News

Talking about mutual aid is so particularly compelling to me right now in a presidential election year. It feels like the presidential election demands so much passivity from us, asking us to watch celebrity drama unfold on a level we can do very little to impact, leaving many people frustrated and relatively helpless. Even if a candidate we prefer wins, our experiences show that justice and alleviation of material suffering for targeted people is unlikely to be delivered from the federal level. Mutual aid projects let us engage right now, at the most local level, to help each other with immediate needs and to mobilize us to practice politics rather than just consuming information about politics and talking about it. I think many people are craving ways to participate more fully and actively in making change.

Here is an article, just out from Social Text, I have been working on for the last couple years about mutual aid, digging into the themes that I have been exploring in recent talks, in this little animated video and in my fall 2019 class at University of Chicago. Many thanks to Hi′ilei Hobart and  Tamara Kneese for co-editing this special issue on Radical Care, and to the journal’s managing editor Marie Buck, and to Roberto Sirvent for giving me feedback on a prior draft.

There is nothing new about the dynamic where some people who identify as feminists struggle with transphobia and want to exclude trans people from various spaces. We’ve been battling this out for so long! Recently this came up in a feminist group I am part of, where some of the cis women in the group wanted to have an option to have cis women-only events, even though the group, overall, has a trans inclusive policy. Some people asserted that if the group has people of color-only events (which it does) it should be able to have cis women-only events. The group is intergenerational, and there are some significant differences in experience between the members that, in some ways, track to our experiences being politicized in different times with different ideas about gender. A friend in the group who is a trans person of color wrote a very clear email to the group with resources for learning, and gave me permission to share it here. I share it in case you are struggling in a similar group and can save time by cribbing any of this. I am moved by his commitment to help people with whom he shares many values to come into alignment with solidarity and care on this issue. I am interested in the moments when we confront painful differences and decide to try to influence each other with love and clarity rather than just leaving. Sometimes leaving is the right thing to do, but sometimes, if conditions are right, we can succeed at helping each other come to new understandings and actions. I hope this is the case in this instance.

Hi friends,

This fall, I taught a class about mutual aid where we talked a lot about the differences between mutual aid projects that provide direct aid as part of radical movements trying to get to the root causes of problems and charity or social services organizations that provide direct aid in ways that often supplement, stabilize, or sustain violent and coercive hierarchies. We also talked and read about organizations that have started out as mutual aid projects and become social service or charity organizations. We talked about how organizations get de-fanged or co-opted, and what kinds of efforts mutual aid participants make to prevent this. As we read various texts about mutual aid projects from different places and times, I tried to keep track on a chart of some of the qualities and tendencies that seem to be present in mutual aid projects, versus those that seem to define social service or charity projects. I hope this might be a helpful tool for people within organizations providing direct aid to talk to each other about. None of the observations below are meant to be absolutes–many organizations have a mix of these tendencies and qualities. The chart only hopes to suggest that an overwhelming presence of qualities in the right-hand column or a drift toward those tendencies and qualities sometimes undermines the potential for mutual aid projects to build new social relations.

