https://inittogether.cargo.site In It Together Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:33:34 +0000 https://inittogether.cargo.site en https://inittogether.cargo.site/Index Sat, 02 Oct 2021 17:18:08 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Index <img width="2550" height="3300" width_o="2550" height_o="3300" data-src="https://freight.cargo.site/t/original/i/661beacfc435f7b9708b317bb38ce33c36908aac92241cf9e5dd24f96d732d45/Cover.png" data-mid="120509846" border="0" data-scale="45" src="https://freight.cargo.site/w/1000/i/661beacfc435f7b9708b317bb38ce33c36908aac92241cf9e5dd24f96d732d45/Cover.png" /> In It Together A Framework for Conflict Transformation In Movement-Building Groups Explore the tools and resources that support the use of human-centered, non-punitive accountability practices in movement spaces. Download the Framework in PDF form here. ︎ Resource LibraryCreated By ︎&nbsp; &nbsp; Interrupting Criminalization︎ ︎&nbsp; &nbsp; Dragonfly Partners︎ Section (1)Introduction Section (2) Our Assumptions Section (3) Common Sources of Conflict Section (4) Diagnostic ToolQuestions Section (5) Stories Section (6)GroundingAgreements Section (7) Creating theContainer Section (8) Tools for ConflictTransformation Section (9) Practitioners WhoCan Help Appendix:Diagnostic Tool https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-1 Sat, 02 Oct 2021 17:18:06 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-1 Section 1: Introduction In the summer of 2020, sparked by the police killing of George Floyd, the city of Minneapolis became the epicenter of a national and global uprising for Black Lives. In cities and towns across the country, people called to defund the police, end mass incarceration, abolish prisons and invest in public safety in new ways. New coalitions and other campaign formations emerged, often made up of people and groups who had not worked together previously. These new formations have since been offered an unprecedented amount of resources including staff, money, and media attention. There is a great deal of pressure for these groups to make good decisions about how to deploy these resources and there is a fear that these resources and this potent political moment may burn out. Inevitably, significant conflicts arose within these new formations, some of which caused harm. Safety measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic severely limited people’s ability to gather in person. Most connections between people and groups happened virtually. Because groups were so new, there may not have been time to build trust between people or to build processes to manage these new critical relationships and make decisions together. The people coming together have a shared commitment to shift resources and power away from police, but often are approaching this goal from very different perspectives. Because of the extreme sense of urgency and volatility, the conflicts that emerge escalate quickly. Those who have caused harm are called out and often punished in ways that caused more harm. The ongoing impact of harm then threatens the group members’ ability to work together effectively, and can lead to the collapse of a campaign that had promise. Because youth and young adult organizers have been a strong driving force in this movement, they are finding themselves in the position of having to work with older adults, institutions, and other more established entities. Over time, Mariame Kaba, an abolitionist organizer and educator who has been working on these issues for over twenty years, has mentored a number of youth organizers. Some of these organizers and others have reached out to Mariame when harm has been done inside these groups. Mariame has received so many of these requests that she identified a movement-wide need to pull together a framework with tools and associated training to support the use of human-centered, non-punitive accountability practices in movement spaces. About the AuthorsThe project is being overseen by Interrupting Criminalization, led by researchers Mariame Kaba and Andrea Ritchie. Interrupting Criminalization’s long term goal is to end the criminalization and incarceration of women and LGBTQ people of color. The people involved with Interrupting Criminalization have the reputation and relationships to ensure that such a toolkit would make it into the hands of people on the ground. However, given the demands of the time period, they do not have the additional capacity required to develop such a toolkit on their own. In order to meet this emerging critical need, they determined that it would be most effective to work closely with Dragonfly Partners, a process-oriented consulting group with expertise in coalition-building, consensus decision-making, conflict transformation, and harm-reduction in movements for racial and economic justice. Dragonfly Partners is based in unceded Nanticoke Lenni-Lenape territory known as Philadelphia. Dragonfly serves change-making organizations across the continent and worldwide. Our team members bring complementary skills from the fields of community organizing, advocacy and policy, organizational development, anti-racism work, mediation and conflict management. Dragonfly Partners advises, supports, and facilitates times of change for our client/partner organizations. We support them to make brave, principled and strategic choices on how to lead in a racist world. We help groups get unstuck, coach senior leaders, facilitate difficult conversations, manage change processes, develop theories of change, conduct strategic planning processes, develop strong and flexible organizational systems, and support organizations to choose thoughtful and brave ways to run a principled organization. Our sweet spot is at the intersection of advocacy strategy, organizational development, and organizational alignment with strategy and values. Dragonfly values inform our work with our clients, partners, and each other: We show up with kindness, warmth, and love.We embrace contradiction and grey spaces. We are bridge people.We’re brave and speak the truth even when it's hard. Difficult conversations appeal to us because they contain the possibility of change.We avoid formulaic answers in our own politics and in our approach with clients.We remain hopeful about the group and the world even when things get hard. Aarati Kasturirangan and Sara Joffe, both partners in Dragonfly Partners, co-authored this framework (with contributions from Mariame) and the associated training curriculum with significant input from their team members, particularly Kris Smith. Acknowledging the Shoulders We Stand OnWe do not claim to have invented or to own any of the practices and insights described in this toolkit. This work grows from soil enriched with indigenous and aboriginal healing traditions and governance practices. These ideas are rooted in the imagination of prison abolitionists, queer Black feminist thought, and the lessons learned from years of implementation and experimentation with restorative justice, community accountability and transformative justice-based efforts to address harm. We also owe this framework to hundreds of years of work to dismantle white supremacy and build communities grounded in accountability, reciprocity, and ethics of care and love and abundance. Many of the tools that appear in this framework emerge from mainstream approaches to conflict negotiation, mediation, organizational development, and psychology. In some cases we have adapted these tools. The framework and the tools inside it have been filtered through a particular point of view that is feminist, anti-capitalist, and abolitionist. We recognize that the movement ecosystem includes organizations with a range of political and ethical groundings. We know that this framework may not resonate with everyone. What’s Inside?The framework and tools emerge from the decades of experience of the members of Interrupting Criminalization, Dragonfly Partners, and organizers and activists from around the country. This framework and the associated toolkit is intended to support your effort to navigate conflict with those who you presume to have a shared purpose. Each section of the toolkit includes reflection questions which we offer as an invitation to tap into your own knowledge and experience. The toolkit begins by defining key terms and then making visible the assumptions upon which the toolkit has been built. This list of assumptions answers the question, “In this moment, what are the conditions that we believe all people engaged in movements for racial justice can subscribe to regardless of their social identity, political beliefs, or strategy for making change?” Once we have made plain our assumptions, we describe several common causes of tension and harm in our movement formations. Once you have read through the assumptions and common causes of tension and harm, we provide a diagnostic tool to use when troubles arise in your group. It is important to determine what your group’s need is before using the tool, so that you can hone in on what is most useful and strategies that fit your need. If you use the framework and tools too narrowly, you may fight when you could talk -- you may call out when you could call in, you may harm relationships and people when you could connect, come near, cooperate, love in some way. If you use the framework too broadly, you may sacrifice the campaign, the movement, or some people to the oppressive system/s and badly-behaving people whose power you aim to diminish. You risk making them more, rather than less, powerful. The diagnostic tool will help you to narrow in on specific sections of the toolkit to attend to. It will also help you determine when it might be time to seek assistance from people outside the group and what kind of assistance would be most useful. Then we provide a few case examples of groups in struggle who might benefit from this toolkit. We developed these case examples from our experience and they do not reflect the exact experience of any one group. Next, we share a set of grounding agreements for our efforts to build new approaches to mutual accountability and transform conflict. With these agreements as a foundation, we offer some specific tools for accountability that can help you to establish a structure, culture, and practices that promote healthy interdependence. It is our hope that this framework and the tools within it will support you in navigating many of the challenges you encounter as a group on your own. We follow this with descriptions of the various kinds of practitioners