Off for holidays…
Well folks, I’m off for the second of the four 5-day Art of Change retreats (all those AOC postings came from somewhere!), and then for holidays, so won’t be posting anything new for a couple of weeks. Cheers, Suzanne
Filed under: Uncategorized | 0 Comments
AOC Reprise: Inner Knowing 2
“Nature is an unlimited broadcasting station, through which God speaks to us every hour, if we only will tune in.” George Washington Carver
Practice #3: Inner Knowing
Consult and listen to your inner wisdom before making each and every decision—large and small.
May you remember to remember so many times today, that you dwell in a state of beautiful flow with life around you.
“A mind that knows its own depth can see the brilliant magic of the world. The world communicates to us because we’re available, like a flower in spring. Conditions are ripe, and the flower opens. Wisdom and compassion attune us to life, and the environment responds…Causes and conditions meet in such a way that we know when it’s time to take action–or not. When we’re awake enough to see what the world is presenting, conditions can show us the right time to build a house, start a school or expand our business…
Auspicious occurrences indicate that our mind is beginning to relax into the present moment. When we are able to relax, we realize that the present moment is all there is. What we think of as the past is only a present memory, and what we think of as the future is a projection of the present. The wisdom of the dragon tells us to slow down, let go, and be present for the moment, for that is where all power and magic lie.”
- Sakyong Mipham (dharma heir to Trungpa Rimpoche, founder of Shambhala)
Filed under: Art of Change | 2 Comments
AOC Reprise: Inner Knowing
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.” Albert Einstein
Practice #3 Inner Knowing: Consult and listen to your inner wisdom before making each and every decision—large and small.
Many times today, remember to tune into your deep inner knowing. It takes but a moment…but what a difference. Oh–and remember also to DO what you hear.
“I feel there are two people inside me - me and my intuition. If I go against her, she’ll screw me every time, and if I follow her, we get along quite nicely.” Kim Basinger
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
In earlier posts, I mulled over social change overall, the need and opportunity for describing shared visions for the change, and two overarching paths (social marketing/education and policy/advocacy) to pushing change along the ‘social diffusion bell curve”. The lens for all these ideas is focused on social change organizations, or actors, in terms of their approaches to ‘pushing’ change along the bell-curve of a community.
Within the broader policy/advocacy vs. social marketing/education frames, most organizations concentrate on one or two specific strategies. Here’s a menu, at least a partial one, of some of the most basic strategies. Within each of these, there are further subsets of strategies and approaches.
There are also dimensions that cut across all of them. One is class analysis and issues of equity (which speaks, as well to the ‘end game’ and vision at the end of the ‘change-rainbow’). Ditto for capitalism – the entire economic system, now globally dominant (though communist governments are again on the rise in Latin America) and the quiet but persistent potential of cooperative economies. And another is ‘Integral Theory’ . Since intregral theory is, by definition, a ‘theory of everything’, I cannot possibly do justice to it in a sentence (so apologies to any outraged integralists out there!). Essentially it is a vast and growing body of work developed by Ken Wilbur and others, that speaks to the moral, spiritual and psychological development of individuals, groups, and societies, across several dimensions.
Meanwhile, on the ground (so to speak), here’s the basic menu of approaches for driving change, as I see it. They’re all important, and they all have a role. But some approaches leverage change more quickly, systematically and broadly (across communities) than others, depending on the degree to which they focus on systems vs. individuals.
1. Direct service: This is ground zero for perhaps most charities in North America and Europe, and it is the zone where most people are pretty comfortable; say the word “charity” and most folks tend to think of traditional direct service non-profits focused on health, education, and poverty alleviation. Directly provided goods and services are vitally important to the ‘clients’ in need, and can change individual lives. Examples: food distributed through food banks; support services for the disabled; settlement services for new Canadians; or methadone treatment programs for addicts. They could also include “personal development” kinds of service. The tag-line for the Bikram’s Yoga Studio down the street is: “building strong communities by building strong individuals.” But this kind of direct, one-on-one support seldom leverages change for larger groups of people in any sustainable way. Direct services fall in the “give a man a fish” category.
