Designing for Civil Society

Activists - take to your blogs (and prepare for conversation)

My piece about Lewisham politics online - Local activists - take to your blogs - brought an interesting response from Richard Proctor writing on behalf of residents opposing major developments in the centre of this London borough.

There are issues going on in Lewisham that are vital to the future of Lewisham yet seem to be pushed to the back of the table.
I'm involved with a number of residents who are opposed to the Lewisham Gateway scheme as it stands at the moment.
Apart from a number of areas of concern, what may have started out as 'regeneration' and was taken up by a number of groups who had an idea that this may improve the centre of Lewisham (open up the waterways, provide more green space etc etc) has now descended into a developers feast to see how much money they can make out of the development and how high they can build the tower blocks to make a profit – and lets be in no doubt about this – at the expense of the residents and users of Lewisham.
It is a complex subject that requires effort to understand and be involved, an effort we, as residents, and not members of a political party, are prepared to make.
We are prepared to make this effort because we believe we are looking after the interests of Lewisham (in our own small way), and we are continually coming up against bureaucratic brick walls that need to be challenged.
So, what about us?
What about the people who don't want to affiliate themselves with a party – any party – that will gobble up our beliefs and put them into the 'regeneration' pot. (The same regeneration pot that has granted Manchester of "super casino")
Anyway, please visit our website at www.lewishamgateway.org.

The site has lots of explanation of the planned development, and why some residents oppose it. There are some neat before and after visuals aiming to show the impact of development,  and calls to action by petitioning and sending an objection to the planning department.
Richard asked for thoughts, and my immediate ones were that the effectiveness of the site would be improved if it were clear who was behind it (there were no names that I could see), and also if there were a place for commenting or discussion. In writing back to Richard on this, it struck me I was offering just the same advice I would give to a public body, developer or politician: develop an authentic voice, and be prepared to engage.
If activists want to make an impact online, I think that they have to move from rants to conversations too. Shifting to a blog with comments enabled would be a start.
Anyway Richard responding in good part, pointing out reasonably enough how difficult it is for residents to find time to campaign without budgets while earning a living as well, adding:

We're just people trying to get a voice and speak out against something that we not only *feel* is wrong, but in many ways we can *prove* its wrong.
By having a link on a blog such as yours we can spread our message.

I couldn't resist - so here's an opportunity to continue the conversation, here if not at www.lewishamgateway.org. Richard promises a further comment.
A quick search reveals former councillor Andrew Brown, who sparked my earlier piece, has touched on the Gateway in the past:

I wonder if the people who are currently behind the campaign against the Lewisham Gateway were a bit more Web 2.0 they might have a similar conversation with Kate and others who are on the housing list about the need for additional housing in Lewisham?  Perhaps if the council itself were a bit more Web 2.0 officers and politicians could contribute and facilitate it.

I detect just a hint of a contrary view, so I'm hopeful debate may rage meaningful exchanges will follow, somewhere.
Update: if I had taken the trouble to read more I would have seen Richard and Andrew have already met online, when the issue of who is behind the campaign was also raised by Andrew.

