The Art of Facilitation and Meeting with Soul

There are three kinds of meetings – social encounters, meetings to study and learn something, and meetings where people come together to accomplish a task. Each of these kinds of meetings has its own character, but some of the dynamics of each are present in every meeting. Meetings are an essential part of our life in organizations and especially important in the practice of collaboration.

At the end of a meeting we know how successful the meeting was by how we feel. Meetings that flow well, where there are healthy interactions and in which we touch on something important tend to leave us more energized than when we started the meeting. Meetings that are poorly planned, are not well facilitated and where something important isn’t touched on tend to leave us feeling exhausted or frustrated.

While spontaneous meetings can be exhilarating, meetings that are consciously and artfully planned and executed have the possibility of leaving us much more empowered and strengthened. The keys, therefore, to creating more empowering meetings lie in how we go about planning, facilitating and following up. In this newsletter, we explore the art of how to plan and prepare for meetings.

An agenda can be a powerful tool. When the purpose, the process, the content, the flow and the possible outcomes are well thought out beforehand, it is more likely that the meeting will be effective and empowering. Groups waste inordinate amounts of time and energy in underprepared meetings. Does everyone know what the meeting is about, what is going to happen, what is expected of them and what it is hoped the group will accomplish? Are the people leading sections of the meeting prepared? Have materials that participants need to read ahead of time been sent out in time for them to be read?

Here is a chart that identifies and connects various models of the threefold meeting.

Working Together, Chapter 4, Partnerships of Hope*, by Chris Schaefer Link to chapter

In this insightful chapter, Chris Schaefer outlines basic principles and examples for Waldorf Schools, of Healthy Conversation, the Nature of Meetings, Types of Groups, the Practice of Review in Meetings, Leadership and Leadership in Groups.

Chapter Contents

Conversation

Different Types of Groups

The Cycle of Mutual Learning

Qualities of Group Leadership/Soul Orientations

Soul Qualities in Groups:

Group Review:

Playing the Symphony: Group Decision Making

Decision Making by Consensus

Group Development

Perception-Sharing Exercise

Some Biography-Sharing Questions

Authentic Conversation and Spiritual Communion

The Practice of Community

Threefold listening exercise from Partnerships of Hope, Chapter 1

LEVELS OF LISTENING Helps and Hindrances

To be effective listeners, we must learn to listen to the whole person—not just to the words he/she is saying, but also to what lies between or behind the actual words . We need to listen to thoughts, feelings, and intentions .

“Head listening” to facts, concepts, arguments, ideas. “Heart listening” to emotions, values, mood, experience. “Listening to the will” energy, direction, motivation.

The Thinking Level: Head Listening

This is the most obvious way to listen—apparently “objective”— but not as effective as we imagine . Can we truly follow with our own thoughts, the thoughts of the speaker? We think much faster than he/ she speaks . How do we use this extra mental time? To synthesize and digest what we are hearing, or to think our own separate thoughts?

Hindrances on this level include problems of attention and accuracy, but also arise from the different frames of reference held by speaker and listener . Our knowledge, concepts, vocabulary and way of thinking derive from the past—our own individual past education and experience . If we do not allow for the fact that the other person has his own, perhaps very different, frame of reference, it is all too easy to get our wires crossed, or to assume a level of understanding that is not real . We continually run the danger of over-complicating or over-simplifying what we hear .

The listening process is supported on this level by the cultivation of a genuine interest in “where the other person is coming from”—an open-minded approach that does not judge his/her words according to my preconceptions .

The Feeling Level: Heart Listening

Listening on this level means penetrating a step deeper into the other’s experience . Apparently rational statements may be covering feelings of distress, anger or embarrassment . These may be heard more through the tone of voice, facial expressions or a gesture than in what is actually said, and can be obscured, especially if we are unaccustomed to, or inhibited about, expressing feelings directly .

Accurate perception of feelings is continually impaired by the effects of our own feelings, the likes and dislikes that arise in us semi consciously in the face of certain people, situations or issues . Even the mention of certain “trigger” words or phrases can evoke strong emotions in us, which obscure our perception of what the other is feeling . Effective listening can be fostered on the feeling left by “quieting” our own reactions to the immediate impressions we receive and developing the quality of empathy . This means allowing ourselves calmly to “live into” the other person’s experience as he/she is speaking

The faculty of social sensibility that can be trained in this way is a key attribute of skilled negotiators .