Horizontalist and Participatory Characteristics of Mutual Aid Projects	Characteristics of Hierarchical, Charitable Non-Profits and Social Service Programs (or what tends to change about mutual aid projects as they move toward becoming charities or social service programs)
“Members” = people making decisions	“Members” = donors
De-professionalized survival work done by volunteers	Service work staffed by professionals
Beg, borrow, and steal supplies	Grant money for supplies/philanthropic control of program
Use people power to resist any efforts by government to regulate or shut down activities	Follow government regulations about how the work needs to happen (usually requiring more money, causing reliance on grants, paid staff with professional degrees)
Survival work rooted in deep and wide principles of anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism, racial justice, gender justice, disability justice	Siloed single-issue work, serving a particular population or working on one area of policy reform, disconnected from other ‘issues’
Open meetings, as many people making decisions and doing the work as possible	Closed board meetings, governance by professionals or people associated with big institutions or big donors, program operated by staff, volunteers limited to stuffing envelopes or other menial tasks occasionally, volunteers not part of high level decision making
Efforts to support people facing the most dire conditions	Imposing eligibility criteria for services that divide people into “deserving” and “undeserving”
Give things away without expectations	Conditions for getting help or participating in something—you have to be sober, have a certain family status, have a certain immigration status, not have outstanding warrants, not have certain convictions, etc.
People participate voluntarily because of passion about injustice	People come looking for a job, wanting to climb a hierarchy or become “important”
Efforts to flatten hierarchies—e.g. flat wage scales if anyone is paid, training so that new people can do work they weren’t professionally trained to do, rotating facilitation roles, language access	Establishing and maintaining hierarchies of pay, status, decision-making power, influence
Values self-determination for people impacted or targeted by harmful social conditions	Offers “help” to “underprivileged” absent of a context of injustice or strategy for transforming the conditions; paternalistic; rescue fantasies and saviorism
Consensus decision-making to maximize everyone’s participation, to make sure people impacted by decisions are the ones making them, to avoid under-represented groups getting outvoted, and to build the skill of caring about each other’s participation and concerns rather than caring about being right or winning	Person on top (often Executive Director) decides things or, in some instances, a board votes and majority wins
Direct aid work is connected to other tactics, including disruptive tactics aimed at root causes of the distress the aid addresses	Direct aid work disconnected from other tactics, depoliticized, and organization distances itself from disruptive or root causes-oriented tactics in order to retain legitimacy with government or funders
Tendency to assess the work based on how the people facing the crisis the organization wants to stop regard the work	Tendency to assess the work based on opinions of elites: political officials, bureaucrats, funders, elite media
Engaging with the organization builds broader political participation, solidarity, mobilization, radicalization	Engaging with the organization not aimed at growing participants’ engagement with other “issues,” organizations, or struggles for justice

 

Other observations:

• When groups that have been all volunteer get money, they often fall apart in conflict about that money and how to manage and use it. When they get enough money to have staff, there is greater danger of institutionalization and pandering to funders, because someone’s income will be impacted if they lose the funders’ favor.
• When groups get staffed, the volunteers sometimes expect that staff person or few people to suddenly do all the work or more than they can do, and volunteers sometimes check out. This can make the group vulnerable to loss of capacity, and also to becoming more solely governed by a few staffers. It can also be a set up for initial staffers to be heavily criticized and considered failures.
• Burnout is more likely when less people are involved in a group. Burnout is less likely when there are transparent participatory decision-making processes that let people feel like they are holding the project together with lots of people instead of alone. Burnout is less likely when there is a culture of feedback and humility that lets people address harmful dynamics between people or ways that hierarchies of valuation (racism, classism, sexism, etc) are showing up in the group. Burnout is more likely when there are not clear feedback processes and people stifle concerns, gossip about each other, and blow up at each other as pressure mounts.
• When organizations are dependent on funders, they have an incentive to declare false victories, so that they can keep getting funding. This can prevent innovation in the work, or realizing the work needs to be scrapped because it is having an unintentional bad impact. When organizations are volunteer-based, people are more likely to want to scrap bad ideas because their time and energy is precious to them and they want to direct it toward something effective.
• When organizations have no staff, it can be a challenge to do mutual aid work that takes place during typical workday times, such as accompanying people to courts or social services offices. Unstaffed organizations may want staffing because they want to increase their capacity to provide aid.
• Organizations may want to become non-profits or get a non-profit fiscal sponsor so that they can receive grants and/or tax deductable donations. The downside is that this requires financial tracking and organization skills that can concentrate power in the hands of people who have had more access to such skills and systems. It also may bring government attention and cultivate a culture of less boldness and risk-taking within the organization as it considers government and funder surveillance.

For anyone interested in following along with the class I am teaching this quarter, Queer and Trans Mutual Aid for Survival and Mobilization, or using all or part of the syllabus in a community reading group, I thought I’d share some of the discussion questions I am using in class.  

Reading Questions Week 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Young Lords, A Reader: pp. 9-15, 25-36, 56-70, 81-86, 133-144, 151-157, 163-166, 178-179, 185-207, 215-216, 218-222, 226-228.