who can help, and recommendations for finding a practitioner that meets your needs. Throughout the document you will find links to websites, articles, videos and other resources you can explore to support your learning. Key DefinitionsAs you enter into the framework, we believe it is important for us to make plain our definition of several keywords. ︎Accountability Accountability is closely tied to responsibility, commitment and support. In movement spaces, when we join a group, we make a commitment to take on certain responsibilities in order to advance the group’s overall purpose. This commitment can be implicit or explicit. The group, in turn, is then responsible for supporting the individual’s efforts to successfully achieve the desired outcomes associated with these responsibilities. Accountability refers to one person’s ability and willingness to report back to the group and/or the community the group represents on actions they have taken, things they have done or not done, or things they have said, to take ownership of the consequence or outcomes of their action, positive and negative, learn from mistakes, make amends as needed, and change their behavior in the future. To be accountable, the group, in turn, should name the actions or inactions of the group that may have made it difficult for group members to be successful, take ownership of the consequences, learn from mistakes, make amends and change group policies, practices, and culture as needed to increase the likelihood that group members will be successful in the future. For more about the concepts of self-accountability see Shannon Perez’s Self-Accountability and Movement Building. ︎Calling-inCalling-in is a practice used within groups of people who have a shared purpose when a member of the group takes an action that does not reflect the values of the group or breaks the named guidelines of group participation. The call-in is usually a one to one conversation in which a supportive member of the group reminds their fellow member that the group has shared values and guidelines, supports them in reflecting on the ways their behaviors may have led to unintended consequences or harms, and continues to work with that person to make amends and change their behavior. ︎Calling-out Calling-out is a practice most often, and most effectively used to publicly name the harmful behaviors of people with institutional or systemic power or cultural influence and may include demands for specific behavior change and redress. The call-out can be used to draw attention to harmful behaviors and increase public pressure on the person with power. Within a group, people sometimes call-out fellow group members who have repeatedly been called-in but have not changed their behavior in meaningful ways. In this case, the call-out is usually done in the context of a full-group meeting or on social media. Within a group, a call-out is often received as a form of punishment meant to shame the individual who has caused harm. ︎ConflictConflict is a state of being in which two people or parties see their point of view as in opposition to or incompatible with the other. Conflict occurs when someone needs something from another, and the other can't or won't give it to them. Conflicts can arise about a wide variety of needs including money, safety, information, cooperation, and dignity. In some cases, a conflict can arise as the result of a mistake or miscommunication that has had the consequence of someone feeling as if their needs will not be met. ︎GroupPeople who share movement space, or coalition or group space, and who have an explicitly named shared purpose. ︎HarmHarm is the impact felt when a person is deprived of, or senses a threat to an essential need as a result of the action or inaction of another person, group, institution, or system. Essential needs can include access to care, food, shelter, money, safety, dignity, and bodily autonomy. People can also experience harm when faced with behaviors that mirror or embody past experiences of systemic harm. As such, many of us unintentionally cause harm by replicating internalized practices and norms that uphold systems of oppression. ︎IntentIntent is the belief or desire that drives a person’s actions, which sometimes does not match the outcome or consequence of those actions. When we are part of group of people who have a shared purpose, and when that group includes people whose identities reflect different positions in relation to power structures, we are best served by the belief that people are joining the group with the hope that they can move into right relationship, while recognizing that they must work hard to identify and disrupt internalized patterns of dominance. We believe that intent does matter - as a signal that someone is in the struggle to change. When good intentions that lead to unintentional consequences are met with punishment, the person who has been punished often ends up stuck in shame and hopelessness. However, when a person with good intentions that lead to unintentional consequences is called-in or asked to take accountability for their actions we allow that person to learn, make amends, and make changes. ︎InterestsInterests are the deeper hopes, fears, needs, wants and desires that drive a person’s actions or opinions. ︎PositionsA position is a specific stance, opinion or solution that one person has put forward because they believe it will meet their interests. Two people may assert different positions in response to a shared problem because they have not taken the time to identify all of the interests that are driving these positions. The perception that one person’s position threatens the other person’s interest can lead to conflict. However, once interests have been identified, both parties can work together to find a solution that meets the majority of both people’s interests. ︎PunishmentIn psychological terms punishment is a response to an undesirable behavior that is designed to stop that behavior. A punishment can be taking away something good - for example, the right to be part of a group, or to have a certain position in a group. A punishment can also be administering something painful to the person - for example, by shaming the person, damaging their reputation, berating the person verbally, threatening future abuse, or physically abusing them. ︎TransformationTransformation occurs when the two people or parties start out seeing their point of view as in opposition to or incompatible with the other. The two people or parties go through a process that shifts their perspective and allows them to come to a new understanding about what each party needs and how each party might be able to get their needs met. Conflict resolution implies that a conflict is resolved with one person being right and the other being wrong. In conflict transformation, the relationship between the two people or parties is where the change happens allowing for shifts in power dynamics, new ways of communicating, or new shared understanding of what the conflict is about. ︎ adrienne maree brown, an activist, writer and facilitator, has inspired some of our thinking in this framework. https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-2-1 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:27:48 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-2-1 Section 2: Our Assumptions Systems of Oppression Harm us All“Dehumanization, although a concrete historical act, is not a given destiny but the result of an unjust order that engenders violence in the oppressors, which in turn dehumanizes the oppressed.” - Paulo FrierePowerful actors and institutions have successfully built, maintained and strengthened a system in which: The racial hierarchy is kept in place, white supremacist cultural norms are the dominant norms in most spaces, and the racial wealth divide is growing.Patriarchal gender norms effectively police human behavior and maintain power in the hands of those who uphold these norms.Most people struggle to access good quality affordable housing, healthcare, nutritious food, education, air, water, and nature. Individuals, families and groups who have been targets of oppression often internalize the harmful messages about the inferiority of target group members.Individuals, families and groups who have benefited from systems of oppression often internalize the harmful messages about the superiority of dominant group members. Multi-faceted Movement Groups Make Change HappenIt will take a variety of strong, resilient movement building organizations committed to collective liberation to shift power. Many of these groups will, by necessity, be intergenerational, multi-racial, cross-class, multi-issue or all of the above. If we want to redirect power in ways that hold systems accountable to the physical, psychological, socio-cultural and spiritual needs of people who have been targeted by systems of oppression, we will have to acknowledge the&nbsp; interdependence that is key to making change. This is the Work In order to cultivate a state of healthy interdependence, we must wade into the painful waters of past injustice and begin to develop and practice new ways to transform&nbsp; conflict and redress harm. As a part of this effort, we must each commit to humbly examining the ways we have internalized messages of inferiority and superiority, make healing a central part of our work together, and cultivate the skills we will need to build principled communities of struggle. This is the work. Sometimes, it is very difficult. It makes us feel uncomfortable. The path forward is not straight, nor is there a clear end. And it will take time; time to understand the sources of conflict, time to establish the purpose and structure of your group in ways that allow for healthy interdependence, time for people to be human with one another. Time for change. If we are lucky, it breaks down our walls - the armor we have built to survive in this harsh world. But then, we are courageous in conflict, we are direct, we connect, we transform ourselves and one another. There is joy. Together, we search for the places that are stained, soiled. We scrub away the residue of oppressive systems. We wash ourselves in the waters of healing, wring ourselves out, dry ourselves in the sun, and do it again, and again, every day. We soften the fabric, but make the weave strong. Assumptions Reflection QuestionsWhat are your implicit assumptions about how people should work together (individually and in your group)? How do these show up in the work?Are there core assumptions that you need to agree on in your group?What is your Theory of Change?