Enabling Federal Policy Development:
Removing a bottleneck in a national policy implementation.
The Situation
The President of the United States signed an executive order requiring federal government purchases to meet sustainability criteria. The General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees government purchasing, needed to determine what factors make a product ‘green’ and how to measure it; in order to ensure purchasing agents would know how to comply with the policy.
A consulting firm specializing in public policy initiatives convened stakeholders from 53 organizations, including the GSA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Defense (DOD), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), municipal and state governments, universities, paper companies, and environmental NGOs.
These stakeholders convened quarterly, in round table forums and workshops, over the course of two years.
The Problem
Despite numerous solutions being proposed, the consultants were unable to converge the group, as every solution big or small was met with resistance from one faction or another. To illustrate this, it was impossible to get group consensus on the use of ecolabels; simple symbols used to denote the ‘greenness’ of a product. This issue was one of many, emanating from intrinsic disagreements about sustainability. Other points of conflict included measurement methods, the missions and values of organizations, the scope of greenness (Scope 1,2, and 3) and many other factors.
After two years, discussions met an impasse. Frustrations were palpable, with no end in sight.
The Solution
By using conventional methods, the consultants became stuck and were unable to resolve the deadlock. As a result, the consulting firm then brought in a consultant trained in SchellingPoint concepts, methods and tools.
The consultant led an anonymous two-hour virtual dialogue among the stakeholders. To their surprise, the participants learnt that they had six points of complete agreement that had previously gone unnoticed. This insight reassured the group and confirmed they had a foundation to work from. Giving them the possibility for success.
The virtual dialogue data also revealed that the points of resistance included known and unknown resistance.
For the known, it was clear some issues were valid while others were based on incorrect inferences. To illustrate, a root inference was that known differences of opinion were between demographic groups (for-profit paper companies disagreeing with environmental NGOs), and that this created a block due to opposing fundamental principles. Using the 3 Reasons for Misalignment, this rational inference was found to be misguided with weaker alignment instead found within each demographic group than between them. This newly recognized insight enabled the conversations to be reshaped.
For the unknown, issues were displayed on a screen without attribution. To illustrate, the virtual dialogue surfaced that the scope of recommendations was being questioned. As to whether the guidance should solely be for US Government purchasing agents, for company purchasing agents or whether it should be applied at an international level.
These and the other contentious issues were resolved over two days and the stakeholders left with an agreement on the guidance framework for the purchasing agents.
The Result
This policy implementation working group went on to assemble a fully supported recommendation that led to the formation of a 501c(3) nonprofit organization. The Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council now comprising over 1,000 member organizations in more than 45 countries.