This blog is part of an online learning platform which includes the Pathways to New Community Paradigms Wiki and a number of other Internet based resources to explore what is termed here 'new community paradigms' which are a transformational change brought about by members of a community.

It is intended to offer resources and explore ideas with the potential of purposefully directing the momentum needed for communities to create their own new community paradigms.

It seeks to help those interested in becoming active participants in the governance of their local communities rather than merely passive consumers of government service output. This blog seeks to assist individuals wanting to redefine their role in producing a more direct democratic form of governance by participating both in defining the political body and establishing the policies that will have an impact their community so that new paradigms for their community can be chosen rather than imposed.

Monday, May 30, 2016

Asset Based Community Development Lessons for Systems Thinking

In the last post, Cormac Russell, faculty member of the ABCD Institute at Northwestern University, Illinois, now DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois and Managing Director of Nurture Development, the leading Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) organization in Europe, was introduced by this blog. He was contrasted with a more ‘Collective Impact’ approach to ABCD. In this post, we will look at the approach taken by Cormac and Nurture Development and contrast them with the approach taken by this effort, especially Systems Thinking. Such contrasts are more in the nature of different sides of a dice rather than mutually exclusive opposites. 

As was mentioned in the last post, Cormac seems far more likely to write about 'collective' in terms of, direct collective energy towards collective action or, a way that is inclusive and supports people to generate disparate energy into collective democratic power", rather than the often top down methodology of Collective Impact. A problem with Grasstop oriented Collective Impact is that citizen leaders can often be stuck in silos as readily as government departments can. 

At the recent TEDXExter 2016, Cormac gave a talk on Sustainable community development: from what's wrong to what's strong, arguing that we need to start with what's strong within a community instead of trying to right what we see as wrong. We can grapple with humanity’s toughest questions by helping people in discovering what gifts they have and using those gifts to enrich those around them and help people to define and to live a good life. For more background there is John McKnight Keynote Speech about the history, practice and future of Asset Based Community Development from the 2016 ABCD Festival and What is Asset Based Community Development? (in under four minutes)  (more videos).

Now the videos will provide you with a pretty clear, concise and complete idea of what Asset Based Community Development is and what it tries to accomplish, so if you are still reading and haven’t watched yet, you should. If you have watched then you might want to stop and reflect a bit then come back.

In Cormac's TEDXExter video, he uses a familiar term in Systems Thinking, 'unintended consequences'. In this case, of our current institutional, often bureaucratic attempts at helping people in our communities, listing four of them.

The first unintended consequence is defining people not by their gifts, capacities and what they can bring to the solution but by their deficiencies and their problems. The second unintended consequence resulting from a top-down obsession is that money doesn’t go to those who actually need the help.  Instead, it goes to those who are paid to provide the services to those who need help. The third unintended consequence is that active citizenship, the power to take action and to respond at the grassroots level, retreats in the face of ever-increasing technocracy driven by professionalism and expertise and finally. 

With the fourth unintended consequence, Cormac mentions another Systems Thinking term or tool, mapping. Entire neighborhoods, entire communities which have been defined as deficient will start to internalize an imposed a negative 'map' and believe that the only way that anything is going to change for them is when some outside expert with the right program and the right money comes in to rescue them these so-called unintended harms.

At this point, I may have a tendency to start having some different perspectives from Cormac. Before making too much of this though, I should state my own perspective that maps should be seen as raising questions, not providing answers. Maps are launching points for exploration, one can always provide more detail and deeper understanding or one can move beyond the edges. It is easy enough to take maps for granted which is invariably done all the time but that is merely intellectual laziness. 

A viable way to be collective and inclusive from the bottom up, according to Cormac and those with a similar mind set, is to work through the concept of the communal Commons to enable some type of Coalition of the Doing in determining the relationship between Capitalism And the Commons. Such an approach encourages communities to ask questions such as, does growth equal success? (Hint - no it doesn't).

ABCD has the capacity to encompass a rather expansive view of community. It can take a neighbor to neighbor approach as did Tamarack's Abundant Community Edmonton which is part of its campaign to work towards the promise of deepening community. It can also take an institutional city government approach, as with Our London is a city of Neighbourhoods, London, Ontario, Canada that is.

