For practical purposes and in line with many other dialogue methods, the INSPIRED method is structured around three interrelated phases that aim at providing a clear framework for cooperation for all the actors involved and at giving a clear direction to the dialogue process.
Each phase –(1) Collective assessment, (2) Consensus-building and (3) Monitoring and donor alignment– is oriented towards delivering a different outcome resulting from the joint work of the stakeholders involved: a Participatory Policy Assessment (1), a Roadmap for Policy Reform (2) and a Policy Network (3).
To facilitate the process, the dialogue host will need to invest itself in creating the conditions for trust to arise among dialogue participants that are often not on good terms with each other. This is not an easy task and success depends to a great extent on the attitudes, intuition and personal and social skills of the people organising and steering the dialogue process.
There are a number of tools and techniques that dialogue hosts and facilitators can integrate into their work to animate the exchanges among participants and keep their debate oriented towards concrete outputs (See section 3 "Who is involved" > The Dialogue Host)
Experience has shown that far from representing a clear sequence, the line between the Collective assessment, Consensus building and Monitoring and donor alignment phases tends to be rather fluid, which is due in part to the iterative nature of any dialogue process. Indeed, the stakeholders can always ‘take a step backwards’ to review their initial assessment of the policy under discussion (building on new data collected at a later stage, for instance) or pause to assess new developments with a view to finding room for a consensus. Therefore, rather than as phases strictu sensu, the phases of the INSPIRED method should be understood as a continuum punctuated by a whole series of joint events and common achievements that need to fit into the bigger political picture.
This degree of flexibility with regard to the sequencing of dialogue meetings and events poses high demands on the dialogue host, which must remain alert to any changes in the policy landscape and in the delicate interplay between the political actors and stakeholders, and ready to adapt the whole process to those unknown factors that will surely arise in the dialogue process.
