Viewpoint Learning

Mission and Purpose

Viewpoint Learning describes its purpose as "designing and conducting specialized dialogues on complex and challenging issues for Fortune 500 companies, governments, foundations and other organizations across the United States, Canada and Europe." Viewpoint Learning is a for-profit enterprise.

History

Viewpoint Learning was founded in 1999 by Daniel Yankelovich and Steven A. Rosell. Since 1999 Viewpoint Learning has designed and conducted public and private dialogues in the United States, Canada and Europe.

Specializations and activities

Viewpoint Learning specializes in designing and conducting dialogues on "complex and challenging issues" for public and private settings. Viewpoint Learning has developed five dialogue methods intended to guide participants from superficial and unstable attitudes and beliefs about an issue to deeper, more substantial, more stable, more nuanced, and values-based attitudes and beliefs about the issue.

Several of these methods are characterized by a three-stage structure and the use of "scenarios" or broad policy approaches that are related to values held by the participants or the public. Viewpoint Learning often calls the stages of the three-stage structure: (1) "Opinion Formation," (2) "Working Through," and (3) "Resolution."

These methods include:

  • Strategic Dialogue and Scenario Development
  • Choice-Dialogue (formerly called Choicework Dialogue)
  • Stakeholder Dialogue
  • Community Conversations
  • Online Dialogue, Online Surveys, and Online Conversation

Strategic Dialogue and Scenario Development

"Strategic Dialogue" and "Scenario Development," as applied to complex public policy issues, are methods by which governmental, business, and community leaders may create several broad policy approaches that are related to important values that large numbers of the public are believed to hold, and so are likely to enjoy broad public support. The goal of a Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session about a public policy issue is to help civic leaders establish common ground with citizens about the policy issue.

The following description of Strategic Dialogue and Scenario Development is based on Viewpoint Learning's account of the December 2009 CommonGround Strategic Dialogue.

In a Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session about a public policy issue 35 to 40 governmental, business, and community leaders meet face-to-face and in-person in a four-hour session to discuss the issue and develop multiple policy approaches to address the issue.

Before the Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session is held, the convenors of the session meet to research public opinion about the issue, important values held by the public that are related to the issue, policy approaches to the issue, the community in which the session will take place, and political, economic, social, and other dimensions of the issue.

Using this information the convenors create several (sometimes five or six) broad policy approaches, each of which is related to an important value held by large numbers of the relevant public. Such policy approaches generally describe sets of policy instruments and do not define policy objectives. Viewpoint Learning calls such policy approaches "values-based approaches."  In its Strategic Dialogues Viewpoint Learning uses "values-based approaches" rather than knowledge-based policy approaches because a goal of the Strategic Dialogue method is to help civic leaders establish common ground about policy issues with citizens, most of whom are said to make policy decisions on the basis of values rather than knowledge. For a Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session Viewpoint Learning develops multiple "values-based approaches" -- each of which reflects a different social perspective -- respecting the issue being discussed, in order to enable participants to consider the issue from multiple social perspectives.

Participants in a Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session are selected by the convenors, and are not chosen by means of random sampling.

A Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session begins with a brainstorming session, during which participants are asked (A) to identify the most important "changes and trends" respecting the issue being discussed in the relevant jurisdiction during a particular time period (e.g., the past 20 years), and (B) to predict likely social, economic, and other relevant outcomes in the jurisdiction a decade in the future, assuming no policy changes are made respecting the issue being discussed. 

During the next part of the Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session, participants meet in small groups and plenary sessions to discuss the "values-based approaches" prepared by the convenors, in light of the changes, trends, and predicted outcomes that participants identified during the first part of the session. Among other topics these discussions concern the advantages and disadvantages participants associate with each "values-based approach" and similarities and differences between the approaches.

After the Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development session has concluded, the convenors analyze the results and reduce the five or six "values-based approaches" to a smaller number of "scenarios."  A "scenario" is an account combining a description of a broad policy approach -- or set of policy instruments -- that is related to important values believed to be held by a large portion of the relevant community, with descriptions of  advantages and disadvantages associated with that approach. Scenarios may be used by governmental, business, or community leaders to make policy decisions, or as the basis for policy dialogues among citizen participants, such as Choicework Dialogues or Online Dialogues.

It is unclear what decision-making method is used in Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development (e.g., consensus, voting, survey, etc.).

Choice-Dialogue (or Choicework Dialogue)

For a description of this method, see the Participedia article on Choicework Dialogue.

