CPN is designed and maintained by ONline @ UW: Electronic Publishing Group.

E-mail us at cpn@cpn.org

Topics: Environment

Army Corps Districts Use Alternative Dispute Resolution, continued

Index

Story: Army Corps Districts Use Alternative Dispute Resolution
Case Study Plus: An Organizational Assessment of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in regard to Public Involvement Practices and Challenges: an extensive, 150-page assessment conducted by Stuart Langton in January 1994. Includes executive summary and recommendations, 3 long case studies, an historical profile, and bibliography.

I. Forward
II. Executive Summary
III. Organizational Assessment
IV. Case Studies

    1. Case Study #1: Public Involvement Related to HTRW Problems Associated with the Expansion of the Winfield Locks and Dam.
    2. Case Study #2: The Experience of the White River Dissolved Oxygen Committee.
    3. Case Study #3: The Fort Ord Reuse Case.

V. Appendices

A. Selected Opinions
B. Historical Profile and Bibliography

Contents

I. Forward
II. Executive Summary
III. Organizational Assessment

Case Study Plus: An Organizational Assessment of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

I. Forward

This study has been undertaken for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under a general order contract with N. J. G., Inc. Stuart Langton, Ph.D., as an independent consultant, conducted the study. Stuart Langton has been a consultant to 200 organizations. For ten years he was the Lincoln Filene Professor of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Tufts University. In 1978, he chaired the National Conference on Citizen Participation in Washington, D. C. He has directed the National Citizen Participation Research and Development Project sponsored by the Ford Foundation. He is the founding editor of Citizen Participation Magazine and his books in the field of public involvement include Citizen Participation in America, Citizen Participation Perspectives, and Citizen Participation in Public Decision Making. He is now the Director of Challenge to Leadership in Boston, one of the most unique community leadership initiatives in the nation.

II. Executive Summary

This report represents one of three activities undertaken as a part of the Public Involvement Assessment Project of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (The Corps). The study described in this report involves an organizational assessment of the Corps in regard to public involvement practices and challenges. Another project activity includes a historical profile(Appendix B) of major initiatives to promote public involvement within the Corps since 1970. Also, three case studies have been undertaken to identify lessons from projects that are illustrative of issues the Corps is likely to deal with more frequently in the future.

The term "public involvement" refers to the ways in which the Corps includes and consults with the public in planning and decision-making. The public may include individuals, groups of citizens, organizations, government agencies, or elected officials who are interested in or may be affected by plans and decisions. Public involvement may include formal and informal methods. Among the ways in which the Corps involves the public are informal meetings, advisory committees, public meetings, conferences, workshops, and written comments, et al. In the process of public involvement, the Corps also informs the public concerning issues, plans, and decisions that may affect them. Informing the public supplements and supports the public involvement process, but in and of itself, is not public involvement.

Public involvement is not the same as public affairs, although the two are related. Public Affairs is concerned with how the Corps communicates with the public (public relations), how the Corps relates to the community on an ongoing basis (community relations), and how the Corps informs and involves citizens in particular projects (public involvement). Public Affairs personnel within the Corps may play a prominent or supporting role in regard to public involvement activities depending upon the policies and approaches of each Corps district and the way in which each project unfolds. As a general practice, public involvement is a shared responsibility within Corps districts. The management of public involvement usually is in the hands of project managers from one of the functional branches, and public affairs personnel provide a consultative or assistance role.

This study examined the experience and opinions of Corps personnel in regard to public involvement. The aim of the study was to determine how influential Corps personnel viewed the Corps experience, present capacity, and future challenges concerning public involvement. To obtain a cross section of opinion, eleven district offices in different parts of the country were visited. The Districts that were visited were Albuquerque, Baltimore, Ft. Worth, Jacksonville, Little Rock, Los Angeles, Memphis, Mobile, New Orleans, Sacramento, and St. Louis. Two Division offices were visited at Vicksburg and Omaha. Also, the USACE Headquarters office was visited and interviews were conducted with ten officials. More than 100 persons were interviewed for this study. The sample of persons interviewed included officials involved in the various functional areas of Corps activity (Planning, Regulatory Affairs, Engineering, Real Estate, Construction, Military Construction, Operations and Maintenance, Public Affairs, Legal Counsel, and Emergency Management).

Almost all of the interviews were tape-recorded. The project consultant guaranteed each person interviewed that their comments would be treated confidentially, although he informed each person that quotes (without identifying from whom) would be included in the final project report.

This report summarizes the major conclusions drawn from the study. It also includes a series of recommendations proposed by the project consultant based upon the trends, critical issues, and organizational challenges identified by those interviewed. Appendix A includes 35 pages of selected quotes from the interviews that support the conclusions and recommendations The quotes are organized according to the twelve key interview questions which are listed in Appendix A.

It should be emphasized that this report draws conclusions about public involvement within the Corps based upon the perceptions of selected employees. That is a strength and a limitation. It is a strength in that those interviewed were intimately aware of the Corps' public involvement experience and the institutional forces that influence practice. It is a limitation in that the conclusions are not based upon the views of persons from outside of the Corps who have experience in regard to Corps public involvement initiatives. However, this limitation is offset by the fact that many persons from outside the Corps were interviewed in preparing three case studies following the completion of this report. As it turned out, the views of those persons confirmed and reinforced the findings of this report.