&nbsp; Are you on the same page about what is needed to bring about the change you want to see?&nbsp; Do you need to be?How do you see “the work”?&nbsp; Are you on the same page about seeing internal, personal and collective healing work as core to the struggle?&nbsp; Do you see skill-building as critical? https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-3-1 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:29:06 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-3-1 Section 3: Common Sources of Conflict in Groups “The true focus of revolutionary change is never merely the oppressive situations that we seek to escape, but that piece of the oppressor which is implanted within each of us.” - audre lorde We Replicate Harmful Structures and NormsLeadership, decision-making and group culture are based on or influenced by professional middle class, heterosexual, middle aged, white male standards, even in progressive groups which work to create alternatives. This disempowers and alienates people who are closest to the problems we seek to address. As a result the strategies and tactics of the group can be, at best, irrelevant to the problem and, at worst, can actually feed into systems of oppression they seek to dismantle. Inside the group, abusive behaviors can be viewed as normal ways of doing business or too difficult to address directly. We Claim There Are No Structures and NormsIn reaction to the above, people in movement space often associate “structure” with oppressive hierarchy and leave structure and cultural norms undefined. This type of structurelessness can often lead to disputes over who should lead, who owns ideas, who decides, how to decide, and who is in/who is out of the group. When there is no structure, people who are used to having power often assert an unnamed power in the group. Whatever happens, there are always relationships and dynamics of power; that’s our social condition. When power and responsibility are unnamed, it is difficult to hold people accountable for their actions. If no one is responsible for the work, or the work is not distributed well, it increases the likelihood that the work will suffer and that people will be harmed. We Avoid Conflict and Ignore HarmIn many spaces, avoidance of conflict, in the name of harmony, is the norm. Real solidarity requires acknowledging important differences in group culture, understanding of the issue, power, access to resources, and/or capacity. To achieve solidarity, we will inevitably find ourselves wading into the murky waters of misinformation, miseducation, and false assumptions. We will all undoubtedly make mistakes, say things that are grounded in unconscious bias or ignorance, and at times, cause harm. However, to avoid conflict or our own emotional discomfort, we allow mistakes and misunderstandings to occur without pausing to learn from these incidents. When conflict happens, we encourage compromise over wrestling with the tension. Instead of calling attention to harmful behaviors, we give people the benefit of the doubt. Weak accountability mechanisms allow toxic dynamics to gain traction. We transform conflict when healthy steps are taken towards accountability. We Protect Ourselves By Punishing Other PeopleLiving in an unjust society leaves people feeling wounded, separated from one another, burnt out and angry. As a result, people can lash out in ways that are disproportionate or misdirected. Some conflicts emerge around people or groups using their power in abusive ways. We need to stop abuse in its tracks. For years, grassroots activists and cultural workers have started creative models of transformational justice to deal with this type of oppressive conduct. Or they have organized; organizing is our highly developed, principled tool for holding an unwilling person or group accountable. As in public space, we want to move away from buying into the inhumanity of punishment while using strategic and principled tools to hold perpetrators of abuse accountable for what they've done and what they will do. Not all hurt and harm are the result of abuses of power. Hurt and harm are also present in conflict--that is, in disputes among people or groups who share an interest in moving toward right power relations. When faced with conflict, we often overreact, believing the other is abusing power, or that they are motivated by an intent to harm, when our unmet need or desire is in the way of our ability to resolve the dispute cooperatively. In this circumstance, transformation is not possible. In movement spaces, we often talk about punishment as a tool of the system or of people in power. However, in truth, punishment is pervasive. We have all been hard wired to see punishment as the most effective way to manage other people’s behavior. Punishment makes us feel good. We see this play out in our day to day lives. We do not address the person we are in conflict with directly. We call people out in ways that blame, shame, and punish. We are unwilling to see nuance or allow space for people to learn and grow. We stagnate. The imperative to punish those who wronged us is rarely questioned. Calling out some (or “cancelling”, as some refer to it), is potentially a helpful tactic when building power against a larger institution or a target with more power. However, the punitive use of “cancelling” people in coalition-building or team work can be damaging&nbsp; and may lead to the dissolution of the group. We Advocate for Our PositionAs people who battle systems of oppression, we are predisposed to approaching situations in fight mode. Everyone comes with an agenda they want to push forward in the group. We behave as if the people around us are holding power over us and the things we care about.&nbsp; There is limited time devoted to building trust and solidarity inside organizations and movement formations. Different strategies for making change or political frameworks are seen as undermining one another when they may be complementary. We view ordinary tensions and polarities—such as the tension between the needs of the coalition with the needs of individual organizations—as intractable problems. We become stuck in our positions, unable to make meaning and transform conflict. We Are Driven by a Scarcity MindsetMoney and resource distribution are sources of conflict in many groups. Living under racialized capitalism, people are being betrayed by the system every day. People are taken advantage of, abandoned, and left to die. We have a deep sense of worry about whether and how we will survive. It is difficult to trust anyone who is responsible for distributing money and resources to do it ethically and responsibly because we do not see it happen very often. Capitalism encourages us to center individual needs. Across the wealth spectrum, we all have limited skills for talking about and making decisions about money and resources in a way that promotes collective well-being. When resources are plentiful, we may be confronted with suspicion and accusations of mismanagement from our people. We are seen as proxies for the state and are treated accordingly. Inside our organizations, we may feel confused and defensive. We have all been trained to hoard money in times of plenty and we have few models for how to spend in ways that invest in people now while acknowledging the need to plan for the future. All of these factors make it difficult to transform conflicts around money. Sources of Conflict Reflection Questions How do you relate to structure and hierarchy? How does power play out in your group?How do you view conflict? What are your norms for managing conflict?What is your personal experience with punishment? Where do you see it manifest in the group, online, interactions, etc? What accountability mechanisms do you have in place?&nbsp; When they don’t work, what happens?Are you aware when you are advocating for a position? Do you know what your interests are (what matters to you) underneath that position? Do you know what others' interests are?Do you talk about money in your group? How do you talk about money? What happens when you do? https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-4-1 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:29:46 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-4-1 In It Together Section 4: Diagnostic Tool Questions We built this framework in hopes that you will be able to build a culture and structure that supports healthy conflict within your group. We believe that, if you put effort into it, the members of your group are capable of managing most conflicts that arise and transforming conflicts in ways that deepen your work. Before using the diagnostic tool below, we recommend you read through the earlier sections of this document, including the introduction, key definitions, assumptions and common sources of harm. Reading those sections will help you determine whether or not this framework is likely to resonate with your worldview. This diagnostic tool offers a set of questions to ask yourselves when you feel stuck or in over your heads and then points you to sections of the framework and associated tools to focus on. Should you require outside assistance, we also make recommendations for the types of practitioners who might be helpful in certain situations. With each question, if you answer “yes”, you can focus your reading on the subsections listed and the associated reflection exercises and tools. We hope that the act of completing this diagnostic will also help you to clarify the nature of the conflict. We have listed only the questions in the diagnostic here. The full diagnostic with suggestions for specific sections of this framework to focus on can be found in the&nbsp;Appendix. Is there a specific precipitating event, series of events, interpersonal or intragroup conflict, or criticism that you can name? ︎Yes, we can name a specific conflict we need to address. ︎Is the conflict with another group that has significantly more power than yours?&nbsp; Do you believe the other group shares your commitment to shifting the arrangement of power?Do you believe that the other group is unwilling to shift the arrangement of power? ︎Is the conflict between specific individuals or specific groups of people within the group or from within your wider circle of accountability?