state and local levels, and finding that we are spending more time negotiating with our response partners than focusing on the operation itself. Kim Fletcher: Let me use a personal example.... As the Crisis Management Team Director for EPA during the Midwest Flood in 1993, I found myself facilitating a large number of small meetings between EPA program offices, State counterpart offices and FEMA. Most of these were meetings to explain roles and responsibilities, authorities and identifying opportunities for collaboration on common actions. Kim Fletcher: The flood and other response operations led me to begin using "neutrals" for meetings such as those. The benefit of using neutral facilitators is that all the parties get heard, and the hard questions can be asked and answered in a non-threatening environment. That is crucial to successful coordinated actions in/after an emergency response arena. Kim Fletcher: Here at Marasco Newton, we have a unique group of senior facilitators who have emergency response backgrounds. We are finding more and more often that Federal agency emergency response managers are looking for ways to prevent the big arguments that frequently flare up during emergency operations. We have been tasked with providing specialized conflict management training for a variety of those clients. Kim Fletcher: There are many things that an organization at any level (public or private) can do to prevent conflict from becoming a central focus of a response at the expense of the incident itself. There are 3 important factors that can lead to success: Kim Fletcher: 1) A concerted effort must be made to genuinely involve ALL affected parties in the dialogue prior to an incident. For example, a facilitated meeting with federal, state and local partners in a geographical area, to discuss roles and responsibilities can produce large dividends down the road because people now know each other. Kim Fletcher: 2) During the event itself, clearly articulating roles and responsibilities of all affected parties and being vigilant about ensuring that those parties have a means of having their issues heard by the decision makers. This sometimes means having a facilitator available to serve in the role of "shuttle diplomat". Kim Fletcher: 3) Affected parties being involved in the decision- making process (in the most realistic way possible) will help create buy-in and prevent the perception of decisions being made in a vacuum. (Participation and Decision-Making Processes during an emergency operation OBVIOUSLY depend on issues such as health and safety and authorities being accommodated first, but we go a long way to preventing big conflict when we clearly communicate those decisions that are not subject to group participation. Kim Fletcher: 3) Affected parties being involved in the decision- making process (in the most realistic way possible) will help create buy-in and prevent the perception of decisions being made in a vacuum. (Participation and Decision-Making Processes during an emergency operation OBVIOUSLY depend on issues such as health and safety and authorities being accommodated first, but we go a long way to preventing big conflict when we clearly communicate those decisions that are not subject to group participation. Kim Fletcher: So, we think that the concept of conflict prevention and management in emergency operations is worth serious discussion by responders, emergency managers, decision makers and facilitators. I would love to hear your ideas about it. Thanks and are there any questions? Amy Sebring: Thank you Kim. We will now turn to our audience for questions and/or feedback. Amy Sebring: Please enter a question mark (?) to indicate you wish to be recognized, go ahead and compose your comment, but wait for recognition before hitting the enter key or clicking on Send. Amy Sebring: Comments? What is your experience with conflict? Steve Charvat: ? Peter Picanso: ? Amy Sebring: Or what potential conflicts do you see? Amy Sebring: Steve please. Steve Charvat: Ms. Fletcher.. what do your primary clients think about this concept? Kim Fletcher: Our primary clients - US EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers routinely use neutrals... Amy Sebring: ? Avagene Moore: ? Kim Fletcher: we often find ourselves facilitating high level decision makers in multiple agencies who have been conflicted over the same policy for years... Kim Fletcher: we bring them together and, as neutrals who know emergency policy and operations.. Kim Fletcher: we are able to help them communicate those things that have prevented them from having success working together... Kim Fletcher: and frequently help them reach new agreements on different ways to relate and work together. Amy Sebring: Peter please. Peter Picanso: The roles and responsibilities of the federal agencies are pretty well defined, but do you find more problems when you are dealing with volunteer agencies where the roles are less well defined? Kim Fletcher: Actually, Peter, the roles and responsibilities are well defined... Kim Fletcher: however, in the implementation and interpretation, you can see a wide variety ... Kim Fletcher: one of the areas we get deeply involved is multiple states, same agencies, different interpretations of policies.... Kim Fletcher: regions of different agencies often interpret policy differently....as for the volunteers... Kim Fletcher: my experience has been that since they have less clearly defined roles in the formal sense.... Kim Fletcher: they are very flexible and able to fulfill needs as they arise... Kim Fletcher: they still get involved in potential conflicts, though... Kim Fletcher: because sometimes they can't articulate their abilities, or, in some cases, become quickly overwhelmed and don't want to appear unable to fulfill the roles they do have. Amy Sebring: On your recommendation #1, have you facilitated any such regional meetings? If so, have they included state and local reps? How did they go? Kim Fletcher: I have facilitated meetings with state, local, federal and volunteer partners on several occasions. In general... Kim Fletcher: all processes like that start similarly .... Kim Fletcher: people want to know why they have to once again explain what they do... Kim Fletcher: then they come to realize that their partners REALLY don' understand the limits of their authorities or capabilities... Kim Fletcher: or their capacity to do the work...particularly with local governments... Kim Fletcher: I have found that they are unclear how they relate to the state... Kim Fletcher: and how they are represented at the federal level.... Jack Winder: jack winder ? Kim Fletcher: of course, my experiences have been from the federal response perspective. Amy Sebring: Avagene please. Avagene Moore: Although we have talked about the need for federal, state and local personnel understanding respective roles and responsibilities for years, in your opinion, how much progress have we made? .... What is the greatest obstacle to better work relations between all players, all levels in the disaster business? Kim Fletcher: Great question! We have made much progress in terms of all levels of government recognizing that stakeholder involvement is critical... Kim Fletcher: to successful operations, planning and everything else.... Kim Fletcher: many organizations which were mandated to do "stakeholder involvement" have recognized its value... Kim Fletcher: we are seeing collaborative work expand at every level of government. My specific evidence here at MNG is that we have an entire practice are devoted to collaborative processes and facilitation. Amy Sebring: Jack next please. Kim Fletcher: The greatest obstacle is people who are unwilling to give up what they perceive as power...and we have to help them understand that the power comes from the collaborative work. Jack Winder: Kim, How do you get competing offices/agencies to compromise? Kim Fletcher: Besides threatening to move in with them until they do..... Amy Sebring: ? Kim Fletcher: that was a bad joke...anyway, a good neutral will work hard to understand what underlies their unwillingness... Kim Fletcher: to compromise and will help the group develop solutions where everyone at the table gets what they need...not Kim Fletcher: just what they SAY they need, but what... Kim Fletcher: they really need to get a good agreement that can be implemented and that will sustain the relationship. Amy Sebring: Kim, I often hear complaints from the local level about heavy-handedness of federal agencies. Are you including any sensitivity type training for federal agencies? Kim Fletcher: The essence of this whole approach is the assumption that agencies and organizations recognize that they have to have enduring relationships with their partners and it is ... Avagene Moore: ? Kim Fletcher: far better to have a good one than a bad one fraught with anger and unmet expectations. Kim Fletcher: Federal agencies are often accused.. Kim Fletcher: of being "heavy handed." I think that .... Kim Fletcher: one of the things we do well here is to help people see that heavy handed may in fact be... Kim Fletcher: the statutory requirement, and that... Kim Fletcher: the resistance to the feds... Kim Fletcher: may in fact be a sense on the part of the state or local that... Kim Fletcher: they have lost their power and control in a situation... Kim Fletcher: we include in our training discussions about power, control and expectations because these are the areas where much conflict begins. Amy Sebring: Avagene next please. Amy Sebring: oops Jack Winder: Jack Winder ? Amy Sebring: we lost Avagene. Amy Sebring: Go ahead please Jack. Jack Winder: Hi Kim, good answers. How doyou get someone to the table if he/she does not want to be there? Kim Fletcher: Getting people to the table... Kim Fletcher: is a big issue...if someone does not have any interest... Kim Fletcher: in an outcome other than theirs, then it is very difficult... Kim Fletcher: to get them there. My style generally has been to... Kim Fletcher: do the back and forth discussion to see if there is ANY room at all for them to get something out of the agreement that would be really beneficial to them,... Kim Fletcher: that they have not thought of....another way usually happens with citizens who demand a role and that is to threaten media involvement, law suits or other means of ... Kim Fletcher: getting someone to the table...these tactics of course, don't exactly help a relationship!!! Amy Sebring: Avagene next please. Avagene Moore: As a comment and question related to Amy's heavy handedness question -- I have seen the concept of 'home rule' emerge many times when there were conflicts between local governments, states, etc. What is your experience with resolving such a dispute? Jack Winder: thank you. It's all over between us, you mean. Andrea Coudert: ? Kim Fletcher: I don't have much experience with a local claiming home rule as a reason to reject assistance from a fed. Can you give me an example that I might respond to? Avagene Moore: Well, for example, when there is some requirement such as in an EM program that costs money and locals don't want to do it. Home rule is very strong in our part of the country. Kim Fletcher: Locals who don't want to participate may find... Kim Fletcher: that they are eventually left behind...this is a pretty lame answer, isn't it?? Avagene Moore: Maybe we can talk about it offline sometime, Kim. Amy Sebring: That sounds like the unfunded mandate issue ... Libbi RuckerReed: ! Kim Fletcher: Thanks. I'd like to. Amy Sebring: the whole relationships are being redefined. Amy Sebring: Andrea next please. Andrea Coudert: Is