The major conclusions of this study are as follows.

  • Commitment to involving the public in its various functions is widespread throughout the Corps.
  • There is considerable unevenness in the level of commitment and ability of Corps personnel to effectively involve the public from district to district and project to project.
  • The Corps needs to undertake system-wide efforts to assure that it can effectively relate to and involve the public in the future.

The major conclusions identified above are further supported by the Historical Profile and the three case studies. For example, the Historical Profile summarizes how public involvement has evolved as an important activity within the Corps since the 1960s and has become widespread. The Profile identifies many directives within the Corps, as well as regulations from other agencies, that have encouraged or required public involvement - especially since 1970. The Profile documents the concerted effort of the Corps during the 1970s and early 1980s, with particular support from the Institute for Water Resources, to strengthen the Corps' capacity to conduct public involvement activities. As a result of ongoing efforts including training programs, technical assistance, action-research, and distribution of materials, capacity to conduct public involvement among Corps personnel was increased and by the 1980s public involvement was widespread throughout the Corps. The Historical Profile also indicates how public involvement values and practices have been reflected in related Corps initiatives such as Alternative Dispute Resolution and Partnering.

While the Historical Profile illustrates the roots and growth of public involvement within the Corps, the three case studies indicate the kinds of challenges the Corps is likely to encounter in the future. One case involves efforts to deal with a significant hazardous and toxic waste problem in constructing a new navigational lock at the Winfield Locks and Dam site on the Kanawha River in West Virginia. In this case, the Corps had to deal with citizens' organizations and a number of community leaders who became distrustful and critical of the Corps. The second case chronicles the experience of the Corps in addressing the problem of low dissolved oxygen, which posed a threat to a world-class trout fishery, downstream from the Bull Shoals Dam on the White River in Arkansas. In this case, the Corps was challenged by recreation interests and the State of Arkansas. Consequently, the Corps joined with others in establishing the White River Dissolved Oxygen Committee to attempt to manage the problem. The third case describes the Corps role in helping the Army prepare for the reuse of Fort Ord in California. In this case, the Corps worked on behalf of the Army in preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (E. I. S.) and in undertaking hazardous and toxic waste clean-up activities. The E. I. S. was particularly difficult because of time limitations imposed and complex community dynamics. While the Corps experience in working with the public in developing the E. I. S. involved considerable tension and conflict, public involvement in regard to hazardous and toxic waste clean-up efforts progressed smoothly and without public disagreement.

The three cases reinforce and illustrate the major conclusions and observations made in this Organizational Assessment. For example, the cases reflect how the public has become more sophisticated; how public involvement has become more complex and requires dealing with citizen groups, other agencies, and elected officials; the significance of technology in relation to public involvement; and the importance of informal public involvement processes. The organizational assessment which follows offers recommendations in five areas. These proposals, which are further justified by case study findings, are as follows.

Clarify Policy. The Corps needs to articulate and communicate anew its understanding, vision, and commitment regarding public involvement. It needs policy and guidance documents to clarify and communicate policy.

Strengthen Capability. The Corps needs to assure that personnel have the knowledge and skills to successfully manage public involvement today and tomorrow. Case studies, guidebooks, and updated training programs are needed to do this.

Promote Quality. The Corps is uneven in its capacity to manage public involvement and should address public involvement as a quality management issue. This will require identifying performance standards, encouraging evaluation, and organizing quality management issue groups in each district.

Reinforce Commitment. The Corps should identify public involvement management as a criteria for performance evaluation and promotion. It should also create recognition programs. A reward system is needed.

Assure Leadership. The Corps should clarify who is responsible for assuring the quality of public involvement. It is recommended that the Chief of Engineers and Division and District Commanders provide leadership to assure sufficient commitment and outstanding performance. A Public Involvement Council should be established at headquarters.

III. Organizational Assessment

Introduction

Since the 1960s, demands to involve the public in developing plans and policies among federal agencies have continued to grow. Four important forces that have driven the demand for greater public involvement are as follows:

First, American political culture has changed. Public distrust of government and the decline of mediating institutions such as political parties, and the rise of interest group politics, has made it more difficult to define public consensus. As a consequence, government agencies cannot assure political support from the public, legislative authorities, or government administrative leaders in regard to policies and plans. Therefore, on a case by case basis, government agencies must test and forge support for their action. Public involvement is critical to this process.

Second, public involvement is now a requirement based upon legislation such as the National Environmental Protection Act and hundreds of other laws established since 1969. The public expects to be involved and Congress requires it in major programs. So, as a matter of compliance and expectation, agencies must involve the public.

Third, as a practical matter, government agencies have found that it is cost-effective to involve the public at the outset of any initiative and to a sufficient extent. As a matter of prudent business practice, agencies have learned it is a wise investment to involve the public to avoid litigation or costly delays due to public opposition.

Fourth, in many instances, citizens have provided information and suggestions that have saved costs or improved upon project plans. Public involvement, therefore, often includes helpful and constructive contributions.