&nbsp; Is the conflict between people who have experienced historical oppression and dominant group members? Is the conflict about specific behaviors that have been named harmful? &nbsp;Is the conflict about the way things are being done in the group?Is the conflict about people not meeting expectations or fulfilling responsibilities? Is the conflict coming from people who are finding it difficult&nbsp; to understand how to plug in to the group?Is the conflict around a topic that has come up many times but has never been resolved?Is the conflict about people who have made mistakes, or fallen short of the group’s expectations? Is the conflict about a particular strategy or tactic group members are considering using to make social change? Is the conflict related to money or the allocation of resources by group members? ︎Is the conflict being generated by people outside your circle of accountability?︎No, we cannot name a specific conflict, however, people feel stuck, overwhelmed or like they are about to ignite. https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-5-1 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:30:20 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-5-1 In It Together Section 5: StoriesThe following are a few vignettes about groups working to create a more just world and struggling with conflict.&nbsp; To protect the confidentiality of actual groups who have had similar experiences, we have created composites of many years of stories intended to demonstrate the key themes around conflict in the framework.&nbsp; They represent the very real struggles of many groups trying to sort out how to work through hard stuff and come out the other side intact. MEMBERSHIP-BASED GROUP A member who was also a longstanding informal leader in the group called out the formal leadership for bias and favoritism in assigning leadership roles or giving credit to members. The member did this calling-out publicly, at a meeting, and then followed up in the group’s social media channels. This generated a flurry of response from other members, some of whom began to organize in support of the member who did the initial calling out. Leaders’ written response asking for time to explore and understand the critique further inflamed a group of members, who named specific leaders as the primary offenders. Leaders were not in agreement about how to proceed, factions developed, and two key leaders left the group. COALITION 1 The staff of a coalition of groups largely driven by youth advocates ran into conflict about what it meant to be accountable to the community. When called to be more transparent about the coalition’s finances, there was fierce disagreement amongst the staff around how much to disclose about money they had taken in and how it had been spent. Ultimately a decision was made, but few were really happy with it.&nbsp; Consensus was arrived at more out of exhaustion than from a true understanding of each other’s interests.&nbsp; Information was shared with the community, and some community members were angry that it didn’t reveal the full picture they believed should have been disclosed.&nbsp; When called to defend their decision, many younger staff members found themselves unable to do so, which frustrated or angered older staff, given that it was a consensus decision. The coalition continued its work with an underlying level of internal tension and a persistent current of mistrust in the community. COALITION 2 This coalition was loosely united by the commitment to stopping violence perpetrated against members of their community.&nbsp; People sidestepped disagreements over tactics to join in organizing and direct action.&nbsp; Latent differences surfaced over the public statements of an immigrant group leader, herself undocumented, who claimed to speak on behalf of the other undocumented people in the coalition.&nbsp; Some were worried that her inflammatory language would get in the way of a campaign victory which they saw as imminent.&nbsp; They also feared that the leader’s provocation was too risky for activists who were undocumented.&nbsp; While many saw the leader’s statements as tactically risky, people were not united in how to respond.&nbsp; Some felt strongly that as a person directly affected by the violence, the leader and other undocumented people should be trusted to assess their own risk; some felt that the leader was ego-driven and not actually representing the views of others directly affected, and therefore should be challenged; some felt that there should be a challenge, but that it should only come from BIPOC or immigrant members of the coalition.&nbsp; Before these disagreements could be resolved, an explosive fight broke out between the leader along with her allies on one side, and those who didn’t trust her leadership on the other.&nbsp; The coalition didn’t survive this fight. COALITION 3 After a very successful launching campaign, disagreements in a coalition erupted at their first planning retreat. Tensions had been brewing during the previous campaign between two cohorts: some Black members of the coalition who were older, cisgender -male, straight, and formerly incarcerated.&nbsp; They had no clear, strong organizational base but were great spokespeople for the issues; and a group of other white members (some cis -women, straight and queer) who come from more well-resourced, professionalized organizations. The Black formerly incarcerated leaders had a hit-or-miss track record of showing up to meetings and following through on agreed-upon commitments. At the retreat, they accused white coalition members of taking up too much power and space in the coalition and that decisions and strategy were not driven enough by the interests of Black incarcerated people. They explained their focus on grassroots organizing as their main priority. White leaders viewed the Black leaders as unreliable partners in the work, and felt left to pick up their slack, but were also sensitive to the need for Black leadership in the coalition. They struggled with how to be accomplices and were hesitant to push their critique directly with the Black members at the retreat. Unable to resolve this dynamic, after the retreat the coalition hobbled along for a few months and then dissipated. ORGANIZATION The organization has an anti- oppression lens and has committed to centering the voices of people directly affected by oppressive systems and policies, both internally and in their work. &nbsp; Affinity groups for BIPOC and queer staff support one another and have pushed the organization to address intersectional issues that affected their communities.&nbsp; A virtual forum was organized, billed as a “healing opportunity to hear one another’s stories.”&nbsp; At that session, a Black cisgender participant, while speaking in very personal ways about her experience of systemic racism, included language that was interpreted by some queer participants as transphobic.&nbsp; A fairly awkward attempt by a white, trans participant to name this was seen as insensitive.&nbsp; Other queer, white participants joined in trying to expain.&nbsp; Vocal BIPOC participants reacted angrily, and queer BIPOC participants spoke of the pain of having to choose between their queer and BIPOC identities in the context of this conversation.&nbsp; After some heated back and forth, someone said this was not a safe space, and about half the participants left the meeting, effectively ending the forum. There are many stories like these.&nbsp; What they have in common is getting stuck when a conflict emerges and not having the tools to navigate it without rupture. It is possible to work through each of these scenarios in a way that maintains relationship and connection, while being real about what matters to each party in the conflict.&nbsp; The tools here will help you do that. https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-6-1 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:30:53 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-6-1 Section 6: Grounding Agreements for Principled Communities of Struggle and Practice The sources of harm outlined above do not have to derail our efforts to make change. Given our assumptions about the conditions we are organizing in and the common causes of tension, what are some things to keep in mind as we try to build human-centered non-punitive accountability practices? How can we evaluate our accountability practices? What are our common goals? The grounding agreements described below can and should anchor our efforts to build principled communities of struggle. Presume and Build Shared PurposeWe are coming together with a shared purpose to dismantle systems of oppression and build liberatory systems of accountability, therefore we can presume we are in this together, though we may differ in how to achieve our purpose.&nbsp; We commit to building a shared understanding of this common purpose. Acknowledge and Value Our DifferencesBeing in it together does not mean we have a shared experience of power, privilege or the systems we are trying to dismantle. We honor the experience of people closest to the issue we are trying to address and value their leadership. We acknowledge that people with privilege and power can also make meaningful contributions to change and invite their participation. Unlearn and Learn TogetherWe acknowledge that, regardless of our relationship to the issue we are trying to address, we are all learning to unlearn internalized dominance and internalized oppression. Unlearning and learning can trigger physical, emotional and spiritual discomfort and pain. For those of us who are targeted by systems of oppression there is risk in changing one’s behavior and we may have been punished before.