Nelson, Body and Soul, 49-114.

Optional:

Watch “The Black Panthers: Vanguards of the Revolution,” on Kanopy by logging in with your University credentials at https://uchicago.kanopy.com.

Watch “COINTELPRO 101” at https://vimeo.com/15930463.

Nelson argues that the existence of the federal War on Poverty programs, which purported to value community participation, was a condition that led to the emergence of the  Black Panther Party health programs? Why? What were the Panthers’ critiques of the War on Poverty programs? Why were community leaders unsatisfied by the government programs’ version of community participation? Continue reading “Reading Questions for Mutual Aid Class”

I wrote an essay almost a decade ago based in reflections of my own experiences with overwork and burnout and the experience of people I was supporting in various organizations. I never published it, always thinking there is more work to do on it. I keep going back to it and realized now is as good a time as any to share the excerpt below that I hope is helpful to people who are being impacted by their own burnout and overwork or that of someone else.

Symptoms and Feelings of Overwork

Below I describe some of the symptoms and feelings that emerge with overwork. Some I experienced, and some I have heard others share. Many are very closely related and intertwined, but I have bulleted them for the ease of those who are more likely to skim than read.

• A desire to take on tasks and responsibilities in order to “be important” to the group or control outcomes.
• High stress when thinking about tasks being performed by someone else who might do it a different way, or the group coming to a different decision that I would make.
• Feelings of resentment: “I’ve done the most for this organization” or “I work harder than anyone else.” Can include creating a damaging organizational culture of competition and hierarchy about who overworks the most.
• Not respecting group agreements or group process because I feel above the process as the founder or director or hardest worker.
• Feelings of competition with other organizations that are actually politically aligned or with other issues that I perceive are better supported or other activists I perceive as better supported.
• Feelings of martyrdom.
• Desire/need to endlessly be given credit for my work.
• Taking on more and more work to feed the cycle of martyrdom, shut-down, and resentment.
• Depression and/or anxiety.
• Overwhelm and fear.
• Close to anger and/or close to tears regularly—staying in a constant heightened state, never feeling relaxed.
• Feeling like I “have to” do all these things, cannot see any way to do less work or have less responsibility.
• Inability to let others take on leadership roles.
• Hoarding information or important contacts so that others cannot rise to the same level of leadership, usually rationalized in some way.
• A life or death feeling that it must be done the way I do it. An extreme version of this can result in leaders sabotaging the organization or project rather than recognizing that it might be time to step back and share leadership or take a break from leadership.
• Paranoia and distrust about others in the organization or other people working in this kind of work. Feelings of being alone. Feelings of “me against [members of the organization/staff/everyone].”
• Believing that if I don’t do it, it won’t get done (by coworkers/the organization/other organizations) so I have to accept more and more work.
• Tension or anger that results in giving the silent treatment to others in the organization or former collaborators.
• Exhaustion.
• Overpromising and under-delivering, which can lead to feeling fraudulent and afraid of being caught so far behind.
• Feelings of scarcity driving decisionmaking: “There’s not enough money/time/attention.”
• Feelings of emptiness, anxiety, depression or aimlessness only alleviated by working. Not knowing how to do anything besides work. Not having fun or feeling relaxed on vacation or days off.
• Having no boundaries with work—working all the time, during meals, first thing upon waking and last before sleeping, during time that was supposed to be for connecting with loved ones.
• Dismissal of the significance of group process and overvaluation of how the group is perceived by outsiders such as funders, elites, and other institutions.
• Low quality work product including under-serving vulnerable people seeking help from the organization.
• Defensiveness about all of the above and unwillingness to hear critique. “I’m doing so much, I’m killing myself with work. How can you critique me? I can’t possibly do any better/more!”
• Shame about experiencing all of the above.

