Reading and interesting speech from the UK-Canada Colloquium by Okalik Eegeesiak who is the head of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association. The QIA recently obtained a court injunction against the federal government in Lancaster Sound, preventing scientists from conducting siesmic research on the composition of the seabed. Eegeesiak talks about what this means for Inuit:
Unfortunately, Inuit in Nunavut have taken more frequently to the courts. This move is in protest at not being included or consulted properly. For example, we have a major case before the courts right now to address the federal government’s reluctance to live up to its obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. More recently, my organization, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, was successful in getting a temporary injunction on the federal government’s plans to carry out seismic testing in Lancaster Sound. This injunction is based on our assertion that the air-gun array proposed for parts of the testing will cause irreparable damage to marine wildlife and impair our ability to hunt in the area. The concept that pushes us into these lawsuits is the idea of the right to say no, which can be described as the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent. Meaningful consultation, participation in decision making and the right to say no to development when it does not suit our needs is what we strive for when we participate in the many forums we attend with the federal and territorial governments.
This concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent goes far beyond information sessions or community meetings. Meaningful consultation should reflect an inclusive and respectful process like the consultation you would have with your spouse when you are buying a new home, rather than the “consultation” you have with your teenager about cleaning up their room.
I want to make it clear that we understand that meaningful consultation is not the same as controlling or having a veto over the actions of governments. However, it is our belief that our voice should be heard at a minimum and most of all respected and not ignored, across a wide range of issues that affect us, including education, housing, lands and wildlife management, sovereignty, and economic development. And our voices are worth hearing – we have a valuable contribution to make for our land and ultimately to our country and the world.
Today, as eyes turn north yet again, with dreams of oil, gas, minerals and ice-free ocean travel, we remind everyone to consider the advantages of Free, Prior and Informed Consent and respect the way in which, we as Inuit, choose to engage with our governments, organizations, and industry
In Canada, the law provides powerful protection for First Nations, Inuit and Metis groups who have Aboriginal rights to their territories. In practice, this protection means that governments and industry must consult with Aboriginal groups prior to undertaking any activities that would infringe on Aboriginal rights. Eegeesiak points to what such consultation means for Aboriginal communities. The kinds of conversations that need to take place at this legal, cultural and political interface are complex and weighted with issues of power.
For me one of the most difficult questions to address in these kinds of consultations is the massive power imbalance between the federal government and communities. Ine the example above, Eegeesiak struggles with this power in his characterization of what consultation means: it means the ability to say “no” but also not to veto government action.
For me the power issues might be better characterized by looking at both parties in a formal consultation process and asking who has the power to say yes or no and mean it? And, perhaps more importantly, who has the power to benefit from yes or no?
In other words, it’s one thing to simply say no in a consultative process, as the QIA did (or later in a court case, when they were treated unfairly at the consultation table) but quite another to have the power to benefit from a no. With limited capacity, inuit communities have a limited ability to deal with their own stand against exploitation. For example, most of the economic, social and political infrastructure in the Arctic is directly funded by the federal government. If the Inuit block oil and gas exploration in parts of Nunavut, the federal government has the option of waiting until conditions change, in which case, the Inuit may be in a position where the traditional whale and seal hunt might be sacrificed for the economic benefits of oil and gas exploration and development.
Many indigenous groups around the world face this dilemma. In most cases, resisting resource extraction is simply a temporary reprieve on the demise of culture, land and the lives of the people. In Canada at least, we have Constitutional protection for Aboriginal rights but that so far has not levelled the playing field with respect to power and capacity.
The question for governments then becomes, what is the moral obligation here with respect to decisions and activities that could threaten the future of an entire people, even if such actions bring local and national economic prosperity? the question for indigenous groups is terrifying at every turn: will this decision terminate our people? will this happen on my watch, and will I be the one who let it happen?
We need a new way of consulting and collaborating on resource development and indigenous communities. That these questions are never raised at the tables or in the process says something about the unwillingness of society to engage in the shadowy sides of power and exploitation. If it is not the job of the folks actually in the process, then whose job is it?
1. Practice noticing who’s in the room at meetings – how many men, how many women, how many white people, how many people of color, is it majority heterosexual, are there out queers, what are people’s class backgrounds. Don’t assume to know people, but also work at being more aware.
2a. Count how many times you speak and keep track of how long you speak.
2b. Count how many times other people speak and keep track of how long they speak.
3. Be conscious of how often you are actively listening to what other people are saying as opposed to just waiting your turn and/or thinking about what you’ll say next.
4. Practice going to meetings focused on listening and learning; go to some meetings and do not speak at all.
5a. Count how many times you put ideas out to the group.
