Big infrastructure projects are always a reason for conflict. Nobody wants, for example, a huge pylon in their backyard. So, this was exactly what Amprion, one of the big four German infrastructure providers for electricity, was planning to do: build an 85 km, extra-high-voltage power line across North Rhine Westfalia. Five little towns felt they were not getting sufficient information, and citizens were asking lots of questions. So in October, I was asked by the five mayors to organize and moderate an event for +800 participants.
I have many years of experience with conflict moderation. I am not afraid to go into uncomfortable situations and deal with friction. Still, I had a lot of respect in this case: the planning and preparation with people I didn’t know, but who were inexperienced – only four weeks to get everything up and running – and the sheer size of the event, with a lot of room for unknowns, and a high potential for escalation. Fast forward four weeks, the 3-hour event was emotional, controversial, and in some parts loud. People asked almost 180 burning questions, from health-related concerns to impact on wildlife and property value. And still, many said thank you for the opportunity.
How did we manage to make it a success?
- Four weeks from start to finish is not a lot. Not if people have zero experience in organizing big events, and I need to rely on the staff of five little towns, who don’t know each other, and of which I have to form a team first. To establish good working structures, online and offline, was crucial. I made a list of roles and responsibilities I needed and set up a Miro board as a dashboard and container for all information and project communication. People were happy to volunteer in this adventure, as they felt, and after initial hesitation, they did use the Miro board and project structure, so everyone was able to keep everything in view.
- A big infrastructure company – and a people’s action group. That is a classic David vs. Goliath setting. Conceptualizing the agenda and framing for the event, it was paramount to get the people’s action group on stage, right at the beginning, and thus create a minimum amount of eye-height. To earn trust, we needed to establish clear housekeeping rules and ask for respect for the more vulnerable. On stage, we did allow tough and critical contributions but reinforced respect for the people who exposed themselves in their different roles.
- Clear expectations were another constituent. We would not be able to argue the power line into non-existence, but we wanted to complete a puzzle of all the available knowledge, so people would go home, knowing exactly what their options were. Apart from the people’s action group, we invited independent experts on electromagnetic fields, the Federal Agency for Power Grids, the regional planning authorities, and, of course, Amprion. They would all be heard, and they had to answer a lot of uncomfortable questions.
- Questions: It is impossible to hear several hundred people in an open mic session. So we introduced Slido as a low-entrance digital tool. We could collect, aggregate, and answer questions according to the relevance the audience attributed to them. And give answers to all those questions that we didn’t have time for, via e-mails and websites, in the weeks after the event.
- Tech was an issue: In a foreseeably emotional and controversial atmosphere, nobody should be upset by being unable to see or hear properly. No queues or other inhibitions, caused by bad organization, should raise the temperature in the room unnecessarily. So we hired a high quality tech equipment, and we had lots of volunteers helping with parking, access, registration, and with tech assistance during Q&A. Security was present, but hardly to be seen in order to create comfort, but not additional tension.
I have always worked in close collaboration with my clients' staff, in many different circumstances. I am happy to accept co-facilitators, group leaders, and helpers of all kinds. It makes it easier to cater to the needs of larger groups, and it lowers the cost of those workshops, conferences, or events for my clients. A portion of my knowledge and insights remain with them after my job is finished, and this is absolutely fine. Working this way is organizational learning, and I recognize that it increases the appreciation for what I do, as people can see with much more clarity how complex things can be, and how much conceptional work I do.