conflict resolution actually required by any state or Federal laws? Kim Fletcher: Ah - unfunded mandates....now that is a really interesting question! Peter Picanso: ? Kim Fletcher: There is the Administrative Dispute Resolutions Act of 1996... Kim Fletcher: which prescribes actions for federal agencies to institute dispute resolution in their programs. That is a big... Kim Fletcher: push right now all over the federal government... Kim Fletcher: many states and local jurisdictions... Kim Fletcher: have added collaboration and dispute resolution clauses to their laws, ... Kim Fletcher: particularly in contracts, family disputes, small claims, employee disputes and EEO. Amy Sebring: Libbi next please. Libbi RuckerReed: Unfunded mandates create problems for local commissions in raising taxes to cover the costs of these. If you "leave the locals behind" you invoke the wrath of local citizens when disasters strike. And the local commissions experience the wrath of local taxpayers to pay for these unfunded mandates. Right now, there still exists a serious gap in the role of emergency management to the general public. Kim Fletcher: You are right, Libbi, and my experience... Kim Fletcher: with aspects of federal planning for chemical hazards and natural disasters tells me that that is a huge issue at ALL levels of government. Even the feds suffer from being required to do work for which there is no funding. The Act I mentioned above is a great example... Kim Fletcher: it came with no funding but a large mandate. Libbi RuckerReed: In addition, the perception of emergency managers as PROFESSIONALS has a problem in many areas. Kim Fletcher: ? Amy Sebring: Go ahead Kim. Kim Fletcher: Have any of you on line had experiences during an operation where a facilitator may have been helpful in Kim Fletcher: clarifying roles, etc.? If you have, did you ever consider a neutral?... Amy Sebring: Peter next please and then if you have a response for Kim, we would like to hear it. Kim Fletcher: I ask this because I am finding that more often than not... Kim Fletcher: my clients say, "gee, we never thought of that." Peter Picanso: My experience with the Red Cross has shown me that the problem of understanding the roles of volunteer agencies works better with the feds than with the local governments. Any secrets as to how to inform the locals of the functions of volunteer agencies? Also the locals seem to have the perception of unprofessionalism (which of course we are by definition) when dealing with volunteers. Kim Fletcher: My suggestion would be to do what others have done. ... Kim Fletcher: have a meeting specifically to have that conversation... Kim Fletcher: about roles and responsibilities. NOT briefings about roles, with slides and charts... Joe Fletcher: ? Kim Fletcher: but conversations that get to the obstacles the Red Cross faces in working with locals...particularly focussed... Kim Fletcher: on expectations an how to meet them so that you have success when the response happens. Amy Sebring: Joe please. Joe Fletcher: The problem with neutrals, in my experience, is that they are usually brought in by the feds and therefore viewed as not being totally objective. Kim Fletcher: I wouldn't inform the locals. I would ask them for their expectations of the Red Cross and then discuss those with them. Kim Fletcher: That is a problem we deal with every day. Perception is the key... Kim Fletcher: I manage a roster of over 150 neutrals... Kim Fletcher: and I know that they all have opinions... Kim Fletcher: when I select a neutral for a project, or when I do one, the question... Kim Fletcher: I have to ask is do the actions of the facilitator indicate objectivity??.... Kim Fletcher: if not, then that neutral should be remover. IDEALLY, parties in the dispute should have the option of selecting the neutral jointly. ... Kim Fletcher: this is what EPA and the Corps of Engineers strive for in their big environmental disputes. ... Kim Fletcher: you also have to ask the parties what they define as neutral...it means something different to everyone. Amy Sebring: Thank you very much Kim for some thought-provoking ideas. We are very pleased to have Marasco as a Partner. We are about out of time, but perhaps a few folks would like to stay to address your question. Amy Sebring: Please stand by as we take care of a few announcements. Avagene, upcoming events please? Kim Fletcher: Thanks for the opportunity.... Steve Charvat: Thanks Kim //smiley Avagene Moore: Thank you, Amy. Kim, thanks for taking the time to be with us today. I enjoyed the presentation. I believe we could talk another hour on this topic. ... Kim Fletcher: I think that we could keep going for a long time on this topic! Thanks everyone... Avagene Moore: Tomorrow, Wednesday December 15, is our last program for 1999. However, we are currently lining up our topics and speakers for the first quarter of the New Millennium. We will resume the first week of January 2000. Kim Fletcher: I will stay on line for a few more minutes. Avagene Moore: Tomorrow, our own Amy Sebring, EIIP Technical Projects Coordinator, will be hosting our online presentation. The session will be devoted to a group discussion about planning, "Theory vs. Reality." Avagene Moore: Discussion questions will be posted in advance. Please review those prior to the session and join us. A discussion on planning is always very lively! Avagene Moore: Other than wishing everyone happy and safe holidays, that's it for now, Amy. Amy Sebring: Thank you Ava, and thank you audience. Please join us tomorrow if you can for our last session of 1999! I will have some discussion questions posted later this afternoon and we will get our holiday decorations up in here. Amy Sebring: We will formally adjourn now, but you are welcome to stay for open discussion. Punctuation no longer required.