5b. Count how many times you support other people’s ideas for the group.
6. Practice supporting people by asking them to expand on ideas and get more in-depth, before you decide to support the idea or not.
7a. Think about whose work and contribution to the group gets recognized.
7b. Practice recognizing more people for the work they do and try to do it more often.
8. Practice asking more people what they think about meetings, ideas, actions, strategy and vision. White guys tend to talk amongst themselves and develop strong bonds that manifest in organizing. This creates an internal organizing culture that is alienating for most people. Developing respect and solidarity across race, class, gender and sexuality is complex and difficult, but absolutely critical – and liberating.
9. Be aware of how often you ask people to do something as opposed to asking other people “what needs to be done”.
10. Think about and struggle with the saying, “you will be needed in the movement when you realize that you are not needed in the movement”.
11. Struggle with and work with the model of group leadership that says that the responsibility of leaders is to help develop more leaders, and think about what this means to you.
12. Remember that social change is a process, and that our individual transformation and individual liberation is intimately interconnected with social transformation and social liberation. Life is profoundly complex and there are many contradictions. Remember that the path we travel is guided by love, dignity and respect – even when it is bumpy and difficult to navigate.
13. This list is not limited to white guys, nor is it intended to reduce all white guys into one category. This list is intended to disrupt patterns of domination which hurt our movement and hurt each other. White guys have a lot of work to do, but it is the kind of work that makes life worth living.
14. Day-to-day patterns of domination are the glue that maintain systems of domination. The struggle against capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy, heterosexism and the state, is also the struggle towards collective liberation.
15. No one is free until all of us are free.
From the Colours of Resistance webpage
Last Friday night, beneath the lights on the Bowen island football pitch, my co-ed soccer league team won our Cup Final 5-0. We played the best team in the league for the Cup and although were prepared for a tight game. we were rather stunned with the result. What happened far exceeded our expectations of what was possible. We played unbelieveably well.
Football (I use the global term for “soccer” here) is a team game that is much like other team games in life. It features constrained action, bounded and with a purpose. It requires different people to perform different roles, sometimes at a distance from each other and it requires tremendous levels of improvisation to deal with the flow and constantly changing conditions. At the best of times it is an easy game to play but a hard game to play well, and it is an incredible game when your team plays out of its skin as we did on Friday. In my work life I work with some pretty good teams, especially with my friends in the Berkana Collaborative with whom I have tight and deep relationships. But playing on a football team for an hour or so gives one a clear and bounded sense of the possible, and I have been harvesting some of the key elements that went into making up my peak experience.
1. Train and learn together. It should go without saying that a team that does not train or learn together is not going to create an incredible experience right out of the box. A foundation of basic skills is essential. You have to know how to do the elementary things that you are being asked to do. None of us on the team are professionals, although some of us have had good coaching in the past. And because this is a recreational league we didn’t do much in the way of training together apart from on game days. But on game days we always arrived quite early and worked on skills, worked on patterns and ran some basic passing, shooting and team drills to get us in the mood for the game and to learn a little. Practicing and training together, in a positive spirit of encouragement and curiosity is a fundamental basis for good collaboration. We were never critical with each other, and always helped each other learn to do things we hadn’t been able to do before. In this way I think we all grew a little during the season.
2. Be friends. You are not going to perform anything near well if you don’t like each other. A case in point is this year French World Cup footbal team. A team of incredible invidiual talent, they ended up imploding, picking nfights with each other and going on strike with the result that they clattered out of the tournament’s early stages. When he was interview on CNN about what was wrong with the French team, German great Jurgen Klinnsman said simply “they don’t like each other.” You may think that being friends is a kind of kindergarten approach to getting things done but trying doing incredible work with people you dislike, distrust or haven’t forgiven. Good luck with that.
3. Have an obvious purpose. My friend Toke Moeller says that “purpose is the invisible leader.” So it is. On Friday our purpose was to win the game and the tournament. That was what we were there to do. We didn’t need a mission statement or a set of objectives. We had a simple set of measureables, the most obvious of which was the difference in goals scored. To acheive our purpose, we needed to score goals in their net and keep goals out of our net. But as clear as our purpose was, it would also be fair to say that we had a clear plan, although it was not a very precise one – it was rather based on principles. Basically we decided to attack on the wings, get past their midfield to where their defense was weakest and collapse our defenders on their forwards, denying them the centre of the field. Given these straightforward tactics, which were concrete and easy to remember, execution was easy. As a defender if I was playing too far outside, I could make a mental check in and move towards the middle. If my partner was passing the ball up the middle I could remind her to get it up the wings. We were able to adjust on the fly and feedback was welcome. We played dynamic football, but committed to our roles and responsibilities. We were able to be creative and supportive and flowing.
