Skip to main content

Collaborative Thinking is a Social Change Tool


This is another in a series of posts devoted to concepts that David Castro introduces in his book Genership 1.0 Beyond Leadership, Toward Liberating the Creative Soul. Strategic thinking is the subject this time. While the practice of strategic thinking is well known, the standard approach to it can be improved.

A new way of thinking collaboratively thinking about the future promises improved results from strategic planning sessions. CoThinking is Castro's term for that new way of thinking. To quote Castro, CoThinking is a process whereby “We engage with others in reflective dialogue our desired future, our present circumstances, and the possibilities for strategic action.”

Instead of trying to predict the future, concentrate on what future to create and how that work might be accomplished. Whether two people are talking about maybe starting a nonprofit, or a long-established development organization is ready to expand into new territories, thinking about the future is a necessity. Strategic thinking is a necessity, as are the tools for doing effective creative thinking.

Planning tools such as SWOT analysis or Delphi polling can be valuable sometimes. Often, social entrepreneurs can rely on their knowledge of what is changing at the time and what is reasonably likely to happen in the near future. Is now really a good time to start building village-scale power plants in rural Cameroon? Knowing the social environment in Cameroon should make the question an easy one.

Predicting the future might be useful, but creating a detailed map of what to do and how to do it, is more important. This is what CoThinking is for.


In the Genership model of doing things, there is no one way to envision the future. Castro refers to the journey metaphor here. Getting from where your nonprofit is to where you want to it to be is NOT like a journey. There is no organizational planning equivalent of MapQuest. Individuals should focus on creative efforts to find ways of reaching a desired destination.

CoThinking provides a method for planning in that “create-it-yourself” mold. To that end, CoThinking uses three “domains of thinking”:

  1. Think about the desired future – Here is where the ability to articulate a SMART goal, that the team agrees on will be crucial. What does the group want the future to look like? How many projects serving how many people by what date?
  2. Think about reality in light of that desired future – Scan the group's experience and knowledge of the current social environment, and discuss the group's assessments of same. What resources does the group still need to acquire? Information and skills count as resources too.
  3. Engage in practical planning, execution and evaluation of a certain action – Plan interim objectives and action steps, evaluation criteria, and first steps then take action.

CoThinking is not that difficult to understand, but some effort is required. Read Genership 1.0, Chapter 3 in particular, to find out why CoThinking is a good idea and how exactly it works.

Comments, suggestions or ideas? Feel free to post a comment, and share this post.   
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Five Nonprofit Branding Tips

How do you establish a distinct identity in the minds of potential supporters? I’m glad you asked.   The Fundraising Fundamentals blog at http://www.andrewolsen.net/mark-cubans-advice-for-your-nonprofit/blog )   offered branding tips from entrepreneur Mark Cuban. Here are the tips(My comments are in parentheses): 1. Don’t make educating your donors the focus of your communications. Meet them where they are – not where you want them to be. (Don’t tell them what you want or what your mission is or what you need. Concentrate on explaining how donations or volunteering will benefit them in some way. The most obvious way to do that is to show people how their support will reduce domestic violence or clean up the river.)   2. Forget the witty, brainy, philosophical branding campaigns that are designed to “make donors think.” They don’t want to think. They want to help. Show them in simple terms how they can help. (Take the direct approach. If you are the only nonprofit supporting mic
1 comment
Read more

Steering Your Brain Toward Better Program Ideas

This is a post about asking good questions whenever you think you have a good idea for a program or program improvement. You probably knew that great ideas still need to be examined, questioned if you please. That's what this post is about, sort of. Mostly, I want to offer a few comments on Brainsteering: A Better Approach to Breakthrough Ideas by Kevin and Shawn Coyne. Brainsteering offers a disciplined approach to asking, and answering, questions about product ideas and business ideas. The process also works just fine for program ideas. The book starts by describing some generic questions to ask about a challenge then goes into creating logic trees. A logic tree works by stating a question and breaking it down into subquestions. Simply asking and answering questions might lead to some valuable new ideas. Brainsteering And that's as far as I have gone in the book. I can say that there is a chapter on making your own brainstorming efforts more effective. Other chapter
Post a Comment
Read more

Try This Simple Process for Attacking a Social Problem

This short article outlines a technique you can use to focus your efforts to solve social problems through advocacy, public education, program design, or social marketing. What follows is a framework for thinking about how best to attack a given social problem This process should be helpful whether you know what your options are or not. You'll answer a series of questions about the issue starting with the most obvious question of all.  What is the problem? What is the challenge or problem you want to tackle? This is a broad social problem, like domestic violence or climate change, or something a bit narrower. Avoid stating that the lack of a specific thing is a problem - no playground in the neighborhood, no soup kitchen in the neighborhood, and so on.  There are a few reasons for not including a solution in your problem statement. First, you were probably assuming too much about the social problem in question. You will never look at other, better ways to address hunger or bullying
Post a Comment
Read more