Stakeholder Dialogue

The following description of the Stakeholder Dialogue method is based on the method used in The Future of Housing in San Mateo Stakeholder Dialogue.

Viewpoint Learning's Stakeholder Dialogue method is used in a continous 8-hour face-to-face, in-person discussion session. Most of the participants in a Stakeholder Dialogue are governmental, business, and other community leaders. Participants may also include some citizens -- often participants in preceding Choicework Dialogue(s) about the same issue in the same jurisdiction -- and issue-advocates. The total number of participants in a Stakeholder Dialogue is uncertain. Participants in a Stakeholder Dialogue appear to be chosen by the convenors of the dialogue and are not randomly selected.

A Stakeholder Dialogue is usually held after one or more Choicework Dialogues have been held on the same issue in the same jurisdiction. The Stakeholder Dialogue content usually refers extensively to the results of the preceding Choicework Dialogue(s).

A Stakeholder Dialogue is usually divided into three stages:

  1. Stakeholder Dialogue participants discover "common ground between ... their own perspectives," on the one hand, and the "vision of the future" and the preferred policy scenarios that had resulted from the preceding Choicework Dialogue(s), on the other.
  2. From that "common ground" the Stakeholder Dialogue participants develop "a shared vision" or set of ultimate policy goals and broad policy approaches.
  3. Stakeholder Dialogue participants then choose several "high-leverage goals" -- i.e., achievable policy objectives -- intended to bring about the "shared vision," and begin to create plans for achieving those "high-leverage goals."

During each of these stages, participants engage in small-group and plenary discussions moderated by trained facilitators.

It is unclear what method of decision making is used in Stakeholder Dialogue (e.g., consensus, voting, survey, etc.).

Community Conversations

The following description of the Community Conversations method is based on the method used in the 2010 Anchorage Community Conversations.

Viewpoint Learning's Community Conversation method is used in a 3-hour-long, public, face-to-face, in-person discussion session to which all members of the relevant community are invited. Participants are not randomly selected and the number of participants varies. (Nonetheless, for certain Community Conversation events the convenors will hold a special Community Conversation session in which participants come from a sample that is randomly selected and then adjusted to be representative of the population of the community. The convenors will then compare the demographics and results of the randomly selected session with demographics and results from the other sessions, in order to detect bias and for other purposes.) For purposes of inclusiveness multiple Community Conversation events are often held about the same issue in different locations in the same community over a period of weeks. 

Before a Community Conversation is held the convenors create draft informational materials describing the policy issue and three or four broad policy approaches for addressing the issue. Governmental, business, labor, religious, and other community leaders review and comment on the draft informational materials, which are then revised to reflect those comments, and finalized.

During each Community Conversation four topics are discussed:

  • A vision of the future of the community respecting the policy issue being discussed. (This vision reflects ultimate policy objectives);
  • Policy approaches designed to achieve that vision;
  • Funding methods for the policy approaches;
  • Tradeoffs between policy approaches and funding methods, that are necessary in order to implement feasible policies that achieve the vision of the future.

Each Community Conversation is divided into two discussion sessions, each of which includes small-group discussions followed by a plenary discussion. The small-group discussions and plenary discussions are moderated by trained facilitators.

During the first discussion session participants discuss their vision of the future for the community, the policy approaches, and the funding methods. During the second discussion session participants discuss tradeoffs among policy approaches and funding methods necessary in order to implement feasible policies.

After the second discussion session participants complete a survey measuring their attitudes about the policy approaches and funding methods they have discussed.

Online Dialogue, Online Survey, and Online Conversation

The following description of the Online Dialogue method is based on the method used in Voices for Health Care.

Viewpoint Learning uses two types of Online Dialogue: Online Choice-Book and Online Dialogue Groups.

The Online Choice-Book method is usually used in conjunction with the Choicework Dialogue. In Online Choice-Book, the organizers create an online version of the Choicework Dialogue workbook, which describes:

  • a small number of important dimensions or sub-issues of the principal policy issue being discussed
  • the facts related to those sub-issues
  • up to four "scenarios"
  • advantages and disadvantages of each "scenario," and
  • several options for funding each scenario. 