Explaining engaging

Stakeholders, networking, engagement, conversations, social media all go together in my mind, but it can be hard to explain to other people without falling into technobabble. Fortunately a new round of the Carnival of Nonprofit Consultants, organised by Nancy Schwartz helps by addressing the issue of how to engage audiences who are saturated by marketing messages and images. I think it has relevance for public and for-profit organisations too. First a bit of head-clearing.
Stakeholder engagement is one of the phases that has crept across fields from participative democracy to public relations, marketing and supermarket corporate responsibility. It means mapping who you serve, who supplies and supports you, who you influence, and who influences you ... then working out what sort of relationship you want with them, and how to achieve that. The jargon is a bit off-putting, but the basic idea of two-way communication, listening and responding, seems good to me whatever the area. Of course, there's lots more to it than that, and it only works effectively if you develop some trust with your stakeholders over time. As many an organisation has found, there's nothing worse than creating an expectation that ideas or complaints will be listened to, and then failing to deliver.
Now networking. These days a lot of nonprofit organisations like to say they are networks because it sounds open, welcoming, connecting. Unfortunately too often the reality is that the so-called network is no more than a mailing list, and communication is mainly one-way: telling, selling, with a bit of consulting. There's little recognition that in networks people talk to each other, and that's a good thing if they have good things to say about you ... not if they don't. So take networking seriously.
Social media can be more engaging, as Beth Kanter and I talked about in a recent workshop, because blogs and other tools are conversational and potentially collaborative. Beth's great presentation is here.
Too often I end up in meetings where terms like stakeholder engagement and social media are punted around, but it is pretty clear that the underlying ethos is still internal command and control, external tell and sell. The emphasis is on targetting, positioning, demonstrating ... with stakeholders seen as mainly passive recipients of messages. I tentatively say things like ... umm, isn't this about starting some conversations that help build new relationships, and develop more trust in doing things together? Isn't it about talking to each other? There's the occasional nod, but unless the boss follows up no-one is going to stick their necks out in those sort of meetings.
What I need, in order to make the point better, are examples of people who are recasting marketing, PR as engagement, with some of their good stories. That's what Nancy's Carnival offers this month. R. Craig Lefebvre sums it up: It's no longer about getting attention, it's about earning it.
From here in the UK Whitewater's Anna Crofton stresses the importance of integrity and authenticity and messages that are simple and compelling, and  Steve Bridger recommends the power of storytelling, especially when it's visual. There's lots more in the Carnival which is, it seems to me, a small demonstration of the power of networking, social media and stakeholder engagement. The bloggers who contributed to Nancy's call for posts do so because they believe passionately in a different way of doing things, and also, I guess, because it helps rise their profiles in an authentic way that no amount of straight selling could do. I don't think there was a budget (beyond people's time of course). I'll remember to mention that in the next meeting ... throwing up the main issue: are you ready to make the effort to engage?

[[wiki:designingforcivilsociety:explaining engaging]]

Online fundraising: the widgets, the podcast, and now the pdfcast

Nick Booth, over at Podnosh, has a double goody for anyone interested in online fundraising. Nick met up with Beth Kanter at the workshop we ran recently in Birmingham, and interviewed her about the way in which she and friends raised nearly $50,000 - then matched by Yahoo - for a Cambodian children's charity. As you can see here, courtesy of Paul Henderson, we had a lot of fun with technology-assisted conversation.
The fundraising was done using a widget on Beth's blog. Nick has more about widgets in his post, and also offers a download of a briefing sheet about online fundraising written for the Birmingham Community Empowerment Network. Nick is rather pleased that he is able to offer the interview as a podcast with the pdf attached to the feed, and can't resist pdfcasting as a new bit of technobabble. I'm just in awe of the great stuff social media bloggers are managing to achieve with these tools - whatever you call them. Must edit my own video too.

Local activists - take to your blogs

Recently Labour party activist and former councillor Andrew Brown tossed in a gem of a comment on this blog celebrating the role of political parties at local level. He said they should: 

stop believing the press they get and recognise the strengths they have in being a persuader for better civic cultures. It’s members of political parties that a big part of the civic glue, serving on school governing bodies and health boards, active in local charities, and of course the people who put themselves forward for elections to councils, regional bodies and parliament.

I emailed Andrew asking if he might expand, and so he does over on his blog with a plea for activists to match their on-the-ground civic commitments with more engaging activity online.

These thoughts come from looking at the online presence of the local parties here in Lewisham. None of the sites are absolutely dreadful (although the West Lewisham Tories old site was close to it) but none of them make any real attempt to go beyond a fairly basic description of who they are.
In part I expect the reason why these sites are as uninspiring as they are is because no one is really thinking like a visitor to the site.
I’d like to see us try to do things differently, I’d like to show you the range of people who have joined the Labour Party and why they think that by doing this they are helping create a better Lewisham and a better Britain.
I’d like to try and explain a bit more what being an active member of the party means to me and the hundreds of other Labour Party members across Lewisham; what inspires us to join, to become active and to stand for positions.  How we contribute to our communities in all sorts of ways that are all but invisible in the mainstream debate about Lewisham, but which mean that our schools, hospitals and charities are rooted in the communities they serve.
I’d like to show you just how hard our representatives work on your behalf, and some of the successes they have.
And I’d like to have a better debate about policy.
I think that some of the new ways of using the web would help do that, but we need to believe that we have a message that is worth telling and that the public might be interested in hearing it.
And while the web is not the primary place for this to happen, it should be part of a strategy of trying to describe who we are, what we believe and why we think you might want to help out.