&nbsp; Most of us have had limited opportunities to practice accountability in the context of dismantling systems of oppression. We can all have compassion for ourselves and each other in not knowing how to transform conflict. We are all practicing in real time and will make mistakes. We can and should learn from those mistakes as we go. We recognize that the act of coming together to dismantle systems will require us to disrupt comfortability, question respectability politics and attune ourselves to the negative impacts of white-normative culture in our groups. We also want to make clear that people who have been targets of systemic oppression should not be expected to take on the role of teaching or guiding people with privilege and power to unlearn internalized superiority. However, people with power and privilege can and should support each other’s healing and unlearning. Similarly, in our groups, it can often be helpful to prioritize time and space for people who have been targets of systemic oppression to come together to support one another’s healing and unlearning. Make Space for Difficult ConversationsWe acknowledge the inevitability of mistakes, misunderstandings, contradictions, critiques and conflicting ideas in groups. At times these moments of tension leave group members feeling uncomfortable, anxious, or may even be experienced as harm. Within the context of principled communities of care and struggle, we believe that many of these tensions hold the possibility of transformation. As such, we are committed to cultivating our capacity to tolerate discomfort and work through tensions. Where possible, we turn to the members of our group that have demonstrated skills related to physical and emotional self regulation, interpersonal communication and conflict negotiation to help us navigate these moments of tension. Set Clear Group Guidelines for ParticipationWe acknowledge the reality that some people will use abusive behaviors intended to exert power and control over individuals in the group. If allowed to occur without intervention, these behaviors can threaten the physical, psychological and/or spiritual safety of group members. To minimize the potential for harm, we take the time and care to name specific behaviors that are against the group’s guidelines and detail the consequences associated with those behaviors. Also determine who, specifically, the group is accountable to - one another, a specific neighborhood, town, city or region, a particular constituency? We can also think about this in a more positive framing - setting clear guidelines and expectations around participation can support people’s efforts to plug in to your group in a meaningful way. Practice Accountability that Builds Community and Honors HumanitySystems of punishment have severed relationships, decimated our communities and perpetuated cycles of harm. In our principled community of care and struggle, we resist responses to harm that are designed to blame, shame, retaliate, isolate or punish. When we call attention to harm, we focus on behaviors. Our accountability practices shift power internally while nurturing healthy relationships and building community. Guiding Principles Reflection Questions How well do these guiding principles resonate with you?What would you say you already subscribe to/practice/have in place?What feels out of sync with your experience?What feels challenging? https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-7 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:32:44 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-7 Section 7: Creating the Container The grounding agreements offer groups a foundation upon which to build a principled community of struggle. Based on our years of experience accompanying groups through difficult periods, often marked by multiple sources of harm, we have learned that specific tools increase the likelihood that group members will practice self and mutual accountability. First, it’s important to build a shared vocabulary for talking about issues related to accountability. By adopting a set of shared values known to foster communication, a group can build a culture within which accountability is second nature. A clear and defined structure increases accountability and decreases miscommunication, misunderstandings and conflict grounded in confusion. Finally, groups can set up specific mechanisms to address conflicts as they arise. Some resources: Racial Equity ToolsValues Creation Process for Groups Setting Up A Group StructureClear and Defined Group Purpose and StructureIn an ideal world, a newly forming group will set up the group in ways that allow for healthy conflict to take place. Members of a group are more likely to work well together when expectations for group participation, roles and responsibilities in the group and decision-making processes are clear. However, this does not mean the structure has to be overly formal, hierarchical, or static. Groups and group structures often evolve over time to meet the changing needs of the group and the larger community of people that the group is accountable to. At any given point in a group’s life cycle group members should be able to answer the following questions: What is our purpose and who are our people?Who is responsible for getting work done? How do we share information inside the group and with our people? How do we make decisions? How do we manage conflicts? How do we evaluate what’s working and what’s not? Create a structure for your group, using the tool here.The tool includes how to: Clarify the group’s purpose and peopleDetermine roles and responsibilities of group membersDetermine the authority of the groupEnsure effective communication internally and externallyAgree on a decision-making method (with detail on how to do consensus decision-making)Navigate conflictDo hygiene checks to evaluate what is and isn’t workingIf your group is in the forming stage, you can also use the Community Rule Tool. https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-8 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:33:16 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-8 Section 8: Tools for Conflict Transformation “I picture ‘calling in’ as a practice of pulling folks back in who have strayed from us. It means extending to ourselves the reality that we will and do fuck up, we stray, and there will always be a chance for us to return. Calling-in as a practice of loving each other enough to allow each other to make mistakes, a practice of loving ourselves enough to know that what we’re trying to do here is a radical unlearning of everything we have been configured to believe is normal.” — Ngọc Loan TrầnConflict is a natural, healthy and necessary part of any group dynamic when people are able to practice accountability. Groups that wish to cultivate a culture of accountability should articulate a shared set of practices or norms&nbsp; and embed these in all aspects of the groups structure and function. Based on our experience, the following practices are critical to developing a culture of accountability and transformation to: Acknowledge differences and embrace conflictDefine and respect boundariesHave compassion for our struggles with learning and unlearningApproach one another with a spirit of curiosity and inquiryAct with integrityPractice direct communication and feedbackResist the impulse to fight and punishExperiment, learn and adaptGroups may, of course, have other shared practices unique to their groups. Those listed are described in detail to offer you a firm foundation for your efforts to build a culture of self and mutual accountability. Acknowledge differences and embrace conflict.While we may presume we are all here for the same purpose, our experience of the systems of oppression we are trying to change is very different depending on our political, social and cultural identities. In addition, we are bringing different skills, strategies, and tactics to this work.&nbsp; These differences in our perspectives may cause us to dig our heels into a particular position. We make inferences about other people’s motives (not good) and the roots of their positions (faulty). Instead, we can come together with the understanding that these differences will likely cause conflict and tension in our group. We can call on one another to take time to learn about the different perspectives in the group. If we are able to work through these tensions, we may be able to emerge stronger.&nbsp; In many movement groups, we seek to center the leadership of people who have been targeted by the system. We do this to disrupt the cycles of oppression. At times, we may need to break up into smaller groups based on our identities to help clarify the roots of the dynamics we are experiencing, and work with people who have a shared identity to build support and identify our interests and brainstorm ways to move through conflict within the larger group. However, in some spaces, we may inadvertently invert the oppressive hierarchy we were attempting to disrupt. For example, we explain away the abusive behavior of a leader who has multiple marginalized identities. People don’t call them on it to show that they “understand” why a person who has been oppressed would lash out.&nbsp; This enables harmful behaviors that will never contribute to collective liberation. Instead, we must build a culture that sets high standards for accountability, and also provides a high level of support to people in the group when they struggle to meet these standards. We do not have to punish, avoid or enable. We can support our people to transform in ways that promote accountability. Reflection Questions and Tools for Embracing Difference and Conflict&nbsp; What is your personal relationship to difference and conflict?&nbsp; What role have you tended to play in the group in addressing conflict (eg avoiding, mediating, instigating)?&nbsp; This resource can help you do the inner work to prepare for conflict: Using Innerwork for Conflict Resolution What is your group approach to conflict? &nbsp; These two resources will help you answer this question: Read this article by Yotam Marom on Moving Toward ConflictTake time to assess your group’s approach to conflict, it’s “conflict culture” with this Conflict Culture Assessment from the The Wildfire ProjectHow confident are you in your capacity to de-escalate a situation?&nbsp; This resource can help you build skills to de-escalate a situation. Has your group defined accountability and determined how it can be healthy?&nbsp; This resource from The Wildfire Project will help. Have you addressed upfront how your group wants to approach calling in and calling out? Some resources: 6 Signs Your Call Out Isn’t About AccountabilitySonya Renee Taylor offers another tool beyond “call-ins” and “call-outs”: Let’s Replace Cancel Culture with Accountability14:40-17:46 “And this is why I am proposing a new way that we might be able to address harm when it happens. Yes, there will be times when it is appropriate to call someone out...there will be times when calling in is the best strategy...but I don’t think we have to be bound to the binary in this particular situation. I think there are other options we could do and I propose that we should all spend a little bit more time ‘calling on’...I can share with you how you harmed me and what you did and entrust you with the work needed to repair that harm and hopefully do a bit less harm in the future.&nbsp; I can call on you to learn better and do better.”&nbsp; Define and respect boundaries and prioritize safety.