URBS 230 Class Notes
5/19/03
Community is….
Grouping of people sharing common characteristic
People sharing a common locality
Bringing people of different backgrounds together
Cannot be legislated—people coming together
Natural leaders (good or bad)
Not limited by size (either too small or too large)
Neighborhood—people who live next to each other
Mechanism for progress through mutual benefit
Followers—store owners, blue collar workers—who add to the
community
Leadership is….
Organized or unorganized
Method to organize group to pursue clear direction
Role model for others
Being involved in community
High self-esteem, knowledge, good people skills
Communicator, delegator, matches
people to tasks
Makes important decisions for group/community
Knows project, resources, organization
Can
be more than one person
Can be based on knowledge or charisma
Has well-defined goals, but can be flexible in solving
problems
5/21/03
“The Abilene Paradox”:
ERC Video HD 30.23 .A25 2002 (also see HARVEY, JERRY B. 1988. The Abilene Paradox and Other
Meditations on Management. Lexington,
MA: Lexington
Books.)
Exercise 1: Think of
a previous group decision-making process in which you have participated, one
that you recall in some detail.
- Describe
the event briefly
- Were
you one of the first to speak up & voice your opinion? If so, how did you do it?
- What
special skill, authority, or perspective did you bring to the table? Did you share that expertise during the
meeting?
- Did
others express their opinions? Did
your opinion change while you listened to other opinions?
- Did
you feel the level and amount of discussion was adequate or proportional
to the importance of the decision?
If not, how could this have been improved?
- Did
the group’s decision turn out to be a good one? Why?
- Looking
back, what (if anything) would you have done differently?
Exercise 2: Reasons
you find for taking the trip (Pick your 3 favorites):
- I am
new to the group; it’s too soon to speak up.
- I
don’t care enough about the issue to risk offending anyone.
- I
want to keep my job; I’m going to keep my mouth shut.
- If I
speak up, I’ll get saddled with doing it.
- I’m
no expert; everyone else knows more than me.
- I
shouldn’t have been in this group to start with.
- Let’s
decide something—anything!—and move on.
- I
don’t want to hurt the feelings of the project’s sponsor.
- It’s
the wrong decision, but I will come out ahead anyway.
10.
Last time I disagreed, I got blamed for delaying
things.
11.
It’s up to the boss—that’s why she gets the big bucks.
12.
I wish the rest would be responsible and participate
more.
13.
Whatever.
14.
More data would be nice; maybe next time we’ll have it.
15.
I’m good at details, but no one wants to hear about
them.
Exercise 3: A current
decision
·
Briefly describe a current decision in which you
are a participant or that you are in a position to influence.
·
What would you really like to say about the pros
and cons of this issue? If the decision
were solely up to you, what would you do?
·
What might keep you from speaking up?
·
Consider the following:
|
Choose to speak up
|
Choose not to speak up
|
What is the BEST thing that could happen if you …
|
|
|
What is the WORST thing that could happen if you …
|
|
|
Is the BEST or the WORST most likely to happen?
|
|
|
What is the Risk?
|
|
|
Can you afford the Risk?
|
|
|
- What
help would you need from others to say what you want to say?
- How
could you support others in making their opinion known to the group as a
whole?
Notes on the Abilene
Paradox:
- Definition: tendency of groups to make decisions
that individual members do not truly support
- Mismanaged
Anxiety: tendency of group members
to hesitate to offer their true opinions, and therefore to agree to a
decision they don’t support. Often
due to:
- Action
Anxiety
- Fear
of Separation
- Negative
Fantasy
- Real
Risk
- Symptoms
- Confusing
fantasy and reality
- Fixing
blame (when conflict isn’t the
problem)
- Collusion
- Blaming
the leader (when all are
responsible)
- Solutions
- Assess
real risks
- Take
action
- Confront
the group
5/27/03
6 Theories of Leadership:
- Trait
(inborn characteristics, preferences, etc.)
- Situation
(matching leader style to situation’s needs, skill in handling groups)
- Organizational
(ability to structure & work through organizations; headship; chain of
command)
- Power
(political savvy and empowerment)
- Vision
(sense of direction—“divining & defining” and communicating)
- Ethical
(clarity & commitment)
5/28/03
The Action Wheel:
- Elements:
- Meaning
- Mission
- Power
- Structure
- Resources
- Existence
- Given
a problem, our instincts are to try to solve at the next level down, when
the solution really is at the next level up.
6/3/03 Guttman, Democracy and Disagreement
Moral deliberation requires
- Reciprocity
- Publicity
- Responsibility
“Moral” is not the same as “ethical”—comes from mores (deeply held values of a social
group)
Moral disagreement is inevitable—it is grounded in the human
condition
6/4/03 Frank
Schweigert, “Learning to Lead”
Kinds of knowledge required for leadership:
- Episteme (conceptual knowledge)
- Techne
(practical skill)
- Phronesis (wisdom, “common sense”)
Note differences between “leader” and
Leadership learning requires
“legitimate peripheral participation” composed of
- Learning
- Power
- Support
- Accountability
- Practice
6/5/03 Robert Putnam “Bowling Alone”
Civic engagement—different from individual action &
“family group”
Civic participation—comes from pre-existing engagement in other public settings
Social capital—every community (no matter how impoverished)
has resources
Colonial model—applies as well to urban/rural, poor
neighborhood/wealthy neighborhood as it does to international relations.
6/10/03 Saul D. Alinsky Rules
for Radicals (1971) “Tactics”
- Power
is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have
- Never
go outside the experience of your people
- Whenever
possible, go outside the experience of the enemy
- Make
the enemy live up to their own book of rules
- Ridicule
is man’s most potent weapon
- A
good tactic is one that your people enjoy
- A
tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag
- Keep
the pressure on by varying your tactics
- The
threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself
- Pressure
produces reaction; constant pressure sustains action
- If
you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside
- The
price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative
- Pick
the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.
6/11/03 Notes on Building Communities from the Inside Out
Traditional approach is “needs” based (“problem” approach)
Kretzmann & McKnight propose a
“capacity building” approach based on “assets”—
- Individual
knowledge, skills, and abilities
- Associations
(informal networks)
- Institutions
(formal organizations, whether public or private—including business
corporations)
Key is not only the individual assets, but to network them with others.
Plotting the Course:
- Potential
Partners
- Individuals
- Associations
- Public
institutions
- Private
sector
- Strengthening
Partnerships
- Specify
the individuals, associations, institutions
- Identify
strategies to increase networking
- One-to-One
Relationships
- Develop
strategies specific to
particular partners, identifying flow (preferably 2-way)
- Concrete
implementation of partnership strengthening strategies; permits
assignment of responsibility and
sets objectives for eventual assessment
Mobilizing the Community
- Turn
liabilities into assets
- Strategy
1. Map
assets
2. Build
relationships
3. Mobilize
for sharing (information & economics)
4. Convene
community—vision & plan
5. Leverage
outside resources