Fellowship Charter – joining up conversations

[Laura Billings]

Hopefully everyone has had a chance to view the Fellowship Charter Exhibition, and see the growing list of comments - which I am personally very excited about!

I thought it would be useful to share my thoughts on what’s happening from now until the next Council meeting in December, and provide a space to link together different conversations and comments so far (hat tip to David Wilcox)

How can you get involved?

1. View the Charter Exhibition online and leave a comment
This is a central space for Fellows to add examples of activities to expand on the ideas and examples in the Exhibition.

2. Join a discussion online or in person on what the future of Fellowship looks like, and whether the proposed text of the Charter supports our ambition.


What can I do to help?
This is a great opportunity for Council members, staff, and Fellows to work together.

1. Tell us what you’re doing as a Fellow. Add a comment online and help develop the exhibition.

2. Help raise awareness and join conversations up. Feel free to use this post as a central space to signpost and summarise, to help in gathering feedback.

RSA staff are posting information online, and raising awareness at events and meetings, and through email and phone conversations. It would be fantastic if Council members, and other Fellows could do the same within your own Fellowship networks.


Your comments on the Charter will be considered by the Fellowship Council in December 2009 and the Trustee Board in January 2010. If you have any questions, please do get in touch.

List of other discussion on this:
Thoughts on first meeting of Council
London network Ning

[David Wilcox]

Thanks Laura - since I nudged for a discussion space, here's my 2p. From the exhibition, I take the key words as

--------

Inspire - by sharing and promoting new thinking and ideas
Support - by fostering a connected Fellowship community
Enable - people to deliver change through access to practical tools and skills

Members from all ranks, professions and trades
RSA Fellows are committed, talented, public-spirited individuals, who lead by example.

Circulation of the most useful and Beneficial Knowledge
The RSA Fellowship is an influential group of people which - knowing that as a diverse network we are greater than the sum of our parts - work together to improve the prospects of our communities and the lives of our Fellow citizens.

Exertions of individuals for the general advantage of the community
In order to achieve this, we commit to working collaboratively and practically to make a positive difference to the world around us. We will be open to new ideas and committed to spreading the best of them. We will be supportive of others and respectful of differences. We will be honest, courteous and transparent in our working methods. We will be generous with out time and abilities not seeking personal or financial gain and measuring our success by the impact that we have, not the recognition receive.

---------

I started to think about how these high-level ideals might be applied in practice - and so how people might find it esier to comment on them .... in particular "We will be generous with out time and abilities not seeking personal or financial gain and measuring our success by the impact that we have, not the recognition receive."

That places the Fellowship firmly as selfless volunteers ... which is one model for action. But does it work for everyone, on all projects? Is there no role for socially-oriented businesses, or social entrepreneurs for example?

Then another thought occurred. I think it is difficult for the diverse, distributed Fellowship to self-organise and operate effectively without the support of staff. The RSA is a rich, mutually-dependant ecoystem of projects, lectures, other events and activities where staff and Fellows have complementary and sometimes overlapping roles.

Does it really make sense to have a Charter just for the Fellowship ... which specifies how just one element of the RSA will operate as volunteers, while others are paid? I'm not making a point about rewards, but rather about collaborative relationships. How about a post-bureacratic RSA in which we all commit to some shared purpose and ways of working? Then we could figure out (if we need them) codes for different roles.

Is this totally off-track? Or can we be innovative in our thinking, sparked by the Charter, rather than just pledge and comment?

[Laura Billings]

Hi David

Thanks for the ideas and comments, I will make sure that these points are included in the feedback to Council. And if anyone has any more ideas or comments in response to continue this discussion, please do add them below.

Just to be clear - all of the words in the image make up the Charter, not just the sections you outlined.

An interesting point about social entrepreneurs. The idea about not seeking financial gain from being a Fellow goes right back to our founding roots, when premiums (prizes) for ideas and inventions were only given to those who were wiling to share their ideas for the good of society, and hadn't patented them and were seeking funding to develop personal riches. This still stands today, and, in my mind at least, social entrepreneurs and community interest company models would already seem to be covered by this, as they are not primarily for profit, but for benefit.