The Will Level: Intentional Listening

To sense the real intentions of another person can be one of the hardest aspects of the art of listening . Often, speakers are themselves only dimly aware of what they actually want in a situation . Skillful listening can help to discover, “behind” the thoughts and “below” the feelings involved, the real sources of potential energy and commitment . This will often involve sensing what is left unsaid . The future lies asleep in people’s will-forces .12

Listening on Three Levels

AIM: To practice skills of listening in the following ways:

1) Accuracy and attention in relation to the information, ideas

and mental pictures actually expressed by the speaker

2) Sensitivity to the underlying feelings and mood, which may or

may not be directly expressed

3) Recognizing the fundamental direction of the speaker’s

intentions and energy

METHOD: In groups of four, one person relates a recent experience that contains a certain problem or question for him/her, which is still open or unresolved . Each listener takes one level . After the speaker has finished and a brief pause for reflection, the listeners are asked to share their observations in the following ways respectively:

1) Retell in your own words the main elements of the story you heard . What facts and concepts did the speaker use to make that situation clear?
2) Describe the feelings you imagine were present in the speaker: a) in the past situation that was described, and
b) during the telling .
3) What kinds of motivation could you perceive in the speaker? What does/did he/she want to do about the situation described? How much commitment and energy is present, and in what directions?

All observations are then checked with the storyteller . How accurate was the listening? What was missed? Did the feedback make the speaker more aware of certain semiconscious factors? Distinguish between observation and interpretation—how justified was the latter?

Repeat with new tellers, possibly also with listeners all taking all levels, building up feedback together on each .

The Art of Creating an Agenda, Michael Soule

When teachers create lesson plans, they naturally consider the rhythm of the day, the students’ capacities and their goals for the students’ growth and development. A good teacher is conscious of every little detail and aspect of the lesson. The consciousness put into planning helps the students relax, know what to expect and feel well cared for. Both students and teachers delight in the surprises that will inevitably arise. Planning a meeting requires much of the same consciousness and consideration. Here is a list of key considerations related to the essential practice of thinking ahead.

Consider who is participating.

Picture who is going to be at the meeting, what their gifts and needs are. A conscious meeting planner makes extra copies of the agenda for those who may not have printed out their own copies.

Consider how the group works.

Most groups in organizations, like boards and committees, meet on a regular basis. Understanding the patterns of a group can be helpful in planning.

Be clear about what is being asked of the participants.

It is best when participants know why an item is on the agenda (is it a discussion, brainstorming, gathering of information, time for decision, etc.) and what their role is (provide reflections, bring ideas, evaluate proposals, make decisions, etc.)

Make room for creativity.

Make sure that the agenda is not packed too tightly, that items being discussed have ample time, and that time for possible contingencies are built in.

Imagine the flow.

In the same way that we learn how to craft a lesson plan for students and imagine how they will move through it, imagining how the meeting will flow helps in crafting an agenda. The healthiest kind of flow is organic. Like a wild stream, a meeting will naturally have a current, eddies, and meanders that give it life. A channeled river or a too tightly structured meeting tends to lose its liveliness.

Leave time for review.

One of the amazing aspects of being human is the ability to look back on an event to reflect on it and to learn something in the process. I encourage both individuals and the group to take up a practice of asking three essential questions at the end of every meeting: what was accomplished; what was learned; what relationships grew stronger. Asking these allows for insights that can help in planning the next meeting.

Avoid typical pitfalls

Giving items too little time
Squeezing too many items in one meeting
Not allowing for breathing space or breaks
Getting the agenda out too late for others to prepare
Neglecting to notify those who are leading items
Not providing appropriate background information
Not indicating on agenda what the goals of individual agenda items are
Not varying the style of discussion (go around, popcorn, small group etc.)

In the end, forming an agenda is an exercise in conscious imagination. The above suggestions are intended to help develop good habits in preparing an agenda, but the process is ultimately an artistic one. Once the agenda is created and the meeting prepared, there is another aspect of meeting life that is equally important, the facilitation of the agenda.

Sample Agenda Template

More Space for Spirit-

Meeting as Art Form and Spiritual Practice

Holly Koteen Soule

When Rudolf Steiner brought together the individuals who would become the teachers of the first Waldorf School, he asked them not only to work in a new way with the children, but also with one another. He asked them to work together in such a way as to invite the interest and guidance of spiritual beings into their endeavor.