4. Communicate well and often. Football, like basketball and hockey and other flow sports, moves and changes quickly. Communication is essemtial. In fact it may have been the difference between our two teams on Friday night. We are chatty and talkative, communicating information to each other to alert players to threats, openings, available support, opportunities and options. Sometimes the communication is subtle – a hand waving to indicate that you are open – and other times it is panic laden and full of passion and roar. First and foremost it is clear and factual; second it is encouraging of stuff that is working; third it is helpful criticism to shift strategies or play a little differently.
5. Be aware of the whole field. This is another subtlety that separates good team from poor ones. In collaborative activities there is very little room for people to collapse their focus down on invididual needs. This awareness is a tricky thing to cultivate in an individualist culture, where we are rewarded for personal accomplishment. On Friday I was spending a lot of time tightly marking Team White’s striker, a tough playing and talented Brazilian named Gelson. For a lot of the match my focus was on him but the moment the ball was away from us, I could literally feel my awareness expand to contain the whole field. It helped me to be able to suggest options to our midfielders as I was seeing things unfold from my back line position. This total team awareness was perhaps the best indication that I was in a flow state all night.
6. Do your job and trust others to do theirs. Football is a great sport because you cannot do everything. The division of labour means that you have to focus on your job, figure out ways to connect to others and trust them to run with what you offer them. In football as in improv, the idea is to make your partners look good. A well weighted ball from the back helps midfielders chase it down the pitch. A good recovery from a rebound keeps your goalkeeper riding a clean sheet. On Friday I chose the job of marking Gelson, which meant that I was not going to be anywhere near the opposing team’s goal. No glory for me on the night except through the fact that we weren’t scored on. If I could keep Gelson and the other strikers from having any chance on goal, it would be easy for me trust our strikers to slot goals, and that was just what they did. It’s a relief not to have to do it all. It conserves energy, allows me to focus and takes advantage of the good relations we have.
7. Be generous. I think more than anything else on Friday night, I learned that football is a game of generosity. For the vast majority of the time, your job on a football pitch is to give and create. In the improv world we call this “making offers.” Generosity on the pitch means delivering useful passes, creating space by pulling your markers away from the action, helping support the play going forward by providing options so that we don’t give the ball away. In football, greedy players are vilified unless they are of the absolute highest talent. And even then, when they miss, especially when they had better options open, they are shunned. A shunned team member is impossible to play with and in fact becomes a liability as they create a hole on the pitch and bad feelings that pervade the relationships on the team. So generosity, gifting, creates the best teams. A gift economy of attention, resources, and opportunities creates the conditions for shared glory and accomplishment.
These little learnings are perhaps elementary, but think about how difficult they are to execute in daily life. In your organization, have you got these all right? Is there something you AREN’T doing? Are there elements of collaboration that you aren’t paying attention to? And what other lessons should we glean from peak flow experiences in collaboration and team work?
One of the things I love about my mate Geoff Brown who lives in the lovely Airey’s Inlet, Australia, is his incredible willingness to be playful and creative in his facilitation work and especially in his harvesting work. He is one of the few that gets how important the harvest is – at least as important as the hosting. In this great post, Geoff shares his recent experience with Open Space and with a fantastic harvest that captures that creative brilliance of the group he was working with: The day after Open Space
Silo busting is a very interesting thing. Everyone knows that systems atrophy when they divide their work into silos. Silos entrench difference and prevent learning across sectors whether we are talking about departments in an organization, or a social system like health care or child and family services.
Silos have limited usefulness. They divide work into manageable chunks. But in general they create reductionist responses to systemic problems and they pose a massive challenge to people working nfor change. If we first have to bust the silos, and only then can we address the problems, how do we know we’ll have energy left for the real work?
So let’s be real. Dr. Rob Anda, who I met this week in Seattle, had a great line when talking about reducing the effects of adverse childhood experiences. “I don’t see silos as disappearing anytime soon, but if we work together in community from common information sources we can make change.”
Great line. Forget about the silos. Bring people together in communities of practice to learn about the information they need and that serves their common purpose, and then engage in the conversations that build network and community around learning about change and enacting solutions that make sense at the community level. Bottom up silo busting. Forget about the structural reforms first. Do the work first and then institutionalize the solutions that work across sectors, disciplines and other silos. Follow the Theory U process: concretize solutions following social prototyping.
And when the silos – the funders, the government agencies, the power brokers and decision makers – come looking for evidence and evaluation, use Developmental Evaluation to tell the story of what is going on across the system.