Better Networking 30 April 2014 Sofia Bulgaria Dani

Better Networking 30 April 2014, Sofia, Bulgaria Dani Koleva and George Bogdanov Inspired by Richard Bennett in March 2010 1

NETWORKS • Why? • When? • What? but mainly… • How? 2

WHY NETWORKS? 3

WHY NETWORKS? • Learning from/with each other: becoming excellent at what we do • Influencing collectively: much more powerful • Economies of scale: collective buying – Training – Skilled people – Even office supplies… 4

THE CLASSIC PROCESS Creating networking spaces Identifying common learning needs or potential to learn from each other Identifying common advocacy needs Lots of individual relationships About ourselves & operating environment Learning & training: Learning from each other; Training from outsiders Information service: Issues, operating environment, good practice About the issues we’re passionate about Collective advocacy 5

NETWORKS WHEN? Any time, but especially… • Uncertainty – – New situations Changing environment Threats to our effectiveness or values when the Big Red Fish is biggest • Big influencing opportunities – when we most need Little Blue Fishes Together The world is changing faster – it’s happening more often Networks are more important today than ever before 6

Organizational development and t e g Try to ere Maturity stay h Growth Decline Youth Aging Yearly years Death Birth Organizational stability 7

A NETWORK LOOKS LIKE… 8

‘THE MESSY POWER OF COMPLEXITY’ • Lots of threads, lots of knots: complex, can feel unfocused • Work together makes the most of members’ – Contributions – Commitment – Skills • Members contribute because they… – want to – are excited – have something to offer • They stop if they feel they don’t/aren’t • Benefit – purpose – energy – collective empowerment – inspiration • Which delivers BIG results, when it works 9

Network dynamics: a virtuous circle Effectiveness & impact Work closer together Establish basis of unity Deepen common strategy Develop clear transparent decision making Deepen common agenda Increase common understanding of issues/environment Share information Build trust, get beyond competitive instincts Increase in ad hoc 1: 1 relations between members 10

RUNNING A NETWORK • Few networks survive if control is too heavy • We’re used to command control – Hierarchy – Authority at the top • Networks seem loose, uncontrollable • 3 -D, messy, not pyramid, flexible, can change • Power, authority is spread, hard to see/fix • Not used to working like this, it can be scary • …and that’s ok… • Because it can also be hugely powerful 11

4 BASIC PRINCIPLES • Diversity – Participants are different, retain their own identity • Dynamism – Frees participants to be dynamic, propose activities, get involved – so need light structure, facilitative, enabling, supportive • Democracy – Open, non-hierarchical, dependent on trust – Decision making seen to be fair, inclusive, effective, widespread – Leaders consult and report back • Decentralisation – Shared leadership – Depends on shared vision, values, effective communication – Decisions made where they matter, where the action is 12

ROLE OF SECRETARIATS ‘Servant leadership’ • Facilitating & enabling – Creating spaces for members to share… • Information; Learning; Development of influencing positions – Facilitating productive use of spaces – Administration to make it happen • • Ensuring inclusion, preventing isolation Encouraging/supporting new members Balancing power and influence Linking the whole network with others 13

ARE SECRETARIATS SPECIALISTS? Specialists in • Facilitation • Strengthening threads, tightening knots • Promoting collaboration, not competition • Enabling communications Become specialists in • Understanding members’ dimensions, needs, environment In PURE networks, other specialisms are usually a bad idea • They discourage member activism and leadership • But… 14

WHEN SECRETARIATS DO MORE THAN FACILITATE • A completely new issue arises • The sector needs only one specialist • Collective purchasing is best for everyone …could mean we need an issue specialist But dangers… • Lose facilitation focus • Undermine member leadership & activism • Create institution with its own dynamics So use with caution, and plan for Secretariat’s exit from this type of work 15

Communications: which type? 16

MINI CHECKLIST (1) • Have a clear purpose – Broad consensus – The most we can realistically strive for • Have clear values & principles – Members accountable to them • Keep central rules to a minimum – Don’t strangle creativity • Encourage everyone to lead something – Creates capacity & ownership 17

MINI CHECKLIST (2) • See joint activities as more than outputs – They bring people together, lead to trust & mutual support • Make dynamism & diversity goals in themselves – They bring creativity to the work • View input and participation as central objectives – More engagement = more for everyone 18

AND WHEN WE GET IT RIGHT… 19