The challenge of creating and maintaining a connection with the spiritual world, as difficult as it was then, may be even more so in the present time. Materialism has grown considerably stronger in the 21st century, and so has the need to bring a balancing, healing and renewing element to daily life in our materialistic culture.

The Waldorf classroom is a place where this renewing spiritual element can be found. It comes from the children themselves and from how we work with them. It can also be found in the meeting life of the school, in how the teachers and other adults work together. There are many resources available today on conducting effective meetings in the workplace. In this article our focus is on how we can create a space for the spirit in meetings, and how this can support us in our individual development, in our encounters with colleagues and in strengthening our groups and communities.

Meeting as an artistic activity is a second focus for this article. Understanding meetings as an art form and using an artistic approach in planning and carrying out a meeting will more likely allow participants to be refreshed and inspired at the meeting’s conclusion. While including an artistic activity in the agenda can be helpful, it is more critical that the meeting itself is artistic and displays the wholeness, drama and dynamics of any other artistic creation. Artistic activity can often be a doorway to recognizing spiritual archetypes and building spiritual understanding.

Waking up in the Other

Near then end of his life, after the burning down of the first Goetheanum and during a period of upheaval within the Anthroposophical Society, Rudolf Steiner began to speak urgently about the need to build communities based on a shared spiritual purpose that extends beyond our cultural or hereditary ties. He described physical waking as a response to the stimuli of the natural world in our surroundings. Our waking up at a higher level happens when we encounter the soul-spirit of other human beings. He went so far as to say:

We are also unable to understand the spiritual world, no matter how many beautiful ideas we may have garnered from anthroposophy or how much we may have grasped theoretically about such matters as etheric and astral bodies. We begin to develop an understanding for the spiritual world only when we wake up in the encounter with the soul-spiritual in our fellowmen.

This is a strong call for us to create opportunities for more, rather than less, encounters with our colleagues, despite the inevitable challenges with which we are all familiar. On other occasions, Steiner also spoke about a need in our age (the 5th Post-Atlantean epoch) that can only be fulfilled in groups. He referred specifically to the spirit of brother/sisterhood hovering above us in the realm of the higher hierarchies, which needs to be consciously cultivated so that it can flow into human souls in the future.

The Reverse Ritual

We understand from anthroposophy that at a certain point in the course of the evolution of the cosmos and humanity, the higher creative beings drew back from the sphere of the earth. This withdrawal was necessary for human beings to develop in freedom. As a result, the physical earth is in the process of dying. The human being, having been given freedom and the possibility of spiritual consciousness, has become an increasingly decisive factor in the future of the earth.

One of our tasks is to help re-enliven the earth. We do that with the substance of our human thinking-- not with our ordinary thoughts and reflections, but with spiritual thoughts arising from creative Imaginations, Inspirations and Intuitions. These creative thoughts represented for Steiner a new spiritual form of communion for humanity. He gave many indications for how both individuals and groups could work with creative, enlivening thoughts for their own benefit and for humanity as a whole.

It was Steiner’s deep conviction that the appropriate form for community building in our time was what he called the reverse ritual. He distinguished this ritual from a traditional religious ritual in which a mediator is charged with drawing the spiritual hierarchies down to a particular place. “The anthroposophical community seeks to lift up the human souls into supersensible worlds so that they may enter into the company of angels.”

“We must do more than talk about spiritual beings; we must look for opportunities nearest at hand to enter their company. The work of an anthroposophical group does not consist in a number of people merely discussing anthroposophical ideas. Its members should feel so linked with one another that the human soul wakes up in the encounter with the human soul and all are lifted up into the spiritual world, into the company of spiritual beings, though it need not be a question of beholding them. We do not have to see them to have this experience.”

The “College Imagination” or the “Teacher’s Imagination” that Steiner gave to the first group of teachers is an example of such a form, in which a group working with a common meditative picture, creates the possibility of connecting with specific spiritual beings and bringing back creative impulses for their earthly work.

If Waldorf teachers want to work with these ideas and with the example of the “Teacher’s Imagination,” how could we form and conduct faculty and college meetings in our Waldorf schools? How can our meeting life be spiritually sustaining for individuals and build a vital sense of community in our schools?

Space for Spirit

We know what it feels like to have participated in a successful meeting. We are enlivened at the meeting’s end. We also know that what occurred could not have been achieved by any individual member of the group. These are indicators of spirit presence. It is possible to learn how to create meetings that lift us out of our ordinary awareness and allow us the possibility of working more consciously with the spiritual world. We can create more space for spirit in the following ways.

