[malicesprings] Re: Planning meeting - this Sunday 5th December - midday at ALEC
- From: missa bolibruck <missa_b@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <malicesprings@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 23:37:16 +0000
Hi Everyone,
I'm just catching up since being away - still feeling a bit like I haven't
arrived yet!
On long plane rides and stopovers, I spent alot of time thinking about our
planning day and the league in general and about how we can integrate
Anti-Oppression principals into our league structure. I have used the Cultural
Norms and Values in Organizational Structures article below for years and find
it a really good resource for thinking around organizational structures, in
this case, MSRD league structure. But i believe that these ideas are
transferable!
Just somethings to think about...
x sew
Cultural Norms and Values in Organizational
Structures
This is a list of
cultural norms and values that show up in our behavior in organizational
structures. Culture is powerful precisely because it is so present and at the
same time so very difficult to name or identify. The characteristics listed
below are damaging because they are used as standards without being
pro-actively named or chosen by the group. They are damaging because they
marginalize people outside of the dominant culture. [1].
Perfectionism
· little appreciation expressed among
people for the work that others are doing; appreciation that is expressed
usually directed to those who get most of the credit anyway
· more common is to point out either how
the person or work is inadequate
· or even more common, to talk to others
about the inadequacies of a person or their work without ever talking directly
to them
· mistakes are seen as personal, i.e.
they reflect badly on the person making them as opposed to being seen for what
they are — mistakes
· making a mistake is confused with being
a mistake, doing wrong with being wrong
· little time, energy, or money put into
reflection or identifying lessons learned that can improve practice, in other
words little or no learning from mistakes
· tendency to identify what’s wrong; little ability to
identify, name, and appreciate what’s right
antidotes: develop a culture of appreciation, where the organization takes
time to make sure that people’s work and efforts are appreciated; develop a
learning organization, where it is expected that everyone will make mistakes
and those mistakes offer opportunities for learning; create an environment
where people can recognize that mistakes sometimes lead to positive results;
separate the person from the mistake; when offering feedback, always speak to
the things that went well before offering criticism; ask people to offer
specific suggestions for how to do things differently when offering criticism
Sense of Urgency
· continued sense of urgency that makes
it difficult to take time to be inclusive, encourage democratic and/or
thoughtful decision-making, to think long-term, to consider consequences
· frequently results in sacrificing
potential allies for quick or highly visible results, for example sacrificing
interests of communities of color in order to win victories for white people
(seen as default or norm community)
· reinforced by funding proposals which promise too much work
for too little money and by funders who expect too much for too little
antidotes: realistic workplans; leadership which understands that things
take longer than anyone expects; discuss and plan for what it means to set
goals of inclusivity and diversity, particularly in terms of time; learn from
past experience how long things take; write realistic funding proposals with
realistic time frames; be clear about how you will make good decisions in an
atmosphere of urgency
Defensiveness
· the organizational structure is set up
and much energy spent trying to prevent abuse and protect power as it exists
rather than to facilitate the best out of each person or to clarify who has
power and how they are expected to use it
· because of either/or thinking (see
below), criticism of those with power is viewed as threatening and
inappropriate (or rude)
· people respond to new or challenging
ideas with defensiveness, making it very difficult to raise these ideas
· a lot of energy in the organization is
spent trying to make sure that people’s feelings aren’t getting hurt or working
around defensive people
· the defensiveness of people in power
creates an oppressive culture
antidotes: understand that structure cannot in and of itself facilitate or
prevent abuse; understand the link between defensiveness and fear (of losing
power, losing face, losing comfort, losing privilege); work on your own
defensiveness; name defensiveness as a problem when it is one; give people
credit for being able to handle more than you think; discuss the ways in which
defensiveness or resistance to new ideas gets in the way of the mission
Quantity Over Quality
· all resources of organization are
directed toward producing measurable goals
· things that can be measured are more
highly valued than things that cannot, for example numbers of people attending
a meeting, newsletter circulation, money spent are valued more than quality of
relationships, democratic decision-making, ability to constructively deal with
conflict
· little or no value attached to process;
if it can't be measured, it has no value
· discomfort with emotion and feelings
· no understanding that when there is a
conflict between content (the agenda of the meeting) and process (people’s need