The Corps has developed a reputation since the early 1970s as a leader among federal agencies in public involvement. One reason for this is that the nature of its construction activities in civil works and its regulatory responsibilities in regard to wetlands have a direct and visible impact upon the public. In the early 1970s, the Corps made a strategic decision to address public involvement challenges following the passage of N.E.P.A. in 1969. The Corps' response to this challenge was focused, extensive, and well supported. The Offices of the Chief Engineers provided considerable intellectual and regulatory guidance; planning and public affairs officials throughout the Corps were involved in the development of a comprehensive initiative; the Institute of Water Resources (I.W.R.) was given responsibility to provide guidance and support; and training, publications, technical assistance and other support resources were made available through I.W.R.

By the early 1980s, Headquarters' strategic commitment to public involvement had weakened. In part this reflected the lack of interest in public involvement by the Reagan administration. One example of this was the forced disbanding of the Federal Inter-agency Council on Citizen Participation. Another example was an administrative directive by President Regan to reduce advisory committees among federal agencies. As a result, over 80 advisory committees within the Corps were disbanded. In 1981, the Corps' Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) expressed concern about the Corps' commitment to public involvement. While the Chief of Engineers at the time reaffirmed the Corps' commitment, Headquarters' attention to public involvement as a priority corporate concern has been scant since that time.

Despite the lack of emphasis from Headquarters, public involvement practices have been widespread in the field since the early 1980s. In part, this is a result of federal regulations as well as increasing demands and expectations from the public. Many interviewed for this study have suggested that ongoing commitment to public involvement has been enhanced by a generation of executives who were well trained in the 1970s and early 1980s. Others observe that younger staff naturally understand the necessity for public involvement. Another force that has encouraged public involvement is the expansion of Corps missions into areas that demand a good deal of public communication and interaction. Additionally, it has been suggested that there has been significant advances in public involvement under other names such as Alternative Dispute Resolution, Partnering, etc.

This report concludes that all of these forces have been present for the past decade. As a consequence, and as many Corps officials have suggested, public involvement is now well integrated as a value and practice within the organizational culture of the Corps. Further, there is evidence of considerable experimentation, pride in performance and commitment to public involvement. Yet, there is also a corresponding concern about uneven quality and commitment in dealing with the public. On balance, however, the Corps has been strongly committed in its promotion of public involvement over a 20 year period. By comparative standards, the Corps may provide more public involvement opportunities than any other federal government agency in the world; and, among federal agencies in the United States, the Corps' efforts may exceed or be equal to that of any other major agency.

Beyond expressions of commitment and the widespread presence of public involvement practice, two critical evaluative questions need to be considered: How effective is the Corps in its present public involvement practices, and How well positioned is the Corps to address future public involvement challenges? This report concludes that, in regard to present practice, the Corps is uneven in regard to performance. Quality enhancement and control are critical issues. In considering future challenges, the Corps needs to provide greater attention to and support for promoting public involvement. At present, the Corps is living off a legacy of the past and has not addressed future demands adequately. The Corps needs to develop a renewed public involvement philosophy, strategy, and corporate support system. The philosophy must reflect changing political and technological dynamics. The strategies must address fundamental organizational needs within the Corps. The support system must be adequate, economical, and smart to assure impact. The discussion which follows addresses these issues.

Significant Public Involvement Changes and Trends

Many changes have taken place in regard to public involvement within the Corps in the last decade. As the Corps has changed in significant ways since the early 1980s, so has public involvement practice. Ten of the most significant changes that have taken place or are occurring are summarized below. For the most part, these developments are viewed positively; however, their positive cast should not obscure the challenges they offer for the future. Accordingly, each of the summaries include a description of an associated challenge described in italics.

1. The public is more sophisticated and demanding. Today the public expects to be well informed and involved in regard to issues that affect them. Environmental consciousness and participatory inclinations are widespread among American citizens. The public is more aware of public involvement requirements and are more ready to pressure public officials if a government agency is not responsive to their concerns. They are more rational and less confrontational, yet NIMBY (Not-In-My-Backyard) sentiments are very strong. Interest groups are better organized and funded as a rule. They are more selective in their advocacy and tend increasingly to utilize research to buttress their positions. Environmental groups are frequently willing to build ongoing relationships; however, they often want to postpone their response or commitment to a project to the later stage of a planning process. There are differences throughout the country and among districts in regard to the attitudes of interest groups toward the Corps. In different districts, farmers, environmental groups, Native Americans, recreational interest groups, etc., may be more or less supportive or critical of the Corps based on tradition or the role and responsibilities of the Corps. This means that the socio-political role of the Corps differs among districts. Yet in each district, the Corps must respond to the growing sophistication and demands of interest groups and the general public.

The Corps needs to assure that its employees in every district who interface with the public have the commitment and skills to work effectively with the general public and interest groups within their region.

2. Interpretations of how the public is defined has expanded. Since the 1970s, the Corps has encouraged a very inclusive definition of the public. Today, there is widespread commitment to a very broad interpretation. In addition to identifying people who might be impacted by a project or interest groups in a geographic area, heightened sensitivity is focused on local political leaders; administrators of relevant local, state, and federal agencies; and elected state and federal officials.