Imbue the setting in which the meeting will take place. It is often the case that certain individuals have a natural feeling for the need to prepare the room where a meeting will occur. When we prepare a space with care we are working with the elementals, spiritual beings, according to Rudolf Steiner, that are detachments from the higher hierarchies and who sacrifice themselves for the creation of the material world. They have a great deal to do, not only with the physical setting, but also with our individual physical wellbeing, our thinking, feeling and willing, and our communication. In my own experience, how the room is prepared can have as significant an effect on a meeting as it does on what happens in our classrooms, when we make sure that they are clean, orderly and beautiful. It is especially helpful if all members of a faculty take a turn at preparing the setting, so that more members of the group carry the importance of this aspect of the meeting.

Create a threshold. Meetings that begin with a moment of silence and a mood of reverence allow participants to be aware of stepping through a kind of threshold, out of our everyday consciousness into a heightened sense of presence. An explicit acknowledgment of our spiritual helpers, the spirit of the school and those persons who have been connected to our institution and are now in the spiritual world can also shift the group’s awareness. A conscious effort to begin on time also helps create the sense of going through a doorway together.

III. Reestablish the sense of the group. This activity has two parts. The first is the recognition of individuals and the second is an affirmation of the purpose of the group. A key to the first part is the interest that we take in one another. Listening to colleagues share something out of their lives and or an aspect of their work with students can wake us up to one another in a potent way. The sharing can be brief and, in the case of a large faculty, involve only a portion of the group each week. Sharing can also be connected to the season, for example at Michaelmas, the focus could be, “ What in your life is requiring a fresh burst of courage and will?” This part of the meeting can deepen our understanding of our colleagues and build the level of trust that we need to work together on spiritual matters. Doing movement or artistic activity together can also serve to strengthen the group’s capacity to work together on issues that require sensitivity to one another.

The second part of establishing the sense of the group is an affirmation of the group’s purpose or task. An opening verse or reading can be helpful, but must be relevant and alive for the group. So, it may be important to choose a new opening for each year or to work with festival themes in order to strengthen the sense of community and purpose at this stage of the meeting. While study is often used to bring a group to a common focus, this is successful only if everyone is actively engaged.

Practice conscious listening and speaking. We know that listening to another person means that we are obliged to let go of our sympathies and antipathies and our own ideas; in fact, we have to momentarily let go of our own I to experience the I of the other as they speak. Marjorie Spock wrote most poetically about the effects of perceptive listening.

First, there is what it does to the soul of the listener. A miracle of self-overcoming takes place within him whenever he really lends an ear to others. If he is to understand the person speaking, he must draw his attention from his own concerns and make a present of it to a listener; he clears his inner scene like one who for a time gives up his home for others’ use while himself remaining only in the role of servant. Listeners quite literally entertain a speaker’s thoughts.” Not I, but the Christ in me” is made real in every such act of genuine listening.

Second, there is what happens to the speaker when he is fortunate to be listened to perceptively. Another kind of miracle takes place in him, perhaps best described as a springtime burgeoning. Before his idea was expressed to a listener, it lived in his souls as potential only; it resembles a seed force lying fallow in the winter earth. To be listened to with real interest acts upon this seed like sun and warmth and rain and other cosmic elements that provide growth-impetus; the soul ground in which the idea is embedded comes magically alive. Under such benign influence, thoughts grow full cycle and fulfill their promise. Moreover they confer fertility upon the ground through the simple fact of having lived there. Further ideas will be more readily received into such a soil and spring more vigorously for its life-attunement. And the soul that harbors them begins to be the creative force in evolution for which it was intended by the gods.

It is a rare group that does not need to regularly recommit to practicing this kind of listening and speaking. Brief spaces of silence can also allow thoughts and insights to ripen and fall into the conversation.

Work with pictures and images. Imagination is a language that can bear fruit in the spiritual world. Translating the group’s questions and issues into stories, pictures and images can enhance the group’s meditative work during the meeting or individual work during the course of the week. Taking time over two or three meetings to explore major questions invites the possibility of richer insights to come forth. Colleagues will want to hold back from building support for one or another course of action to be open to new information as it emerges during this phase.

