3. Scenarios selection methodologies

a. Timing

In order to maintain the momentum and enthusiasm generated by the contest, and to be able to move ahead swiftly with preparations for audio-visual production, it's a good idea to conduct the selection process quickly after the contest ends. Young participants eager to find out if they have won will also appreciate this.

Logistics might dictate that you have to wait a few weeks after the end of the contest before being able to start selection. In Scenarios from the Sahel, all participants had until the contest deadline to submit their contributions to the project partner in their community. That meant that the selection committees had to wait until the various partners had relayed all contributions to the respective national capitals. That is no easy task in a huge country with poor infrastructure, like Mali.
After calculating how long you think it will take to receive all contributions, please factor in an additional buffer week. It is essential that all participants' contributions be carefully considered.
The duration of the selection process will, of course, depend on the type and scale of your project.

b. Selection of jurors

The choice of jurors is of critical importance not only for the success of the selection phase, but also for laying the finest possible foundation for the remainder of the project. Please devote a lot of thought, time and energy to juror selection.
Start thinking about potential jurors during the earliest planning stages of the project, and refine your list through observation as the contest phase progresses.
As you go about putting together your lists of jurors, please bear in mind a couple of potential dangers:
C Inviting people to participate as jurors is a great way to bolster their sense of ownership in the project. However, you cannot invite everybody, and if you are not careful, you might discourage and alienate those who have been overlooked. There are a few ways to minimize this risk:

i) take time to sit down and talk to non-invitees about the role(s) they could/are scheduled to play in subsequent phases of the project (data entry, data or textual analysis, pre-testing of film scripts, assistance during the shooting phase, drafting of the Users' Guide, distribution of the films);

ii) invite a few of them each time the juries have lunch;

iii) time permitting, invite them to make a brief presentation to the jurors about their work;

iv) time permitting, arrange juror visits to their organizations' offices.

C If initial selection processes are to be conducted in several (perhaps remote) places before the final jury convenes in a central location, make sure that the composition of the juries chosen for those initial selection processes really does correspond to the criteria defined by the project team. If you're not vigilant, juror selection might be overly influenced by obligations founded in local politics or friendship, religious bias, or other irrelevant criteria. This is one moment in the course of Scenarios at which the core team should definitely not shy away from firmness in asserting crucial principles of the project.

The following are a few ideas that you might wish to consider when putting together your own list of criteria for juror selection. The ideas are divided into two groups, with two different objectives in mind: i) Selecting jurors with a view to choosing the best possible winning scenarios; ii) Selecting jurors so as to maximize synergy development, to ensure project continuity, and to secure or reinforce requisite political and financial support.
i) Selecting jurors with a view to choosing the best possible winning scenarios
C Strive for balance in the jury: male/female, by ethnic group, by religion, by profession_.
C Try to identify multi-dimensional jurors, for example: an individual with experience in grass-roots prevention work AND creation of relevant educational materials AND an understanding of the situation in both rural and urban areas; or a young person who has audio-visual training AND is active in a rural CBO that deals with HIV/AIDS_.
C Also, try to find people familiar with different geographic areas within the project zone. The final Scenarios from the Sahel jury included a Senegalese based in Burkina Faso (Waly Diop, Canadian regional HIV project), a Burkinabè based in Senegal (Georges Tiéndrébéogo, SIDA-Service, ACI), and a Malian working in Burkina Faso (Lillian Barry, WHO Representative).
C Ideally jurors should either be native to, or have many years of experience living in, the culture in which the contest has taken place. The Scenarios from the Sahel juries were composed uniquely of Sahelians, with the exception of Gary Engelberg, who has spent more than three decades in the Sahel.