2. Social marketing/Education: Social marketing focuses on trying to reach larger numbers of people to change individual attitudes or behaviours. Here, I’m conflating social marketing and education. Education is almost always a part of social marketing campaigns. It makes sense: people won’t adapt new behaviours or attitudes unless they encounter plenty of facts and ‘validators’ to back up the new idea, facts that tend to fit within their pre-existing ‘frames’ or terms of reference. Examples of social marketing campaigns: public health campaigns focused on anti-smoking, fitness, condom use; anti-bullying education; drinking-and-driving education; or reducing energy consumption. But like direct services, social marketing campaigns focus on individuals, rather than systems. They may focus on relatively large numbers of people, but don’t really address the landscape in which people make decisions in the first place.
3. Business/consumerism: In the past 20 years across Europe and North America, the CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) world has exploded. The underlying assumption for CSR advocates is that capitalism is here to stay: so let’s develop pockets and swirls of positive, equity-focused, environmentally responsible market forces that can eventually impact the monolith of economic globalization. Examples of CSR initiatives range from the development of “climate-friendly mortgages” (eg. to encourage energy efficient building and renovations), organic foods and fair trade consumer products, to cross-branding with progressive social causes (eg. The Red Campaign). On the consulting side, there’s a host of “sustainability practitioners” to go along with the trend (I confess to still not understanding what that means, exactly!). This so-called “pocket-book activism” has power in numbers – huge numbers - of consumers. Presumably, if alternative markets develop and become sufficiently large to truly compete with resource-depleting, inequitable, conventional businesses, they can yield change in the broader system over time. Or, one could argue, pocketbook activism can lull consumers into thinking they’ve done their bit, without substantially changing anything.
4. Policy Advocacy: Advocacy – that is, advocacy centred around clear calls for policy change – addresses power. It is a central strategy for many environmental and anti-poverty groups in their roles as “third party” influencers of the actual decision-makers. Activists often use the term “advocacy” to mean a wide range of rabble-rousing, usually with an implicit (but not always clear) call to action in terms of corporate or governmental policy change. The role of third parties is tricky, because all the effective rabble-rousing in the world (eg., demonstrations, rallies, letter-writing campaigns etc.) does not necessarily make for change. It has to be linked to a clear understanding of actual levers of power in the decision-making process. Is there a city council vote coming up? A Treasury Board or finance committee debate about the next budget? A desperate need for supporters by one potential candidate in an upcoming internal party nomination campaign?
Before moving along the continuum, it’s worth pausing to map out this territory a bit further – because it is the primary approach used by most social change organizations. Again, by ’social change’ (vs. social wellbeing) organizations, I mean those organizations seeking to change the system, or triggers within the system, in order to leverage greater equity or environmental responsibility. Within this policy advocacy realm, there are many strategies groups use to shift power and effect systemic change:
‘Public will’: Public will campaigns are about mobilizing ‘key publics’ to communicate with their elected officials in sufficiently strong numbers and effective formats (eg. real letters vs. postcards) to encourage shifts in decision-making. This can be even more effective when those constituents wield power themselves in relatively direct ways that matter to elected officials – party donors, business allies, or voters in key ridings, for example. Within public will campaigns, there are a host of approaches or sub-strategies:
Organizing – eg. ‘concentric circle organizing’, old-fashioned face-to-face ‘shoe-leather’ outreach (canvassing, streeters, house parties, etc); ‘netcentric’ campaigns using on-line and off-line approaches; ‘viral’ on-line approaches, and likely dozens of others; the idea is to target current and potential supporters, build relationships, listen and where values align, help them move them up the ‘leadership ladder’ to greater and greater levels of engagement – ideally, to create a whole new cadre of organizers
‘Gatekeeper’ campaigns - campaigns aimed at targeting a few individuals who have access to broader groups of people, access that the social change actor or organization does not easily have on its own
Celebrity or ‘opinion leader’ endorsement for positioning and profile (‘surprising bedfellow’ strategies could fall under here)
‘Inside champions’ to provide access to internal podiums, provide endorsements & positioning
Government relations: For me, one big learning over the past year has been how few organizations do any government relations at all – when policy change is at the heart of their entire strategy. Government – both at the staff and political level - is where policies are made. A solid government relations (GR) program provides intelligence about what laws and policies have the potential to move through the internal ‘food chain’ of government decision-making. It can inform what stage policies are at, whether the time is right for moving specific initiatives forward (and when such efforts will realistically be futile), and what the specific levers of change are for moving them more quickly and in a stronger direction. GR is about research, listening, and learning. It is about relationship-building that leads to a deeper understanding of how, where and when to shift power. It is as essential to any effective policy effort as opinion research is to any broad public communications effort.