As Matthew Taylor argued at the recent e-democracy '06 conference, much political blogging just reflects the negative, snide, gossipy slanging match between traditional media and politicians. He called for more thoughtful deliberation - as does Andrew. He certainly leads the way on his blog, being prepared, for example, to argue the benefits of a directly elected mayor when others are mounting a campaign to "bring back democracy". What's particularly democratic about having councillors, rather than electors, choose the Mayor, asks Andrew. I also like the way that Andrew offers a round up of what's happening in Lewisham.
I hope Andrew is successful in further encouraging more civic online activity in Lewisham. I suspect this is going to come from individual activist bloggers rather than a speedy transformation in the way that the main parties present themselves. Individual voices online are easier to develop than collective ones.  But then, that's another example of how individuals and social media can show how to do things differently... and as this little blog-comment-email-blog-blog exchange shows it's easy to start a conversation.

I-genius responds

I-genius founder Tommy Hutchinson has responded to my item about the social networking site for social entrepreneurs that he and Michael Ward set up. I asked to be de-registered after trying it out. Tommy emailed me:

Yes we will deregister your profile. Hope you can appreciate that with a new site like this there are many technical aspects that we have to improve on including inclusion of de-registering facility. In our joining information we make this clear and ask our users to be patient whilst we sort these out. We are very grateful for the patience they have shown and for their ideas for improvement.
I did read your blog which has many good elements but overall i felt the tone and some specifics were overly critical and somewhat cynical. We are a new organisation with a small but very energetic team trying to bring a fresh approach and have been incredibly encouraged by the responses we have been receiving.

I thought this was rather a limited response to my points, and wrote a longer post here restating them, and griping about email instead of blog commenting for conversation. But on reflection, and after a speedy comment from Carl (thanks), it seemed pretty churlish and trivial, so I've cut it.  Instead I've taken another look at the i-genius site with a more positive eye. I still don't like the name and some aspects, but the use of pictures is terrific and I think its ease of use will encourage participation. Who could fail to be engaged by Vicky Hughes Sea Turtle Education Project? As Mark Elton pointed in a comment to my original piece, i-genius has already helped broker support. I'll keep looking in.

Cut back second-tier nonprofits, says major funder

The UK nonprofit field of community and voluntary organisations is pretty confusing even to those involved, so it would seem sensible to have second-level organisations operating across a city or district to provide shared services, advice to groups, a voice towards public bodies, funders and so on.  These Councils for Voluntary Service would also seem to be a good place to locate local technical support, and online networking hubs.
Unfortunately, it isn't working out that way, at least in London. The recent Building Blocks report from a major funder, the City Parochial Foundation, concludes:

Many second-tier organisations (STOs), including councils for voluntary service (CVSs) face difficult issues of quality, credibility, conflict of interest and overwork, and a number of CVSs seem to have lost their sense of purpose and focus.
It is likely to be increasingly difficult for them to raise funds from local authorities, primary care trusts and other statutory funders, given the pressure on those bodies to show that money is achieving improvements in public services, say authors Alison Harker and Steven Burkeman.
The role perhaps most important for CVSs - that of facilitating the voice of voluntary groups - is the one most difficult to fund.
There are many STOs but who they benefit, how they do it and when their intervention is appropriate is unclear to those who might seek their help. This encourages haphazard working in the sector. Small groups in particular feel their voices are not heard and it is funders and outside agencies which decide what they 'need'. Frontline groups value one-to-one help, from knowledgeable, experienced, committed, and skilled individuals/bodies which are not in competition with them for funding.
Among their recommendations, the authors state that over time, funding should increasingly be directed to frontline groups. They will then be in a stronger position to purchase the help they need, from whichever source can best provide it.

The report strikes a chord with me, because of the likely changes in information and support needs in a more networked environment. As I wrote in Why bother with "membership" in future:

It used to be that you joined associations because it was a way of meeting like-minded people and getting help, facilities, information and other things difficult or costly to organise for yourself. These days it is much easier to find people and resources online, and to mix and match these assets into project teams, communities of practice, and informal networks.

I was referring to individual membership, rather than group membership of second-tier bodies, but the same pressures will apply. If funders start to shift resources to the front line - as the report recommends - then CVSs will need to be doubly smart in convincing their members that they have a crucial role ... and getting them to pay for it.

