Complexity World Cafe

On a radically different note from the previous post...

I co-hosted the first of what may be many sessions on complexity at IDS today! After extensive brain-scratching and chatting with colleagues and co-learners a World Cafe format was developed and we got a good mix of students - including some new faces from outside IDS - talking, sharing and co-creating knowledge!

I must admit that I was a little bit nervous before hand. I know the limits of my own knowledge and wondered what would happen if we didn't get the energy in the room that we needed (it was my first world cafe of this sort!). But we did! And after some initial concern that danced across the faces of people who felt like they didn't know much (most probably including my own!) once the process took off there were people buzzing around the big boards we had put up with marker pens in hand adding all kinds of wonderful ideas to the key-words that we had put up.


The key-words were: systems, self-organisation, emergence, chaos, non-linearity and attractors. We also had blank sheets up for people to add whatever concepts they might want. Everything got completely filled up and the curiosity and eagerness to share ideas felt almost electric!


The wrap up was a little rushed (and couldn't be finished) but it was really good to have Rosalind Eyben, a fellow(ess) here, to do some of the wrap up and guide the reflection on what had emerged. We ended with declarations of a desire to take the work forward, people volunteered to help out, suggestions rolled forth and I wondered how so much happened without my really doing anything. Quite remarkable!!!

Big thanks to Agnes for the photos ;)

essay writing

Right now I am supposed to be writing my first assessed essay of the term. It's Sunday afternoon and the essay is due at 8.45 on Monday morning. Go figure!

Well, in any case, the title is: "Contribution of an inter-disciplinary approach to studying and/or practicing development."

It's quite an experience putting together my first assessed essay in years. I have written countless reports and documents over the last 5 + years since I arrived in India to do 'real' work but none of them really had any references. Exploring how to manage multiple data sources, to extract the key arguments that diverse authors are making, find suitable quotes, weave them all together and ensure that my own voice and thinking finds its space - and, that at the end of it all, the whole thing actually forms a coherent whole, is quite a fascinating process.

I have already made three mind-maps. The first one was supposed to be the overall structure of the essay. The second one I had to produce when I realised that I had underestimated the depth that would be required for the second half of my paper (which only became obvious after completion of the third half) but ended up just revealing the need for restructuring of the first half before being able to figure out how to proceed. The third was for the second half of the essay, laying out the key themes that would need to be addressed on the way to the conclusion. Wow! Last time I really used mind-maps in such a systematic manner was for revision guides back in my undergraduate days.

Anyway, here's something that doesn't fit anywhere in my essay. Some food for thought, I suppose:

I am calling for a confluence of worldviews... not a dismantling of diversity, but a kaleidascopic harmonisation of what we know and how we know to vastly expand the range of present and future worlds that we can perceive, experience and co-create!

Thank you and please mind your epistemology!

social objects as medium for change - v2

After writing that last post, I came up with a slightly more elaborate diagram for thinking about social objects and how they fit into the social change process that Seva Mandir is trying to bring about... It's a skill I'm trying to develop (the diagramming that is) ;p

There are still a lot of question marks in my mind about this - and there are a lot of black/grey boxes that are in real need of getting opened up. This is especially the case with the design of the social object (and not just its actual design but the way that the designing itself fits into the overall process), and the issue of how convergence or co-evolution of the values takes place through dialogue and action around the social object.

I have also made a special effort to include resources as one of the attributes that communities bring to the table (rather than just needs) as I fear that we sometimes forget that communities do have resources - and I don't just mean Rs.5 a month - I'm talking more about knowledge and insights about what can work and what can't and why... and probably a lot more than that too!

Which brings me back to that oh-so-critical question of what, exactly the community is... and, if it's really so fragmented, then (a) can I still get away with calling it a community?; and (b) how can the social object and associated process be used to actually nourish community and make it vibrant? If community is both a means and an end (which means it implies something normative) - if it is our purpose-idea - if we really believe that the answer to all of the problems we are facing stem out of a severe loss of social cohesion, of community, then what we really need to be studying in a very rigorous way is just how, exactly, community gets built. And that is what this line of inquiry is all about!

On we go!

A new line of inquiry: social objects as medium for change

I have been thinking about social objects (a la Hugh of gaping void) for a while now - particularly in the context of the kind of work that Seva Mandir is involved in - i.e. 'community development'.

"The Social Object, in a nutshell, is the reason two people are talking to each other, as opposed to talking to somebody else."

In this line of work social objects are our medium for bringing about change within a community. They are the objects that cause people (staff and community) to engage with each other and bring about change. This line of thinkin"g led me to the the following two questions...