Cormac is concerned with institutions using asset mapping to build data about the assets of communities, like an inventory, instead of supporting those communities by first building relationships and then connecting the assets. Even so, he provided a practical and fun way to start a conversation about community assets without any theory. The point according to Cormac is remembering asset mapping is an inside job focused on relationship building not data collection. Similarly with Systems Thinking, it is the relationship between people and assets that brings about the potential for emergent capacities of the community. The challenge is keeping the focus on the community. 

One possible way of keeping the focus on community could be through a digital community and virtual collaboration. The later is one area I am currently working on through a Systems Thinking approach. The Leeds Digital Festival is one example of a real world community, working as a digital community, leading the process to understand themselves, rather than depending upon others to do it for them. This, however, presents a whole new set of decisions according to Usman Haque

Being that we are focusing on community, it seemed that there should be a potential but true synergy between the work of Placemaking, as in the creation of Community Places (wiki-page) done by organizations such as Project for Public Spaces and Asset Based Community Development (wiki-page) work being done by Nurture Development and other organizations, if one takes the view that Placemaking is to places what ABCD is to people. Having admitted not knowing that much about ABCD, I asked the experts. Project 4 Public Spaces told me Placemaking is indeed inspired by and connected to Asset-Based Community Development and the good folks at @ABCD_Global agreed.

The area of greatest interest is in the creation of Healthy Cities (wiki-page) and communities. Cormac Russell is seen as a sort of Medical Heretic, in a good way, by the Home | World Health Innovation Summit's blog. In particular with efforts at Place Based Health through which community social work moves away from an assessment/case management approach and shifts from what's wrong to what's strong. This approach promotes the concept of 'social prescribing' and other ideas redefining, the Future of Medicine.

"We have to build circumstances to allow General Practitioner practices to engage with local community and support asset-based community development,” according to  Dr. Amir Hannan of the Haughten Thornley Medical Centres (another Cormac fan site) in Hyde, Cheshire, United Kingdom, and chairperson of the World Health Innovation Summit (WHIS).

Simply claiming, "Improving health? Start local" does not align with an ABCD framework and misappropriating the name does not change that. Fundamentally because Asset-Based Community Development is not an alternative to Services. The differences, beyond a tendency to want to ‘fix’ somebody, are though suspected to be more complex than I am appreciating not having enough specific knowledge of the issues under consideration being, 'Across the pond.' More importantly,  As Cormac's Black Swans White Swans and Ugly Ducklings article states, "Mapping people’s journey towards wellbeing in this way is deeply problematic, especially if we harbour aspirations towards deeper democracy. It obscures from view the capacities that exist within and around people that can be used to secure what is required for a good life in any and all climates."   

According to Cormac,"With ABCD efforts when you aim to scale; prepare to fail. Instead, try focusing on proliferation of deep practice and abandon fidelity to model,” because 'What Communities Build For Themselves, They Won't Destroy’. This may appear an antithesis to Systems Thinking (wiki-page), it is generally acknowledged that, "All models are wrong, some are useful". However, while acknowledged, part of the rationale for this post is that while often professed it is not as often followed. Taking a rather different perspective can assist in bring such models closer to the truth of the world.

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Coming Back to Learn about ABCD

Ok, I am confessing to a perhaps obvious truth, I am a bad blogger. First, it has been about ninety days since my last post and some time before that one, not blogging bad. The usual excuse, working in other areas and easier to stay with the more introspective capable Kumu than switching with Blogger media. Focus has been on updating past done systems thinking oriented Kumu maps, mainly on participatory and deliberative democracy, and means of collaboration. Other perhaps less obvious reasons for being a bad blogger are good bloggers are said to write what audience is interested in, write what they (bloggers) know, and write short pieces. I don’t do any of that. So, don’t have thousands of followers but okay with that. This is a means of interacting with new ideas of interest. Most things written about have been about things that were at first of little knowledge, including Systems Thinking, but one learns over time by engaging.

So showing up again to write about something of increasing interest but currently of little knowledge, Asset Based Community Development or ABCD. Why now though? It has been on the mental back burner for some time, actually a year, since writing on Collective Impact and Kumu Relational Mapping - Creating New Ways of Seeing Our Community, which showed up today as  a Facebook memory, and again in Using Systems Thinking to Explore Amplifying the Voices of Community Members in which ABCD was first mentioned in a Kumu map, as well as again in Living Cities Collective Impact • Modules 1 to 2 Bridge / Collective Impact - Living Cities online course • Kumu

Still have more questions and concerns than knowledge on Collective Impact but he focus went elsewhere. More recently though have been following @CormacRussell on Twitter, a faculty member of the ABCD Institute, and Managing Director of Nurture Development offering an interesting contrast to fellow ABCD Institute faculty member, Dan Duncan, who was featured in the Living Cities’ approach to Collective Impact, an arguably Grasstops down perspective. So the original question was how does ABCD relate to Collective Impact? Or perhaps better, does ABCD relate to Collective Impact the way I am being told that it does?

The Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) approach has some useful tools to determine what assets exist in a community, and how they can be leveraged. In short, the ABCD approach seeks to discover the skills and passion of local community members, ask them to share those gifts, and then connect with others to create meaningful solutions, according to an article by Living Cities. "Amplifying the Voice of Community in Collective Impact" which cites an article by H. Daniels Duncan, “Effective Collective Impact: Through the Power of ABCD and RBA

True resident engagement requires institutions, funders, local governments and nonprofits to lead by stepping back to create space for residents to be involved as producers. To accomplish this it is imperative to ask five strategic questions to drive institutional actions: 

  1. What are the things that only residents can do? 
  2. What are the things that residents and institutions or government can accomplish together?
  3. What are the things that only institutions or government can do? 
  4. What can we stop doing to create space for resident action? And, 
  5. What can we offer to the community beyond the services we deliver to support resident action?

RBA {Results Based Accountability(tm)} questions to drive action and results.
1. What are the quality-of-life conditions (population results) we want for the children, adults, and families who live in our community?
2. What would these conditions look like if we could see them?
3. How can we measure these conditions?
4. How are we doing on the most important of these measures?
5. Who are the partners that have a role to play in doing better?
6. What works to do better, including no-cost and low-cost ideas?
7. What do we propose to do?

ABCD provides an effective framework to answer the RBA questions 5, 6, and 7 and provides the structure to work collectively with the community...

1. Community engagement and co-production
2. Relationships and trust
3. Results and accountability; and
4. A clear, common purpose.
So I have finally gotten something written on ABCD and Collective Impact but the sense I get, with my limited familiarity, is that Cormac’s and Nurture Development’s approach is somewhat different. 

Not judging here, though biases may peek through. Still far more that I don’t know than I do know about ABCD. Don’t know to what extent my own, systems thinking oriented approach is in truth in line with Cormac’s and ABCD. I have discussed briefly with Cormac, the complexity of citizen interaction with civic professionals and building community efficacy on Twitter (mostly everything on Twitter is brief). 

Latest twitter discussion has raised complex questions of art and community empowerment and ABCD. Still not sure though what ABCD has to do with it. Cormac hasn’t had any input yet but I originated the discussion in his Twitter account. I included @ArtsFwd in the conversation as I knew that they have background in this area having been featured in the past with Art as a Path of Social Disruptive Innovation Towards New Community Paradigms, and New Community Paradigms Require a Creative Community not just a Creative Economy

So a number of new and interesting ideas to follow up on to learn more about Collective Impact and now more about Asset Based Community Development (along with new wiki-page), both independently and how they could be related. 

I will leave off with another numbered list from another organization held in high esteem and learned about through the Living Cities Collective Impact course, Tamarack, an Institute for Community Engagement. The folks at Tamarack came up with 5 Big Ideas from their 2014 CI Summit in Toronto which while not explicitly has, from my limited insight, a more ABCD feel to it in perhaps finding a balance.

Collective Impact 3.0:

Big Idea #1: "Collective Impact" Does Not Need to be Applied to Every Collaboration

Big Idea #2: "Context Experts" and "Content Experts," a 50/50 Proposition

Context Experts are residents with lived experience, including children and youth. Typically, they are the people who experientially know about the issue. Content Experts are professionals, providers, and leaders with formal power who have knowledge, tools, and resources to address the issue. Typically, they are people with technical knowhow.

Big Idea #3: Ownership and Buy-In are Not the Same Things

Big Idea #4: Best Practices are the Enemy of Emergence

Big Idea #5: Change Happens at the Speed of Trust

People can tell me if I am getting any of this wrong, a matter as someone as told me of trial and learning. I will be following up, though to be honest, I will be going back to a more close knit inquiry,  using Kumu, into effective virtual collaboration with Systems Thinking and other ongoing concerns. With any luck, I will have something to blog about that in the not too distant future, well hopefully at least before another ninety days.

Past Posts