   

  These feelings and behaviors, of course, are reasonable results of the conditions under which we do our work. We are steeped in norms of capitalism and white supremacy that encourage us to compete, distrust, hoard, hide, disconnect, and only understand our value as based in how others see us. Our work is often under-resourced in important ways. Many of us come to the work because of our own experiences of violence or harm, and doing this work can be emotionally triggering and exhausting. We come to the work to heal ourselves and the world, but we often do the work in ways that further harm ourselves and impede our contribution to the resistance. In the context of professionalized non-profit social justice “careers” there is rarely room to process our triggering experiences or admit what we do not know how to navigate our roles in organizations. We also carry around fallback attitudes and behaviors that can undermine our principles, especially when we are stressed out and over capacity. These are the times when we might act out gender privilege, race privilege, class privilege, and forms of authority based in status distinctions like educational attainment. Many of the symptoms and behaviors listed in the bullets above can correlate to systems of privilege.

  Addressing the Impacts of Overwork and Burnout in Organizations

  When we are experiencing toxic feelings and acting out, or when someone in an organization we are involved with is struggling in this way, there are things we can do to address what is going on. One thing that helps is having a language for what is going on and realizing it is not about one person being “bad” or about whether the organization will be run by this person or others, but instead recognizing a set of dynamics that are impacting the group and impeding the mission of the organization and the principles of the person or people who are struggling. When we realize how common these dynamics are, sometimes we can move away from shaming and blaming ourselves and others and toward acknowledging what is going on and supporting change. It is often hard to confront another person about behavior that is harmful, and it is often hard to be confronted about harmful behavior and listen to what is being said. The ideas below do not change that, but they may help individuals or groups create concrete steps to address the problems. My own experiences with these issues are based in horizontal organizations that operate using consensus decisionmaking, so they may be most appropriate to those situations.^[1] In my view, horizontal and consensus decisionmaking models are the most conducive to creating accountable, sustainable organizations that build lots of people’s leadership and have the capacity to address the causes of burnout.

  Steps Toward Balance for Organizations

Bring more attention to addressing the organization’s internal problems. The organization cannot do its important work if it is falling apart inside, and it cannot do its work well if it is promising to do work it does not have the capacity to do. The internal concerns cannot wait until later because the giant need the organization exists to fill is probably not going to be reduced in the immediate future. This does not mean the organization’s work needs to stop, but it might mean calling a moratorium on new projects and commitments so that the problem does not worsen, and so that people can carve out time for working on the internal problems. Organizations working on internal problems might seek any of the following resources:

• • Training on decisionmaking and consensus
  • Facilitation training
  • Facilitated discussions and training about how racism, ableism, sexism, homophobia, trans phobia, classism and other systems of meaning and control impact organizational development and culture
  • Active listening training
  • Strategic planning provided by trainers using grassroots social justice-centered, not corporate, approaches
  • Reviewing workplans and job descriptions to figure out how to assign work fairly, assess workload and plan for reasonable workloads
  • Conflict mediation between particular people or groups with an outside facilitator who understands the organizations values and who the people in conflict trust and/or see as relatively neutral
  • Work on building transparency in the organization so that people know what each other are doing and members, clients, peer organizations and other partners know what the organization is doing
  • Training on giving and receiving direct feedback to reduce or avoid gossip and trash-talking and increase responsiveness and accountability to each other
  • Creation of regular evaluations systems where people can hear from each other about what is going well and what needs work early and often, rather than only when someone blows up or a controversy emerges

Make sure that new people who are entering the organization are being welcomed, given full background about what is going on, and clearly understand that they are being asked to fully participate in all decisions and ask any questions they need to in order to do so. Ensuring that everyone is getting access to what it takes to co-lead is essential to building leadership in more people. The organization and the people in it will be healthier if lots of people are leading, not just one or two.

Establish mechanisms to assess the workload and scale back. How many hours is each member working? Is it beyond what they are supposed to or can do healthfully? Did they actually track their hours for a week to make sure they are really aware of how much they are working? Assess the workload and scale back projects until it is under control. Create a moratorium on new projects until capacity expands. Enforce the moratorium—no one can unilaterally take on new work for the group or for themselves as a member of the group.