Maggie Baxter, Chair of City Parochial Foundation said: “The report identifies a number of issues and provides a ‘warts and all’ view of the sector. The authors have provided a range of constructive recommendations which provide a programme for action – not just by the STOs themselves but by funders, third-tier organisations, the Charity Commission and Capacitybuilders. We do not expect everyone to agree with all of the findings and recommendations, but we do hope it will start a debate and lead to significant improvements in how infrastructure support is provided and funded.”

There's nowhere on the City Parochial site, that I can see, to discuss these issues, but there will be a conference on March 1. The report can be downloaded from this page on the Foundation's site, together with conference details.

Home truths about technobabble and social media

A few weeks back I was getting a bit over-lyrical with a group of friends about the world-changing potential of blogs and other social media, and the buzz from conversations with other enthusiasts around the globe. Words like feeds, tagging, FLOSS and folksonomy may have come up ... and ideas like crowdsourcing and collective intelligence. One of the group (was it Kevin?) remarked "you are an elite, aren't you" ... which was rather challenging, since the point of the conversation was how helpful these technologies can  be in creating greater transparency, openness, challenging hierarchies and so on.
I'm reminded of this because over at Podnosh Nick Booth, reflecting on another post about must-know words, takes us to task for technobabble:

I consider most of this language to be downright rude. They are what I call “home words”: the ones you can get away with only in ‘private’. It’s the sort of language which convinces others that a normal human has become a techno-evangelist (oops), at best a geek, at worst a raving lunatic and certainly to be avoided. So in the world of charities and the internet which are out ‘home words’? What will alienate rather than stimulate?
Here are my five starters…
nptech (tags don’t belong in the real world)
vlogcast (unh?)
blogosphere (we want them to join it, not run screaming)
user generated content (worse ugc)
trackback

However, as Steve Bridger points out in Social media is distinct from traditional media

We do still need to differentiate between the “old” broadcast way of doing things and the “new”, more conversational.

Steve B is commenting on a post by widely-read blogger Steve Rubel:

Today, Steve calls time on “a bunch of terms” he signals are now completely unnecessary. These include “social media,” “user generated content” and “consumer generated media.”

Steve R says:

The problem with all of these balkanized phrases is that they connote that the content created by digitally empowered individuals is somehow bush league. It's like we're a separate entity from the rest of the so-called "mainstream" journalists, filmmakers, photographers, etc. who do what we do and get paid more for it. We sit in a special dish like leftover meatloaf so we need a special name. If you use these phrases you're unintentionally perpetuating that myth.

And adds:

The fact is that everyone who is contributing to the dialogue - be it in video, text or photos - has earned the right to be called media. Let's can the compartmentalization and recognize once and for all the world has changed. We are all media - period.

I think there are number of different issues here.
My friend raising the issue of elites was reminding me that it's a bit dodgy claiming you are doing good in the world, by promoting empowering tools, if  those you aim to benefit can't understand what you are talking about. You risk becoming yet another self-serving bunch of smug "experts". I think Nick's points are in line with that, as one might expect from someone whose podcasting focusses on helping people share conversations more widely - rather than just do smart interviews.
Steve B (and many of those commenting on Steve R's item) believe it is important to have some different words for media that is two-way rather than broadcast, and participatory. Oops, another Home Word. Steve R seems to want to join the mainstream media that Nick (former BBC) and I (former Evening Standard) chose to leave, and which Steve B I think wants to challenge.
All this is currently very relevant, since instead of musing on these matters I should be actually developing an A-Z of social media and networking over on the socialmedia wiki. Here's an earlier mainly non-tech one I did on networking. I think writing this piece has increased my motivation.
Meanwhile I need to decide what to tag this. I see that Nick is using nptech, nptechuk, technobabble, homewords ....

Technorati Tags: nptech, nptechuk

Peer assist towards action learning

Last year I worked with a Government client to help develop action learning groups, so that public officials could work together to understand more about public engagement, and how to run engagement programmes. It didn't work out as planned, and I wonder if things might have been easier if I been able to show the Flash tutorial on Peer Assists, created by a partnership between Bellanet and the University of Ottawa. It was spotted (like so much other good stuff) by Nancy White.
The idea of action learning groups is that people come together in small groups to work on a real problem raised by one of the members. They share ideas, take action, bring results back to the group, and reflect on what's happened, as described here. It's a powerful method and the Peer Assists Flash tutorial sets out a similar approach.
In practice the programme I worked on was problematic because we had little time, people were at different stages of understanding, in different departments, very busy, and with different preferences for learning. Some liked courses, others manuals, and a few liked tackling practical problems in groups. Although the groups didn't work too well, we and the client learned a lot from the experience - not least that it is a mistake to start with a given method. You need to look at circumstances, learning preferences and much more. Maybe discussion around a Flash tutorial would have raised those issues earlier.
I understand that a cross-government community of practice on public engagement is now emerging, following our recommendations and review work undertaken by our client. A community of practice video would be a challenge to make.