A "scenario" is a relatively broad policy approach that is related to particular values believed to be held by large numbers of the relevant public.  A "scenario" is an account combining a description of a broad policy approach -- or set of policy instruments -- that is related to important values believed to be held by a large portion of the relevant community, with descriptions of  advantages and disadvantages associated with that approach.  A "scenario" generally does not describe policy objectives. The Online Choice-Book is then placed on an Internet-based platform, such as Citizen Compass.

Participants for Online Choice-Book are not randomly selected. Participants are invited through "advertising and outreach" on "websites," in "affinity groups," and on social media sites. The number of participants in a typical Online Choice-Book dialogue varies. For example, the Voices for Health Care Online Choice-Book began with 555 participants of whom 368 completed the Choice-Book. It is unclear how long an Online Choice-Book typically remains open for participation.

The Online Choice-Book experience is a 30-minute-long online session which may "be completed either all at once or in several sittings." At the beginning of the session each participant completes a survey asking for the participant's demographic information and measuring the participant's attitudes about the scenarios and funding options. The participant then reads through the Choice-Book, and finally completes a second survey measuring the participant's attitudes about the scenarios and funding options.  

An Online Dialogue Groups event usually takes place after an Online Choice-Book experience has concluded. Participants in an Online Dialogue Groups event consist of individuals who have previously participated in an Online Choice-Book.  The purpose of an Online Dialogue Groups event is "to identify and discuss" concrete policy approaches that should be used to address a major policy issue "and search for common ground." 

An Online Dialogue Groups event usually occurs on an Internet-based platform, such as Citizen Compass, that permits moderated discussion.

Participants in an Online Dialogue Groups event appear to be self-selected from among participants in an earlier Online Choice-Book session.  Participants are then assigned to groups having approximately 25 members each. Viewpoint Learning describes these groups as "randomized" so as to be "as diverse as possible in terms of gender, age and income."

Before each Online Dialogue Group event begins the organizers choose three discussion topics, which appear to consist of two policy goals and one set of funding mechanisms.

An Online Dialogue Group event lasts for seven days. During that week participants may post messages to their group at any time. Each group discussion is moderated.

Participants may view, but may not contribute to, the discussion in groups other than their own. This allows the dissemination of ideas across groups.

During Online Dialogue Group discussions participants discuss concrete policy approaches for achieving the two policy goals, as well as means of funding those policy approaches. Participants spend two days discussing policy approaches for achieving the first policy goal, two days discussing policy approaches for achieving the second policy goal, two days discussing means of funding the policy approaches, and the last day reaching "common ground" on policy approaches and funding mechanisms.

It is unclear what decision making method is used on the final day of the Online Dialogue Group event.

The following description of the Online Survey method is based on the method used in the survey called Californians and their Relationship to Government.

An Online Survey generally measures respondents' attitudes about a political issue. For an Online Survey Viewpoint Learning gathers what it refers to as a "random representative sample" of approximately 1,020 respondents. Respondents are "recruited from a range of panels, intercept interviews and from social media." Results have a margin of error of 3.1% at the 95% confidence level.

The following description of the Online Conversation method is based on the method used in California’s Community Clinics and Health Centers: The Online Conversation.

Online Conversation is not a public discussion method but a data-mining and analysis method. In Online Conversation researchers retrieve online public comments about the issue being researched, by conducting keyword searches related to the issue on major Internet search engines and social media sites.

Results are filtered using pre-established criteria. Comments in the final results set are then categorized by sentiment and topic. Topics are identified from the comments themselves, not from a pre-established taxonomy. Next, researchers analyze the topics to identify similarities and differences between the topics. From this analysis researchers identify several “themes,” each of which corresponds to multiple related topics. Researchers then analyze the comments a second time by associating each comment with the themes expressed in it. The themes are then ranked by the frequency with which they are associated with comments. 

In Online Conversation neither the commenters nor the comments are randomly selected, and nothing is known about the demographic or other attributes of the commenters.