Litigation: This form of advocacy involves using existing policy levers and legal tools (statutory tools and precedents through the courts). Litigation has been used with incredible, tangible impact by groups such as the Sierra Legal Defence Fund and Pivot Legal. During more progressive government administrations, where ‘third party’ civil society groups tend to have more access and influence on policy development, litigation strategies are less needed, and tend to wane. But during relatively regressive, inaccessible administrations, litigation can be a vitally powerful advocacy tool for advancing social change.
Market Campaigns are about going to a different kind of power source: corporations. So much can be written about this approach, and in this globalized economy, usually only organizations with global reach themselves can use them. But the basic model (which groups like ForestEthics use masterfully) looks something like this:
1. identify a corporate target, ideally an iconic or influential member of a broader sector. Research it thoroughly in terms of chain of supply, investors, distribution networks etc
2. ask for change in policy (eg. procurement policies like selling paper products derived from pristine old-growth forests, or marketing policies like targeting children in tobacco marketing campaigns)
3. when the change doesn’t come, organize creative, public communications initiatives, generating plenty of earned media, that position the company negatively and potentially harm market share and/or investment potential, in order to drive the target to the negotiating table
4. negotiate for the change; agree to publicly praise the company for its leadership when the change comes
5. and here’s a twist that applies to some campaigns: as part of the negotiations, ask the newly-converted company champion(s) to meet with government to encourage a broader policy change that levels the playing field for all companies in the industry – thereby leveraging a more lasting, systematic shift in the decision-making landscape
5. Politics: Politics are about going to the heart of the matter – the matter being power. It is the stage where the complicated dance between vision and compromise plays out most starkly. Politics are not about being ‘pure’, or necessarily right – because in a democracy there may be many variations of ‘right’. As my partner says, “do we want to be a club – or a movement?” Initially, it is about battling it out in the arena of votes, at both the nomination and election stage. But when those battles are over, politics is about the opportunity to roll up your sleeves and dive into the messy work of sorting through diverse and sometimes conflicting values and solutions by tapping into collective intelligence and into leadership, all to develop policy. In the elections process, third party of civil society groups can play indirectly in this arena in several ways: building relationships with prospective candidates (one they’re in power it becomes a government relations exercise); organizing and list-building in specific electoral districts to build power through ‘get out the vote’ (GOTV) work on e-day; endorsing specific candidates; volunteering or otherwise building the capacity of specific candidate campaigns; and various forms of voter education.
Final word:
Power lies at the heart of each of these approaches, as I believe it lies at the heart of all social change. Each approach has value. But I believe that the closer each is to addressing power, the harder the work becomes – and the more likely it is to have lasting, systemic impact. In developing strategies for social change, and for building movements that lead to social change, we are continually faced with the cost-benefit analysis of which approach will best serve, or be more fruitful, given our own assets, resources and ability – and willingness – to wield power.
Filed under: Campaign Strategy, Social Change, strategic communications | 3 Comments
AOC Resprise: Deep Listening 2
“Every person in this life has something to teach me — and as soon as I accept that, I open myself to truly listening.” - Catherine Doucette
“Generative listening is the art of developing deeper silences in yourself, so you can slow our mind’s hearing to your ears’ natural speed, and hear beneath the words to their meaning.” — Peter Senge
Practice #2: With each and every person with whom you speak, bring the deepest and most respectful quality of listening.
