Please read: The resources on this site are provided for information only and are not a substitute for professional advice. We are not responsible for the content or online safety of the sites we link to.
These notes were taken during one of our Climate Conversations. Unfortunately, they might not mean much if you weren’t there! You may find this conversation guide and resource list helpful if that’s the case.
What are your experiences of working in a group?
What was the group trying to achieve?
What was the outcome? Was the group successful?
How did the group start and/or finish?
How did the group work? How did you get along?
After our last meeting, we wanted to think a bit more about what makes groups successful, and we chose to look at our own past experiences for ideas. These didn’t have to be environmental groups – any kind of experience of working with other people to get something done would be helpful. We took a little time to think and then took turns to share our experiences.
- Experience of belonging to an international volunteering organisation.
- It’s been going for a hundred years.
- It’s successful in that it’s still going.
- The problems we’re working to solve are still there but we have had successes.
- It’s international. There are levels of organisation from the global to local clubs.
- There are strong personalities in the group which sometimes clash.
- We have had disagreements over which projects to support.
- Having officials and set roles help. These roles can use the skills people have.
- Democracy group.
- Local branch of a national organisation.
- We’ve not won on the big issue yet.
- One key person might have started the group and does a lot of the organising, with a few other key people, with others who are less involved.
- We have a monthly online meeting and use WhatsApp groups.
- There are different personalities but people generally get on well.
- There are frustrations over unequal contributions.
- The group’s activities are led by the wider campaign.
- Workers co-ops
- Someone always assumed a leadership role, although that’s not part of the official structure.
- Sometimes that’s a benefit, but sometimes it collapses if that person leaves.
- ‘Sweat equity’ is an idea that’s supposed to recognise the extra work the founding members but it but can cause problems when someone wants to withdraw their equity.
- There can be serious problems, for example, a nervous breakdown and a lack of support from colleagues.
- There is lots of friction.
- Weekly meetings where everything is decided together.
- Fairness became a priority. Sometimes that felt petty. Putting rules in place stopped resentment building.
- A society/association
- The group is old. I’ve no idea when it started.
- It’s run by a committee.
- The committee did manage to do its basic purpose.
- However, meetings could be horrible with people using bullying or passive aggression to get their way.
- There were good things.
- There was a lot of passion.
- There were clear roles.
- When the main people left things changed.
We then looked at the notes we’d made on our experiences and started picking out themes and patterns. I think it’s fair to say that the four of us taking part in the conversation all appreciated structure, and a different group of people would probably have come up with a different list.
- Find a group that works for you.
- That suits your personality.
- Need to have fun (though boring stuff has to be done sometimes, by someone).
- Suits your needs e.g. disability.
- Matching skills, personalities and roles.
- We felt that having defined roles is important.
- That’s a challenge for decentralised groups.
- It would be best if you also respected people’s boundaries. No one should be pressured into taking on roles.
- Sustainability – the problem of having only one or two people keeping a group going.
- Try to have more than one person able to do a job or task.
- Created resilience – can keep going if someone leaves the group.
- Backup and contingency plans.
- Sharing the work – so people have the chance to take a turn doing the interesting work.
- Write it down or find ways to share know-how.
- Avoid the bus/lottery/circus problem.
- Problem of over-reliance on one key person.
- A formal structure that makes sure jobs are passed on, and that there are people capable of taking over.
- Have a system for regularly changing the chairperson.
- Term limits for officers.
- Try to have more than one person able to do a job or task.
- Minutes and agendas.
- They make meetings more effective.
- During Covid, we moved to Zoom, and started emailing reports in advance. This lets people read in advance and we’ve kept doing it.
- Meetings benefit from having a clear purpose. Reading a mission statement at the start of the meeting helps with this.
- Goups lifespan.
- We talked about how groups have a lifecycle with different phases (e.g. forming-storming-norming-performing)
- Groups have an endpoint.
- Working in groups is difficult and very rewarding.
We then had a discussion about different approaches to organising groups, and how different formats might work in different circumstances. We were particularly thinking about decentralised groups (e.g. XR) and groups with hierachies and traditional ways of working like societies and committees.
- It can depend on how many people are in the group. In a large group, it’s hard for everyone to be heard.
- Decentralised structures might allow for more creativity and can act quickly. But they might not be doing the most useful or impactful thing if there isn’t a lot of strategising or deliberation.
- More conventional structures can get traditional and staid, with new ideas being rejected because “that’s not how we do things”.
- There’s maybe a balance between flexibility or freestyle and rigidity. Groups need to find ways to avoid getting stuck in one way of doing things so the group can keep adapting.