to be heard or engaged), process will prevail (for example, you may get through
the agenda, but if you haven't paid attention to people’s need to be heard, the
decisions made at the meeting are undermined and/or disregarded)
antidotes: include process or quality goals in your planning; make sure your
organization has a values statement which expresses the ways in which you want
to do your work; make sure this is a living document and that people are using
it in their day to day work; look for ways to measure process goals (for
example if you have a goal of inclusivity, think about ways you can measure
whether or not you have achieved that goal); learn to recognize those times
when you need to get off the agenda in order to address people’s underlying
concerns
Worship of the
Written Word
· if it’s not in a memo, it doesn't exist
· the organization does not take into
account or value other ways in which information gets shared
· those with strong documentation and
writing skills are more highly valued, even in organizations where ability to
relate to others is key to the mission antidotes: take the time to analyze how
people inside and outside the organization get and share information; figure
out which things need to be written down and come up with alternative ways to
document what is happening; work to recognize the contributions and skills that
every person brings to the organization (for example, the ability to build
relationships with those who are important to the organization’s mission)
· only one right way
· the belief there is one right way to do
things and once people are introduced to the right way, they will see the light
and adopt it
· when they do not adapt or change, then
something is wrong with them (the other, those not changing), not with us
(those who ‘know’ the right way)
· similar to the missionary who does not
see value in the culture of other communities, sees only value in their beliefs
about what is good
antidotes: accept that there are many ways to get to the same goal; once the
group has made a decision about which way will be taken, honor that decision
and see what you and the organization will learn from taking that way, even and
especially if it is not the way you would have chosen; work on developing the
ability
to notice when people do things differently and how those different ways might
improve your approach; look for the tendency for a group or a person to keep
pushing the same point over and over out of a belief that there is only one
right way and then name it; when working with communities from a different
culture than yours or your organization’s, be clear that you have some learning
to do about the communities’ ways of doing; never assume that you or your
organization know what’s best for the community in isolation from meaningful
relationships with that community
Paternalism
· decision-making is clear to those with
power and unclear to those without it
· those with power think they are capable
of making decisions for and in the interests of those without power
· those with power often don't think it
is important or necessary to understand the viewpoint or experience of those
for whom they are making decisions
· those without power understand they do
not have it and understand who does
· those without power do not really know
how decisions get made and who makes what decisions, and yet they are
completely familiar with the impact of those decisions on them
antidotes: make sure that everyone knows and understands who makes what
decisions in the organization; make sure everyone knows and understands their
level of responsibility and authority in the organization; include people who
are affected by decisions in the decision-making
Either/Or Thinking
· things are either/or — good/bad,
right/wrong, with us/against us
· closely linked to perfectionism in
making it difficult to learn from mistakes or accommodate conflict
· no sense that things can be both/and
· results in trying to simplify complex
things, for example believing that poverty is simply a result of lack of
education
· creates conflict and increases sense of
urgency, as people are felt they have to make decisions to do either this or
that, with no time or encouragement to consider alternatives, particularly
those which may require more time or resources
antidotes: notice when people use ‘either/or’ language and push to come up
with more than two alternatives; notice when people are simplifying complex
issues, particularly when the stakes seem high or an urgent decision needs to
be made; slow it down and encourage people to do a deeper analysis; when people
are faced with an urgent decision, take a break and give people some breathing
room to think creatively; avoid making decisions under extreme pressure
Power Hoarding
· little, if any, value around sharing
power
· power seen as limited, only so much to
go around
· those with power feel threatened when
anyone suggests changes in how things should be done in the organization, feel
suggestions for change are a reflection on their leadership
· those with power don't see themselves
as hoarding power or as feeling threatened
· those with power assume they have the
best interests of the organization at heart and assume those wanting change are
ill-informed (stupid), emotional, inexperienced
antidotes: include power sharing in your organization’s values statement;
discuss what good leadership looks like and make sure people understand that a
good leader develops the power and skills of others; understand that change is
inevitable and challenges to your leadership can be healthy and productive;
