Note from Sharing Power Cell 3
Summary of key points
We heard how one organisation is fundamentally reviewing their practices, examining their data, and considering how they can apply their resources and influence in ways that achieve a fundamental shift in power in society and in their own services for those they work with. Another told us how they were taking advantage of an increased interest by residents in their community to build agency (purpose, belonging, power).
Other organisations will also be reviewing how they work in the light of Covid-19 but change will require determined leadership, and new tools, including use of data, better frameworks for co-production and for accountability. It’s important agencies don’t undermine and disempower community building by temporarily parachuting volunteers in from outside.
While COVID-19 has highlighted the power of community and connection, some groups of people have become even more isolated, unheard and/or under-served, and some have effectively been silenced, eg prisoners confined to their cells without access to support. We need to do more to highlight this loss of power.
A discussion about inequality can allow everyone to talk about their own experience of power and privilege, and when they have felt themselves to be at a disadvantage. This type of discussion can lead to profound change.
We need to move away from extraction (where those in positions of relative power exploit others for their own ends) towards investment (where we support people and organisations to become more powerful, in their own right).
In more detail
Caroline Slocock, co-convenor of the Better Way, introduced the cell, the third in a series of meetings. She explained that the aim was to share insights with each other and inspire each other to do more, and that we would share learning from these discussions with the wider network and beyond.
Our Better Way Call to Action pointed out that power is in too few hands, and sharing power is one of the ways to redress that. Many of our Better Way discussions are pointing towards the importance of giving people authentic voices and platforms, through a process of what has been described as radical listening. At our first meeting Sue Tibballs, the thought-leader for this cell, reminded us that although power is concentrated in too few hands and formal institutions including government do have enormous power, we have more power than we think, and so a key question is how to mobilise that. In our second meeting Whitney Iles described the value of reflective practice when bringing lived experience into organisations and policy making, working genuinely together, not labelling people, putting aside preconceptions.
This time we want to explore how, as organisations are shifting in COVID-19, reviewing their strategies and structure, they do so in ways which share power better. We started with two presentations:
Sonya Ruparel from Turn2us pointed out that during COVID-19 power imbalances have increased and the charity’s data is showing that financial hardship has become worse for those who were already marginalised before COVID-19, including many Black, Asian and minoritised ethnic people, many disabled people, and many women. The data also reveals that Turn2u distributed £1.3m in emergency grants in eight weeks, and while people from BAME backgrounds received 35% of the grants, they were also less likely to be successful in their applications. The charity is seeking to understand why this happened and how that bias can be addressed in future.
Examination of the data has driven a stronger sense of urgency in Turn2us, to consider how to use its own power more responsibly, and not reinforce power imbalances in grant making and partnership formation for example. Turn2us is now working towards co-designing a framework for co-production. This will set out where, when, and how the charity should and must work with experts by experience. Sonya noted that in the crisis it has been easier to engage users in co-production, and that Zoom has been a good leveller.
Turn2us only exists because of power imbalances in society, Sonya said, and there is no good reason why people should have insufficient money to live on in the UK, and so the charity seeks to use its programme work and the relationships it holds to demand systemic change. Sometimes power is invisible and is visible only in the violence which is done to people’s lives, but it can be revealed through data analysis. So Turn2us is introducing a power analysis and policy and advocacy objectives in all its programmes, working with lived experts. It is also designing an accountability framework for the whole organisation, to enable service users to hold the charity to account, to deliver what it says it will deliver, and to use its resources and power responsibly, listening and learning from feedback, and responding.
As we learn to share power, Sonya said, we need to learn how to hold ourselves to account, and enable others to hold us to account, and have the humility to accept where we need to change what we do, how we work, and who we work with.
Tom Neumark, from the Peel in Clerkenwell, explained the organisation’s vision to build community connections in a neighbourhood, which is very mixed but where there has not always been a lot of mixing. The Peel aims to build ‘agency’ among local people, that is, the ability to shape the context of one’s life.