The Corps has learned that a positive effort to involve the public may be undermined if other government agencies with responsibilities related to a Corps initiative are not involved sufficiently from the outset.. Also, some elements of the public may appeal to elected officials if they are not satisfied with a decision even though they have been involved in its development. These dynamics require multiple, integrated and sophisticated approaches to public involvement at the district level. Consequently, public involvement requires three considerations today in most Corps projects: citizen interest strategy, an inter-agency strategy, and an elected officials strategy.

Corps personnel who are responsible for the design and management of public involvement require understanding and skills not only in dealing with citizens, but also in dealing with other agencies and elected officials and their staffs. Knowledge of organizational behavior and political processes are now a necessity for those responsible for the design and management of public involvement.

3. The scope of public involvement activities has expanded. During the 1970s and early 1980s the greatest demand for public involvement was in planning for civil works projects and in regulatory programs concerning wetlands. Today, the demands have expanded into many other mission areas that have grown in the past decade. These areas include clean-up of Hazardous, Toxic and Radioactive waste (HTRW), military base realignments and closings, environmental restoration, work-for-others, outdoor recreation on rivers and reservoirs where the Corps has operational responsibility, and emergency management in responding to floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters.

Expansion into these mission areas poses new and intensified public involvement demands for the Corps. For example, HTRW clean-up requires educating the public about risks and alternative treatment options. Emergency management and recreational site management often involves working with volunteers, a growing area of public involvement. Increasing demands on Corps operated water resource sites calls for managing competing demands from homeowners, fishermen, hydropower interests, outfitters, etc.

The Corps has previously studied, documented, and provided considerable training in public involvement in the areas of civil works planning and regulatory affairs. However, practical research, case-studies, and focused training about public involvement are limited in the growing mission areas identified above.

The Corps needs to develop state-of-the-art knowledge and training opportunities in regard to public involvement in expanded and expanding mission areas. Prospect courses provided through the Huntsville Division, and other training programs, must remain current with these developments. New case-studies need to be prepared and made available.

4. Technology is influencing public involvement performance. Computers and related technologies have influenced the performance of public involvement in many ways. Maintenance of mailing lists is enhanced by the use of computers. Desk-top publishing software makes it easier to produce reports, newsletters, and brochures of higher quality and often at less cost. Computer networks make it possible to interact with others involved with a project or a common interest. Telefacsimile technology allows information to be shared immediately, thus reducing misunderstandings as a result of delay. Compugraphic technology contributes to more effective slides and charts that are produced more quickly and economically. Satellite technology makes it possible to photograph terrain and monitor natural resources and changes which helps the public to better understand a situation. Decision support technology such as the program used in the Corps National Drought Study, help all participants to better understand and assess options.

All of these technologies are being used throughout the Corps in dealing with the public to a lesser or greater extent. However, the use of technology in public involvement has not been documented, evaluated, or widely shared.

A challenge to the Corps is to help their personnel responsible for public involvement understand and develop skills in the use of communication technologies to increase their productivity and effectiveness.

5. Management approaches to public involvement have become more diverse. Until recently, Corps personnel have been completely responsible for the design, management, and control of public involvement projects. This tradition is changing as the Corps takes on more work-for-others and as a result of the amendments to the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 which requires cost-sharing in civil works projects. Whether undertaking a project on behalf of another agency, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, or planning a civil works project with a local sponsor, a Crops district may now assume a variety of roles in regard to public involvement. The district may be given total responsibility or it may have more or less depending on the wishes or capacity of its sponsor. Then again, the district may share responsibility on an even basis with a co-sponsor.

Each of the management arrangements between a Corps District and partners involves unique challenges and dynamics. For example, how does a district influence a sponsor that may want to manage public involvement but has limited experience or a poor track-record? Which are the best management procedures for a shared public involvement initiative? Because diverse public involvement management arrangements are fairly recent, there is limited collective knowledge about them. As a practical matter, it is important to know how to best manage public involvement under alternative relationships because the credibility and performance of the Corps is at stake even when the Corps' level of control may be modified.

The Corps needs to develop and share state-of-the-art knowledge about alternative management approaches to public involvement with sponsors. District personnel need to develop understanding and skill to assure effective leadership under different arrangements.

6. Informal interactive public involvement processes are preferred today. In the 1970s, public hearings were a predominant form of meeting with the public. Today Corps personnel indicate opposition to public hearings except in occasional circumstances where a more formal approach may be appropriate. Even in such cases, it is suggested that a hearing be used to augment other activities that have provided opportunities for more open and interactive dialogue. In civil works planning projects, public workshops which allow for discussion on a one to one basis or in small groups has evolved as a popular involvement medium. In regulatory affairs, informal pre-application discussions are widely preferred. In operations of recreational facilities, surveys with users, meetings, and advisory groups are used frequently. In general, the Corps has found approaches such as these to be more "user friendly," but also they provide better vehicles for exploring alternatives and dealing with conflicts.

The Corps needs to document, evaluate, and share information about various public involvement procedures used in different kinds of activities. District personnel who work with the public need to know of "best practice" models and how to implement them.