Also an interesting point about RSA staff, and I agree that this will only work if everyone is signed up to a shared ethos. Staff here are encouraged to become Fellows themselves, so are also committed to working in this way. But it's good food for thought, and I'll make sure it gets fed in.

[David Wilcox]

Thanks Laura - really helpful

I wonder if the principles of open collaboration, creative commons etc now reflect the original purpose as I think you imply? And the new organisational structures for benefit are also in line.

If so, I think that "We will be generous with out time and abilities not seeking personal or financial gain and measuring our success by the impact that we have, not the recognition receive".

should be modified to reflect this. At the moment it ties people into a volunteering model.

Can you give us a bit more on how decisions will be made on these fundamental points?

David

[David Wilcox]

How about

"We will be generous with our time and abilities, placing social benefit above personal or financial gain, and measuring our success by the impact that we have, not the recognition receive".

That would allow Fellows to bring their work in nonprofit organisations, social enterprise etc alongside the paid-for work of staff on projects ... and also enable Fellows to propose to RSA collaborative projects where they could be appropriately remunerated.

I'm not suggesting this in order to gain personally from association with the RSA. It's just that if RSA is too prescriptive in telling Fellows how to behave, then there will be much less useful doing.

RSA is, in effect, in competition with many other organisations and self-organising opportunities for the skills and commitment of its Fellows. In order to achieve more social action it needs to offer more help on can-do, and less can't-do.

Just my thoughts. Is there any discussion going on among council members, in the closed group, that they might share?

[Laura Billings]

Hi David

"Can you give us a bit more on how decisions will be made on these fundamental points?"
We're in feedback stage at the moment, so the focus is on getting as many Fellows as possible to view the Charter, and comment or discuss in forums such as these. All feedback will be collated and taken for consideration by the Council in Dec 09, and the Trustee Board in Jan 2010. We'll work out what happens next from there.

Thank you for the suggested edits above - and the wider point on not excluding social enterprise. I'll make sure this point is included in the feedback.

If anyone wants to come back on this point, or add more examples of the types of activities they would like to do as Fellows, and whether the Charter speaks to this, please do comment.

[David Wilcox]

I posted some thoughts on the London City Network site, because Clare Reilly started a discussion there and three council members have reported back on the first meeting.
My points there were that I think the charter has problems on three fronts: the stuff about how to behave is - in my view - a bit patronising; the Charter is just for Fellows when what we need is more staff-Fellow collaboration; the line about "not seeking personal or financial gain" could rule out social enterprise and expects us all to be selfless unpaid volunteers. OK in some circumstances, but very limiting on action.
Thanks so much Laura for your really helpful responses. Rather than just wind on with drafting criticisms, I thought it might be fun to come up with a different version covering these points ... but hopefully in the spirit behind the the Charter. So here's a whole-RSA Charter (or whatever we might call it). I'm suggesting we bring it alive by links to examples, guidelines and anything else needed to put it into operation.

----------

Fellows

Feel free to tell your story
Fellows have been chosen because of their inspiring achievements - so we hope you will share those with others. Link -> Here's some examples, and ways you can tell your story.

Do good, collaboratively
The main purpose of the Fellowship is to help you do more than you can alone, with Fellows, and others you will meet through the RSA. Link -> We have some priorities for action that we hope you will support.

Put social benefit ahead of private gain
We hope you will find many networking benefits from the Fellowship, but when the RSA's name is associated with a project the purpose should be social benefit. Link -> There's some further guidance here.

Staff

Be open, participative, transparent
Staff are at the core of the RSA - so your actions set the style for collaborative working. Link -> You'll find more about the way we do this here.

Look for opportunities to support and work with Fellows
The way we work within the RSA should be a demonstration of the collaboration we aim for with others. Link -> There are some examples of staff-Fellow projects here, and some suggestions for doing more.