Social marketers launch social networking for social entrepreneurs

Social entrepreneurs and social networks are both hot ... or is it cool ... topics, so let's put the two together. I'm interested, but do I want to join the new i-genius site when I get an email from Kim Bedi asking if I will add a link to my site, and put up a profile?

i-genius is a world community of social entrepreneurs and seeks to inspire a new generation of social innovators.

When I ask to know more, Kim sends me this launch release:

Top dating sites which enable people to establish networks for sex and relationships have helped shape the creation of a new website to support social entrepreneurs.
Established by i-genius, this new site seeks to create a world community of social entrepreneurs and inspire a new generation of social innovators.
Created by its founder Tommy Hutchinson and business partner Mike Ward, the site is driven by user generated content allowing social entrepreneurs to upload their individual profiles and through blogs and video blogs enable other users to follow their journey as they establish their social projects and businesses.
Speaking at the Global Entrepreneur Monitor conference today, Tommy Hutchinson said “Networks are crucial to the success of social entrepreneurs.  i-genius has taken the very best features and technology of user-generated friendship and online dating networks such as myspace and Facebook to create a site which encourages social entrepreneurs from around the world to establish partnerships between people from diverse geographical and cultural backgrounds.”

The "sex and relationships" stuff has the feel of an agency desperate to get a "simple to understand" angle, as does the "Amazing People Doing Amazing Things" strap line. Tommy has a video about social entrepreneurship - and one blog post I want to work with people who turn me on from last month.
I would like to know more about Tommy's appearance at the Global Entrepreneur Monitor conference mentioned in the press release. The quote read to me as something said publicly, maybe even in a keynote, relating igenius and GEM. However, the GEM programme shows Tommy on a couple of panels. I'm interested in how Tommy worked the quote into his panel contribution ... or was it, well, more of an aside?
Anyway, I've registered to see how the site works and got the usual profile options of interests, the services I'm looking for or offering, and tags. I then get a personal page that enables me to post blog items. The pathway from registration to personal page is simple. That's a plus in appealing to people not familiar with the more arcane arts of blogs. On the other hand the term "user generated content" in the press release is not a good way to describe what social networkers do. It comes from the pre-networking world of publishers, readers and viewers.
So far I can't see how igenius does anything you can't get from Linked in, or ecademy, or many of the other social networking sites. I'm not sure if the promoters recognise that social networking needs more than "we've built the site, come and join". What about events? Oh, here's the i-genius World Summit:

The i-genius summit is bringing over 100 of the most creative and innovative social entrepreneurs from around the world together with leaders in government, business investors and NGOs to participate in a unique event.
Hosted in one of the world’s most environmental friendly hotel, the new Indigo Pearl in Phuket, Thailand, the summit will be provide an enriching experience to all the participants and an inspiration to those who will be viewing the proceedings through online media outlets.

Hmm, I get the style. Who's behind igenius? The About Us section of the site is very light on detail, but a little Googling - and a logo on the Home Page - finds Tommy and Michael Ward at Equator Media, which has the same address as igenius.

Equator Media is a social marketing agency. We work with our clients and partners to create positive social and environmental change. Integrity and authenticity will always be the core pillars of our work.

We want to inspire change on important issues. Africa, climate change, drugs, food, health, and social entrepreneurs are just some of the issues that we’re currently working on. 

Equator Media lists Channel 4 as a partner, and says it is their "official agency". Equator Media are also partners with social media company caféDiverso "to develop channels and partnerships for their new book and media series 'Everyone has a good story'."
Tommy and Michael Ward also both feature here and here on a blogs and vlogs site about ethical and social concerns ... food markets and young people. Tommy is chair of the youth charity Kikass.
The igenius site has worthy logos along the bottom: Unesco, British Council, Ashoka, African Foundation for Development, Make Your Mark: Start Talking Ideas. No quotes from any of them, though in an email from Kim they are described as funders and partners.