Major projects and events

Some of the major dialogues that Viewpoint Learning has designed or conducted include:

Using the Strategic Dialogue or Scenario Development method:

  • California’s Community Clinics and Health Centers: Dialogues (2011)
  • Canada Task Force for the Payments System Review: Scenarios for the Future of the Canadian Payments System (2010-2011)
  • The Future of Non-Profit Health Care: Engaging Leaders in Minnesota, New York and Texas (2007)
  • Making Trust a Competitive Asset: Breaking Out of Narrow Frameworks: [Strategic Dialogue for Senior Corporate Executives] (2003)
  • "Our Voices, Our Children": A Strategic Dialogue on Early Childhood Development with Leaders in New Mexico (2009)

Using the Choicework Dialogue method:

  • Beyond Wishful Thinking: Californians Deliberate State Budget Reform (2008)
  • California Citizen Dialogues on K-12 Education Reform (2007)
  • Citizen Dialogues on Covering the Uninsured (2004)
  • Citizen Dialogues on Paying for Health Care in Retirement (2008)
  • Citizen Dialogues on the Coming of Age in Arizona (2003)
  • Citizens' Dialogue on Canada’s Future (2002)
  • Citizens' Dialogue on the Future of Health Care in Canada (2002)
  • Citizens' Dialogue on the Long-term Management of Used Nuclear Fuel in Canada (2004)
  • CommonGround: The First Five Years: A Dialogue on Early Childhood in New Mexico (2010)
  • Facing Up to Our Nation's Finances: Changing Expectations: Americans Deliberate Our Nation’s Finances and Future (2006-2007)
  • The Future of Housing in San Mateo: Citizen Dialogues (2003)
  • The Future of the San Diego Region’s Airport: Choice-Dialogues with County Residents (2004)
  • Health Coverage for All Arizonans: Citizen Dialogues (2005)
  • Health Coverage for All Californians: Dialogues with the Public (2005-2006)
  • Listening to Californians: California Citizens' Dialogues about California's Government (2004)
  • San Diego Dialogues on Community Water Fluoridation (2005-2007)
  • Sustainability Research Initiative: Listening to the Public: Understanding and Overcoming Barriers to Sustainability: [Vancouver Choice-Dialogues] (2005) 
  • Voices for Health Care: Engaging the Public to Advance Significant Health Care Reform (2008)

Using the Stakeholder Dialogue method:

  • California Citizen Dialogues on K-12 Education Reform (2007)
  • Facing up to Our Nation's Finances: Changing Expectations: Americans Deliberate Our Nation’s Finances and Future (2007)
  • The Future of Housing in San Mateo: Stakeholder Dialogues (2004)
  • Voices for Health Care: Engaging the Public to Advance Significant Health Care Reform (2008)

Using the Community Conversations method:

  • Anchorage Community Conversations (2010)
  • The Future of K–12 Education in Anchorage: Community Conversations (2012)
  • Salinas Community Dialogues (2009)

Using the Online Dialogues, Online Surveys, or Online Conversation method:

  • California’s Community Clinics and Health Centers: The Online Conversation (2009-2011)
  • Californians and Their Relationship to Government: [Online Survey] (2010)
  • Citizen Dialogue on Education Reform (2008) [Online Component of: California Citizen Dialogues on K-12 Education Reform]
  • The Future of the San Diego Region’s Airport: On-line Dialogue (2005)
  • Public Voices for Housing Choices: An Online Dialogue on the Future of Housing in San Mateo County (2008)
  • Voices 
for 
Health 
Care: Online
 Dialogue
 and Choicebook (2008)

Funding

Funding for a Viewpoint Learning dialogue usually comes from the organization sponsoring the dialogue. For public dialogues the sponsoring organization is often a foundation or a government.

Publications

James S. Fishkin, Steven A. Rosell, et al. (2004). ChoiceDialogues and Deliberative Polls: Two Approaches to Deliberative Democracy. National Civic Review, 93(4), 55-63.

Isabella Furth and Heidi Gantwerk. (2010). Anchorage Community Conversations: Bringing the Public to the Table. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Anchorage_Co...

Isabella Furth and Heidi Gantwerk. (2012). The Future of K–12 Education in Anchorage: Report on Community Conversations for the Mayor's Education Summit. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ASD_CC_Web.pdf

Isabella Furth, Heidi Gantwerk, and Steven A. Rosell. (2006). Health Coverage for All Californians: Catching Up with the Public: A Report on Dialogues with the Public and with Business and Civic Leaders. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Health_Cover...

Isabella Furth, Heidi Gantwerk, and Steven A. Rosell. (2009). Medicare: It's Not Just Another Program: Citizen Dialogues on Paying for Health Care in Retirement. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Medicare_its...

Isabella Furth, Heidi Gantwerk, and Steven A. Rosell. (2009). Voices for Health Care: Engaging the Public to Advance Significant Health Care Reform: Project Report, Spring 2009. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Engaging_the...