Put social benefit ahead of brand prominence
The best way to get things done is not to seek too much credit - actions speak louder than logos.
Link -> Our marketing consultants have some guidelines on how to promote the RSA brand in a collaborative spirit.

[Tessy Britton]

The reaction/comment to the draft Charter has been very interesting. Not very much comment has been online, so it is difficult to get a sense of what Fellows think more widely. Jackie Elliman commented on the Charter:

"I actually like the new Charter document (not everyone does) and feel that its graphic form effectively links the RSA's history and its current activities. I also like the "Inspire, Support, Enable" slogan, even though some consider it tautologous."

There are certainly some that like it and others with reservations, as Jackie notes. The Charter is a wonderful opportunity to encourage harmony and Fellowship, and I really admire the thinking behind the Charter, and its visual execution. My own suggestion would be to give some of the wording a 'lighter touch' in places, consider changing some of the unnecessarily controversial elements and keep it very high level?

I really like what David has written above. It has a real sense of mutuality and I would like us to take these to the Council meeting in December if possible. I am not sure how or where we could bring these in - perhaps as a more detailed set of points.... or 'how we are collectively working to deliver the Charter day-to-day'. From education, business and elsewhere we understand that we get what we measure... and introducing a space where collaborative working between Fellows and RSA can be highlighted in some way, would perhaps be helpful in encouraging more of this type of activity.

@Laura Billings The points about personal gain and the RSA's history are fascinating in the light of more recent views of intellectual property. I read an interesting article a few months ago, reviewing the issues we all know about, around music and literary rights. The point they made was people are finding it hard to profit from invention in the same way (songs, books etc), but that new models will have to based more around work, as measured by time spent working. Many people are fans of the new 'free' culture, but even those who are gifting their work and ideas, are frequently still seeking some form of recognition (understandably in my view), hence the 'attribution' element of some Creative Commons licences.

Trying to develop more explicitly a culture of generosity at the RSA is a very positive aim indeed particularly on social projects, but accompanying that with appreciation and recognition I feel is important - and there is plenty of evidence at the RSA of that already... through lectures, Journal etc.

Ensuring that 'RSA' social output is open source (either from RSA or Fellows or both) is essential, both philosophically and to comply with 'charitable aims'. It is such an emergent , complex and controversial set of issues that could (and probably should) occupy discussion for a long time. Perhaps we could promote generosity very broadly, rather than specifically, as in the final point in the draft Charter?

[Laura Billings]

@David thanks for that. interesing points, and some nice language in your version. it's interesting that despite your previous comment on this only working if we all pitch in together under the same ethos, you've still split out staff from Fellows, when a lot of staff are Fellows!

I should also say that the Charter document was planned to be, as Tessy says above, a high-level overview, to bring a sense of coherence and understanding. There is also a lot of thinking being done around the practicalities: what the opportunities are, how to access them, how to articulate them best or make them more interactive, and how to showcase good stuff. But we decided to separate that part out from the Charter document itself to avoid it being too long and complicated. It would be interesting to think about ways to develop a second level of detail, again as Tessy notes.

@Tessy great link between open source / creative commons today, and our patent-free history!

[Avril Baigent]

I have to say that I find this all rather frustrating. There is a wide difference between commenting on a charter and pledging support for it, and that difference seems to be reflected in the words of the Charter too. I feel that the tone is chivvying and nagging rather than supporting, and I'm not sure, had I been presented with this in my membership pack, that I could ever have felt able to become a fellow. I don't know why there has to be such an emphasis on new projects, either. Surely there is as much benefit to the wider society in enabling fellows to do the amazing and inspiring stuff they already do, better?
I like David's version better. It is much more high level, and I like the idea of linking with case studies - inspiring by example is always a good idea. I'm not sure there's the need to split between fellows and staff, but something brief like this would give a good idea of what the Society is for and how it works. It will be very interesting to see how this all develops over the coming months.