Share responsibility. Recognize talents among colleagues and give one another opportunities and support to develop latent capacities. Different individuals can lead various parts of a meeting. A group of two or three people can plan the agenda. Incorporate means of regular feedback and review for those taking responsibility in the yearly schedule. It is clear that a group can be healthiest when individuals are continuing to grow and develop. Even the most competent facilitator needs to step back or work with a new colleague in order to gain fresh perspective. Rotating leadership and having several individuals carrying one or another aspect of the meeting facilitation makes it more likely that all members will feel involved. Spiritual leadership requires learning how to create the conditions for meaningful conversations and then helping the group follow up on what arises out of those conversations.

VII. Let the meeting breathe. In our work in the classroom we need to prepare carefully and also be ready to respond to what comes from our students. A meeting that has a compelling wholeness and feeling of flow is probably the result of a well-crafted agenda and some adjustments made during the meeting to an emerging sense of clarity and direction. Having prior agreements about how to deal with new information or agenda changes is helpful. A rhythmic relation to time in a meeting creates more of an opening for spiritual insights than either an overstuffed agenda or a formless one.

There are a number of simple means of making a meeting more rhythmic. Honor the times on the agenda, but not so rigidly that people feel cut off or topics are truncated. Vary the conversation from full group sharing to small group work and individual reports. Find a balance between pedagogical and other topics, review and preview, past and future, speaking and listening. When the group is not moving physically, make sure there is plenty of inner movement. Remember to invite the spirit of Play and the spirit of Humor into the meeting.

VIII. Expect to be surprised. There is nothing more uninviting than a completely predictable meeting. On the other hand, a meeting in which the group is pulled this way and that way by personal agendas is equally frustrating. We must stay awake to the influences of Ahriman (too much form) and Lucifer (too much impulse) as they work in our individualities and our institutions.

In order to stay the course in the creative spiritual stream, we need to ask real questions; practice positivity and open-mindedness; be comfortable with not knowing; and expect answers and solutions to come from unexpected places.

Review. During the meeting review, we give ourselves feedback on what went well and what could have been better, so that we can improve our work together. Review serves another important purpose as well. Just as our nightly review is a conversation starter for the work with our own angel during sleep, our meeting review serves as a seed for the continuing conversation with the spiritual world in between meetings.

Running late in a meeting is sometimes the reason that groups neglect review, but review can often capture essential aspects of a meeting in a brief and economical way. In this regard, poetry is more useful than prose. Brief characterizations, even one-word or one-image offerings, can illuminate hidden gems.

Review is not a rehashing of any part of the meeting. It should bring to light aspects of content, processes and interactions that can benefit from greater awareness on the part of individuals and the group. A perceptive facilitator will vary the means of review and offer questions that can elicit information that might not otherwise be brought to light. “Where did we experience gratitude in the meeting?” “Were there any moments of unresolved tension?” “What did we do that might be of interest to our spiritual helpers?” Review in the form of an earnest question is the best kind of invitation to spirit beings.

Prepare and Follow-up. If we recognize our meeting as a kind of ritual, then the preparation and the follow-up to the meeting are as important as the meeting itself. This requires more than a quick glance at a copy of the agenda. When individuals come to a meeting having thought about the issues and their colleagues the night before, the spiritual ground has already been tilled.

How we carry the questions, as well as the tasks, from one meeting to the next, can make a difference in whether the seeds sowed will sprout healthily in the coming weeks. Working rhythmically with time has both a physical and a spiritual aspect. The spiritual aspect is the releasing phase. When an individual offers ideas to the group and is then able to let go of them, the images can return in more precise archetypal form out of the influence of our spiritual helpers.

These are some of the realities that we need to take into consideration as we build a vessel for the spiritual aspect of our work, just as we need to pay attention to earthly realities in constructing a physical home for our schools.

Meetings as Art

The Artistic Process

The arts were more integral to life in earlier civilizations. Creativity, according to Rudolf Steiner, was experienced as a transcendent spiritual activity. The urge to create flowed out of a “spirit-attuned state.” Only since the rise of materialism has the status of art changed from necessity to luxury. Steiner saw the fructification of the arts in our time as an important task for anthroposophy and he took up various artistic projects himself during the latter part of his life.

He contended that the present longing for art arises out of the recognition of the limits of abstract thinking. Ideas alone are not able to illuminate the world in its full richness; they can only point to reality. To discover a whole, living reality, we need to create, to practice art. Artistic feeling, Steiner said, arises when we sense the presence of something mysterious and certain secrets of nature that can only be revealed through our feeling.

