Serving, Fixing, and Helping

by

Recently I (virtually) met Cory who heads up the Action Hero Network. He sent this out to us from the facebook group.

In the Service of Life

Serving is different from helping.
Helping incurs debt. But serving, like healing, is mutual.
Serving is also different from fixing. There is distance
between ourselves and whatever or whomever we are fixing.
Fixing is a form of judgement. All judgement creates
distance, a disconnection, an experience of difference.
If helping is an experience of strength, fixing is an
experience of mastery and expertise.
Service on the other hand, is an experience of mastery,
surrender, and awe. We cannot serve at a distance.
We can only serve that to which we are profoundly connected,
that which we are willing to touch.
We serve life not because it is broken, but because it is holy.

Adapted from Rachel Naomi Remen

(found on Argon’s page: http://people.tribe.net/argonvancouver )

Indeed. I like this description very much. It resonates deeply with the way I was trained to think with coaching and trained to see philanthropy. (Yes, I know that is not at all what most people would assume philanthropy is–but let us hope for a transformation in this direction where serving is the form of contribution.)

Field Building? What is that?

by

Social network analysis reveals the nodes and their connections. Yes. “The nodes in the network are the people and groups while the links show relationships or flows between the nodes.” Great. What about the things that support the nodes and their ability to make connections. This is the field of the network, and it functions as an energetic even magnetic space that impacts the network in profound ways. We are defined not only by the positive space of our presence and the relationships we bear to each other, but also the space between us, the “negative space” referred to in art class.

If you want to change the configuration of the social network map, changing behavior is one avenue, but it is often difficult to encourage and enforce. Another option is to change the environment. It can be easier, perhaps, to find levers for change in this layer.

So when I talk about field-building, I am talking about that space–the environment of the network. Created by convening events, participating in dialogs, creating avenues to disperse messages, refining the language and frames of the network and its purpose.

Ornet.com network image

World We Want revisited

by

Over at the World We Want blog last year, I responded to a post with an essay on the World I Want. It received feedback.

I want to revisit that. Draft 2.

What is your vision of a better world?

Many revolutions converging to create a world with more honor, respect, and ecological/systems awareness.

What converges?

Convergence of improvements for global health. The eradication of major diseases. Small Pox down, Polio close, Measles next, then each one or even many simultaneously. And more and more of this being achieved by organizations working together as a global health community using more and more complex and responsive information tools. More safe drinking water made available through coordinated efforts using community-labor and resources along with global data tracking and local/global teams which share and transfer expertise. We begin to take care of the bottom of the Maslow pyramid for all people. Put a bottom under it so all people do really and truly have a chance to have dignity and health.

Increased transparency of our resources above and beyond money to “grow ours” rather than “grow mine” including:

    • WEB 2.5—mass communication facilitated by servant leaders and centered on user-collaboration, tapping into collective intelligence. The many edges all empowered by mediums of information conveyance to speak across traditional boundaries and be honored in a customized user-driven fashion. Power to the edges, baby!
      Social Network Analysis—beginning to map and value the actual relationships that exist between us rather than the relationships placed on us by org charts. Moving forward to show relationships between people, organizations, affiliations, interests and passions. Deep and rich visualizations that empower connection and uplift action.
      Community Asset Mapping—tapping into the greater wealth of our communities—our connections, the resources we can bring to bear. Going beyond money to do more and see clearly, visually, what is available so making intentional choices is easier. Tapping into multiple forms of resources, inciting flows, and creating and empowering “currents” for systemic flows.
      Open Source—community working together producing property for the commons and changing the model for developing intellectual material. Let me repeat, producing property for the commons, particularly infrastructure that empowers honorable markets.
      Volunteerism on the rise as more and more boomers get back to their ideals. Retirement shifts from retiring/resting from work and community to become a meaning-making phase. It becomes about giving/contributing while supported by financial independence. It allows the vast intellectual and social wealth of the Boomers to be reused and shared through extensive volunteer and community efforts.
      The Organic Movement and other ecologically sensitive movements growing in popularity. People more and more realize the cause and effect relationships of their consumption and for their own health and the health of the world make different more thrivable choices.
      The rise and flourishing of our neglected gift economy via increased information sharing, matchmaking of needs with resources, and spiritual sense of oneness promoted by globalization in the best sense. Think Blessed Unrest and Wiser Earth.

    • What are the conditions needed to realize it?

