Planning: What Works and What Doesn't
Karen S. Walz, AICP	© & Author Info

Abstract

Many planners observe, participate in or are affected by planning projects and processes that do not end with the anticipated results. When the actual results address a community's needs effectively, the project may be recognized as innovative or flexible. When the actual results are less-than-optimal, the project may become the basis for "war stories" among planners. In reality, those projects that did not achieve desired results are valuable learning tools. An interactive workshop format offers planners a means to use these lessons in a productive way, furthering the application of good planning practices in situations that reflect everyday planning dilemmas.

Learning from Unexpected Results

Most planning projects begin with great fanfare: a major update to the zoning ordinance is announced or editorials herald the enormous potential of a comprehensive plan that will "give our city a road map to the 21^st century!" In many cases, these projects do indeed bring significant benefits to the communities, but they seldom produce the precise outcomes anticipated when the projects began. This should not be surprising, because such major planning projects are typically:

• Scheduled over a period of one or more years, during which time significant changes may occur in a community's economy, political context or set of community issues perceived to be of high priority;
• Designed to include large numbers of individuals and organizations, each with a different perspective on the issues and solutions;
• Structured to address both highly-technical issues (zoning district use definitions, roadway design criteria or environmental impact measurements) and strongly emotional concerns (quality of life, community character or good jobs); and
• Led by professional planners, city managers and elected officials with strong personalities, clear (but sometimes different) concepts of desirable results and relationships with one another and the community that cause them to define the project's main purpose in very different ways.

Each of these factors adds uncertainty to the planning project or process. Together, they ensure that its conclusion will differ, in major or minor ways, from the anticipated results described when the project was initiated.

In some cases, the project's results address a community's interests very effectively. The project is then described as innovative, flexible and successful. In other cases, the results are good solutions (though perhaps not the best), adequate compromises among divergent positions, a redirection of resources to other programs or community rejection of major proposals. For planners, all of these outcomes can provide important lessons in the application of planning concepts and theories to the "real world" situations they face every day. The professional development challenge is to provide a forum for learning from all these examples, particularly those that are unlikely to be documented an innovative new planning breakthroughs. An interactive workshop setting creates the opportunity for this dialogue and a learning experience that is relevant to many planning settings.

Who's the "Expert"?

The interactive format of the workshop means that all planners who participate become members of the group of experts who define and debate effective planning solutions. Several benefits result from this approach. First, it increases the relevance of proposed solutions to each participant's own community. Virtually all practicing planners have perspectives and opinions on effective planning practices that are based on unique sets of experiences in this diverse field. By involving all participants as experts, the lessons learned in many settings are shared. A solution that is effective in a large, diverse central city may prove ineffective in a small rural community. Rather than relying on the experience of a single lecturer or a panel of speakers, this workshop format gives participants a broader sense of the application or relevance of a particular approach to the concerns in their own community.

A second benefit is that all participants are engaged in creative problem-solving, an important form of learning. Rather than listening and writing down potentially-useful ideas, the participants are directly involved in dialogue with other practitioners. This interaction requires each participant to evaluate a potential issue or technique in terms of her own experiences, making the issues more real and relevant, and therefore more memorable when they apply to that individual's job or community.

A third benefit from this session is that it offers many solutions to a particular planning situation. By considering diverse possible solutions, rather than prescribing a single "right answer", the workshop enables participants to identify solutions that are most appropriate to their communities. It also underscores the fact that there are seldom planning issues that have a single correct solution regardless of the community and context in which they are addressed.

A final benefit is appreciated by those attending many lecture sessions C it's fun! It allows participants to get acquainted with professionals from other areas and to enjoy an entertaining learning experience.

Encouraging Creative Solutions

Though this workshop format draws on the experiences of all participants, it differs in important ways from the sharing of "war stories" that commonly occurs between and after formal sessions at a conference. It uses a set of simplified "planning situations" to set the stage for focused small-group discussion. It requires each group to discuss the factors affecting a specified situation B politics, resource constraints, differing value systems, management expertise or other factors. This analysis draws out insights that help participants understand the significant ingredients in a successful solution.

The group cannot simply relate this situation to their own experiences, but must reach agreement on a better solution for the specific situation presented in the exercise. In this way, participant experiences with similar planning programs (whether they were more or less successful) help groups evaluate the situation under discussion, but ultimately problem-solving by the group is needed to develop a specific recommended solution.

A time limit and an element of competition also add interest for participants. There are more "planning situations" than a group can solve in the time available to them, but they are challenged to solve as many as they can during the time they have. Also, the small groups present their best solutions to the entire audience at the end of the workshop, so individual groups tend to develop solutions that reflect well on participants' creativity and expertise. As a result, the solutions presented at the end of the session are practical, thoughtful and, in many cases, entertaining as well.

In Conclusion

Experience with this interactive mini-workshop has shown it to be an excellent vehicle for learning and a constructive way to strengthen participants' sense that their own experiences in planning do indeed provide valuable insights into professional effectiveness. The ideas discussed and the perspectives shared by all participants enable planners from diverse geographic areas to enhance their own professional abilities and gain a greater appreciation of the extremely varied roles planners play. It helps professionals share and use practices that make planning a more valuable tool for communities and their decision-makers.

Karen S. Walz, AICP,
Principal, Strategic Community Solutions
Executive Director, The Dallas Plan

For additional information on this interactive workshop, contact the author, Karen S. Walz AICP, at 214-320-1154 or kwalz@airmail.net.