7. Public involvement training is influencing practice. The Corps' long-standing investment in public involvement training has been beneficial. Those interviewed for this project who have previously participated in a public involvement training program developed by I.W.R. (about 60%), were almost universally positive about what they learned and how the have been able to apply their learnings. Senior officials who received training in the 1970s indicated that it has influenced how they plan and manage projects. Mid-career personnel who have taken the prospect courses offered through the Huntsville Division indicate that the planning procedures and methods they learned about were helpful. A number noted that they utilized an interactive workshop format they learned about in their training experience. A third area of training, of more recent vintage, includes seminars on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) developed by I.W.R. using many lessons from earlier public involvement training and sponsored by the Office of the Chief Counsel. These programs are also highly rated and of practical use to those who have attended.

Two elements of training are regarded as particularly helpful. One is the use of realistic cases, and the other is leadership from people outside the Corps who understood the Corps' organizational culture but have a broader perspective.

The Corps needs to continue to provide meaningful training programs in public involvement that is of practical benefit to personnel.

8. Leadership rather than regulation is the preferred strategy for promoting public involvement. A popular strategy among federal agencies and within the Corps during the 1970s was to provide strong and specified regulations for public involvement. Such regulations often included enumerating methods to use and frequency of use. Today, Corps officials view this approach as unrealistic and inappropriate because it does not address the uniqueness of different situations. Further, the view is widely held that promoting change and enhancing performance must be nourished rather than regulated.

A common view among Corps officials is that public involvement is best promoted through leaders who espouse its values, establish corresponding policies, practice its principles, and reward employees who do the same. These factors are frequently identified as things that influence and have a lasting impact on performance because they are integrated into the culture and operating system of the Corps..

Corps leaders need to articulate the importance and values associated with public involvement, provide examples through their own commitment, and create incentives and rewards for employees in the area of public involvement.

9. There is growing recognition of the relationship between community relations and public involvement. A frequent theme among those interviewed for this study was that public involvement in particular projects is often influenced by previous and ongoing relationships between the district office and the community. If a district had previously experienced contentious relationships in several projects or in a project with high visibility, it was reported that it was far more difficult to develop a positive public involvement project. Conversely, a number of districts report that ongoing community relations efforts contribute to and make it easier to create productive public involvement programs.

A number of officials are of the opinion that public involvement must be thought of as elements of an ongoing community relations strategy of a district. They propose that public involvement must be viewed more systemically rather than episodically to promote quality and effectiveness. Examples of community relations efforts that are reported to positively nourish public involvement include the following: the establishment of Advisory Committees or Councils that meet with district officials to discuss mutual concerns, attending conferences sponsored by interest groups, a speakers program to inform community groups of the Corps' resources, values, and concerns; volunteer programs to assist schools and other community institutions; public workshops that provide information on district activities; and informal visits with government officials, the media, and leaders of community organizations.

The Corps needs to increase awareness among all districts of the positive relationship between community relations and public participation. Information and training opportunities should be made available to encourage senior leadership in every district to develop community relation strategies and activities.

10. Many Corps initiatives compatible with public involvement have been developed. Many management initiatives have been developed within the Corps since the 1980s that are compatible with public involvement values and practices. These initiatives include "customer care" which stresses responsiveness, satisfaction, and accountability in the work the Corps does with and for others. "Partnering" emphasizes good communication, cooperation, and collaboration with others who work with the Corps in the delivery of services. "Army Quality Management" (AQM), an Army-wide initiative adopted in some districts, is relevant to public involvement in that it advocates participation among employees as well as those served to enhance the quality of services. "Alternative Dispute Resolution" (ADR) addresses one of the most challenging issues in dealing with the public - how to reduce and resolve disputes and achieve workable agreements. Finally, recent Headquarters emphasis on "communication" and on "relationships" as major corporate themes parallel core values related to public involvement.

The Corps could benefit from an examination of its many initiatives regarding its relations with its many publics. A coherent and updated philosophy that shows connections between initiatives, strategies to build synergy, and benchmarks for improvement could increase commitment, cost-effectiveness, and performance.

Critical Issues

The changes and trends identified above suggest a number of needs that should be addressed if the Corps is to continue to maintain and strengthen its capacity to manage public involvement in the future. In addition to these changes and associated needs, this study has identified a number of critical issues that must also be addressed. These issues are particularly important because they deal with the capacity or lack of capacity of the Corps to respond to changes concerning public involvement and their related challenges. The issues are as follows.

1. Unevenness in quality and commitment. While public involvement is widely undertaken within the Corps, great discrepancies in effort and quality exist. The situation varies from district to district, among functional divisions ("stovepipes") within districts, and among projects or activities in a division.

Although Corps personnel tend to speak very positively about the importance of public involvement and their commitment to it, the following factors are mentioned frequently as impeding the quality and value of public involvement to the public and the Corps.

  • A minority of Corps personnel are opposed to public involvement because they view it as a challenge to their authority and expertise. The proportion of personnel who maintain this posture is viewed as having declined over the past 20 years.
  • Many personnel who must interact with the public are not effective in listening to or communicating with the public. Some are perceived as arrogant and defensive when questioned by the public. One or two cases of such behavior can undermine an otherwise positive public involvement effort.
  • Often the Corps does not involve the public early enough in planning or policy-making. As a result, the Corps is viewed as having decided what to do and then organizing public involvement activities merely to gain public compliance. In such cases, the public views the Corps as manipulative or rigid and considers public involvement to be a waste of time.
  • The Corps sometimes conducts public involvement in a pro-forma or haphazard way. Little effort is made to identify or reach-out to publics that may be affected by a plan or policy. Public concerns and suggestions are not seriously considered, and follow-up contacts are not made with the public.