And choose three conversations today to REALLY practice your deepest listening.
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
AOC Reprise: Deep Listening
And for the next two days, let’s return to the practice that is the favorite of those who get to be with you:
How do I listen to others?
As if everyone were my most revered Teacher
Speaking to me
His (her) cherished last words.
- Hafiz
Practice #2: With each and every person with whom you speak, bring the deepest and most respectful quality of listening.
Bring to everyone you meet–and yourself–this most wonderful of gifts of loving attention.
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
AOC: The Three Questions
As healers (broadly defined), we want to be mindful of the opening lines of Hippocratic Oath taken by physicians which begins: “Above all do no harm.” Engaging in any kind of change work: helping, healing, giving feedback, etc. is an intrusion of our energy into someone else’s energy field. A wise and revered Sufi* teacher and healer named Reshad Field suggests that we always ask ourselves three questions before engaging in any kind of healing work with others:
#1. May I? Do I have permission?
Is the other(s) willing to receive what I have to offer?
#2. Can I? Do I have the knowledge, experience and/or competence to provide the service well?
#3. Should I? Is it wise for me to intervene? Is it timely? Will it really serve the needs of the situation—from both short and long term perspectives?
We might have permission…but lack competence. Or conversely, have plenty of competence…but no permission. We might have permission, and we might have the capacity, but our inner knowing may be telling us that it’s still not right. This is the case surprisingly often. Timing is key in this work.
I have found reflecting on these three questions offers me valuable guidance into my actions as a change agent.
Practice Variation for Today:
Explore these 3 questions throughout the day, as you are presented with opportunities to help or engage with others:
May I?
Can I?
Should I?
And continue on with Practice #5: For each significant context and relationship (work & personal) with which you engage today, ask yourself the following questions:
1. What is the nature of our contract, stated or implied?
2. How clear are our expectations of each other?
3. Have there been insecurities, frustrations, mis-steps, inefficiencies,
or breakdowns, or due to differing expectations?
4. How comfortable am I with the current nature of our agreement
field?
5. Are there areas I might like to clear up or renegotiate?
6. How might dynamics related to differences in power be impacting our agreement field?
* The Sufis are the mystical branch of Islam.
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
“There is a vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening, that is translated through you into action.
And because there is only one of you in all time, this expression is unique.
If you block it, it will never exist through any other medium and will be lost.
The world will not have it.
It is not your business to determine how good it is,
Nor how it compares to other expressions.
It is simply your business to keep the channel open.” Martha Graham
In case it’s not completely clear, there practices are not things one masters, then forgets.
Staying connected to our true, inner power…
Deep listening to those whom we meet…
Listening to our inner guidance…
Living from choice rather than victimhood…
Keeping our agreement fields clear…
These are paths to good living, and creating goodness in all our work.
DAILY PRACTICE #1: Inner Power
Pause before each significant act of leadership:
* speak your leadership mantra three times, silently or out loud
* link each repetition to a deep breath, using the breath to help you anchor and embody your place of inner power
Make some real connection between this deeper purpose and power, and the action you are about to take. Many times day.
Use these pauses in your busy day to really connect.
Remember what is most important to you…why you do what you do.
Remember who you really are.
“This is the true joy in life, the being used for a purpose you consider a mighty one, the being like a force of nature, rather than a feverish, selfish clod of ailments and grievances complaining that the world will not devote itself to making you happy.” George Bernard Shaw
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
Only free men (and women) can negotiate; prisoners cannot enter into contracts.
- Nelson Mandela
We examined in Session I how our work as change agents always takes place within a context of power relationships. These differences in power have profound implications for the nature of our workand for the process of contracting. Let’s begin by quickly reviewing some of the major external factors that impact our power relationships:
1. Positional Power:
Where one party has actual power of institutional position (e.g. the power to demote or fire, or deny funding or other resources)
* Even if those with more power have no intention of using this power, it remains a potent influence in the relationship.
