More information about the re-invention of the 250-year-old RSA, with a stronger role for its 26,000 Fellows, emerges from the blog of chief executive Matthew Taylor, and an independent report of an online discussion and poll. I think the two taken together highlight the need for the RSA to open up the process. In Farewells and the Future Matthew Taylor writes:
Work for the Fellowship re-launch is gathering pace. Our focus groups have confirmed that Fellows really are up for a more challenging and rewarding role.
I've also just received a full report of the independent online discussion among Fellows that I reported here. Thirty five registered, 14 took part in a Virtual Coffeehouse Challenge. It clearly isn't representative, but perhaps raises some issues that might not surface so readily in an open meeting. Catherine Shovlin, who carried out the Synthetron exercise, writes:
Although 82% of the participants were reasonably happy with the RSA, The discussion highlighted three key concerns:
1. POTENTIAL ENERGY: Under-realisation of the potential of the Fellowship (a wasted resource)
2. CONNECTIVITY: Greater scope for improved connectivity between Fellows (for personal social benefits and more global / societal gain)
3. BROKEN CIRCUITS: A disconnect between the “official” RSA (staff) and the Fellows – even going as far as a suspected conspiracy for a significant minority, and undermining goodwill.
I think that the challenge facing the RSA is relevant to many other organisations trying to rethink what they can offer - and gain - from members in an age when there are lots of other ways of connecting with people who may have shared interests. Earlier RSA items here. In his blog item Matthew continues:
We've had fantastic pro bono support from the agency ?What If!, who have both forced us to think though exactly what we are trying to achieve and offered us some great new ideas. We are also hoping we can draw on the innovation expertise and support of NESTA.
The new Fellowship model will have much in common with the best examples of the Coffeehouse Challenge.
As the CHC gathers pace I have been thinking about what makes an event successful and what this tells us about the kind of Fellows' networks we want to develop in the future.
In essence it's all about connecting three key links in the chain.
First, creating the right networks of people - sharing commitment and values but bringing different skills and perspectives.
Second, it's about clarity in thinking - what do we want to achieve and how can we go about it?
Third, it's turning intentions into actions in a way that is effective but realistic, given all the other demands on people's energies and time.
Getting groups of people to work together to achieve real benefits to wider society is part science part art. It involves good process, clear thinking and soft skills such as communication and empathy.
I hope that through the CHC and the new plans for the Fellowship the RSA can develop strong insights into how to make this happen. Insights that we can then share across the Fellowship and more widely.
Moving on
I have been having some very useful discussions about the RSA's future.
Last week I was at a large and enthusiastic gathering of Fellows in Birmingham and earlier this week it was the staff that gathered to brainstorm the RSA's role in social progress. I told all our staff that I want them to become Associate Fellows. They don't get the letters after their names, or voting rights, but it means that apart from their work they can participate in emerging RSA networks in their neighbourhoods or areas of interest.
The team here is really keen to get going.
Here's more of the summary of the online discussion (pictured above), filling out the main concerns highlighted above:
Any comment here has at least two-thirds of the group’s support, those in bold have 90-100% support.
POTENTIAL ENERGY:
There is a high level of agreement around this topic and shared sense of frustration that the RSA does not add up to the sum of its parts, let alone more than that:
• not utilising the power of the fellowship
• really about under-optimised as a resource of fellowship
• It is an organisation with huge potential
• a feeling of potential but not yet realised
and there is a clear call to action:
• engage the Fellows. that is the strength and play to it
CONNECTIVITY:
When asked what they love about the RSA, and what they would recommend to others, the social benefits play a strong role:
• meeting people who are interested in big issues facing us
• the cafe is so casual and easy, other people are so interesting
and the perceived barriers to connecting with other Fellows show up as a source of frustration:
• I feel like a passive participant - not sure how to meet and make things happen with other fellows - can't work out the 'rules' - have met other fellows socially which is very pleasant but would like to take part in more working groups or project groups
• Why can't we have an open, networky process of developing?