There is no current guiding corporate philosophy regarding public involvement and no coherent guidance system. Each "stovepipe" is responsible for training its people and managing its own public involvement activities. Quality management tools such as standards of excellence, performance guidelines, and evaluation are seldom utilized. Occasionally evaluation of personnel may involve criteria related to public involvement. There are few rewards or incentives for undertaking or managing public involvement effectively. There is no "designated center of excellence" for public involvement as is the case in regard to many other important operational matters in the Corps.

The present situation within the Corps is that public involvement is at the discretion of district commanders, division heads, and project managers. While there are many desirable features of this practice, including flexibility according to need and the capacity of personnel, the Corps needs to place greater emphasis on the importance of public involvement and increase corporate guidance.

2. Lack of state-of-the-art information. With the exception of developing case studies and other materials in the area of Alternative Dispute Resolution, the Corps has not undertaken studies or published many materials concerning public involvement for over a decade since the last series of I.W.R. publications. An exception is the first and recent ten year reader in public involvement, published by I.W.R., for which a considerable demand is reported. Practical research and publications are particularly needed today to address public involvement issues in new mission areas, the use of technology, alternative project management models, community relations, and productive methods.

Strong interest has been expressed in such material (especially case studies) by many interviewed in this project. Presently, there is no organizational unit that has the assignment or a budget to develop such materials as was the case with the I.W.R. in the 1970s and early 1980s.

3. Inadequate training system. At present training in public involvement within the Corps consists of Prospect Courses offered through the Huntsville Division and programs made available through functional divisions, "stovepipes." The present system is inadequate for meeting present and future training needs in four respects First, many who want to participate in Prospect Courses find they cannot because of other training requirements and reductions in budgets for training. This is reflected in declining enrollments and a recent course cancellation. Second, the amount of attention devoted to public involvement in each functional area is limited and there is no coordination at all among them. Third, training opportunities have not been created to address changes and trends such as the use of technology, alternative management, new missions, etc. Fourth, there has been no systematic update by Corps public involvement experts since public involvement courses were assigned to the Huntsville Division.

The root of the Corps training problems are similar to the lack of updated field research and publications. No unit or person is assigned to manage these issues and no budget is available. Further, there is no mechanism for connecting training needs and interests among "stovepipes." This points to the need for a designated "Center of Excellence" within the Corps.

4. Dilemmas regarding Public Affairs Officers. There are great differences among districts regarding the roles and responsibilities of Public Affairs Officers, and this is reflected in the variety of ways that P.A.O.s relate to public involvement. Models vary from district to district and are influenced by such factors as tradition, the rank and ability of P.A.O. staff, the approach of each district commander, and the ability of other staff in designing and managing public involvement activities.

Among the roles that P.A.O.s may undertake in public involvement are as planners and strategists, media representatives, coaches to staff in developing public presentation skills, writers and editors, meeting consultants, and meeting managers.

Because public involvement is so critical to the Corps' success, it is important that the role and abilities of Public Affairs Officers be examined. Three related issues deserve particular attention. First, the ideal role and responsibilities for P.A.O.s regarding responsibilities in public involvement should be clarified. A standard is needed to guide the field. Second, efforts should be made to assure that staff who are competent to assume these responsibilities are retained or hired. Rank and salaries commensurate with role and responsibility should be provided. Third, a thorough and comprehensive training program is needed to assure that P.A.O.s possess the knowledge and skills to handle public involvement responsibilities in the future.

In considering the future role of P.A.O.s in regard to public involvement, several points should be considered. One point is that some P.A.O.s now deal with public involvement only as a public relations issue. A related point is that some P.A.O.s serve merely as apologists for their district or division. To serve future public involvement challenges, P.A.O.s will need to transcend these limited perspectives. They will increasingly need to become wise strategists, advisors, and advocates in helping the Corps to relate to the public in the broadest sense of determining the public interest.

Related Organizational Challenges

In addition to the issues identified in the previous section, the Corps faces related organizational challenges that are relevant to the future of public involvement practice. These challenges include matters that are essential to the mission and integrity of the Corps as an institution. Since public involvement reflects and is influenced by these considerations, it is important to understand how they are related.

Turnover among district commanders. Public involvement considerations are among the most immediate and visible matters confronted by a district commander. At present, district commanders are assigned for two years and in a few cases they stay three years. District staff and a number of commanders indicate that this is detrimental to effective public involvement because it takes a commander at least a year to learn about a district, and once the commander builds relations with community leaders, he leaves. This high turnover rate contributes to lack of continuity and inability to deal with fundamental attitudinal or structural problems regarding public involvement within a district. These dynamics suggest that longer appointments and/or more corporate guidance regarding public involvement would be beneficial. The current situation suggests the need for reinstating the two-day training program in public involvement for all district commanders that was provided in the 1970s.

