The Dispute Resolution Institute (DRI) was founded in 1991 under the leadership of Bobbi McAdoo and its first symposium, Moving to the Next Level in Transformative Mediation: Practice, Research and Policy, was held in 1999. Over the course of the next sixteen years, DRI developed and refined a particular methodology for its symposia, captured by the common title of “An Intentional Conversation” which is then followed by a specific theme for each symposium. The intent behind this can best be captured by the following:
DRI symposia bring together scholars and practitioners to engage in purposeful conversation around critical issues in the field of conflict studies and dispute resolution. Each symposium theme is different, but all share a unique and intimate in-the-round format that intentionally supports engaged and focused conversation and exploration in the symposium’s area of focus and whose role is to frame, open up, and promote dialogue in which all attendees fully engage
The 2015 Symposium, An Intentional Conversation About Public Engagement and Decision-Making: Moving from Dysfunction and Polarization to Dialogue and Understanding, took place October 23–24 (with a pre-conference reception the evening before at the James J. Hill House). While DRI Symposia have consistently operated under the “intentional dialogue” theme, this one was unique in that it was an “intentional conversation” about conversation (or dialogue). This meant that we had the added opportunity not only to have the substantive conversation about engagement, but also to reflect on the ways that we were engaging and to demonstrate different options.
Another unique feature of DRI’s Symposia is that participation is by invitation only. In order to have the type of rich conversation organizers envisioned, it was critical to ensure that a range of perspectives were in the room. In the first phase, the planning committee, which included DRI Director Sharon Press, Associate Director Kitty Atkins, Professor Emerita Bobbi McAdoo, Professor Ken Fox, Professor Jim Coben, DRI Senior Fellow Aimee Gourlay, and Office of Collaborations and Dispute Resolution Director Mariah Levison identified appropriate “theme leaders.” The role of theme leaders was not to present a paper or fully formulated idea, but rather to “tee-up” the conversation that would follow amongst the participants. In addition, theme leaders were invited to use the Symposium to further refine their ideas and to write articles for this Symposium Issue of the Law Review.
In planning the Symposium, we decided that this theme would lend itself to a series of symposia and that initially we would focus our attention on Minnesota as a microcosm of what was happening nationally (and perhaps internationally, as well). Minnesota’s story is an interesting one because it went from a legendary period in the 1970’s when “people worked together across party lines to pass needed legislation to a much more polarized environment for local and state decision-making.” In identifying theme leaders, the planning committee focused primarily on Minnesota with a small number of nationally recognized individuals who would add to the perspectives in the room.