    That the converging efforts find support and common cause and so unite and reinforce each other bringing together multiple upward spirals to change the overall flow of our culture.

    What are the obstacles?

    • Old thinking which focuses too much on immediate needs, “get me mine” thinking.
      Fear and scarcity thinking.
      Old established systems slow to change.
      Over-focus on band-aid efforts like micro-lending or over-glorification of system-reinforcing work that plays itself like change such as the Grameen Bank (which perpetuates debt-based systems).
      Delays in seeing the power of unity as each groups scrambles for funding, investors, audience, or attention. Competition instead of collaboration. Delay in seeing or valuing persistently our common cause.

    • Based on your experience, what parts of the vision are realistic and what ideas, strategies and plans can make it so?

    My vision is not only realistic; it is already in motion. The main question is about timing. How soon will we change? How many of us need to have an awakening in order to tip the change?

    I partner, as I can, with those who are doing everything they can to enable the dawning of a new age of thrivability, respect, honor, and ecological/systemic awareness. I spread the word to you, and you pass it on. If it is a message people are ready for, it will spread virally far and wide. If not, we re-work the message, lay more groundwork, develop more tools, share more information, and reach out to more hearts.

    I believe…
    I have a dream…
    I hope….
    that we believe
    and we have a shared dream…

    Nurture Tools

    by

    I have been working over at wagn.nurture.biz to add some tools and resources.

    Here are articles I have written about coaching and philanthropy. Then, here are some book reviews which are usually one page descriptions and summaries of books like Freakonomics. And some new worksheets for entrepreneurs looking toward venture financing. And a Development Plan Questionnaire for coaching clients.

    Friend Wheel

    by

    This friend wheel thing is pretty fun on Facebook. How connected are your friends? To each other. Keep in mind this is only as good as the data and the condition that your friends be on the social network.

    friend wheel

    Being Web 2.0

    by

    It is not about the tools! It is about being organic, distributed, and discerning. It is about emergence and collaboration.

    Organic not controlling. Web 2.0 is not about controlling. Organic and Emerging, yes. Directing possibly. Controlling, no. Anything that hopes to limit, contain, own, restrict, or control is not, at its essence, web 2.0 regardless of the technology it uses.

    Distributed not centralized.     Much like controlling, is centralizing. Power at the edges baby! Network theory. Distributed systems. Not only is this a more powerful way of structuring information, it builds trust in participants. I mean mashups and widgets rather than facebook apps, people.

    Discerning not divisive. Web 2.0 is not about creating us and them dichotomies. It is not divisive distinctions: men v women. White::black. The global north::The global south. It is about commonality. And that can require us to discern differences, but the focus is on finding what do we have in common rather than what we are different. How can we connect and share with others? What can we share with? How can we create trusting relationships for sharing in a global conversation space? Who am I and who are we?

    Being Web 2.0 is facilitated by tools. Definitely. But it isn’t merely using the tools. It is much more. It is part of our evolution toward collective consciousness.

    Making Money Make Change

    by

    (posted by Phil at Gifthub and listed at Resource Generation….and Tides…

    Money Making Change Retreat

    Challenging Wealth Disparity, Creating Justice

    Registration is open for the 2007 Making Money Make Change (MMMC) Retreat. This is the big annual conference for young progressive people with wealth to come together to be supported and challenged in making creative and informed choices about their resources.

    October 4th – 7th, 2007 :: Whitackers, North Carolina


    Register here    .

    The Unsaid

    by

    One of my favorite books in college was called the Mystical Languages of Unsaying. But this is not about unsaying. It is about a giant elephant in the room.

    Conversation. Conversations can be about growing an idea or growing a connection. They can be about refining and becoming more rigorous. Whatever the subject and aim of the conversation, we focus on what is present there. My words responding to your words, and vice versa.

    elephant

    Keep in mind, this, yes, and also, what is absent from that. We are often pulling from the realm of what has not yet been said, obviously, as otherwise the conversation would stagnate in the same statements recirculating. No, we pull in from what has yet to be said.

    That is not necessarily the elephant in the room though. The elephant in the room is what has not yet been stated AND isn’t being stated for political or emotional reasons. But that very things is what the conversation is navigating around. It is silently acknowledged by not given space to be reviewed or responded to. Bring it to light. Bring the unsaid into the open.

    Ask, “What are we not saying here?” which has an infinity of answers in truth. However, what will come up is what is not being said because it is dangerous. Excellent! Be real. Face the danger. Unearth the unsaid.