I think about whether I want to be part of a network of people calling themselves igeniuses. I don't. I go to my profile page to de-register, but can't find how to. I have to write to the editor.
Perhaps I'm being cynical and unfair in my comments on igenius. If so, I'm sorry ... but the way it currently presents made me cross and suspicious.  Igenius may be a totally worthy effort, launched in a rush, with lots more features and clarification to come.
Here - for what they are worth - are some suggestions:

• Update the About Us page to make clear who is behind the project, and the role of the various bodies cited at the bottom of the Home Page. Let's hear what they have to say about igenius.
• In future announcements make clear whether igenius statements (like the quote in the press release) really are associated with big players (like GEM). Otherwise it looks like an attempt at endorsement by association.
• Clarify in the Terms of Use whether igenius - or Equator Media partners - can use stories provided by those contributing to the site.
• Clarify the de-registration process.
• Start blogging - and reading blogs - to get more feel for the world of social networking. It's not the same as social marketing.

Hope this helps.  I was approached by igenius to put in a link....

Local tech planning with a pack of cards

We recently ran another session of our Digital Challenge workshop game, used to help plan area-wide technology programmes. Last time it was Bristol - this time we were at the Manchester Digital Development Agency, which is one of the most experienced outfits in this field. Could our simple set of project cards, used to prompt discussion about how technology might benefit local people, bring anything to the techie toolkit?

Drew Mackie and I were delighted to find that they could, not least because of the enthusiastic way in which Dave Carter (with Gary Copitch in the picture) led his colleagues in stories about Jack, lone-parent with twin daughters, and the Malis, recently arrived from Somalia.

As before, we asked participants to work in groups and follow this sequence:

• Describe an area - who lives there, and its characteristics
• Invent a local character or characters
• Choose from a set cards those projects you think will benefit them
• Tell the story of how they use the technology ... while we throw in a few life crises and opportunities along the way.

This led to:

Jack has severe health problems and no computer skills, but with local support ends up in a self-help online health group, and running an E-bay trading setup with his daughters.
Mr Mali becomes a local councillor running online services for his constituents, while Mrs Mali uses the Internet extensively to further her career as a health care professional.

You can download the game kit we used, and the stories that resulted, from the links at the end.
The stories will help Manchester in developing storyboards for its Digital Challenge bid, and once that is out of the way I think that Manchester, Bristol and others may be interested in how these workshop techniques could be used to help local organisations and residents explore what digital development programmes will mean in practice.
We received a further boost when Gary Copitch, director of the Manchester Community Information Network, used the game himself for a workshop. He reported back:

We got six people from different Black and Minority Ethnic groups and I split them into 2 groups. I did a bit of a brief on the bid itself as people were interested in what it was. But it also gave a concept on what was possible within Manchester.
I then asked participants to come up with an identity. This they did with not too much trouble. One group developed a profile for a  Somali women with 2 children who was an asylum seeker and the other group came up with a single Polish worker who was a migrant.  They then filled in the year 1 and the impact of the technology on people's lives.  I then gave them a number of scenarios. These included: where asylum status was approved, problem with a child in school, computer was stolen, the situation in Somali got worse, the Polish worker decided to bring his family over, there was a backlash against migrant workers in the press.
They all responded to this and changed their use of ICT. Overall the game worked really well in helping them define their problems and thinking about how ICT could be used in each case. What was interesting was that all the cards came into play. Once the infrastructure was in, and training given, both groups quickly went towards the social media type work and producing content. I would definitely use the game again.

Gary also gave us some valuable feedback on how to improve the mechanics of the game, including changes in the timeline, and different ways of handling scenarios.
From our experience so far it seems to me that the game offers particular benefits in a situation where the aim is to benefit excluded groups, and involve a wide range of people and organisations in planning and delivery of technologies that few people understand:

• The format creates a level space in which the simple cards and instructions (we hope) make it easy for everyone to join in
• Working in groups means those with more understanding of technology can explain to others.
• The range of cards means it is easy to describe what may be planned "for real" in an area, while also enabling people to ask "why can't we do that too".
• Moving into storytelling about local characters means the language and discussion is more likely to be in terms anyone can relate to - or challenge.
• The game sessions are not intended to lead to any firm decisions, but rather to trigger conversations that can continue afterwards. That allows time for reflection and evolution.

You can download the game kit, and stories developed in Manchester as pdfs:
Instructions (1.2M)
Project cards (1M)
Characters (22K)
Stories (120K)
All these as zip file (1.2 M)
See also: Running the social media game