The BRIDGE: The Background Story on one of Extension’s Newest Signature Programs

Not all problems are created equal. Using one’s intuition or past practices might work for solving very simple problems. Yet our past and our view of the future may limit our solutions. When we are facing an issue or challenge that requires a fresh solution and has many interrelated components — perhaps several different constituents are involved or can be affected by the solution — a more robust process will bring you a clearer, more novel solution. Based on Snowden’s (2007) research, there are four levels of problems – simple, complicated, complex and chaotic. As director of the Alber Enterprise Center, I helped to develop an issue management model specifically designed to resolve our clients’ complex problems.

The BRIDGEIn my own research comparing The BRIDGE Issue Management Process with other more basic problem-solving models, I determined that there are three features that differentiate our model. The BRIDGE:

  1. Identifies a system of interrelated solutions that resolve the issue;
  2. Provides templates for clients to document the desired outcomes, action steps, measurements, and resources into formal documents; and
  3. Gains buy-in from their respective organizations to implement and sustain the solution.

Deciding how to solve problems and issues can create a challenge in itself. Giroux (2009) conducted a study of the decision-making habits of small business owners and entrepreneurs in Canada. Using one’s intuition seems to be a common practice, as was learning from past incorrect decisions. Also, emotions may unduly influence the decision if the problem is critical to the success of the business. Without a formal process that helps them view the problem objectively, small business owners sometimes lacked the ability to make sound decisions (Giroux, 2009). They are limited by their past experience and their view of the horizon.

There is history in the phrase “issue management process.” It was coined by the late Howard Chase in 1976 to describe a process he crafted for corporations to manage their public relations image and to influence public policy. Although Chase restricted his model to the corporate and public policy environment, issue management eventually progressed into a discipline used by other types of entities to develop strategies for a wide range of issues in their respective environments.

As one of Extension’s newest “signature programs,” The BRIDGE: Issue Management Process, is not actually a program as educators know it. It is a tool that anyone experienced with facilitating groups can utilize to solve complex issues. The BRIDGE creatively incorporates adaptations of several organization analysis tools designed by business scholars arranged in a logical flow. First, the facilitator carefully chooses stakeholders familiar with the issue and invites them to a workshop to guide them through the process. The facilitator then coaches the participants to storyboard what they can control or influence about the issue; to reflect on where they are currently and what they want as an end result in measurable terms; and to identify forces driving the issue as well as barriers that must be overcome. The group then designs a comprehensive, multifaceted solution that specifies the action steps and addresses the human resistance to change that may hold back implementation. Creating an evaluation plan for monitoring the outcomes is the final phase of the process.

We use The BRIDGE when:

  1. there are many components to an issue that are interrelated, and minor changes to one component could cause major consequences to others;
  2. we want a creative solution that has not been done before; and
  3. we have a short time period to resolve the issue.

I hope that this post helps to broaden your perspective on problem-solving vs. issue management, and that the next time you’re faced with a complex issue, you’ll reach for The BRIDGE tool kit.


Myra WilsonMyra Wilson is program director for the Alber Enterprise Center located at The Ohio State University at Marion.

Cuyahoga River Achieves Important Milestone for Improved Aesthetics

It may be too cold and dreary to be in a boat for most of us just yet. But, we are not all that far away from spring and will soon be making plans to get back on the water!

And for those of us with such thoughts, we have some really good news. The United States Environmental Protection Agency recently approved the removal of “Degradation of Aesthetics” from the list of Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) in the Cuyahoga River Area of Concern (AOC). This action acknowledges that aesthetics have improved dramatically in the decades since the Cuyahoga and nearby Lake Erie tributaries were named one of the 27 federally-designated U.S. waterways that have experienced severe environmental degradation. The aesthetics BUI was one of 10 specific problems identified for the Cuyahoga and its watershed in accordance with the 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) – a bi-national accord between the United States and Canada focused on cleaning up the most polluted tributaries draining into the Great Lakes.

In a letter to Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Director Craig Butler, Great Lakes National Program Director Tinka Hyde said, “Removal of this BUI will benefit not only the people who live and work in the Cuyahoga River AOC, but all the residents of Ohio and the Great Lakes basin as well,” and congratulated Ohio EPA staff and “the many federal, state, and local partners who have worked so hard and been instrumental in achieving this important environmental improvement.”

Environmental improvement has been dramatic in the Cuyahoga River Area of Concern.

Surveys and observations over the past few years have shown that persistent “occurrences of sludge, oil, scum or other objectionable materials that produce color, odor or other nuisances,” which are the measure of aesthetic quality set forth in a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) completed for the Cuyahoga, are now either nonexistent in the Area of Concern or are being remediated by long term control plans to reduce combined sewer overflows. Litter and woody debris are not considered persistent impairments in this category.

“This is a significant step forward on the path to delisting the Cuyahoga. It’s great to know that the progress we’re making to restore the AOC can now be recognized. With lasting support from state and federal agencies, and local partners, we can see a future when we reach all our restoration goals,” said Jennifer Grieser, Chair of the Cuyahoga River AOC Advisory Committee.

