How we work together is as important as what we achieve, and the way our meetings go is part of the process of creating the social resilience we are trying to achieve. Means matter as much as ends. Group processes are a skill for us to develop as we go along, including examining and making explicit our underlying assumptions.

How might our meetings move towards becoming as sustainable and life affirming as possible? Here are some thoughts to ask ourselves as we move towards that lovely future when meetings become a pleasure, supported by years of honed knowledge and skill in how to make our meetings as efficient and as human as possible.

Principles, Values and Assumptions

Everyone matters. In ecology, diversity is known to lead to stronger and more resilient systems. Will we value diversity in our groups? Will we remember to welcome people with ideas and opinions different from our own? Are there ways we will adapt our meetings to be more accommodating to others, physically and psychologically? Will we automatically speak in words everyone can understand, and remember to check out whether everyone has understood technical terms or abbreviations?

Respect matters. Will I show greater respect for other people, even when I disagree with what they are saying? Will I get better at challenging the opinion, not the person?

Consensus is the belief that everyone’s view counts and that sometimes it’s the minority opinion that turns out to be the right one. Mass agreement is no guarantee of actually being right. General experience of consensus is that although it may take longer to get a decision made, this is more than compensated for by the increased commitment to carrying out that decision that comes from everyone feeling part of the decision making process. What other models of decision making might be useful?

Subsidiarity is an important Transition principle: decisions should always be made at the lowest level of scale possible. The Transition movement works not as a top-down hierarchy but as a horizontally-organised network of self organised groups within as loose a framework as possible. This supports diversity and resilience and local relevance.

Conflict, although sometimes uncomfortable, can also be creative and energising when handled responsibly. When two people disagree, this could be a conflict of personalities, but it could also be that these two people are representing the polarised ends of a spectrum of opinion. In this case the group as a whole needs to take responsibility for containing and resolving the issue, and not just let the identified two argue it out. How will we learn not to fear conflict? Will our meetings still try to avoid it? Or will the groups and larger organisational structures have support in place for conflict resolution and mediation?

Feedback is essential, even if it is sometimes time-consuming. Positive feedback affirms and encourages us, and tells us we are on the right track. Less positive feedback helps us to see how we might do better. Will our meetings encourage feedback on our work, and make enough time to consider it?

Empowerment. Power is currently distributed unequally in our society, in ways that can discourage people from less advantaged groups from fully participating in the work of social change. True community resilience can only come when everyone’s voice is heard, and everyone’s participation is encouraged. Will we get better in future at empowering those who are currently reluctant to speak? How might this be done?

Transparency. We have been conditioned in the past to be suspicious of leaders and of power. The way to overcome this is for our processes and decisions to be as open as possible. How can we make our workings explicit for everyone to see? Could we circulate minutes to everyone who asks, or post them on the website? Are our meetings open to observers? If some people or meetings are empowered to make certain decisions, how will others know this?

Fun matters. We are all human, and need to feel rewarded for our work. We need space to be creative, feel appreciated, and enjoy what we are doing. If your Transition work comes to feel more like drudgery than pleasure, something’s wrong. Let’s think about how to make our meetings sustainable and energising. Let’s take time to celebrate successes.

Techniques and Strategies

Preparation is courteous. How can I make time to prepare properly before meetings? Could I get better at reading through documents and emails more thoroughly beforehand? Might I more often arrive fed and watered and fresh, instead of late, hungry and stressed? Are there ways that the impact of my lack of time and energy on other group members might lessen?

Will we always remember to explain to new people what our processes are? Will we be friendly and welcoming? Will we make time to review the way our meetings work, and look at new ways we might do things? Will we be clearer about time boundaries? Will we make the group’s roles and assumptions more explicit for newcomers?

Might it help the meeting to start with a short silence/tuning in/‘check in’ so that everyone feels welcomed and fully there? Paying attention at the start to how everyone is feeling can save time and friction later on. It also models the type of sustainable community relationships we are aiming to create, where people are of value in themselves, not only for what they can contribute.

Will we always appoint a facilitator to structure the meeting and keep an eye on time? Will this be a different person each time, to avoid power imbalances? Will all group members get better at contributing to the facilitation process, rather than leaving the named facilitator with all the responsibility for making sure that people stick to the topic and timescales?

If the meeting is potentially large, long or conflictual, would it also help to appoint a ‘vibeswatcher’, whose task is to monitor the mood and energy of the meeting and intervene to suggest tea breaks or other short activities to restore energy and defuse tension?

Will our group have enough skills in facilitation and consensus process? Where will this have come from? How will we make ways for less assertive people to speak? Is it possible to have a clear commitment to consensus processes, but also an agreement of when consensus might need to be set aside and other decision making techniques used instead?

Will time still be a constant pressure? Will we become more realistic in estimating how much can be done in the time allocated? Will we manage to build in enough slack for creative divergence, for care for each other, and a bit of humour, too? Will we have enough time for everyone to be heard?

Will the group take time sometimes to discuss its own process, how people feel in the group and how things might be improved? Will we value our own sustainability?

Personal Responsibility

When I speak, am I saying it because it’s helpful to the group task, or just because it’s something I want to say? How do I keep my ego in check? Will I still tend to go off on tangents, or will I become more responsible in sticking to the point? Will I remember to listen with an open mind, rather than being too caught up in what in want to say next?

Will I become more alert to how I am feeling, as well as what I am thinking? Will I get better at noticing if I start to sound irritated/judgemental/impatient? How could I get better at bringing patience and cheerfulness to the group?

Will I reflect enough on my own needs and how and where they get met? Where will I find the support I need so as not to burn out? Will my own involvement be sustainable?

Yes. It can be done.

Sylvia Rose, 21^st February 2009