Heidi Gantwerk. (2004). The Future of Housing in San Mateo: Citizen and Stakeholder Dialogues. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Future_of_Ho...

Heidi Gantwerk. (2005). Fly into the Future: An On-line Dialogue About the Future of San Diego’s Airport: A Report to the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Fly_into_the...

Heidi Gantwerk. (2011, February 14). New Mexicans Can Reach Agreement About Early Childhood Issues. NMPolitics.net. http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2011/02/new-mexicans-can-reach-agreement...

Heidi Gantwerk and Isabella Furth. (2006). Health Coverage for All Arizonans: A Report on Citizen and Stakeholder Dialogues. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Health_Care_...

Mary Pat MacKinnon et al. (2003). Citizens' Dialogue on Canada's Future: A 21st Century Social Contract. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Network. http://www.cprn.org/doc.cfm?l=en&doc=359

Rob Mariani. (2009). Summary Report: Voices 
for 
Health 
Care: Online
 Dialogue
–
Choicebook. Ottawa: Ascentum. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/VFHC_Choiceb...

Rob Mariani and Bryan Myles. (2009). Summary Report: Voices 
for 
Health 
Care: Online
 Dialogue
. Ottawa: Ascentum. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/VFHC_Dialogu...

Judith Maxwell, Steven Rosell, and Pierre-Gerlier Forest. (2003). Giving Citizens a Voice in Healthcare Policy in Canada. BMJ, 326, 1031-1033. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1125934/pdf/1031.pdf

Steven A. Rosell. (1995). Changing Maps : Governing in a World of Rapid Change. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.

Steven A. Rosell. (1999). Renewing Governance: Governing by Learning in the Information Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Steven A. Rosell. (2000). Changing Frames: Leadership and Governance in the Information Age: Report of the Roundtable on Renewing Governance. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/changing_fra...

Steven A. Rosell. (2004). A Missing Step in the Governance Process. Development, 47(4), 43-49. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/missing_step...

Steven A. Rosell and Isabella Furth. (2006). Listening to the Public: Understanding and Overcoming Barriers to Sustainability: Sustainability Research Initiative. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Listening_to...

Steven A. Rosell and Isabella Furth. (2007). Effectiveness of Population-Based Interventions to Promote Oral Health: Understanding Public Judgment on Science-Intensive Issues: San Diego Dialogues on Community Water Fluoridation. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning; Oakland, CA: Dental Health Foundation. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Undetstandin...

Steven A. Rosell, Isabella Furth, and Heidi Gantwerk. (2008). Beyond Wishful Thinking: Californians Deliberate State Budget Reform. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Beyond_Wishf...

Steven A. Rosell, Isabella Furth, and Heidi Gantwerk. (2008). Changing Expectations: Americans Deliberate Our Nation’s Finances and Future. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/changing_exp...

Steven A. Rosell, Isabella Furth, and Heidi Gantwerk. (2008). Moving Along the Learning Curve: From Values to Public Judgment: Citizen Dialogues on K-12 Education Reform. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Moving_Along...

Steven A. Rosell and Heidi Gantwerk. (2008, September 24). The California Government We Want: Dialogues with Californians. Presentation to the California Forward Conference on Getting Past Gridlock — Achieving Fiscal Reform, Sacramento, CA, September 24, 2008. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/calgov_fall0...

Steven A. Rosell and Heidi Gantwerk. (2008). The Future of Non-Profit Health Care: Engaging Leaders in Minnesota, New York and Texas. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Future_of_No...

Steven A. Rosell and Heidi Gantwerk (2010). Moving Beyond Polls and Focus Groups. In Daniel Yankelovich and Will Friedman (Eds.), Toward Wiser Public Judgment (pp. 110-128). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.  http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/TowardWiserP...

Steven A. Rosell, Heidi Gantwerk, and Isabella Furth. (2005). Listening to Californians: Bridging the Disconnect: A Report to the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and The James Irvine Foundation. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Listening_to...

Viewpoint Learning. (2003). Citizen Dialogues on the Coming of Age in Arizona: A Report to St. Luke’s Health Initiatives. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Coming_of_Ag...

Viewpoint Learning. (2004). Citizen Dialogues on Covering the Uninsured: A Report to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Citizen_Dial...

Viewpoint Learning. (2004). The Future of the San Diego Region’s Airport: Choice-Dialogues with County Residents. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Future_of_Sa...

