Sociocracy

 .

I went to a two-hour Sociocracy workshop in October, and Sociocracy is as well all know 😀 a "peer governance system based on consent". Can't say I know too much about it, but I found it to be an interesting form of governance and decision-making somewhere in-between top-down hierarchies and flat organisations. 

While we enter discussions with a clear idea of "this is what I want", Sociocracy askes "what you are willing to..." - what you can work with and what you can live with?. That shift in perspective expands the area of possible consent and increases the chance that we can find ways of moving forward that all parties can live with - even if they don't love it. And there additionally needs to be consent before a decision is taken, and objections are taken seriously and seen as a gift. If you really really object to a decision, that means it needs to be further discussed and possibly revised/altered in ways that takes the objection into account. Here's an example of Sociocratic principles at work:

"I have five children. [...] If I ask them, "what do you want for lunch?", then I lost already. [...] Instead, I need to ask for ideas for lunch. Out of those ideas, I pick something and propose it. Let's say I want to propose burritos. The question I need to ask is not: Do you want burritos for lunch?". The question is: "Is there any reason not to have burritos for lunch?". That way, now the family member that has a reason not to eat burritos will be able to say so. But if one child really wanted noodles but is willing to go for burritos, we can still make a decisions. I've set the expectation to what people are willing to do, not what they want to do."

Ok, that's the short version and there's a lot more to it. And the Swedish Transition Network (Omställningsnätverket) had asked one of their partners, Holma Folkhögskola [Holma folk high school/adult education center], to organise a course in Sociocracy that was tailored to their needs - and I wanted in and tagged along. I went to Holma with the intention of learning more about Sociocracy (I in fact read a book just to prepare for the weekend), but the joke was on me as all the other 20 participants were there not just to learn about Sociocracy, but to also reshape the way the Swedish Transition Network itself functions, based on Sociocratic principles. So while I just wanted to lean back and learn, and had definitely not planned to take on any commitments (too busy), everyone else wanted action and were prepared to roll up their sleeves and find their place and their role in the new governance structure for the Swedish Transition Network. 

At one point early in the weekend there was a round, and people stated what they were ready and willing to contribute with. I wasn't prepared and didn't know what I was willing to do, but fortunately Sofie from Gothenburg (a new acquaintance, lots of bantering, front row, second from the left) said that me and her should work on setting up a "humor group". That sounded like a terrific idea and discussing and shaping what such a group could contribute to the larger movement became my personal entry point to the remainder of the weekend. And so for me personally, it turned out there are two roles that I'm willing to do for the Transition Network. 

Both of there roles support the Event "circle" (Sociocracy lingo for group), which is a sub-circle to the General circle. And the Event circle has sub-circles of its own of which the most important is the Annual Conference (that I want to in October and where I first learned about Sociocracy). So the "boring" role that I'm prepared to play is to help with the conference, and I'm especially interested in creating a structure (a memory) that can help transfer knowledge between conferences, since the annual conferences are organised by a new team in a different part of the country each year. The more "exciting" role is to help shape a sub-circle to the Event circle that I proposed should be called "The resource group". That is a very anonymous name (by design), and it doesn't say anything about what that group is and what it is supposed to do. I am however thinking of this group as a "traveling circus" or a "travelling theatre company" that will help liven up events by bringing fun to them. So the resource group could contain any and all of the following; a clown, a buffoon, a mime artist, a ventriloquist, a puppeteer, a jester, a juggler, a stand-up artist, improvisational theatre, and of course musicians. Four persons were willing to help out with different parts of what the Event circle plans to do, but I believe the resource group currently consists of only Sofie and me, although I have two named persons I would like to recruit (AA, a clown/actor and AL, a poet/actor/musician). 

There were a lot of creative suggestions proposed during the weekend and it could be that the newly formed Event group will plan and organise not just the annual conference, but also additional events (two persons in this group had in fact worked as event planners). 

Each group (circle) got a form to fill out and here's a subset of what I formulated for the "humor group":

• "Goal (and how does it relate to our vision, our mission and our principles?)": Work with humour, playfulness, events, embodied exercises, interventions and performances.
• "Domain (what do we make autonomous decisions about, when do we need to transfer things back to the General circle?)": Shape a new role for our group that will include making the annual conference more fun and alive.
• "Roles, policies (what roles, policies and routines does the circuit take care of?)": Develop (anti-) rites, rituals and ceremonies, support local organisations with structure and content, support the board with using the annual conference (and other events) "strategically". 
• "Influence (what do we need from other circles, what do other circles need from us?)" We drew a blank here and it's empty for now.

.