In the artistic process, the artist moves back and forth between sense perceptions and intuitive visions- awake, but in a dreamlike feeling state. Steiner described the subtle changes that occur in a person engaged in aesthetic activity (regardless of whether the person is creating or enjoying an artistic creation) such that the sense organs are re-enlivened and the bodily life processes are lifted to soul-like processes.

In artistic activity we use our heightened sense of feeling rather than our everyday sympathies and antipathies. The artist, consciously or unconsciously, approaches the threshold between the supersensible and sensible worlds and brings something back from the supersensible world into the world of the senses. The resulting creation is a specific reality lifted into a universal expression.

As Waldorf teachers we understand the importance of the arts and our own creativity in the work with our students. Can we also imagine a consciously artistic approach and heightened sense of feeling to our work with our colleagues and in our meetings?

Social Art

In the series of lectures called, “Art in the Light of Mystery Wisdom,” Steiner connected each of the arts with the various members of the human being. The laws of the physical body are expressed in architecture, the etheric in sculpture, the astral in painting and the ego in music. The still developing spirit-self he connected to poetry and the life-spirit to eurythmy. In other lectures where he spoke about social art he related it to our highest member, spirit-man.

The first three arts- architecture, sculpture and painting (including drawing)are the spatial arts and are derived out of formative processes and past evolutionary cycles. They are connected to sculptural forces working out of the past and help children come into their bodily constitution. In contrast, the time arts- music, speech and poetry, and eurythmy- are connected to impulses coming out of the future. As Waldorf teachers we work out of our higher bodies and what Steiner called our musical forces in order to properly guide our students into their present life.

The time arts could also be called the threshold arts, living as they do between the physical and spiritual worlds. We can experience this in particular when we do eurythmy. Social art also belongs to this group, but is younger and even less developed than eurythmy. How can we study and practice this least tangible of arts?

My own experience is that working in any of the other arts can serve as a basic instruction manual. Being grounded in an artistic practice makes it easier to apply the principles of creative activity to any aspect of life, including social situations. When I had a particularly satisfying day in the kindergarten, I felt as if the children and I had spent the whole morning moving to an exquisite piece of music. I began to plan meeting agendas as if I were composing or painting and, during the meeting, paying attention to compositional elements like repetition, variation, harmony, balance, focus, surprise and reprise.

In addition to the writings of Rudolf Steiner, we can also learn about social art in certain traditional texts where the renewing or healing spiritual element is represented symbolically: the “water of life” from the world of fairy tales, the Grail in the legend of Parsifal, the philosopher’s stone of the Alchemists, and conversation in Goethe’s tale, “The Green Snake and the Beautiful Lily.”

In this country we owe a great debt to Marjorie Spock who brought Steiner’s concern for community building to America. She translated the “Awakening to Community” lectures into English and wrote two little pamphlets, titled “Group Moral Artistry,” that are a continuing inspiration for many people. Goethean conversation was the term she used to describe the process by which a group could invite truth into their midst like a guest. She began with Goethe’s framing of conversation as the art of arts and described Goethean conversation as a form of the reverse ritual and an appropriate means of practicing social artistry.

Artistic Meetings

Our artistic sensibilities and an artistic approach to our work in a meeting can enhance the possibility of lifting ourselves into the company of angels, if only briefly. Meetings can be artistic in a number of ways.

A meeting can be artistic because we consciously include an artistic activity in the agenda and allow what flows out of that activity to enhance the rest of our work together. It can also be artistic in the way we use images and pictures to enrich our conversations. When the meeting itself is seen as an artistic process, we will be more likely to strive for a palpable sense of aliveness and wholeness. Lastly, if we take our work in the social arts seriously, whatever we are able to achieve in the special situation of our meetings has the potential to strengthen our relationships overall and may even have a healing effect on other relationships in the community.

Conscious Conversation- An Invitation

We swim in a sea of spirit. Our matter-bound everyday consciousness, however, easily forgets the reality of spirit that lives in and everywhere around us. In this age of Michael especially, we have to wake up in those places where we are sleepily flowing along with the materialistic tides of existence. It is not easy to push aside pressing concerns again and again to make space for encounters with spirit in one another and with spirit beings on the other side of the threshold.

As Waldorf teachers, this is a task that we have taken on, not only for the sake of our students, but also because the conversation with the spirit is the source of our own strength, inspiration and creativity. In our meeting life and through an artistic practice of conscious conversation, we have an incredible opportunity to enter as a group into the realm of spirit sensing. Our own work and Waldorf education needs this renewing spiritual force as it continues to grow and proliferate in far-flung corners of the world.