“No matter what your workplace is, if you want people to...accomplish what they need to accomplish in the workplace, you have to take account of their emotional well-being and their relational well-being. Otherwise, all that has happened to people may very well sabotage what you’re actually trying to accomplish.” — Dr. Sandra Bloom “Safety is not the same as comfortable. To make positive change, because this is all so deeply embedded in the way our culture works, it is not comfortable to make changes in these automatic reactions, but that doesn’t mean it’s not safe. And that’s an important differentiation. People will often feel uncomfortable and say, ‘I don’t feel safe.’ Really? Do you really not feel safe? You really feel that your body and your mind are in danger? Or is this just really uncomfortable? I think that’s a good strategy to use with each other as well. That change is not comfortable. And these deep down changes are very uncomfortable.” -- Dr. Sandra Bloom We can strive to build spaces where we do not sacrifice our own well-being to make other people happy. Instead we can focus on cultivating purposeful spaces that foster safety in multiple dimensions, including physical, psychological and emotional safety. After doing the work to Create a Clear and Defined Group Purpose and Structure, at a group level it is important that group members and leaders uphold the clear boundaries of what the container is and isn’t so that people know which needs and purposes will be met through their participation in different spaces and which will not. For instance, if the group is currently meeting for 30 minutes about finances, and the group has recently had a falling out about an unrelated matter, it is important to be clear that the current container may not be fit to hold the other needs of the group and, wherever possible, to opt to schedule specific time and space to move towards understanding, acknowledgment, and towards a process of reconciliation or transformation. On an individual level, since we are different from one another, we also know that we each have different boundaries that are important to our autonomy and safety. These boundaries may be about physical touch, personal space, modes of communication, cultural sovereignty, religious beliefs, or even other things we have not anticipated. Where possible, the group can take steps to actively state boundaries of both individual group members and of the group process, respect those boundaries, and to take steps to repair boundaries when they are, often unintentionally, crossed. Defining these individual and group-level boundaries and the words we use to hold boundaries and set expectations for building a culture that allows people to access safety is an important part of building a culture of transformation. For example, if we agree to be transparent, what does transparency mean? What boundaries can we set for ourselves that supports us to be accountable to the group while also allowing us to meet our individual needs? In the spirit of self-determination, personal autonomy, and collective care we come together with the hope that each person will take care of their own physical, mental and emotional needs, and that the group will create the container for this to happen.&nbsp; Reflection Questions and Tools for defining and respecting boundaries Emotional Regulation and Safety PlanningIndividual Reflection:What are the signals that you are getting emotionally activated during an interaction (e.g. body temperature increasing, speaking faster, etc.)? What are some situations that can trigger those responses in you? When you notice those signals or triggers, what are some actions that you can take to regulate yourself before choosing your next action? What are some things that can help you pause? Resources: Step-by-step guide to safety planning - Creating a personalized list of 3-5 things that you can do in the moment to get yourself back to a state of calm or presence. “This is an individual strategy that then becomes a group approach. It means figuring out what emotions am I most likely to get triggered [by] and lose control so that I may do or say something that is a problem? And then developing some very simple physiologically-based strategies so when I feel my emotions rising, I do something that helps me maintain control and self-regulate. It’s an individual responsibility that goes into making the whole.” --Dr. Sandra Bloom on Making Positive Psychology Work PodcastOn an individual level, we can practice strengthening our emotional self-managementBody work and generative somatics can support body regulation and stress management.&nbsp; Think of your next meeting. What are some feelings that might arise in group members as they gather around the meeting topic? How might you use this information as data to plan for your meeting and create a space that welcomes all emotions? While groups may not be able to meet all the needs of their members, they can be a space that acknowledges and validates the differing emotions that group members are bringing. On a group level, we can begin with creating a space that welcomes our emotions and the need to collectively adopt trauma informed practices. "8 Practices For A More Emotionally Just Organization" provides a starting point&nbsp; Groups can also adopt the norm of self keeping, which assumes that individuals in a group will take care of themselves and let the collective know when they need something from the group. To learn more about how to practice selfkeeping, read My Body, My Home, A RADICAL GUIDE TO RESILIENCE AND BELONGING by Victoria Emanuela and Caitlin Metz. Have compassion for our struggles with learning and unlearning. We are each working hard to unlearn our internalized inferiority or internalized superiority within systems of oppression. We are each struggling to resist our cultural imperative to punish and shame those we perceive as causing harm. We are trying to imagine our way into a different paradigm for addressing conflict and harm. We are each trying to learn what it means to build a transformed society in which we are all free. We have compassion for ourselves and each other in this struggle. We regularly reflect on how white supremacy culture is showing up in our lives. We talk about our personal experiences with punishment.We endeavor to build a daily practice of inclusion and accountability. We turn away from actions designed to punish or shame people and turn towards those that affirm our shared humanity and accountability. It isn’t easy to have compassion for one another in our learning.&nbsp; As Tema Okun has said in her work on white supremacy culture, “white supremacy wants us to attack each other as the problem”.&nbsp; In our movements, we sometimes weaponize learning tools and use them to scold, shame and beat each other up.&nbsp; We ask that you use the opportunities to reflect with the tools below with a spirit of openness, interest and investment in each other’s development and growth.&nbsp; From Tema Okun: “I hope we can use (this learning) to help us name the ways in which our conditioning might be getting in our own and each other's&nbsp; way rather than as an instrument of shame, blame, or accusation of not being good enough. The&nbsp; dominant culture already gives us plenty of messaging about how deficient and wrong we are;&nbsp; perhaps we can learn to show up to each other with more compassion (and give ourselves and&nbsp; each other a break when we can't)”. Some of the initial exploration may need to happen in separate groups for BIPOC and white people; it is important to then come back together in a spirit of learning and inquiry.&nbsp; We can be in this together. Reflection Questions and tools for increasing compassion for our struggles with learning and unlearningHas your group explored how white supremacy culture shows up in your lives and your work together? Tema Okum, who first wrote about the characteristics of white supremacy culture in 1999, has created a new comprehensive white supremacy culture website with many resources including a revised version of the characteristics: White Supremacy Culture - Still Here.&nbsp; It’s long, and well worth the time. If you have more limited time to reflect together, use this, from Dragonfly, which includes a group exercise: Inclusive cultural normsOn an individual level, you may also choose to do this White Supremacy Daily Check InHas your group explored your own experiences with punishment?&nbsp; Have you explored together the work of abolitionist movements against punishment?&nbsp; Questions to explore include:What is your first memory of being punished for doing something wrong?What did you learn growing up about punishment?What is your experience in your adult life with punishment?Learn about the ongoing work of abolitionists Against Punishment Approach one another with a spirit of curiosity and inquiry. Knowing that we are different from one another and that we are unlearning and learning, we can build relationships with one another by asking curious questions, listening actively and taking the opportunities available to us to learn from one another. Though we may believe in our own point of view, we can remain both humble to the fact that we do not have all of the information and open to the possibility that multiple perspectives can help us deepen our work. Reflection Questions and Tools for the practice of curiosity and inquiry It is the responsibility of all members of a group to cultivate a climate of openness and&nbsp; curiosity. These Skills for Effective Group Process in Multiracial Groups&nbsp; will help you do that.Has a conflict occurred? If so, use inquiry skills to ask Questions about the conflict. This resource can be used for both individual collective reflection. This checklist for powerful conversations will support you on an individual level. Act with IntegrityAt times, we may be afraid of making mistakes, because we are afraid of becoming a target for other people’s anger. In truth, we cannot control what others do or say about us. We can only control our own actions and speech. Criticism, when delivered with care, can be an opportunity for learning, growth and transformation. When criticism is delivered as a form of punishment, we are best equipped to weather the storm when we know we have acted with integrity. When we act with integrity we: Are clear about our purpose and who we are accountable to. Tell the truth.Do what we say we will do.Own up to our mistakes.Learn from mistakes and make changes in response.Don’t expect or require forgiveness or engagement to change.Maintain the boundaries we need to keep ourselves safe and healthy.At times, groups