Implications of reorganization. The proposed Corps reorganization plan will reduce or eliminate planning staff in a number of districts. Since planning staff have historically been at the forefront of public involvement, there is concern among districts that will lose these staff that the district's public involvement capacity will suffer. It is predicted by some that planners who are located at greater distance will not understand community political dynamics or build the kind of relationships that nourish good public involvement. Other officials propose that good training, adequate field visits, and appropriate use of technology can compensate for changes resulting from reorganization. Whatever the case, the issue of how public involvement can best be promoted under reorganization plans should be addressed.

The promotional dilemma. Successive administrations have prohibited the Corps from engaging in marketing activities concerning its services. In large measure this is a policy to assure that the Corps does not compete with engineering firms in the private sector.

The Amendments to the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 make it more important for the Corps to make their resources in areas of civil works known to local officials even though this cannot involve marketing as such. This situation reinforces the importance of community relations and positive public involvement activities. As a practical matter, the Corps will encourage more potential local co-sponsors for projects as a result of outstanding performance of public involvement. In this regard, public involvement may be one of the best demonstrations of the Corps' ability to serve the public interest.

Balancing centralized and decentralized approaches. The Corps is a complex organization that seeks to balance headquarters guidance and selected control with discretionary authority at the district level. In each decade, and according to various management issues, a balance must be crafted between central influence and decentralized discretion.

In the early 1970s, Headquarters exerted considerable direction regarding public involvement. By the 1980s, public involvement had become essentially a decentralized consideration. Today, there is a need to resurrect headquarters guidance, not necessarily as a control force, but rather as a facilitating mechanism to assure quality and networking among districts. The Corps needs to assure that an acceptable level and quality of public involvement is present in every district. This will not take place without Headquarters' leadership.

The Corps needs to determine how to promote, strengthen, and assure quality in public involvement-building upon its headquarters resources and its decentralized field tradition. An important resource in this equation, as it once was, could be the Institute of Water Resources. Another important resource that may be influential are division commanders. Their potential role in advancing public involvement should not be overlooked. Additionally, the Corps may need to create a new organizational entity combining headquarters divisions to promote and coordinate public involvement interests. Further, a network representing field and headquarters interests may be helpful as a group to meet occasionally and communicate continuously using the best available technology.

Connecting "Stovepipes." The Corps has developed a system of specialized areas of expertise, referred to as "stovepipes." These areas include planning, engineering, regulatory affairs, operations, public affairs, legal counsel, et. al. This specialization of functions has contributed to quality enhancement in each area. A present challenge to the Corps is to maintain the benefits of this system while assuring better corporate connections and integration among them. In the area of public involvement, it is critical that each "stovepipe" reflect a coherent corporate commitment and approach. If any area is lax in this regard, it will undermine the reputation of the Corps as an organization. As the saying goes, the weakest link can break the chain.

The Corps needs to assure that each of its functional units is committed to and capable of dealing with public involvement challenges. At the same time, as a matrix organization, connections need to be made between functional areas at the level of headquarters, divisions, and districts. Because public involvement is not the exclusive responsibility of any one "stovepipe," strategies and processes are needed to assure that public involvement needs are attended to and connected between "stovepipes" at all organizational levels.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Three major conclusions can be drawn from this study. One is that public involvement is a critical and necessary activity that will influence the reputation, performance, and future work of the Corps. Second, the Corps has achieved considerable success in promoting public involvement activities: however, quality is uneven and an acceptable standard of performance needs to be identified and achieved throughout all districts. Third, the Corps must create a system-wide initiative to upgrade knowledge and employee skills to address new and emerging dynamics associated with public involvement.

To address the public involvement needs and challenges within the Corps, five strategies are recommended. These strategies can be stated simply as follows:

  • Clarify Policy
  • Strengthen Capability
  • Promote Quality
  • Reinforce Commitment
  • Assure Leadership

What these strategies suggest as possible actions are described below.

Clarify Policy. It has been twenty years since the Corps has undertaken a major effort to define its values and approach in involving the public. Such an effort is needed today because public involvement challenges have grown in regard to areas of application and complexity. Further, many of the values associated with public involvement are served by other programmatic initiatives such as AQM, ADR, Partnering, etc. Also, the connection between the need for community relations and public involvement needs to be clarified today in theory and in practice. Accordingly, the following actions are proposed.

  • A policy document should be created that provides an updated philosophy of the Corps in regard to public involvement. The document needs to offer a coherent model for dealing with the public, explaining how public involvement, community relations, ADR, partnering, etc., are related and reflect essential Corps values. The document should define and communicate a corporate ethic to guide all Corps employees in their interactions with the public.
  • A guidance document (or series of documents) should be developed to assist district offices in carrying out the Corps' public involvement philosophy without regulations. The guidance document should describe and illustrate preferred approaches to public involvement and list criteria that district offices could use to plan and evaluate efforts to involve the public.

Representatives from various headquarters divisions and representatives from field divisions and districts should actively participate in the creation of the above.

Strengthen Capability. The Corps should update and expand its efforts to help personnel better understand and manage public involvement activities. This can be done in the following ways.