Focus on facilitation. How can the group’s meeting culture foster well-being, good will, connection between members? Eating together, having check-ins with interesting questions about people’s favorite foods, plants, movies, or politicizing moments may feel silly at first but makes a big difference. Bringing an attention to wellness into the organization means helping members be there as multi-dimensional people, rather than just as work machines. People need to build strong enough relationships to actually be able to talk about strong feelings and dynamics that come up in the work, or those dynamics will fester. The organization needs to build a culture that can cultivate supportive relationships.

Is everyone trained on how to facilitate meetings in ways that maximize the participation of all members of the group? Whenever there is a danger that just a few people will dominate an important conversation, use a go-around rather than having people volunteer to speak. Quieter members speaking can really change the dynamics.

As a group, recognize the conditions creating a culture of overwork. It is not one person’s fault, and everyone may be feeling the pressures. Have one or many facilitated discussions about the pressures and dynamics that lead to overwork or to individual’s dominating or disappearing. Create a shared language for the pressures the members may be under so they are easier to identify and address moving forward.

Include time and space for evaluation of how the group is operating regularly. This can include filling out questionnaires that allow people to provide feedback that may be hard to say in an open meeting, as well as having group discussions. Ask questions like: Do you feel clear about your role in the group? Is your workload manageable? Do you feel welcomed by and connected to the other members? What would improve your relationship to the other members and to the group as a whole? What kinds of support do you need to help you participate in this group? Are you noticing any dynamics that we could improve? What is going well in the group from your perspective? What are our greatest strengths?

Make sure that facilitation of meetings rotates, including agenda-making and other key leadership tasks.

• Addressing Burnout and Overwork in Our Own Lives

  In addition to creating organizational approaches to burnout, we can take action in our own lives when we recognize symptoms of overwork and burnout in ourselves. This requires us to work on changing behaviors that may be causing problems for us and for people around us. It also means we have to be willing to examine the root causes of our impulses to over-commit, to control, to overwork, and/or to disconnect. This is healing work aimed at helping us be well enough to enjoy our work, make sustained life-long contributions to the movements we care about, and receive the love and healing that is possible in communities of resistance. Above all, we must take a gentle approach to ourselves, avoiding judgment, recognizing the role of systemic violence in producing these responses in us, and patiently and humbly experimenting with new ways of being.

  What the compulsive worker, over worker, control freak might need:

  • I need trusted friends who I can talk to about what is going on, who I can ask for honest feedback about my behavior, and who can help support me and soothe me when I feel afraid of doing something in a new way. For example, these people might remind me that even though someone else in the project will do this task differently, it is better to let them do it so they can build their skills and I can do something else with that time that has been missing from my life. These people might help remind me that it will be okay if I say no to a task or project. These friends can help me give love to the wounds underneath my compulsive, competitive, or controlling behavior, reminding me that I am worthwhile and my value does not hang on what the organization does, how much work I do, or what other people think of me.
  • I need supportive friends who can also point out compulsive, competitive or controlling behavior or ideas when they hear them from me or see me engaging in them. It can be difficult to receive such feedback, but it is truly a gift.
  • I need to attend to my defensiveness. When I get feedback from friends or collaborators about concerns they have, I need to resist the impulse to defend myself or critique the way they delivered their message. This feedback, including any anger they express while sharing it, is likely a sign that others are identifying my leadership. They are doing the hard and uncomfortable task of raising a concern because they see me as a person with influence. I can remember that, no matter how it is delivered, this feedback is an investment in me and in our work, an act of love. I can seek out a friend separately to process the difficult feelings that receiving this feedback brings up. The need to avoid acting out my defensiveness, or taking on a victim narrative, is especially important when I am in a position of privilege of any kind and/or have more developed leadership in the group or project.
  • If I hate everyone I’m working with or feel like I am going to die or like I have to stay up all night working, this is probably about something older or deeper in my life, not about the current work/workplace/organization/coworker. If my heart is racing, if I feel threatened, if I feel like I can’t get out of bed, if I feel like I can’t speak to my coworker or I’ll explode, I am probably experiencing pain rooted in deeply in my life history. To get out of this reactive space, I need to devote resources to uncovering the roots of my painful reactions and building ways of being in them that don’t involve acting out harm to myself or others (including the harm of overwork). The first step is recognizing that my strongest reactions may not be entirely or primarily about the work-related situation directly in front of me, and being willing to slow down and explore what is underneath.
  • I need a healing path for myself if I want to be part of healing the world. What that looks like is different for everyone, and could include individual or group therapy, 12-step programs (including Workaholics Anonymous), exercise, bodywork, spiritual exploration, art practice, ritual, and building meaningful relationships with family or friends. Whatever it is, I have to be in it in a loving and gentle way and be careful that it doesn’t become another thing to try to be perfect at or to try to be the leader of. A healing path can, in addition to other things, help me increase kindness to myself, trust others, trust processes, and avoid scarcity mentality. It can be a place to practice doing things because they feel good rather than to accomplish something.
  • I need to stick around. It may be tempting to disappear altogether from a project or organization if relationships have gotten difficult and I am experiencing negative feelings about myself and others. If I want move toward a more balanced role in the organization, or even transition out altogether, I need to do so gradually and intentionally. I need to transfer relationships and knowledge and skills that I hold and make sure that my transition is done in a way that ensures the organization is healthy and my coworkers are supported.
  • Healing can happen, even inside relationships that have become difficult, if I am willing to admit to the dynamics that exist. This can be very hard if things already feel adversarial with coworkers, but it is really worth it to push past the fear. People often want to forgive, and having the truth of the dynamics acknowledged will create space for healing and forgiveness. It is okay to admit mistakes.
  • If I am in leadership and someone is yelling at me, it is likely that part of what they are saying is true. I don’t have to believe all of it, and I can reach out to my support network to help process how it feels to be yelled at, but the most important thing for people in positions of privilege (like being staff rather than volunteer, or being a long-time leader or founder, or having privilege in a social identity) in an organization to do when someone is yelling at them is listen for the truth of the person’s experience and feelings and acknowledge it. Just listening, rather than denying, defending or minimizing, is the first step to resolution.
  • If I have particularly strong feelings about one of my collaborators in the project or organization, if the dynamic with them is particularly tense, there is probably great love and respect in the relationship. This relationship may be the most charged because of how I admire this person for particular traits, because their articulation of what is going wrong in the organization or relationship are hitting home for me and I am feeling afraid. These relationships can heal, and it can help to try to remember what I love about this person, why I was drawn to collaborate with them, what I admire about their work in the world, why we both ended up in this kind of work, and what I might like our relationship to be like in the future.

   

  Working with Joy

              It is not surprising that most of us have distorted relationships to the world of work, including activist work. The conditions and systems we live under make work coercive, create severe imbalances in who does what kinds of work for what kinds of compensation and recognition, and make work a matter of survival. Working to change the world is extremely hard because the conditions we are up against are severe, we lose people from our communities regularly, and we are battling monstrous apparatuses of violence. We cannot blame ourselves for having distorted relationships to our work, even though we understand that healing from distorted relationships to work is vital for our movements and for our own well-being and survival. We must be compassionate to ourselves and each other as we practice transforming our ways of working together.

              One of the most significant sources of suffering people face the communities I live and work in, which often exacerbates other forms of scarcity and vulnerability, is isolation. When we do work together to build resistance movements, we often break this isolation and experience the healing of being heard by others about our experiences, of helping each other out with basic survival needs, and of sharing inspiring imagination and little experiments with building the world we want to live in. Our connection to each other is vital for us as we experience the grief, heartbreak and rage of living under brutal conditions, witnessing and experience harm and violence, and enduring setbacks in our work for change. We need each other badly to share what is hard about the overwhelming suffering in the world and the challenge of doing work for change in dangerous conditions. Even in the face of the pain that being awake to contemporary conditions causes, I believe that all of our work for change can be rooted in the comfort and joy of being connected to one another, accompanying one another, and sometimes being inspired together or by each other. Rather than our resistance being rooted in connection, often our organizations struggle with cultures of overwork based in capitalist, sexist and racist norms of scarcity, fear, competition, insecurity, and disconnection. Putting more attention toward how we work together, and what it means to be together in new ways that defy harmful norms, is essential to building the huge, strong, inspiring, joyful movements we need. Reflecting deeply about our own orientations toward work, what it feels like to participate in groups, what ideas we are carrying around about leadership and productivity, is crucial to building a practice of working from a place of connection, inspiration and joy. This means intentionally creating ways to practice a new relationship to work with each other, and diving into the psychic structures underlying our own distorted experiences of working and finding methods of healing that create new possibilities for how we can be in our work lives.