* We also bring a lifetime of experiences with people with more power, and we carry these into relationships in the present.
* When people look at someone with more positional power, they project a lifetime of dealing with authority figures: parents, teachers, other bosses.
* Those of us who have positional power are often awkward in these roles, often creating even more unclarity and confusion.
Power related to Social Identity:
Where there are relationships between members of social groups that have historically been oppressed and members of relatively privileged groups.
* All of us have been impacted by having grown-up and living in a white- dominated, heterosexual and patriarchal society.
* When we meet across these lines of privileged and less-advantaged social identities, its not just about you and I as individuals, but that collective history lives with us in the room and affects the dynamics of helping relationship
* Social identity dynamics may also interact with positional power dynamics:
e.g. an older white male supervising a young woman of color
3. Power related to institutional dynamics: examples:
* you have been hired by the Board or ED to work with the organization. You are ultimately accountable to that person with positional power. In the eyes of staff, you may been viewed as an agent of those with power.
* you are facilitating a coalition meeting. You are the representative of the most powerful organization in the coalition, the one whose support can make or break any decision. Your attempts to help may be experienced through that
lens by less powerful members.
Those with more positional power tend to be less aware of these dynamics at play. Those with less power rarely forget. It is therefore incumbent upon those with more power to stay conscious and alert in navigating these dynamics.
Today’s Assignment:
Re-look and reflect on your inquiries into your contracts and contracting over the previous days of our practice. How might issues of power be impacting each of these contracts and agreement fields?
Are you engaged in contracts with those with more positional power where this
power differential is having a undesirable impact on the agreement field?
Are you engaged in contracts with those with less power, where the power
differential may be having an undesirable impact on the agreement field?
Practice Variation for today:
Add the above lens of power to your continued field research into the state of your contracting.
Practice #5: For each significant work context and work relationship with which you engage today, ask yourself the following 5 questions:
1. What is the nature of our contract, stated or implied?
2. How clear are our expectations of each other?
3. Have there been insecurities, frustrations, mis-steps, inefficiencies, or breakdowns, or due to differing expectations?
4. How comfortable am I with the current nature of our agreement field?
5. Are there areas I might like to clear up or renegotiate?
But now add the following inquiry:
6. How might dynamics related to differences in power be impacting our agreement field?
In order to really engage with this intriguing (and possibly unsettling) practice:
* write these questions down where you can easily see them over the course of
the day
* use whatever kinds of reminders (sticky notes, etc.) seem to help you stay
focused on practice
* jot some notes over the course of the daytheres a lot to be tracking and
integrating here
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
To create change in organizations, we want to work with all three major components of the Wheel of Change [Wheel of Change for Organizations]:
1. perceptions-emotions-beliefs, which we call Inner Work
2. behavior, which we call Behavior Change
3. external “reality”, which we call, Outer Work
Inner Work:
- vision: working with purpose, vision and mission to energize and unify the organization to prepare for change
- values: clarifying and deepening people’s commitment to their shared beliefs around how to be and act
- open communication: getting people to speak truthfully and open the flow of authentic information within the organization
- team-building: developing trust, respect and community
- ideas: unleashing new perspectives and creativity to help shift existing and limiting beliefs
Behavior Change:
- agreements: making clear agreements around new behaviors
- focus: keeping attention focused on implementing these agreements
- feedback: creating ongoing feedback to promote learning and implementation of new behaviors
- support: providing support for experiments in behavior change: group dialogues, peer coaching, training, etc.
- accountability: making sure everyone, beginning with top leaders, holds each other accountable for living the new behaviors
Outer Work:
- strategies: developing new strategies, allies, resources, etc.
- structures: working with management structures, job descriptions, policies, etc.
- systems: bringing organizational systems such as HR, financial systems and governance into line with the desired changes
- skills: developing the skills needed to support the changes through hiring, acquisitions, trainings & development, etc.
- tools: making sure people have the tools such as software and work processes needed to implement the new directions
Filed under: Art of Change | 0 Comments