Viewpoint Learning. (2008). Public Voices for Housing Choices: An Online Dialogue on the Future of Housing in San Mateo County. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/TH_08_writeu...

Viewpoint Learning. (2009). "Our Voices, Our Children": A Report on Strategic Dialogue with Leaders in New Mexico. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.ourvoicesourchildren.org/downloads/NM_Strategic_writeup.pdf

Viewpoint Learning. (2009). Summary Report: Salinas Community Dialogues, Spring 2009. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/SalinasRepor...

Viewpoint Learning. (2010, December 24). Californians and Their Relationship to Government: Survey Results. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CA_Forward_S...

Viewpoint Learning. (2010). The First Five Years: Choice-Dialogues on Early Childhood in New Mexico. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/First_Five_Y...

Viewpoint Learning. (2011). California’s Community Clinics and Health Centers: The Online Conversation. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/BSCF_CCHCSOn...

Viewpoint Learning. (2011). CommonGround: The First Five Years: Choice-Dialogues on Early Childhood in New Mexico. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://ourvoicesourchildren.org/downloads/OVOC_writeup_WEB.pdf

Viewpoint Learning. (2011). Early Childhood in New Mexico: Choice-Dialogues. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMVB374tIRQ

Viewpoint Learning. (2012). California’s Community Clinics and Health Centers: Taking Initiative a New Health Care Landscape. San Diego, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/BlueShield_T...

Viewpoint Learning and Canada Task Force for the Payments System Review. (2011). Scenarios for the Future of the Canadian Payments System = Scénarios sur L’avenir du Système Canadien de Paiements. Ottawa: Task Force for the Payments System Review. English version: http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/FINANCE_View... . En Français: http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/FINANCE_View...

Daniel Yankelovich. (1991). Coming to Public Judgment: Making Democracy Work in a Complex World. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Daniel Yankelovich. (1999). The Magic of Dialogue: Transforming Conflict into Cooperation. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Daniel Yankelovich et al. (2006, Fall). The Next Big Step in Deliberative Democracy. Kettering Review, 54-66. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/kettering_fa...

Daniel Yankelovich. (2009, August 31). It's Time to Really Engage Americans in Health Reform. Huffington Posthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-yankelovich/its-time-to-really-enga...

Daniel Yankelovich and Will Friedman (Eds.). (2010). Toward Wiser Public Judgment. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Daniel Yankelovich and Isabella Furth. (2006, Fall). Public Engagement in California: Escaping the Vicious Cycle. National Civic Review, 95(3), 3-11. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/civic_leader...

Daniel Yankelovich and Steven A. Rosell. (2003). Making Trust a Competitive Asset: Breaking Out of Narrow Frameworks: Executive Summary. La Jolla, CA: Viewpoint Learning. http://www.viewpointlearning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Making_Trust...

Secondary Sources

Canadian Policy Research Networks. (2005). CPRN and Deliberative Dialogue – A Primer. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. http://www.cprn.org/doc.cfm?doc=1238

Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada. (2002). Report on Citizens' Dialogue on the Future of Health Care in Canada. http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/CP32-77-2002E.pdf

EKOS Research Associates. (2005). Citizens’ Dialogue on Public Health Goals in Canada: Final Findings Report. Ottawa: EKOS Research Associates. http://www.ekos.com/admin/articles/cd-phg_e.pdf

James S. Fishkin et al. (2004). ChoiceDialogues and Deliberative Polls: Two Approaches to Deliberative Democracy. National Civic Review, 93(4), 55-63.

Carolyn J. Lukensmeyer and Lars Hasselblad Torres. (2006). Public Deliberation: A Manager's Guide to Citizen Engagement. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un-dpadm/unpan0392...

Judith Maxwell et al. (2004). Responsible Action - Citizens' Dialogue on the Long-term Management of Used Nuclear Fuel. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Network. http://www.cprn.org/doc.cfm?doc=1050

Amanda Sheedy. (2008). Handbook on Citizen Engagement: Beyond Consultation. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. http://www.sasanet.org/documents/Resources/Handbook%20on%20Citizen%20Eng...

External Links

Citizen Compass, http://dialoguecircles.com/

CommonGround, http://www.ourvoicesourchildren.org/CG_home.html

Our Voices, Our Children, http://www.ourvoicesourchildren.org/

Viewpoint Learning, http://www.viewpointlearning.com/

Voices for Health Care, http://voicesforhealthcare.org/

Notes