  ^[1] Some useful resources for further learning about horizontal organizations and consensus decision making can be found here.

Sometimes I feel like it is out of style to be in and build organizations, compared to in prior eras of social movement work. When I was reading Katie Batza’s book Before AIDS, I was struck by one of the interviewees talking about in the 70’s how if you were interested in something or pissed about something, what you did was join a group and start a project like a newspaper or free clinic or childcare project or whatever. These days, I think we are more (mis)directed, if we are feeling up in arms over something, to only declare our views online or send a check to a non-profit, or maybe try to get a job at a non-profit. There is less participation in groups of all kinds, and our movements suffer from that. I’ve been trying to support conversations about people building mutual aid projects as a response to that dynamic. Supporting people to do that includes showing lots of awesome models of what people are starting–abortion funds, child care collectives, networks for housing people coming out of prison, court support projects, defense campaigns for criminalized people, bail and bond funds, and the like–but it also includes talking about how to build organizations where people work well together and can stick to it for a while instead of bursting into flames from conflict and harm. I wanted to make a post that has some of my favorite resources about that here because I find people asking me for this stuff more and more. Yay! Let’s build lots of awesome organizations and do amazing stuff together. Fight to win!

Tools I have written or co-written:

• A document about building accountability and avoiding disposability in our organizations I prepared for an event Mariame Kaba organized about organizational conflict a few years ago.  There is some detail about a model of evaluating people’s work who are in paid or leadership roles if your group has that, but it may also be adaptable for organizations that don’t have paid roles but want to make sure people get feedback and support in their work in the organization.
• A report I worked on with other people from the Sylvia Rivera Law Project (SRLP)  studying various organizations’ models of membership, decision making, dealing with burn-out, how to plug in people who have obstacles to participation, and other key issues. It has useful ideas for structuring mutual aid projects and dealing with common problems. You may also be interested in this page about why SRLP has been run as a collective for more than 15 years.
• An essay I published about conflict inside our social movement groups and what to do when it is happening.
• A chart I made about organizational culture that may help groups you are forming or working in to talk through how things are now and how you want them to be.
• An essay and chart about the difference between “having a cause” and building sustained radical lives and communities.
• A chart about leadership qualities that support mutuality versus those that support hierarchy.
• An essay about burnout and overwork that may be of use to people suffering from burnout themselves, or being impacted by someone else’s burnout behavior.
• A worksheet about overwork that people may want to use in a group or organization to talk together about if they are overworking and how to change it. I made this for an organization I was working with where overwork was causing conflict. We talked about it in a workshop together.
• What I Do Under Pressure Worksheet. I made this for a workshop with an organization where we wanted to increase everyone’s self-awareness about what happens to us when we are stressed, what happens when we are trying to support someone else who is stressed, and what kinds of support we’d like from people we are working with when we are stressed. It is meant to be filled out by each person so that they can share what they  choose to share from it with people they are working with to increase awareness of the best ways to support each other in hard times.
• A worksheet for reflecting on perfectionism. I made this after talking to campus activists at a school I was visiting where they shared that a major force of demobilization among them was a sense that if they couldn’t do things perfectly it was safer not to participate. We looked at this worksheet together in a workshop and talked about where we saw perfectionism in our lives, its impacts, and how it got there.

