used to using the left side. The result is different; where the left side of the brain will generate ordered lists, the right side typically provides a more creative view, in which human interactions are depicted and emotions are present.

Another benefit of drawing instead of writing or talking is that less sophisticated and articulate members of groups are not disadvantaged as they so often are in discussions. Although powerful people (particularly men) often claim they cannot draw, this is of course not true – almost all of us could draw before we could write, even if our drawings were with a stick in the sand. Drawing in a group also shifts the kind of relationship people establish in a short time; groups inevitably begin to feel that they are team and there is a slightly competitive element that drives them to produce a “better” drawing than the group next to them. Facilitators prompt groups to go into greater detail, to see what is inside buildings, to describe in their drawings mobility, time and relationships. Once the drawings are complete, groups are offered the opportunity to present their drawings to one another and then the elements are captured as a collective answer to the question “what does it look like when its fixed”. The model captures forty-eight elements; this provides enough elements to ensure a complex picture of what it looks like when its fixed, including elements that everyone in the room can recognise as being their own contribution. With less elements, there is the danger that some people will feel they have not been heard. Without a cap on the number of elements, the process will never be complete. Having a finite number, albeit a large finite number of elements is useful as it makes people

feel that, despite its complexity, the model is somehow manageable and achievable. The vision becomes the agreed destination for all that will happen thereafter.

Working in a slum in Nairobi, we used the analogy that our vision for a safe school in a safe community is like agreeing to travel to a destination, in this case Mombasa. Its not an easy journey, the road is long and petrol is expensive, there are no vehicles waiting to help us get there. But having agreed that this is where we are going, at least we know how to respond if someone comes along with a very seductive offer of a lift to Kampala. “No thank you,” we will say, “we are putting all our efforts into getting to Mombasa”. This is not as obvious as it sounds; all too often policies and strategies fail because something easier to achieve comes along and diverts us from our more difficult but valuable objective. So framing the vision is really important and once we have populated the model, we need to ask ourselves the questions “are we sure that’s our destination? What value do we place on it? Will we sacrifice to get there?” If there is doubt, we must, literally go back to the drawing board.

Using the knowledge in the room and simple indicators that describe the status of each element, current status is measured against the “fixed” model. A four-point scale is used for simplicity. In our circumstance is this element great, good, bad or terrible? Each element is measured against three indicators and groups are given a very short time for discussion and scoring. Each group submits scores on each element and an average is

“Innovation is the specific tool of entrepreneurs, the means by which they exploit change as an opportunity for a different business or a different service. It is capable of being presented as a discipline, capable of being learned, capable of being practiced. Entrepreneurs need to search purposefully for the sources of innovation, the changes and their symptoms that indicate opportunities for successful innovation. And they need to know and to apply the principles of successful innovation.” – Peter Drucker

30 Management Today | September 2011