• not enabling access to other fellows easily
though they also have some constructive ideas:
• the fellows have to lead and direct rather than wait and respond
• more opportunities for informal gatherings - a bar from 6-7pm say (for those in London), or a permanent Fellows Table in the restaurant
• I like the “Virtual RSA” idea - indeed it is something that I, as a remote rural Fellow, have advocated for more than a decade. I welcome this attempt to engage Fellows in disciplined conversations.
BROKEN CIRCUITS:
There is general concern about “our RSA” or “their RSA” – and a clear sense of “us and them” on the part of the Fellowship
• there's the sense of a favoured circle ... it's not clear how things are developing.
• There is a “personality cult” at work here - not a good thing for the future of the Society unless its ambition is to be an Establishment stronghold - a sure recipe for extinction!
• not sure how people 'get chosen' but certainly misses out on a lot of contributors - and very good ones - rather the favoured few
This also affects the look and feel of the organisation and prompts statements about a less than inclusive attitude
• feels rather elitist while preaching the reverse
• feels a bit self important
• very smug
• paternalistic culture
• really hate that it is so damn worthy and that I get treated like a kid- patronised in the lectures
SUGGESTED ACTIONS
Despite the concerns explained above, there is a lot of positive energy around Fellowship – the sense is of making points in order to help the organisation have more impact, rather than just griping. There is recognition that changes are already happening:
• there are a huge range of new ideas abounding at the moment to encourage fellows to participate in issues which they feel strongly about I welcome that and hope that the energy can become focused and productive.
And further suggestions with widespread support include:
• please feed results back to RSA - chairman and CE need to hear this as they don’t seem to know!
• employ someone specifically to help fellows network within similar interests or skills
• combine discussion and informal networking for fellows around key themes
• moving from hierarchical staff-led processes to more open collaborative process by enabling Fellows to converse, contribute, act together
• we don't have to wait for the rsa if we want to talk to each other. Set up a group in Facebook and invite Fellows to join, and start talking
There are also signs of the beginning of a sense of empowerment, that the Fellows can be part of the change and work with the “official” organisation rather than just waiting for it to happen:
• what can we do as fellows of the rsa - the rsa doesn't exist - if you mean the elite management of the rsa then what should they do to assist us to change the issues
• we need to be that change - we need to be active in the areas to ensure we don't typify the smugness
I'm definitely one of those who feels there is enormous potential in the RSA Fellowship - though I'm not too happy with the term. Since no-one (that I can discover) gets turned down, it really means member. However, I strongly believe that dealing with the concerns raised above, and releasing that potential, is best done by running an open re-launch process on the general lines I was writing about last week. This is underlined by part of Catherine's analysis:
Appetite for change: this group is certainly ready to see some changes. They have one of the highest levels of difference we have seen in a discussion group (other than a bank in the middle of a change process where the staff were concerned that the management were in denial of the crisis and the need for improvement). Based on this debate, there will not be much resistance to change, so long as it is improving those issues they see as needing adjustment – namely the active involvement of Fellows with “management” in the running of the RSA and with each other in the achievement of the RSA goals.
... and the key conclusions
• There is an appetite for change
• There is a lot of potential to be harnessed within the Fellowship
• There is a desire for more information and more involvement in the changes, and a hope that a more Fellowship led structure will emerge, including using this kind of tool to engage and listen to dispersed groups.
I think it is excellent that Matthew Taylor is giving the chief executive's view. How many other Third Sector or association CEOs do that in the UK? Now, how about an open blog or forum on the main RSA site for members, potential members, and well-wishers? Or would it be more healthy for RSA members to set something up themselves? I certainly think another Synthetron session with more people involved would be interesting.
There's an independent group meeting next week to discuss various ways that social media could benefit the RSA, so drop a comment below if you are interested, or mail me. Meanwhile I'll carry on with the social reporter role.
Technorati Tags: membership, rsa
Recent Comments