C Be sure to involve audio-visual experts at each stage of the selection process. Each of the Scenarios from the Sahel juries included audio-visual experts specialized in the production of health-related films. Their input was unique and invaluable. The presence of artists in the selection process helps to ensure that creative aspects of the debate are not overwhelmed by dry, strictly technical concerns. The debate remains broadly multidisciplinary; synergies of art and science develop at every turn. If you already know the film directors you would like to work with, try and get them on board for the final selection.
C Among the other specific kinds of individuals you might want to consider are:

a) Young people. Be sure that the young people chosen are willing and able to hold their own in what might be a primarily adult jury. The flip-side is also important: make sure that the adult members of the jury are prepared to listen closely to a much younger juror _ something that is not self-evident in all societies.
b) People living with HIV. Before the Scenarios from the Sahel deliberations began, we were concerned that the morbid content of many of the contributions might turn the selection process into a harsh emotional experience for the jurors who are living with HIV. We took special steps to ensure that they had the support they might need in such an event. In the end, however, we were overjoyed to see that the young people's scenarios, generally replete with expressions of compassion and solidarity, had filled those living with HIV with a powerful sense of optimism.
c) Those who make extensive use of audio-visual materials in the field.
d) Individuals who have a good overview of existing audio-visual materials. Such people can help the jury avoid selecting scenarios that, relative to existing resources, neither cover new material nor offer a novel approach.
e) Those specialized in working with key groups, such as street youths, IV drug users, commercial sex workers, people living with HIV.

In addition to the above, please bear in mind the question of group mechanics when selecting jurors. It is important to have people who are capable of working intensely in a debate-oriented, potentially contentious environment for a relatively long period of time. They must be people who can take losing an argument, because every juror invariably finds himself or herself in that position often in this kind of set-up. Finally, try to avoid including jurors who might disrupt proceedings by focusing on their own, alternative agendas.
Astute selection of the chairperson is critical. This person should not be appointed by mere seniority (granted, that's hard to avoid in some cultures), but rather after careful consideration of the following:

C The chair has to be able to manage time effectively. Often, this means wielding a forceful gavel to cut short debates that may well be fascinating and passionate, but are not helping the jury to come closer to reaching decisions. Precisely because the young people's contributions are so interesting and because they raise so many important questions, the chair of a Scenarios jury must be prepared to be highly interventionist (and, as a result, subject to frequent temporary unpopularity).
C The chair must distribute the floor equitably. She or he must see to it that people who are soft-spoken are not dominated by charismatic, smooth-talking orators who, if left unchecked, could easily influence any group to support any proposal they make.
Before the jury itself convenes, you might want to consider asking a trained facilitator to serve as chairperson.
In order to ensure that the chair and the jurors are all free to devote themselves entirely to the deliberations, we would also recommend hiring an outside person to serve as rapporteur. Experience tells us that you should also have a "runaround" person who can help out with any of a great number of tasks -- primarily logistical in nature -- which arise spontaneously.
ii) Selecting jurors so as to maximize synergy development, to ensure project continuity, and to secure or reinforce requisite political and financial support
C When drafting your juror list, don't forget that that the selection process is a great opportunity to foster the creation of sustainable partnerships and synergies. So, go ahead: think creatively, and try your hand at high-impact matchmaking.
C You might want to invite representatives of promising, lesser-known organizations with a view to handing them an excellent network of contacts and heightening their visibility.
C The involvement of representatives of structures that helped out with the contest validates and perpetuates their contribution to the project.
C It might be advisable from a political perspective to give special consideration to representatives of relevant state bodies such as the national AIDS control program, ministries of health, education, communication and culture, or the national health education service. This could also prove to be a good strategic move, paving the way for free broadcasts on state media and for high-level support in the event that religious traditionalists call for censorship of certain films.

C You might want to consider the possibility of inviting a qualified representative of a potentially troublesome structure, such as a traditionalist religious group. The possible strategic benefit in their involvement may be significant: they would be allowed to present their point of view in an atmosphere of mutual respect; they would be able to learn from their colleagues on a substantive level; they would come to the realization that more liberal-minded approaches to HIV prevention were not aberrant imports from a faraway land, but rather very much local mainstream thought; and risks of opposition to subsequent elements of the project could be diminished. In taking your decision, you will need to weigh up the potential advantages with the potential threat to group dynamics and the jury_s consensual decision-making capacity.
C If full funding for all elements of the project is not yet secured, consider inviting qualified representatives of funding bodies.
Please note that although it could be beneficial to select some jurors on the basis of synergy potential or strategic value, there is a danger that this kind of approach could be taken too far, and the selection process might fall short of its immediate substantive objectives.