    What will this get for you? The safety of the space often deepens because the work has touched something sacred and dangerous…and it bonds the conversationalists together in the common space of the real (and not just the plastic soft niceties). What else will it get for you? Well, the unsaid is often something that has this taste of the sacred…and we must be able to touch and handle even sacred ideas and make choices about them. It allows you to go deeper into a situation, acknowledge what is really involved, and open more choices about where you want to go next.

    So, try it, ask what is not being said.

    Curiosity!

    by

    Listening seems really important. But to go beyond that and be actively listening there need to be a spark of curiosity.

    To go beyond hearing what someone has to say and be engaged in discovering them and their ideas–that reveals several things about both parties. First, that you really care and honor them as a person, which frees people to share. Second, that you have connection to what they have to say–that you see value in knowing what they are offering. Third, that you see potential of learning from them and opportunity to co-create together. Forth, that you are interested in exploring with them.

    Many dialogs really are monologues cross-spoken. If someone holds in their mind what they want to say, what they want to get across, what they want to argue, what they want to push as an agenda…then the conversation isn’t really a conversation. Be co-creative in your conversations and display a good dose of curiosity.

    When I went through training as a coach, one of the first exercises we did was to give advice to our partner. The second exercise was to listen. I noticed two very important things. One, that the person I listened to seemed very capable of creating their own solutions. Second, the person I listened to was energized more by being listened to then by the advice. Since then, over and over, I have witnessed the power of being curious and listening actively and deeply as it activates the creative resourcefulness in people. More than that, they seem more likely to follow through on their own ideas and solutions than on any advice I would give.

    It does take some stepping back…it requires the listener to give up the idea that they have the right answer. Be curious, the person you are talking to deserves the opportunity to create solutions for themselves. What is that? Listen for it. Be curious. And you might learn something wonderful and unexpected. I have.

    But don’t just take my word for it, check out these benefits of active listening from an expert:

    • Sometimes a person just needs to be heard and acknowledged before the person is willing to consider an alternative or soften his /her position.
      It is often easier for a person to listen to and consider the other’s position when that person knows the other is listening and considering his/her position.
      It helps people to spot the flaws in their reasoning when they hear it played back without criticism.
      It also helps identify areas of agreement so the areas of disagreement are put in perspective and are diminished rather than magnified.
      Reflecting back what we hear each other say helps give each a chance to become aware of the different levels that are going on below the surface. This helps to bring things into the open where they can be more readily resolved.
      If we accurately understand the other person’s view, we can be more effective in helping the person see the flaws in his/her position.
      If we listen so we can accurately understand the other’s view, we can also be more effective in discovering the flaws in our own position.

    • KINS and Growing a Field

    by

    Looking over Capital Missions Companies, Key Initiator Network Strategy (KINS), I have many points of agreement about the principles behind the strategies. I believe

    • that we are all one
    • that there are key laws of nature including distributed intelligence and emergence which we can learn from
    • that there is strength in weak ties
    • that peer-to-peer relationship offer great power
    • that abundance, generosity, and trust figure strongly in our evolution

    And we do need resource efficient ways to make large social change. So this is my spin and twist on what I understand about KINS.

    Spreading behaviors path of 5

    1. Establish credibility. To make network change, change agents require credibility. Susan answers the credibility issue by asking for powerful high-status actors. I would say, sure those help. High-status is one way of being credible; it is not the only way.

    2. Encourage Inter-organizational Networks. Professionalization and inter-organizational networks act as sources for spreading the behavior through a network of common interest. There need to be paths in the network for connections to spread behaviors.

    3. Fosters powerful models. Modeling innovative behavior can lead to the spread of that behavior. Lead by example. This can be reflexive A<-=->B or mimentic A–>B

    4. Focus on commonality. Susan asserts that the spread happens through actors in similar structural positions. I prefer to broaden that: it spreads through actors who have something, anything that they know to be in common. The common trait between A and B need not be the common trait in B and C. There may be a propensity for dispersal of behaviors at a structural peer level, but it is not a requirement or limitation.

    5. Emerge effective collective action. Open space for mobilization and coordination of community of individuals and organization around a common cause.

    Agreed: “Homogeneous interests, a sense of shared identity, and dense social networks increase a group’s ability to mobilize its resources.”

    So that is how I am understanding and reframing what I understand of KINS.

    However, this does not speak to how to create homogenous interests, shared sense of identity, nor dense social networks. How do we do that?