may receive negative feedback from people outside the group and the people the group is accountable to. Under these circumstances, it is natural to feel defensive, hurt or confused. Groups can get caught up in quickly responding to such criticisms, which may lead to unproductive and sometimes harmful exchanges. Acting with integrity becomes even more critical in these moments. When criticisms come to you from outside your circle of accountability we can: Acknowledge the criticism and reassert the purpose of the group and who you are accountable to. Share the criticism with our circle of accountability in order to be transparent. Ask ourselves - Have we been acting with integrity?If not, we can begin the process of moving back towards alignment with the support of our circle of accountability. If so, we can consider moving on with our work, and resist the urge to react, defend, or counter critics.Reflection Questions and Tools for acting with integrity What are my values? What are our values as a group?Resource: Set a regular time to do this quick personal values check in.Developing Communities of AccountabilityIndividual Reflection: Who is in your community of accountability? Write down the names of the specific people you can call on to help you to stay in alignment with your values.Group Reflection: What other groups are in your community of accountability? Write down the names of the specific people connected to groups you can call on to help you to stay in alignment with your values.Resource: This Pod-Mapping worksheet from the Bay Area Transformative Justice Collective walks us through the history of the term “pods” and includes an exercise for reflecting on and creating our own pods to support our accountability. Practice direct communication and feedback. Conflict and tension are normal occurrences in any healthy group, especially in groups where people come together across differences. By practicing direct communication when we are in conflict with the people around us, we can avoid misunderstandings, miscommunications, and mistakes that are grounded in false assumptions and misinformation. The goal of direct communication is not to make everyone happy or feel good about themselves. In fact, our desire to please others can often lead us to avoid being direct.&nbsp; Our goal is to be honest in the moment in ways that are compassionate. We do this by: Communicating clearly and directly with group members, working to match intent and impact in interactionsBeing proactive in resolving conflicts and misunderstandings, especially across difference. This includes being able to effectively identify and interrupt microaggressions or other behaviors that undermine equity and justice. Offering feedback that is clear, balances honesty with care, and is delivered without blame or judgment. Using direct communication platforms like in person, one to one, direct contact, not public forums or social media.Some people have a naturally direct communication style, which can be perceived as helpful and also as pushy and aggressive, depending on the identity of the speaker, context and implicit group cultural norms.&nbsp; Dominant norms favor directness in class privileged, straight white men and indirectness for everyone else.&nbsp; Most of us have little personal and group-based experience of direct communication in the context of conflict or feedback that is clean and clear. &nbsp; The tools below are intended to support you in developing and practicing these skills individually and in your group. Reflection Questions and Tools for direct communication and feedback How would you describe your own communication style?&nbsp; What has been your experience of being direct in communication with others in your group?How would you describe the communication norms of your group?&nbsp; Has the group made its preferred modes of communication explicit?&nbsp; Group-level communication norms&nbsp; include mechanisms for communicating, but also expectations of how people in conflict can be direct and clear while also demonstrating care for one another.&nbsp; This resource will help: Direct Communication in the Context of ConflictHas your group agreed on guidelines for feedback and created space for practice?These resources will help.&nbsp; Feedback skills Feedback Circles ToolStrategies for dealing with challenges that arise within individual people, within yourself, or within the group as a whole. This is often described as problems with people everyone finds challenging. (Trauma informed approach) Interrupting/intervening“Who, Me, Lead A Group?” book by Jean Illsley Clarke - Question 7 - “What Will I Do If Problems Arise?” chapter preview of pages 75-87 here - This chapter helps to determine where the actual problem lies and offers suggestions for how to approach the situationResist the impulse to fight and punish.Advocates are trained to fight for what they need - when we fight, we demand that the other side give us what we want and we are not concerned with their wants or needs. We stick to our position. Fighting is a critical tool to use when there is a measurable power differential between two groups of people. Punishment can also be a great advocacy tool -- by enacting consequences that show the other side they have done something wrong, we maintain power in the situation. However, in many groups, fighting is the default even when navigating conflict inside the group.If we assume we have a shared purpose and that we are all learning and unlearning, we do not need to approach each other with a firm position or advocacy stance. We don’t need to fight. Within a mixed group, we can start with the assumption that we have enough power to get our interests met through talking or negotiation. If we have at least as much power as the other people in our group or coalition, consensual joint problem solving can result in new solutions we may not have come up with on our own. In some cases, a subset of the group may gather together to get clear on a shared set of interests to bring back to the larger group, or to the leadership.&nbsp; In a white supremacist society, leaders are primed to see these types of organizing activities as a threat to group integrity and may use punishment to discourage this type of organizing. Instead we can view this as an opportunity for people with shared concerns to get clear on what those concerns are which, in turn, can increase the likelihood of a productive joint problem solving effort. If joint problem solving is not effective within the group, spend some time considering why that is happening. Has everyone involved identified their interests or are we stuck in our position? Are there sub-groups that can align around shared interests, and strategize on how to bring those shared interests to the wider group? Are group members weighing the gaps between their own individual interests and organizational interests?” Does it feel like there are still hidden interests, and are there enough interests on the table to be able to sufficiently start problem-solving?Learn more about interests and positions here. Learn more about when to talk and when to fight.Against PunishmentExperiment, learn, and adapt &nbsp;“Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other.” — Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed As we unlearn the behaviors, ideas and norms that have been perpetuated by systems of oppression, we must experiment with new ways of being and doing things that are grounded in our vision for liberation. As we experiment, we can be sure that we will learn important lessons about what does and does not work as we build a new society. We are open to adapt as we learn from both our mistakes and our successful experiments. Reflection Questions for experiment, learn and adapt Have you established the expectation that the group is a space for learning? How might you ...Individual or Group Reflection: Brainstorm and explore expectations of the group as it grows and learns. What may be some unfair or unreasonable expectations of group members and/or leaders as they commit to their learning journey?What may be some fair or reasonable expectations of group members and/or leaders&nbsp; as they commit to their learning journey?Sample Mechanisms for Conflict TransformationEstablish Community Agreements to Set Guidelines for BehaviorWe will respect each other’s bodily autonomy.We will honor each other’s timeWe will communicate directly with each other when someone says or does something that makes us feel fear or pain. We will attend at least 75% of all group meetings. We will communicate when we are not able to meet the responsibilities we have agreed to take on in the group. We will support each other’s need to take care of ourselves and our families.Involve the Community KeeperThe role of the Community Keeper is to pay attention to the way people in the group are interacting with one another, create space to build community and trust, name conflicts when they arise, and intervene when group members are unable to navigate those conflicts on their own.&nbsp; The steps outlined below are for the Community Keeper. What is the situation?&nbsp; Hear the story of the person/people who believe they have been harmed. Create space for feelings to be expressed. Acknowledge the impact on them. Listen with compassion and humility. Ask questions in a spirit of inquiry. Ask them to think about what their specific needs, wants, hopes and fears are related to this situation. Try to determine who is responsible beyond the individual who caused harm—ask how the community is implicated? Try to assess if others in the group may have been impacted as well. Review the community agreements and accountability process with them. 1. &nbsp; &nbsp; What is your understanding of the situation? 2.&nbsp; &nbsp; What is most important to you in this situation? 3.&nbsp; &nbsp; Why is that important? 4.&nbsp; &nbsp; What do you think a good outcome might look like? 5.