make sure the organization is focused on the mission
Fear of Open
Conflict
· people in power are scared of conflict
and try to ignore it or run from it
· when someone raises an issue that
causes discomfort, the response is to blame the person for raising the issue
rather than to look at the issue which is actually causing the problem
· emphasis on being polite
· equating the raising of difficult
issues with being impolite, rude, or out of line
antidotes: role play ways to handle conflict before conflict happens;
distinguish between being polite and raising hard issues; don't require those
who raise hard issues to raise them in ‘acceptable’ ways, especially if you are
using the ways in which issues are raised as an excuse not to address the
issues being raised; once a conflict is resolved, take the opportunity to
revisit it and see how it might have been handled differently
Individualism
· little experience or comfort working as
part of a team
· people in organization believe they are
responsible for solving problems alone
· accountability, if any, goes up and
down, not sideways to peers or to those the organization is set up to serve
· desire for individual recognition and
credit
· leads to isolation
· competition more highly valued than
cooperation and where cooperation is valued, little time or resources devoted
to developing skills in how to cooperate
· creates a lack of accountability, as
the organization values those who can get things done on their own without
needing supervision or guidance antidotes: include teamwork as an important
value in your values statement; make sure the organization is working towards
shared goals and people understand how working together will improve
performance; evaluate people’s ability to work in a team as well as their
ability to get the job done; make sure that credit is given to all those who
participate in an effort, not just the leaders or most public person; make
people accountable as a group rather than as individuals; create a culture
where people bring problems to the group; use staff meetings as a place to
solve problems, not just a place to report activities
· i’m the only one
· connected to individualism, the belief
that if something is going to get done right, ‘I’ have to do it
· little or no ability to delegate work
to others
antidotes: evaluate people based on their ability to delegate to others;
evaluate people based on their ability to work as part of a team to accomplish
shared goals
Progress is Bigger, More
· observed in systems of accountability
and ways we determine success
· progress is an organization which
expands (adds staff, adds projects) or develops the ability to serve more
people (regardless of how well they are serving them)
· gives no value, not even negative
value, to its cost, for example, increased accountability to funders as the
budget grows, ways in which those we serve may be exploited, excluded, or
underserved as we focus on how many we are serving instead of quality of
service or values created by the ways in which we serve
antidotes: create Seventh Generation thinking by asking how the actions of
the group now will affect people seven generations from now; make sure that any
cost/benefit analysis includes all the costs, not just the financial ones, for
example the cost in morale, the cost in credibility, the cost in the use of
resources; include process goals in your planning, for example make sure that
your goals speak to how you want to do your work, not just what you want to do;
ask those you work with and for to evaluate your performance
Objectivity
· the belief that there is such a thing
as being objective
· the belief that emotions are inherently
destructive, irrational, and should not play a role in decision-making or group
process
· invalidating people who show emotion
· requiring people to think in a linear
fashion and ignoring or invalidating those who think in other ways
· impatience with any thinking that does
not appear ‘logical’ to those with power
antidotes: realize that everybody has a world view and that everybody’s
world view affects the way they understand things; realize this means you too;
push yourself to sit with discomfort when people are expressing themselves in
ways which are not familiar to you; assume that everybody has a valid point and
your job is to understand what that point is
Right to Comfort
· the belief that those with power have a
right to emotional and psychological comfort (another aspect of valuing ‘logic’
over emotion)
· scapegoating those who cause discomfort
· equating individual acts of unfairness
against white people with systemic racism which daily targets people of color
antidotes: understand that discomfort is at the root of all growth and
learning; welcome it as much as you can; deepen your political analysis of
racism and oppression so you have a strong understanding of how your personal
experience and feelings fit into a larger picture; don't take everything
personally
[1] One of the purposes of listing cultural
characteristics is to point out how organizations which unconsciously use these
characteristics as their norms and standards make it difficult, if not
impossible,
to open the door to other cultural norms and standards. As a result, many of
our organizations, while saying we want to be multicultural, really only allow
other people and cultures to come in if they adapt or conform to already
existing cultural norms. Being able to identify and name the cultural norms and
standards you want is a first step to making room for a truly multi-cultural
organization.
Other related posts:
