Transition Culture

22 Sep 2009

Reflections on When a Transition Initiative Stalls…

We often say that failures in Transition are just as important as our successes, that Transition is an iterative process where what matters is that we learn from honest assessments of what we have tried.  In that spirit, today’s post offers a fascinating and illuminating case study of a Transition initiative stalling.  We are deeply grateful to members of the steering group of the now-dormant (hopefully temporarily) Transition Oxford group for so honestly and openly sharing their thoughts as to why things have reached the stage they have.  Their reflections are largely unedited, and have been left anonymous.  My thanks to Jo Hamilton for collating them. 

A Brief Transition Oxford Timeline

July 07 – COIN and ClimateX invite Rob to speak in Oxford

Sept 07 – informal meeting of people interested in transition Concept. From this idea of a steering (seed) group was bourne

Oct – Nov 07 – a few meetings of initial seed group to discuss making most of RH talk , invite other groups and individuals

Nov 07 – Rob’s talk – really well attended, good energy and buzz

Jan 08 – follow up meeting – well attended, but not as high energy as could have been

Feb – Jun 08 – series of 4–6 weekly meetings for wider Transition community, plus tree planting event, benefit gig. Had Open space type sessions, visioning, writing dreams, forming of smaller groups (some of which met a few times, some of which turned into a car club)

Had about 3 ‘nurturing process meetings facilitated by outside people for the seed group, plus one strategy meeting. A couple of people leaving seed group.

Oct 08 – Info meeting (TO and ClimateX) – Peak oil and climate change – not so well attended, but fantastic info

Nov 08- Chris Johnstone talk – really well attended

TO plan kick off – not so well attended, but people enthusiastic and stepped forward to take on parts of itt

Jan – May 09 – diminishing energy in SEED group, but more focus on plan writing and bringing plan process together

May 09 – Organised meeting for community transition initiatives in Oxfordshire – bringing groups together and identified a need for skillsharing of ideas for groups

June 09 – SEED group decided that would go into dormancy, as time and energy seriously waning, with realistically no let up of this.

***

Reflection 1

Supporting the energy

Energy was high at the first meeting (Rob’s talk) and the second one the following January. We had a lot of interest from people wanting to get involved in some way. I think we could have enabled people more effectively at those times.

Other learning could be that it might have been good to explore the concept in more depth, and get a group of people ready to take things further earlier – so that a high profile talk would be more of a public launch, rather than a ‘so who wants to see if this can happen here?’. Maybe if we had a more established group then we could have the capacity to meet the energy generated by it.

Seed group energy

The Seed group started in autumn ’07, as a response to J and M contacting people they know were interested in the transition initiative, to explore if this could happen here. There was a specific aim in sight, namely Rob’s talk at the end of November ‘07.

Sometimes it wasn’t clear to people outside the group how to be more involved, and there was tension within the group about how closed / open to new members the group was.

It was good that we did a lot of work looking at how we operated within the group, with the ‘nurturing the process’ sessions, although even within the group there was a tension between time taken for group process… as opposed to time taken doing the running / meetings. I think the fact that the energy diminished rather than grew though reflects that we could have had a better process. There was a general feeling of ‘I haven’t done enough.. the task before us is too big.. maybe I’m not the right person here’ which we all expressed at different times, regardless of how much time and effort we were actually putting in. More positive feedback / recognition of our energy / work done might have been more helpful

Wider group of people who got involved and came to meetings

Sometimes people would look to us to provide some leadership, whilst we were looking to the wider group to say what they wanted to lead on. I’m thinking of how we could have enabled people to take that leadership more. Perhaps making it clearer what we were about earlier, but we didn’t know what might emerge, and wanted to keep it as open as possible.

We could have given the formation of the ideas groups more of a lead, and supported them better (I think some of this was down to me..and I didn’t do it well). Most wanted to get on with action – were they ready to do action, and get on and become the seedlings of a section of the EDAP? Perhaps.

Involving other groups in Oxford

Members of the seed group had good links established with other Oxford groups, and a forum for groups to come together was already established through other organisations (ClimateXchange, COIN, Community Action Groups). Whilst some local community groups regularly came to the events (Wolvercote, Canalside ) others either expressed reservations about dealing with ‘climate change and peak oil’ or more often were simply too busy doing their own groups and projects to get more involved, or come to yet another meeting.

Some practical spin offs

Some practical and visible activities that resulted was the tree planting event – great to give some energy and a focus, and the formation of a car club in East Oxford.

Wider Oxford / Oxfordshire

There was and (and still is) a huge amount of environmental / climate change activity going on before TO formed. At the beginning we envisaged TO could be a way to knit this together, to provide a synergy, a glue to bring the different stories together. We wanted to work with and through groups to bring a collective vision and story to light. Many groups mean lots of activity, but more time in the planning, involving, inviting and strategising about how best to go about it. I feel that none of us had the time and energy required to do this justice – to proactively go out to the existing groups and see how they could be involved

The Transition Oxford Plan

Having a focus on the plan was great, we had a specific ask, and it brought new energy in, with contacts in networks. In retrospect, maybe this should have come earlier. For me personally, my energy and time to put into it had started to wane by then – partly because of demands of work and my course, but also because I didn’t want an active involvement in more strategy, as it was too close to my day job!

***

Reflection 2

Seed Group’s existence meant no-one else thought they needed to attend to overall needs of TO, and in absence of Seed Group either addressing something, or a means of real reporting/accountability, nobody would know it was being neglected.

One big area of neglect was active networking with existing groups.

Was ‘strategic thinking’ also neglected? Was it obvious at various times how Seed Group saw ’12 Steps’, and how they were applying, or adapting them?

Seed Group allowed more energy to go into the processes within itself, than into the other groups around it, and which seem, in all but one case, to have required seed group support if they were to survive. Ie, they all disappeared (except Oxcar – tootle tootle! – sound of own trumpet)

My sense is that whoever/s was ‘holding the energy’ of TO had a heavy emotional/energetic task, and that was not sufficiently recognised or actively worked with. Need for support from others was not identified and asked for in time/often enough.

***

Reflection 3

Hmmm, my thoughts are coloured by an emotional response to TO’s demise. I often felt “used up” by TO but learned a lot and really valued being part of it.

I still feel that something certainly is needed to pull together all the disparate things in Oxford that are working for similar ends. But in a place like Oxford that won’t happen without fundraising, a project manager and paid team, and a COIN/ClimateX/CAG type organisation to put in the work needed – organising events, participatory processes, effective communication, going out and talking to all the groups – we could see all that was needed but could not make it happen on the margins of busy work lives. Why should it be voluntary and on the margins? Why shouldn’t at least one or two of us make it our work?

“what did we do well”

– there is clearly a great hunger out there for initiatives like Transition Towns that join things up.

– lots of enthusiastic people at events, many really good events, facilitation experience in the seed group.

– supporting other local transition towns (thanks to J),

– website

– going official (eventually) and opening a bank account

– help from the nurturers (Liz and Isobel) was brilliant

– the evening that S facilitated for us and the energy and ideas she brought. Anyone still in touch with her?

“what could we do better” learnings:

– the seed group was the main outlet/inlet for TO enthusiasts for most of the last two years (remember various people coming along to our pub meetings). The seed group held the space but did not have the person power to build on the early momentum. This blocked others from joining the bandwagon.

– we needed more and more effective ways of communicating

– we needed to link with groups, both to find out what they were doing and take the TO message to them. We recognised this early on but did not have a clear message to take to the groups and did not have the energy to meet with many of them. Perhaps a reincarnation of TO could focus mainly on this with fewer TO events providing a platform for the groups themselves and getting them to make the links with cc and peak oil.

***

Reflection 4

Seed group energy

The group process was uncomfortable; often felt unwilling, with little solid, ordinary support for each other. From my perspective, if the group had been more enjoyable, the energy would have been higher. Odd really, because individually everyone was really nice.

I think we were too ambitious, and we didn’t really agree on what we aimed at, but because we couldn’t handle the group process we never clarified issues.

We never followed up S’s simple idea of getting out there and connecting to other groups, for instance. (I know I could have done, but I never dared. I always felt I’d landed by accident in a group of experts, so I couldn’t go and meet anyone, I’d have felt a fraud!) which leads onto:

Involving other groups in Oxford

We never really did this, as I’ve said, although I know that at least J probably knew a lot of people anyway – but they must have thought why Transition? – what’s wrong with climateX? We didn’t have much more to offer, and I for one wanted to do something much grander and deeper than be an umbrella group connecting people together! In the event, I think that might have been the most helpful thing we could have done.

***

Reflection 5:

I remember saying that I joined in this effort because I wanted to find ways of raising awareness among the wider population. Looking back, I don’t think we achieved that. My impression is that those we reached were lots of people with eyes already opened to the problem and already searching for ways of addressing it. I am looking for ways of opening more eyes, and moving more to the point of action.

We did lots of stuff well, but you have probably noticed that I find it easier to see the negative than the positive, a lifelong habit that I’m working on, so forgive me if I’ve missed anything. We, or rather about half of us (and you will know who you are) are skilled at organising and holding meetings, techniques for making people think and encouraging participation. (I do not include myself.)

What could we have done better?

Harnessing the energy revealed or generated at those meetings. I think we failed to do that but I don’t know why, by which I mean that I have no thoughts of “if only we had done this or that”. I don’t know how to harness that energy.

We could have done a better job on PR, or maybe we couldn’t. PR could definitely have been better, but I don’t think we had the skills (or maybe the time) between us to achieve it. By PR, I mean making sure that everyone who heard or read about us had a clear idea of what TO was and was not.

There is one thing that is firmly outside our control. I think there is an element of luck in creating really effective teams, even when you have some control over the process as in an employment situation – that control being the ability to pick team members from a pool of willing participants. We all self-select in these voluntary groups and it is a matter of luck if a team comes together with that “je ne sais quoi” that achieves a result that is greater than the sum of its parts!

Our worst piece of luck was that we didn’t have an obvious leader, but that will not be the only factor – I don’t know what the other factors are. By leader I don’t mean someone who directs others to do his bidding (these people usually aren’t women), but something much more subtle than that.

None of us should reproach ourselves for what has happened, or not happened. The experience is valuable.

Message for others? If you fail, acknowledge it, know that there is a large element of luck in finding the right people, and don’t blame yourself. Go forward and try something else, let others step in.

***

Reflection 6

– What did we do well?

Got going, organised events, kept it on people’s agendas. I think the tree planting day at Cutteslowe was great as we had plenty of core supporters, some potential converts and other people who just felt like going out and planting trees.

– What could we have done better?

Been more inclusive, been more reflective and been more aware of that seed group members may have different amounts to time to give.

I think possibly the reflective aspect is the most important here, i.e. to spent longer consolidating what Transition Towns meant to us and to the people of Oxford – I think this would have created more ownership of TO by both those in the seed group and those not.

– Any lessons learnt / guidance for people who want to do more in Oxford?

I think some of the language of Transition Towns might have been a bit off-putting/exclusive to those not already engaged – i.e. ‘Hearts and Minds’ and ‘unleashing’ and ‘open space’ – I don’t disagree these things may be necessary but i think the terminology is too exclusive to mean anything to the ‘average person’….also to make it more fun and less ‘worthy’ 😉

[Added after I read the other comments] Perhaps put energy into campaigning for the post/resources needed – Oxford’s not lacking in motivated, energetic but busy people – I’m sure some would consider contributing to a Transition Oxford post (even if only very part-time) … not to mention the potential for support from (city) councillors!

I’m also sorry at TO’s demise and hope it will return in some guise.

***

Reflection 7

– What did we do well?

The Seed Group had an excellent combination of talents and connections which was inspiring to be around. We were much more reflective than other groups I have been involved in and as such it was interesting to see different approaches. I feel this is a valuable part of the Transition Movement as a whole and of TO- to provide a space to think creatively and differently about the age-old task of changing the world. I for one learned a huge deal from this. We did well at keeping the meetings participatory, which I think helped them stay large with lots of people power potential, and rallied together well when it came to practical action for example the tree planting.

– What could we have done better?

I was unable to be as involved for as long as I would have liked. My involvement brought home to me just how hard the “thinking” part of getting an initiative started is, especially when working to embody principles of horizontal leadership and consensus. With hindsight, more agreement at the start as to what we sought and what we were able to provide might have helped, then more action planning and action, with the valuable “nurturing” skills deployed to reflect and evolve once actions had been accomplished. One factor here was that I, for example, as a “professional” in a relevant field, was looking for a different way to do things than I was used to, and perhaps slightly unwilling to do “work”, when really some of those work skills might have been more fully deployed!

A more general reflection is that peak oil is tricky for a grassroots organization to tackle. It requires awareness to be raised from scratch about an issue that is cloudy for most people and about impacts that will be devastating. The Transition model starts with this as the first task. Our group never seemed to fully embrace this for different reasons, leaving us bereft of the prescribed easy starting activities such as film showings that can help a group to gel.

– Any lessons learnt / guidance for people who want to do more in Oxford?

Am I right in thinking that Climate X provides the networking role that we wanted to with TO? I hope people who were involved in TO take this experience forward with them into other work- I certainly will!