Just another WordPress site
by admin
“What I want is someone who will do what I tell them to.”
“What I want is someone who works cheap.”
“What I want is someone who shows up on time and doesn’t give me a hard time.”
So if this is what the boss really wants, how come the stars in the company don’t follow these three rules?
From Seth Godin’s Linchpin
by admin
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g]
by admin
While Pittsburgh’s government and business leaders pressed for big-government solutions – new stadiums and convention centers – the city’s real turn- around was driven by community groups and citizen-led initiatives. Community groups, local foundations, and nonprofits – not city hall or business-led economic development groups – drove its transformation, playing a key role in stabilizing and strengthening neighborhoods, building green, and spurring the development of the waterfront and re- development around the universities. Many of Pittsburgh’s best neighborhoods, such as its South Side, are ones that were somehow spared from the wrath of urban renewal. Others, such as East Liberty, have benefited from community initiatives designed to remedy the damage done by large-scale urban renewal efforts that left vacant lots in place of functioning neighborhoods and built soulless public housing high-rise towers. That neighborhood is now home to several new community development projects, including a Whole Foods Market, which provides local jobs as well as serving as an anchor for the surrounding community. This kind of bottom-up process takes considerable time and perseverance. In Pittsburgh’s case, it took the better part of a generation to achieve stability and the potential for longer-term revival.
The Great Reset copyright © 2010 Richard Florida (emphases are mine)
If this IS true, and could also be true of Leeds, then what does it mean for the focus of community development workers in the city?
by admin
Some extracts from David Cameron’s first speech that seem relevant to the community development sector. There is much here to hold him to. Emphases are mine!
One of the tasks that we clearly have is to rebuild trust in our political system…it’s about making sure people are in control and that the politicians are always their servants and never their masters.
Real change is not what government can do on its own. Real change is when everyone pulls together, comes together, works together, when we all exercise our responsibilities to ourselves, to our families, to our communities and to others.
And I want to help build a more responsible society here in Britain, one where we don’t just ask ‘what are my entitlements?’ but ‘what are my responsibilities?’. One where we don’t just ask ‘what am I owed?’ but more ‘what can I give?’. And a guide for that society, that those who can, should, and those who can’t, we will always help.
I want to make sure that my government always looks after the elderly, the frail, the poorest in our country.
Above all it will be a government that will be built on some clear values — values of freedom, values of fairness, and values of responsibility.
I want us to build an economy that rewards work, I want us to build a society with stronger families and stronger communities, and I want a political system that people can trust and look up to once again.
“About making sure the people are in control and that politicians are always their servants.” Perhaps time for a serious consideration of person centred and responsive methodologies instead of policy centred and strategic. Be interesting to see what happens to Communities and Local Government under the new coalition.
Cameron’s full speech is reported here.
by admin
This site from Australia shows how a council is using online forums to engage with at least some of their constituents on a range of matters including:
This particular council has a resident population of around 74 000 and participation on the forums is relatively low. Unsurprisingly perhaps, rate variations has got by far the most traffic almost certainly because of its direct impact on the self interest of local people.
There is no doubt that the forums have surfaced a wide range of opinions that may not otherwise have been heard – and some clearly offer clues to the council on areas where its own performance may benefit from a review. The forums provide an interesting case study in the potential and limitations of such online engagement tools for informing decision making and policy.
However the point I wish to make is not about the medium of engagement (in this case online) but on the content of engagement. In this case we have rates, trees, community and cultural facilities, a planning application and integrated planning strategy as the topics for engagement.
My question is this.
Of the 74 000 residents of this council, how many have their own progress genuinely held in check by any of these issues?
How many people cannot make progress in their own lives until the council sorts out its strategy on trees? Or integrated planning? Or even business rates?
The answer is very few. In most cases perhaps none. These are examples of what I call lowest common denominator issues. Most people will agree that they matter and need thinking about. They are also impersonal enough to be safe topics for discussion. But for next to nobody will they be the really critical issues that hold back individual talent or community potential.
Many of those 74 000 people will have ideas about how they could make a better life for themselves, their families and the community. And most of them will have a pretty good idea about what is stopping them. Instead of engaging local people in the somewhat ‘removed’ priorities of the council, the council could design engagement processes that enable people to engage with each other, the council and other stakeholders, in their real priorities for making a better life. To uncover the real issues that act as barriers to real people making progress in real lives.
If people are to be open and honest about what is stopping them from making progress we need to have a relationship with them that is trusted, confidential, competent and compassionate. I suspect that such relationships cannot generally develop entirely online. That they still demand an element of face to face conversation. That they will need real people working in the community with good engagement and development skills. They may also need additional reserves of social capital, community networks and ‘brains trusts’ that can be accessed to provide support and expertise as and when it is needed.
Until we start to engage large numbers of individuals and groups on the real issues that they feel are preventing them from pursuing their aspirations then we will not get to heart of the matter.
Perhaps we should stop seeking to engage the people in our strategies and plans, but instead seek to engage ourselves in theirs?