Tom quoted Jon Alexander, who has described agency as ‘purpose and belonging and power’, and he described the varied experiences in Clerkenwell, both positive and negative, in the pandemic:
Purpose: In COVID-19, as with many other neighbourhoods, there was an upsurge in community volunteering, mutual aid and participation. At the height of the lockdown 300 meals a week were donated by local restaurants and delivered by residents to people who were self-isolating. But for many their sense of purpose was shaken, with a lot of people searching for something else in their lives. And some were far too concerned with immediate pressing difficulties in their own lives to think beyond this.
Belonging: Clerkenwell was a dormitory neighbourhood for many of its residents, who go elsewhere for work and leisure. But in the pandemic that changed, and suddenly the neighbourhood assumed much more significance. Some people connected with their neighbours more and their sense of belonging increased. But for others the day to day routine in the neighbourhood has been severed, and the sense of belonging has been under strain.
Power: the Peel has been giving practical guidance for people who want to make something happen, in effect taking power into their own hands. For example a ‘bake and take’ initiative, where residents meet on line, bake something at the same time, and deliver it to a neighbour. But rules about how people can meet each other, use streets, and so on, are imposed quickly and change frequently, and this can produce a feeling of dislocation and powerlessness. New relationships had between mutual aid groups and the council but at the same time there is a tendency in the council to seek to formalise mutual aid activity, and this has resulted in resistance from those who don’t want to be turned into a service.
So, the Peel as an organisation has been trying to redirect its resources to become a platform for those who have felt a loss of purpose, belonging, and power. It is learning to ask ‘what do you want to achieve and how can we meet you there?’ rather than expecting people to fit into processes set by the Peel. The organisation is also training local people to act as radical listeners, so that they can help to catalyse activity which comes from residents themselves.
Breakout sessions
Participants broke into smaller groups to discuss these topics further. Feedback from the breakout sessions, and the subsequent discussion facilitated by Steve Wyler, Better Way co-convenor, included the following points:
Shifting power in organisations
There are many example of positive practice, but many agencies are a long way behind. Some organisations still want to be seen as powerful in themselves. Big ‘oil tanker’ charities and public sector agencies will not achieve the turnaround needed without radical rethinking and redistribution of power, not just to those with lived experience and clients/beneficiaries, but also within the organisation itself.
Moreover, there are some big structural problems in the charity sector. A lot of charities still operate according to benevolent and paternalistic models developed in the Victorian era. We expect charity boards to be unpaid, but this results in less Board diversity among charities than among FTSE100 companies.
COVID has shown that large institutions can act at speed when necessary, but this requires leadership from the top. If the CEO and chair are not up for change, nothing will happen. It was suggested that those in leadership roles should consider what they control, what they influence, and what is beyond their influence and control. They can also reflect on their ability to bring about personal, interpersonal, organisational and societal change.
Voices that have been silenced
It’s a dangerous time. Many young people in particular are looking for security and certainty but feel things are out of their control, and are feeling powerless. Many people feel that things are not right, but that they don’t have a voice, and are not listened to, or when they are it is only as part of a tick-box exercise.
Furthermore, in the pandemic, many people have remained unheard and/or under-served. What is happening in prisons is silent, invisible, not covered in media, kept out of sight and out of mind. Because prisoners are being kept in isolation, groups working with them have been unable to visit and represent them properly. There are others who in different ways, have also found themselves effectively silenced, including for example, Gypsy and Romany communities, those experiencing domestic violence, and the families of patients with Do Not Resuscitate notices. There needs to be more concerted efforts to tell these stories and also data can be powerful in revealing where these power imbalances lie and where they have got worse.
When people are heard, those working in policy and media roles need to consider their responsibility to work with people in ways which do not ‘strip people’s stories from them.’