&nbsp; &nbsp; What are the obstacles to reaching that outcome? Why has this situation occurred? The Community Keeper calls on the individual who has been named as causing harm to do the work of making repairs. Ask them to share their perspectives on why they engaged in the behavior—what was the intent? Create space for feelings to be expressed. Listen with compassion and humility. Ask questions in a spirit of inquiry. Ask them to think about what their specific needs, wants, hopes and fears are related to this situation. Explain the impact of the behavior on group members. Encourage them to try to determine who is responsible beyond the individual perpetrator—how is community implicated? Review the community agreements and accountability process with them. What is your understanding of the situation?What is most important to you in this situation?Why is that important?What do you think a good outcome might look like?What are the obstacles to reaching that outcome?Based on the conversation with the harmed person and the person who has been named as causing harm, try to assess if the harm occurred as a result of: A mistake, miscommunication, or misunderstanding A conflict of ideas, approaches, or prioritiesAn effort to exert power and control in the groupConfusion about roles, responsibilities, or decision-making processes.Group norms that are grounded in systems of oppression Take action to repair the situation. If the harm is determined to be the result of behavior that lies within the stated boundaries of the group (see setting boundaries above), the Community Keeper should work with all parties and the community to repair the harm with the aim of strengthening relationships and deepening mutual accountability. If appropriate, the person named as the one who caused harm should: Regulate their own physical and emotional response to causing harm so that they can focus on the needs of those they harmed.Acknowledge the behaviors that caused the harm and the impact of those behaviors. Apologize for the behavior and ask if the apology can be accepted. If the apology can be accepted, ask what can be done to repair the harm. Work with the Community Keeper to repair harm.If these actions have taken place outside of the group meetings, the Community Keeper should work with both parties to determine how best to share the lessons from this process of mutual accountability with the full group. Ask group members to support both parties as they seek to transform the conflict. This is an important step in building a principled community of struggle. If the harm is determined to be the result of behaviors that violate the boundaries set by the group or if the person who has caused harm continues to engage in harmful behaviors after multiple attempts to “call-in”: Inform the person causing harm and the one who reported harm that if another harmful behavior occurs, the consequences outlined in the community agreements will be enacted. If the person causing harm repeats the harmful behavior, be direct in reminding that person that they have agreed to hold themselves accountable. Focus on the behavior and restate the community agreements. Acknowledge the impact of the behavior on group members. Enforce the consequences stated in the community agreements. Encourage group members to support both those harmed and the person who caused harm in ways that lie within the stated community agreements. Avoid calling out in ways that shame, blame or punish. Reflect on the processThe Community Keeper or another leader in the group can lead the group through a process of reflection by asking these questions adapted from Kai Cheng Thom in the Loving Justice Framework: Were we completely honest with ourselves and each other? What questions still remain?Did we approach the process with humility? Have we taken time to address the way we may have contributed to harm? Were we brave in our efforts to work through tensions and name harm? Did we confront our own biases and the possibility that we have replicated oppressive norms?Were we kind and compassionate to all members of the group while honoring our boundaries? Did we respond in ways that reinforce positive behaviors and avoided shame and punishment? https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-9 Wed, 06 Oct 2021 01:33:34 +0000 In It Together https://inittogether.cargo.site/Section-9 Section 9: Practitioners Who Can Help In this section we list a wide variety of outside practitioners you can seek support from when navigating challenges in your group. We offer a description of the types of services provided by each practitioner and list some specific groups we have worked with in the past as a starting place. However, we hope that you will make a concerted effort to use the strategies outlined in the framework before turning outside the group for support. Coaching for IndividualCoaches work with individuals or small teams to support their efforts to identify areas for growth, build new skills, and change their behaviors in ways that support their work. Communications and Public Relations ConsultantsCommunications and public relations consultants work with teams to clarify their messaging, present their story, and manage crisis communications that may be needed when a group is dealing with major critique from inside or outside the group. Development and Fundraising ConsultantsDevelopment and fundraising consultants can help you think through values-aligned strategies for getting the resources you need to support the work of your group. Financial Management ConsultantsFinancial management consultants can help you think through systems and infrastructure you might need to manage your money, build strong accounting practices, and make plans for future growth or times of challenge. Group Process FacilitatorsGroup process facilitators specialize in holding space for difficult conversations and creating an environment that allows for everyone to contribute their best thinking. Healing Arts PractitionersHealing Arts Practitioners include spiritual guides, curanderas, energy healers, mindfulness coaches, and others who have built skills around guiding groups and individuals through processes or rituals with the intention of clearing blockages, healing wounds, and making space for new energies. Interpersonal Violence Counselor/AdvocatesInterpersonal violence counselors and advocates work closely with survivors of violence and members of their support networks to address the emotional and physical trauma associated with interpersonal violence, to work with the survivor to develop a safety plan, and to help them explore options for engaging members of their community in that plan. These practitioners also can direct survivors of violence to other resources they may need. Management TrainersAs organizational leaders, committee chairs or other leaders inside a group, we may need to recruit or hire people into the group, manage projects or campaigns,&nbsp; delegate tasks to other group members, and ensure people feel supported and have clear expectations for what they need to do. All of these are management skills. Many of us never have the opportunity to focus on developing skills as managers. Management trainers can offer you tools, skills and ways of thinking about management to strengthen your group’s cohesion and effectiveness. The Management Center is an organization that focuses on helping people to build skills and problem solve management issues. Go to https://www.managementcenter.org. Mediators A mediator works to support two people who are trying to navigate conflict, misunderstanding, or a change in their relationship. A mediator will often ask to meet with each person separately before the mediation session to get a better understanding of each person’s respective needs, wants, hopes and fears for the mediation. Mediations can take place in one more session depending on the circumstances. A skilled mediator should be able to work across differences in race, ethnicity, gender, ability, sexuality or other significant differences in identity. However, for some participants, the identity of the mediator can have a strong impact on their sense of safety within the mediation. The Emergent Strategy Ideation Institute has put together a living document with mediation resources. This document also includes a link to a guide for how to vet a mediator. Organizational Development ConsultantsOrganizational development consultants support groups and organizations to build strong, values-aligned organizational cultures, structures, policies and practices in service of their missions. An organizational development consultant can help you identify the root causes of specific organizational challenges you are facing and work with you to build the skills and knowledge you need to make change. Organizational development consultants recognize that organizations can themselves be places where people feel traumatized and seek to transform organizations into places where they can thrive. Resources for understanding organizational trauma can be found here. Program EvaluatorsProgram evaluators work with an organization when group members are interested in learning about the quality and impact of their efforts to make change. Process evaluations focus on quality - how did we do the work, did we do what we set out to do, and did we do it well?&nbsp; Outcome evaluations look to see if we were able to make meaningful changes in the issues we care about. Program evaluators can also support you in identifying and testing your assumptions about how change happens. Restorative Justice PractitionersIn a situation where one person has harmed another, or two people have caused harm to each other, a restorative justice practitioners work with the person who has been harmed, the person who caused harm, and the people who support them, as well as other affected community members, to create an opportunity for both parties to speak about what happened and to work with their support people to determine how to move forward in a way that holds the possibility of restoration. This approach prioritizes actions that repair harm, avoid punishment and shame, and allows the person who caused harm to make amends and remain in community. Northwest Justice Forum has compiled a directory of restorative justice practitioners based in the Northwest region of the United States. Social Justice Training OrganizationsSocial justice training organizations work with groups to build skills related to community organizing, advocacy, and campaign strategy, tactics and considerations for actions designed to apply pressure, amplify an issue or resist unjust practices. Some social justice training organizations may focus on a particular issue, while others are more general. Many social justice training organizations also work with groups to address internal issues and support individual well-being within social justice work.&nbsp; A list of Social Justice Training Organizations can be found here. Additional ResourcesCheck out these links for additional resources and practitioners whose work crosses many of the categories listed above: Relational Uprising︎︎︎Community Transformation︎︎︎Raphah︎︎︎Briana Herman︎︎︎Elizabeth Clemants︎︎︎Jugnurj︎︎︎