1. What are the social objects through which our relationship with the community is mediated?
2. How, exactly, do these social objects mediate our relationships with the community?
   
3. What are the implications for how they contribute to a desirable change process?
   

... and the following little diagram (it's only version 1 and seems quite incomplete. Your suggestions would be welcomed!):

Essentially this diagram is trying to say that the social object is the interface between Seva Mandir and the community. It is then trying to point out that the social object is active or effective to the extent that it is able to find resonance at the level of such factors as 'shared values', and 'resources that meet needs'. Admittedly, this isn't saying a great deal. The really critical aspect of all this is how the social object leads to change...

The answer, as far as am I concerned is 'dialogue' or 'conversation'? Conversations that achieve convergence of the values. Conversations that match resources with needs. And then, there is the question of whether or how the conversations are able to influence the design of the social object itself! Do we simply deliver ready-made, pre-packaged solutions to the community or are we all engaged together in a continuous process of evolving these solutions based on local conditions? How might/does this impact on the direction and quality of the social change process?

Drawing on my experience to date, I have started thinking about what some of the answers to some of the first three questions might be and I have also started thinking that taking up these questions as new line of inquiry - possibly one combined with workshops and trainings involving staff across the organisation - and especially the front-line staff- could have a rather profound effect on how the work gets carried out on the ground.

Here are some quick responses to the questions that seem to be bubbling up:

1. What are the social objects through which our relationship with the community is mediated?
These objects seem to fit into distinct categories - some are more direct and tangible others less so.

The direct and tangible ones include things like: non-formal education centres, meetings, lift irrigation systems, forestry projects, a health camp...

The indirect and intangible ones include things like: objectives, values, ideas, images, metaphors, targets, responsibilities... perhaps these cannot be called social objects? Are they properties of the social objects or do they exist in their own right?

I think there's probably some kind of a matrix that can be constructed here...

2. How, exactly, do these social objects mediate our relationships with the community?
I suppose this question is really getting at the matter of how the social objects - the way they are lived (constructed, interpreted, understood?) by people - contribute to (enable, enhance or constrain) - the change process... At another (deeper?) level this is also a question of how they determine or shape the quality of the relationships that exist between the organisation and the community... which feeds back into the first question... What are the various factors that influence this?

One part of this inquiry would probably involving using a bit of ethnomethodology or something of the sort to really start looking at how the meaning of the social objects is actually articulated and lived by the various stakeholders... This would hopefully generate the kind of evidence that can be used to understand the dynamics of the process through which different relationships based on different sets of meaning and experience are brought to life... And this, perhaps, could be used to design interventions in a manner that more intentionally emphasises the positive transformation that we all (hopefully) end up desiring.

For example is 'a target' itself a social object or is 'target' a property of a more tangible social object - like' a non-formal education centre'? How does 'target' affect the relationship between staff and community? How does it affect the way that people relate to the social object itself and how does it affect such critical factors as the transfer of values and the occurence of social change? I think there is rather a lot to be explored here and some detailed case-studies would be required...

3. What are the implications for how they contribute to a desirable change process (and, therefore, what we ought to do about it all)?
This question follows on from where the previous question leads us... It probably needs to be taken a little further, beyond understanding the dynamics of the process towards the all important question of how we use our new understanding to make the social objects (however we end up framing them) more effective catalysts of 'desirable' change.

Now, one of the critical questions that I seem to be skirting around here is the question of what, exactly, constitutes 'desirable' change. Who gets to frame it? How do we judge if this really is desirable? Is joint inquiry with the community adequate or do we need something more? This is the real sensitive stuff and everything that we do - assuming we discover a way of being wildly successful - will have this 'desirable' element embedded into it.

And this leads us back to the really critical issue of 'conversations'. How do we structure our conversations around the social objects that we are creating or co-creating with the community as an interface for social change? Are there simpler or more effective ways of going about this than what we have already discovered?

If I can get deep enough into this inquiry then perhaps it will be possible to really uncover some valuable material and develop some deep processes maps... I'm especially thinking in terms of some recent questions that have been surfacing in my work, mind and conversations about what, exactly, we mean by community (does it exist yet?) and how we can leverage the rampant fragmentation in the communities we work with through the designs of our interventions, thereby enhancing our ability to actually build (or rebuild) community. It would also be really interesting to see how all of this can be woven into a process that simultaneously enhances the capacity of the organisation and its staff to engage within this kind of a framework!

A lot of questions. Far fewer answers. But something to get the appetite throbbing!