Addressing inequality
Many organisations have introduced EDI (Equality, Diversity, Inclusion) strategies. Some in our discussion felt that these were ineffective, especially when they categorise people according to protected characteristics groups, with the implication that one group of people has power and another group is a victim. A few people might be placed on Boards or appointed to other leadership roles, but this can be tokenistic, and deeper problems remain. Some less visible forms of inequality, including class, are largely ignored, and EDI strategies often fail to address intersectionality, and the reality that different forms of power (or the absence of it) can be experienced by everyone, to some degree.
It was suggested that a discussion about inequality can be a good way to begin, because it can allow everyone to talk about their own experience of power and privilege, and when they have felt themselves to be at a disadvantage. This type of discussion can be the start of more profound change.
Shifting power at community level
Some areas have experienced persistent disadvantage and social inequality, over many years, despite considerable spending on regeneration and renewal programmes. This was largely because those programmes focused on individual deficits, and failed to share power, or even ask people what they really wanted.
In the pandemic the community response came first, then the more formalised voluntary sector, then the state. This has produced a greater respect for community activity, and a desire for more porous boundaries between informal and formal action.
But not all community activity in COIVID-19 produced a positive shift in power. Where people offered their services as volunteers, well-meaning, often white middle-class people often became involved, sometimes from outside the area, and this could be disempowering and/or undermine the community building that comes through genuine mutual aid. Some even started to tell other people what they should be doing, even what they should be eating, in ways which were very disempowering.
We need to stop talking about disadvantaged communities, as if the people who live in the communities are the problem, and require outsiders to sort things out for them.
A need for change in the benefits system
Across the public and social sector there is a pervasive inequality between those who are employed and receive a salary, and those who are unemployed and on benefits and only, at best, receive a voucher for their work. There is a need to change the system so that it is possible to reward contributions without disrupting benefits. It was pointed out that ten years ago a coalition of charities called for a community allowance which would provide a benefits disregard for people carrying out paid part-time community work, but this was ultimately blocked by senior DWP officials and Ministers. It may be time to revive this campaign, or something equivalent.
Political education
Many people don’t only want to tell their story. They also want an opportunity to work with others on the solutions.
That means developing an understanding of how the system works, and carrying out a power analysis. This can include an understanding of how invisible power can operate, through ideas and beliefs which can be a force for progressive change but which can also produce harm.
Listening exercises therefore need to be accompanied by political education, if we wish to see a democracy which in which true sharing of power can take place.
Sue Tibballs, thought leader for this Better Way cell, shared some closing reflections. COVID19, she said, has had disruptive effects, for good and for bad. Central government has provided massive injections of state funding to support people and businesses. Local government has looked afresh at local charities and community groups, devolving more responsibility to them, asking them to step in.
For some people it has felt that their power to act and to make a difference has been growing. But as we head in the discussion many people have lost power, become more isolated, even silenced.
In the coming period, civil society will need to renegotiate relationships between those operating at different levels, e.g. people (as service users, donors, volunteers), the local voluntary and community sector, and the national voluntary and community sector.
We will need, Sue said, to make sure that the work we do moves away from ‘extraction’ where organisations are taking what they can use from people with lived experience, or where big organisations are exploiting small organisations. Instead, we need to find ways to practice ‘investment’ , and this will include helping the people we work with to understand how power operates, creating opportunities for them to be active in pursuit of greater power.
Caroline Slocock concluded by saying that it was good that the power of connection and community was increasingly being celebrated by politicians and others but we must do what we can to also highlight the isolation and loss of power of certain groups, despite the upsurge in mutual aid.
Next meeting
The group thanked Grace Wyld who has supported its work, and who is moving on from the Sheila McKecknie Foundation.
The group also agreed it would be useful to continue to meet. Themes could include:
Developing the accountability framework
Understanding sources of power
Documenting the loss of power
Changing the narrative of power
Caroline encouraged participants in the cell to suggest further ideas and also to contribute blogs on the topics we have been discussing. The date of the next meeting is 28 October, 3-4.30 pm.