Making Space for Spirit: Holly Koteen Soulé

Working together, A booklet on Group Work in Waldorf Schools, by Keith Jefferson

Keith Jefferson (Themba Sadiki) was a Waldorf Teacher for many years. He created this booklet for colleagues to share insights about meeting dynamics, preparation, planetary influences, and working with spiritual hierarchies. This is the first page of his booklet. It is available online at LEadtogether.org through the link above.

The Temperaments and Leadership: Working Together in Groups

Lisa Mahar 2023

These characteristics and questions are developed from the framework of the four temperaments as indicated by Rudolf Steiner and used in Waldorf Education. In the educational practice, temperaments are worked with to help understand tendencies in children (and in adults). The temperaments are related to the four bodies (physical, life/etheric, Mind/Sensing/Astral, and Individuality/Ego) and the tendency of each individual to have and express stronger connections to one of their four bodies. These are not labels but observable characteristics and one aspect of the unique individualities of children and adults.

Melancholic (earth)

Analytical and detail oriented
Deep thinker/deep feeler
Often introverted
Avoids being singled out
Self-reliant
Empathic and compassionate, sees the difficulties people face
Strong sense for unfairness
Reserved
Anxious
Poetic /Imaginative
Can take things personally
In an unfolding situation, often understands motivation
Responds well when feeling understood
Color: Blue

Phlegmatic (water)

Relaxed, peaceful, quiet
Easy-going, unflappable, cheerful
Sympathetic but tends to hide emotions
Good at seeing the general in the specific
Good at finding compromise
Likes creature comforts—good food, cozy surroundings
Complacent
Likes to be left alone
Solid, reliable, settled, grounded
Doesn’t recognize crisis and works to avoid labeling anything as a crisis
Infrequently angry, but when roused to anger it can be intense
Color: Green

Sanguine (air)

Talkative, enthusiastic, active
Social, the life of the party
Extroverted and most comfortable in a crowd
Outgoing, charismatic
Trouble doing nothing
Enthusiastic for whatever is coming next
Excited by what’s new
Doesn’t concentrate on any one thing too long
Interests are broad but not necessarily deep
Loves people and discussions
Knows all the news
Color: Yellow

Choleric (fire)

Extroverted
Independent, decisive, goal-oriented
Ambitious, dominant, natural leader
Short-tempered and impulsive
Fulfilled by doing
Often the first to volunteer
Can be accidentally insensitive to others’ needs and is surprised when this is pointed out
Is interested in and seeks oversight of everything
Needs rules and expects them to be followed
Must have respect for those in charge or above
Impatient with slowness or weakness
Heroic, loyal defenders
Good judgment and fair
Color: Red

Considerations

How might we use these insights in our work? In our own self-reflection? In how we meet, interact, supervise, collaborate with others?

What’s your dominant temperament? Least present? What do you wish you had more of?

Which one do you respect the most? Least?

Think about your friends circle and key relationships . What temperament are you drawn to?

How might each temperament respond to feedback/criticism?

How might each temperament function in a group? Contribute to group decision-making

How might each temperament like to be supervised?

How might you use your understanding of temperament in recruiting, Hiring, Onboarding, Training?

How might you use your knowledge of temperaments in how you plan and facilitate a meeting? Write a community letter? Solve a parent issue?

7 Practices of Collaboration*, Michael Soule

At the heart of Waldorf Education is an imagination of a better world through human beings’ conscious collaboration with one another, the natural world and the spirit. Its founder, Rudolf Steiner, looked into the future and saw that, in order to combat an age of growing materialism and self centeredness, a new approach to education was needed – one that took into consideration the spiritual nature of the human being and the cosmos – one that considered the interdependence of the natural world and the spirit.

Now almost one hundred years later, we have made a good start. Waldorf Education is known and practiced in thousands of independent institutions throughout the world – schools connected by a commitment to this imagination.

In all of these schools and early childhood centers worldwide, groups of individuals continue to wrestle with the unique social dynamics of their organizations, trying to understand and incorporate the social impulses embedded in the first school, as they strive to be practical, sustainable and creative organisms in their communities and cultures.

Throughout his life, Rudolf Steiner offered insights, tools and examples of a conscious working together. From the very beginning, he imagined Waldorf schools as social organisms where individuals would learn how to collaborate and lead together.