  • A series of case studies and guidebooks should be developed to describe "best practice" public involvement approaches. The series needs to focus on public involvement in the numerous mission areas of the Corps. Additionally, attention should be given to productive methods, use of technology, and alternative management approaches.
  • A coordinated training strategy should be designed and implemented that cuts across all "stovepipes." A project should be undertaken to assure that training activities in each "stovepipe" includes a common core body of learnings about public involvement.
  • New training courses in public involvement should be designed and required for all new district commanders. Also, a program similar to the model developed for ADR training should be initiated. Required training workshops in public involvement should be conducted for senior personnel within each district.

Promote Quality. In addition to the other proposals in this section, a number of things can be done, and at reasonable cost, to promote quality in the design and implementation of public involvement. In particular, the following three initiatives are recommended.

  • Identify performance standards and criteria in involving the public in each functional area. Such standards should apply to organizational units as well as executive officer performance. This will provide professionals in different functional areas with a clear understanding of what should be achieved as a result of public involvement activity. Standards and criteria should be explained and reinforced in training programs in each functional area.
  • Encourage evaluation of public involvement. A norm should be promoted in each district to evaluate public involvement activities within each functional division on a regular basis. Peer review techniques and the performance standards proposed above can serve as useful tools. Simple methods such as recording major learnings and problems can be used to advance state-of-the-art knowledge in each functional area.
  • Organize quality management issue groups within each district. These groups can serve several functions. They can monitor project evaluations and develop reports that document major learnings and common problems. The group can provide consultation to divisions or particular projects within the district. They can also undertake a comprehensive assessment of public involvement activities within the district and offer recommendations to promote quality performance.
  • Reinforce Commitment. To reinforce commitment to public involvement, the Corps must develop procedures that reward personnel for their commitment and performance. Two ways to do this are proposed below.
  • Establish performance and promotion criteria. Management of public involvement should be an important criterion in evaluating the management performance of Corps personnel who must work with the public. This criterion should be included in the annual evaluations of Headquarters Division Chiefs, District Commanders, Division Commanders, and other staff who have important responsibilities in regard to relating to the public. Additionally, demonstrated public involvement management abilities should be important considerations in hiring and promoting managers.
  • Establish recognition programs. The Corps should recognize officials who demonstrate exemplary leadership in public involvement. Awards honoring excellence should be made in functional division areas ("stovepipes") annually. Also, each district should identify and recognize exemplary performance on an annual basis.
  • Assure Leadership. A major problem in assuring effective public involvement within the Corps is that it is everyone's responsibility in general but no persons responsibility in particular. This is one reason why quality is uneven and the Corps is not well-positioned to meet emerging challenges. Therefore, the following actions are proposed.
  • The Chief of Engineers and Division and District Commanders must provide leadership in assuring sufficient commitment and outstanding performance in public involvement practices. The Army leaders within the Corps must accept responsibility and hold themselves accountable for the capacity of the Corps to relate to the public. While it may seem paradoxical that military men trained in a tradition of authority should become stalwarts in the promotion of administrative democracy, such are the challenges of leadership today.

    Public involvement leadership and management needs to become an important consideration in the selection, rating, and promotion of Army personnel within the Corps. While civilian managers will always be responsible for implementing public involvement, authority and accountability must clearly reside with the military officers who dominate senior leadership positions. Clearly, responsibility for public involvement must be shared between military and civilian officials, but Army officers need to be the source of accountability.

  • For Public Involvement to work, the people in contact with the public must have the authority to negotiate in good faith. If the solutions they work out in cooperation with the public are routinely overturned or altered by headquarters, there can be no meaningful public involvement. The Corps must create a system in which headquarters has confidence in its districts to establish agreements with the public.
  • Create a Headquarters Public Involvement Council. The Corps needs an organizational structure to provide leadership in the area of public involvement within Headquarters. A Public Involvement Council is proposed as a mechanism to provide such leadership. To create integration in public involvement practice, the Council should include representatives from the functional divisions and units within headquarters.

    The Public Involvement Council should provide leadership in acting upon the proposals advanced in this report and/or alternative actions. The Council should be provided with sufficient resources (budget, staff, and consultants) to carry out its work. A unit within the Corps, as I.W.R. once did, should be provided with the assignment and resources to serve as a "center of excellence" with guidance from the proposed Council.

  • Conduct Annual Audits of Public Involvement within Districts. Each district should be expected to audit and assess its public involvement strategy, procedures, and activities annually. The audit and assessment should determine what changes, if any, are needed and how to achieve them. Each district would be expected to develop its own plan for promoting and enhancing quality in the area of public involvement.

Index

Story: Army Corps Districts Use Alternative Dispute Resolution
Case Study Plus: An Organizational Assessment of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in regard to Public Involvement Practices and Challenges: an extensive, 150-page assessment conducted by Stuart Langton in January 1994. Includes executive summary and recommendations, 3 long case studies, an historical profile, and bibliography.

I. Forward
II. Executive Summary
III. Organizational Assessment
IV. Case Studies

    1. Case Study #1: Public Involvement Related to HTRW Problems Associated with the Expansion of the Winfield Locks and Dam.
    2. Case Study #2: The Experience of the White River Dissolved Oxygen Committee.
    3. Case Study #3: The Fort Ord Reuse Case.

V. Appendices

A. Selected Opinions
B. Historical Profile and Bibliography

Back to Environmental Index