[Laura Billings]

Hi Avril

Thank you for your input.

Sorry if the different ways of feeding back aren't clear. The pledges below the website were hoped to be a way for Fellows to think about what they already do, or might want to start doing, that speaks to the values in the Charter and share them with others. The discussions are a space for wider conversations or comments to be fed back into the process, as is happening here.

And you are absolutely right about the huge value in enhancing what Fellows already do, through connections and collaboration. It is a point that was also made at the first Council meeting. The pledge I put up about helping young volunteers is an activity I have been doing for the past 3 years and will continue to do, so it's definitely not a new project! I guess what is new is a publically articulated shared sense that this is what it's all about, and the forum and parameters to do it effectively.

I hope that answers a few of your concerns initially, and I will make sure your points are added to the feedback.

[David Wilcox]

@Laura - thanks for continuing responses, really appreciated. It's good to know a lot of staff are Fellows, but I'm not sure that helps with the Charter as it stands
- a key point in the Charter is "not seeking personal or financial gain". That means non-staff Fellows do things voluntarily, while staff-Fellows get paid if/when we all "pitch in together".
- the Charter is meant to apply to all Fellows, while staff decide whether to opt-in (or not) to the ethos.
I think we need something where staff and Fellows are on an equal footing. I'm not suggesting equal pay on projects (!) - just that we should grapple with the challenge of designing a mutual, whole-system approach, where people do of course have different roles, and there is a mix of gift and paid-for economy.
The Charter seems rooted - perhaps understandably - in a 19th/20th century view of social action. Tessy offers some very useful links to more recent models.
All this is really challenging ... but then that's what makes it interesting.
In my view the only way to design whole systems (if we go that route) is to get the key interests together to do it in the same room. The Charter feels as if it has been designed somewhere else (by whom?) and offered up with very limited opportunity for input. Which is not to minimise what you are trying to do here.
And while I agree we need a high-level overview - if that's all it is most people will find it difficult to connect to the day-to-day realities of personal and project activities. It becomes a rather elite and exclusive discussion, with only a few obsessives like me trying to get behind the concepts.
At a practical engagement level, how about asking council members if they would help with this process. Apart from Tessy and a very few others, they are nowhere to be seen or heard. If the council is meant to be relevant at a strategic level, surely the Charter is exactly where they should be focussed?
In terms on multi-layered multi-stakeholders document consultation there's some great ideas from Steph Gray here. If stuff is on the web it is, of course, very easy to do short docs with links to practicalities ... or in print to have appendices ... or in exhibitions maybe to have side panels?
If you agree there are some important issues at stake, this needs to be a bigger conversation. Anyway, thanks for keeping it going this far.

[David Wilcox]

Thanks Avril. Phew, thought it was just me!
Your point about projects is fundament: can RSA objectives be realised mainly through the good work of Fellows, or should Fellows work together on projects for social and civic benefit?
The collaborative project focus was established by Matthew Taylor in 2007, in an email you can read here (scroll down page).

"In essence, our aim is that the RSA becomes a network for civic innovation, empowering both Fellows and staff to develop new initiatives that promote and deliver progress in society. We want to make it easier for any Fellow who wants to get involved to connect with other like-minded Fellows and to develop initiatives that seek to remove barriers to progress, working locally, in professional groups or simply among people who share interests and enthusiasms. This is a huge step, arguably one of the biggest in our illustrious history.".

There was - as far as I can recall - no consultation on this. I was personally inspired by the idea ... but it has proved difficult to bring to fruition. I doubt if most Fellows even know that it is policy ... but it does, I think, underly the way that the Charter has been drafted, and guidelines like these.

I'm making a bit of a nuisance of myself by pushing for some simple explanations of what the basic questions and answers are - discussion here. I guess it's my background as first a journalist, then a community engagement specialist. Both taught me that if you nudge through high-level documents that have embedded assumptions that people don't recognise, it can lead to trouble further down the line.