Tools I admire and recommend from other people and organizations:

• This zine from Activate Grand Rapids addresses how to form an affinity group.
• Five Tips for Forming and Affinity Group from Resilience Circles. They also provide a guide for your first meeting, and lots of other information about building small groups and circles.
• War Resisters International provides a guide called Techniques for Consensus Decision Making in large Groups: The Spokespersons Council Method and a sheet about affinity groups that talk about the purpose of affinity groups, how to run groups, how to make decisions, roles within groups and more.
• On Conflict and Consensus is a very useful book about how to do consensus decision making.
• Beautiful Solutions is a useful site collecting stories, solutions and theories about transformation. Check out their page on horizontalism which links to many specific accounts of people creating and sustaining horizontalist projects.
• Marina Sitrin’s book, Horizontalism, provides a window into horizontal organizing in Argentina that is full of examples that will inspire.
• Gay Shame just released a new zine about how to do direct action that includes useful guidance about forming groups and initiating projects. You can also email gayshamesf at yahoo dot com and they can send you a lot of paper copies to distribute in your community.
• Here are some tools from the Center for Story-Based Strategy about sustainability in our work, including No-Burnout Bingo!
• Punch Up Collective created a curriculum called “Getting It Together: Organizing Collectives for the Real World” and they include their own list of additional resources that are very useful. 

I am involved with organizations that are always striving to support people growing more skills for making the world more aligned with values of justice and mutuality. We’re figuring out ways to make decisions together and share resources together and everything else it takes to build the social conditions we want. One part of this work is shedding the baggage of what we’re told in a racist, colonial, patriarchal society counts as “leadership.” That model is usually about individuality, competition, and domination. We are imagining and working to practice other ways of leading. I made a chart that I hope is a handy discussion tool in organizations that are thinking about how to live their values. I think it might go well paired with this chart I posted before about qualities of organizational cultures.

Leadership Qualities Supporting Mutuality vs. Hierarchy

Hierarchical Leadership Qualities	Just and Accountable Leadership
Successful by dominating others/being the decider	Supports the growth of decision making processes that include everyone effected by the decision
My way or the highway	Wants to find out how others are doing, what they need or believe, what they want
Self-promoting	Eager to help many people develop leadership skills and share the spotlight
Concerned with maintaining reputation, looking like “the best”, looking “right”	Willing to admit mistakes
Arrogant and grandiose	Humble and dignified
Good at talking and commanding	Good at communicating: sharing and listening
Wins others’ support through status, fear, or because others are climbing	Wins support by being supportive and trustworthy
Certain I’m right	Open to influence and changing opinion
Concerned about reputation of organization	Concerned about organization’s material impact—does it alleviate suffering and increase justice?
Fosters competition in the group	Fosters compassion and a desire that no one is left out of the group
Paranoid	Generous and open to newcomers while holding boundaries
Impulsive—plans change with my whims	Holds steady to the groups’ decisions and purpose; Reliable
Judgmental and exclusive	Can tolerate people being a lot of different ways; sees potential in people to become part of the work for change and helps them develop skills and abilities
Gets sense of self from status	Self-accepting and steady in sense of self, so able to take risks or hold unpopular opinions
Cares most what elites think	Cares most what those on the bottom of hierarchies think and know; works to cultivate authenticity
Needs to be center of attention	Can take the risk of being seen, can step back so others can be seen
Insensitive to others’ feelings	Sensitive and responsive
Tells people what to do	Avoids advice-giving unless asked, instead interested in supporting people to make decisions that align with their values
Seeks immediate gains, even if it means big compromises	Sees the long view and holds to values
Gives demeaning feedback or fails to give feedback or gossips instead of giving direct feedback	Gives direct feedback in a compassionate way
Defensive, closed to feedback	Open to feedback, interested in how I impact others
Controlling, micromanaging	Can delegate, can ask for help, wants more people’s participation rather than more control
Outcome-oriented	Supports processes with integrity that lead to more people participating in decision-making
Seeks and demands comfort	Interested in what can be learned from discomfort, from changing roles or being out of place, from conditions transforming

Ways to use this chart:

1. Write or talk in your group about what is missing from these lists.
2. Circle qualities you see in yourself that you are working to cultivate and grow. What might help them grow?
3. Circle qualities you see in yourself that are challenging or don’t fit your values. What helps you move toward not acting out of those qualities? Where did you learn those qualities? How did they serve you? How did they get in the way of what you want or believe in?
4. Notice qualities that are prevalent in organizations you are in. What could help cultivate the ones you think are beneficial and reduce the ones that are harmful?