Restoration along the Cuyahoga River bank.

The next BUI to be delisted – hopefully in the spring of 2018 – is “Public Access and Recreation Impairments,” which has been helped by the development of trails, rowing clubs, fishing areas, boating and paddle sport amenities, residential areas, and dining and entertainment facilities that now allows its removal and signals full recovery. All one needs to do is stroll along the east bank of The Flats in Cleveland, or take a cruise on the Cleveland Metroparks Water Taxi, to see examples of community development on shore and restoration actions along the river’s banks.

If you want to track the progress of the Cuyahoga River as more BUIs are delisted, check out the website for the AOC’s facilitating organization, Cuyahoga River Restoration and the Cuyahoga River Area of Concern Advisory Committee. There is also plenty of information on the web page of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as that of Ohio Sea Grant, which is one of the organizations along with nonprofit community groups, businesses, government agencies, and local residents that collaborate to help guide restoration actions throughout the watershed. For more detail on the GLWQA and Cuyahoga AOC, as well as some of the restoration actions taking place, see my CD Blog post from March of 2017 titled: “We all know the Cuyahoga River caught on fire.  What’s being done to clean it up?”

See you on the river!


Scott Hardy is an Extension Educator for the Ohio Sea Grant College Program.

Recognizing Excellence: Contributions and innovations in Extension CD

How do we achieve excellence? We stop what we are doing, stand back, and assess efforts. We then recognize those special accomplishments.

The Raymond A. Schindler Excellence in Community Development Extension Award is named in honor of Raymond A. Schindler, one of the first Extension CD professionals in Ohio. Hired in 1962 as an Area Extension Agent, Ray began his career in southern Ohio, based in Highland County. He took a collaborative approach to his work, focusing on tourism development, comprehensive planning, planning commissions, and business retention and expansion programs until his retirement in 1988.

Today, we recognize Extension CD professionals with The Raymond A. Schindler Excellence in Community Development Extension Award. The annual award seeks to recognize:

  • long term strengths in teaching and research
  • a long-standing record of teamwork and collaboration in program planning, implementation and evaluation
  • a successful track record in grant awards, cost recovery, or other external funding

In January 2018, we recognized Becky Nesbitt with the Raymond A. Schindler Excellence in Community Development Extension Award for her ability to develop and deliver multidisciplinary, evidence-based programs in collaboration with colleagues, stakeholders, private industry and state and federal funding partners that empower others to affect positive change. Since joining Ohio State University Extension in 1987, she has truly demonstrated a record of excellence in creative and scholarly work, teaching and service to community and profession.

Click here to learn more about Becky and her work.Congratulations, Becky!


Greg Davis is a professor and assistant director for OSU Extension Community Development.

Small Business Innovation Research – New Initiative to Launch in Ohio!

Did you know that nearly half (46%) of Ohio’s workforce is employed by small business enterprises? According to the Small Business Administration, Ohio is home to 927,691 small businesses, roughly 80% of all business in Ohio.

In 2018 I will be working with other Extension professionals from across the United States to bring the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) programming – coaching and support – to Ohio. I will be learning about the intricacies of the program and will be disseminating that information to each of our county offices. The ultimate goal: to attract and support Ohio’s entrepreneurs via SBIR funding.

The mission of the SBIR program is to support scientific excellence and technological innovation through investment of Federal research funds in key U.S. technologies. The ultimate goal is to support a strong economy through small business innovation and application. SBIR is a highly competitive program that encourages small businesses to engage in federal research and research and development efforts with potential for commercialization.

Car of the future?

SBIR specifically targets entrepreneurs, innovators, idea guys and gals, because this group is where most innovation and innovators thrive. The problem for this population historically has been the expense of conducting research and development. Many are boot strapping or funding their projects and start-ups. To combat this challenge, funds have been earmarked for these innovators and are distributed to qualified candidates through the competitive approval process.

The SBIR program blends four goals:

  • nurturing technological innovation
  • meeting federal research and development needs
  • extending special attention to under-represented groups (women, socially or economically disadvantaged individuals)
  • and driving private sector commercialization.

In short, the SBIR program offers an “incubator” of sorts that begins with innovation and ends with commercialization.

Annually, SBIR recognizes success stories from their alumna companies. I reviewed the list of those recognized by SBIR in 2015 and 2016. Of those 23 recognized by SBIR in 2015, only one was located in Ohio (Frontier Technology Inc.). And none were from Ohio in 2016. During 2015 and 2016 only 20 states had any companies recognized through SBIR for their work. But SBIR funding is available! Perhaps entrepreneurs are not aware?! It is my goal to present the SBIR challenge/opportunity throughout the state of Ohio and encourage would-be techies to give it a shot. Look for the date of the upcoming training, coming soon and plan to join us!

Here are two examples of the types of companies that received SBIR program funds:


Kyle White is an Extension educator, Medina County.