Collaboration in a faculty, in a board and in an administration is essential to the long-term success of Waldorf Education. Collaboration between schools and colleagues is equally as essential if we are to develop the kinds of relationships needed to keep our Waldorf schools vital.

Keys to Collaboration*, Michael Soule

The Basic Qualities of Collaboration

In every area of human endeavor, leaders are understanding better and better how to support the healthy development of the individual while building relationships that further the mission and effectiveness of the group or organization. In both hierarchical as well as horizontal organizations, inspired leaders are discovering and practicing new approaches to organizational management that create a balance of organizational and individual growth and development.

While a science of collaboration is still as of yet undefined, practice in many fields are leading towards a common view of the basic guiding principles.

In future posts, we will be elaborating on these principles and sharing insights, tools and skills to support healthy collaborative working.

At its core, collaboration requires a commitment to a common vision, shared values and clear goals.

Collaboration requires that individuals are empowered to take initiative and step into leadership roles according to their capacities.

Collaboration requires having clear roles and responsibilities for the people involved and ways of supporting individuals to be successful in their roles.

Collaboration requires the building of safe space and trust within and between groups. Trust is built through transparency, communication and consistency, as well as tolerance and forgiveness.

Collaboration requires open mindedness towards other points of view, experiences, contributions and styles and the practice of equanimity in relation to one’s own feelings and to the actions of others.

Collaboration requires ongoing reflection by individuals involved (in the form of self-reflection) and by groups (in the form of conscious review of intentions, processes and interactions).

Collaboration requires an interest by each individual in the growth and development of the other individuals involved in the group. This requires the individuals to be sincerely interested in understanding others and accepting that each person is on their own unique path of development.

Collaboration requires individuals to understand that the health of a group or organization depends on the health of the individuals involved and to be committed to finding ways that both the individual and group can grow simultaneously.

Both teacher, staff and volunteer leaders in Waldorf Education regularly face these challenges of working together in our organizations. There are many tools available to help us navigate them -- from learning to clarify values and create shared vision, to sharing biographical work, to hygienic communication techniques, to learning new ways of self and group reflection through meeting review and individual contemplative practice. There are a vast array of resources to help us. -MS

Developing a Culture of Leadership, Chris Schaefer link to article

In this article, also a chapter from Partnerships of Hope, Chris Schaefer shares insights into the nature of leadership and aspects of cultivating service leadership in our schools.

Developing a Culture of Leadership, Learning and Service

in Waldorf Schools

Christopher Schaefer, Ph.D.

This essay was adapted from a talk given at a Leadership Symposium at Camphill Soltane, January 26-28,

1996: “Leadership in the Culture of Anthroposophical Organizations.” It will also appear in a book,

Partnerships of Hope: Building Waldorf Schools and Other Communities of the Spirit, to be published in

1998.

I can summarize my experience working within and outside the Waldorf movement in a provocative way

by saying that within the Waldorf movement we have new social imaginations and new social forms, but

we often don’t work with them out of a new consciousness. Meanwhile, the conventional world has old,

hierarchical forms and old imaginations, but, in part because of economic pressure, works at changing

them with a new consciousness. It is a compelling experience to work with United Airlines pilots

practicing communication skills, paraphrasing, and consensus, and to see a dedication I seldom

experience in our own institutions. For them, the experience of meeting in new ways is so deeply moving

because they can experience each other as human beings for the first time, rather than as roles within a

bureaucratic structure. For us such a meeting is assumed, and because it is often not worked at

consciously, it falls into habit and drudgery.

I am quite uneasy and concerned about the state of many Waldorf school communities. Despite many

accomplishments, mature Waldorf schools and other institutions connected to anthroposophy often

exhibit a tiredness, a lack of energy and direction, an absence of leadership and a lack of joy that is

worrying. As individuals and institutions inspired by the work of Rudolf Steiner, we have a rich legacy of

new social and community forms that are collegial, non-hierarchical, and spiritually based. These forms

encourage us to create institutions in which positive working spiritual beings can participate, and they are

forms which encourage us to meet at deeper levels, to experience that we are brothers and sisters on a

path of mutual development.1 Yet, this rich tradition of new social and community forms does not appear

sufficient to sustain us or to lend to our work the health and vitality we would wish for at this time. And

so we need to ask why, despite this rich social legacy, is there a sense of tiredness, of drifting?

In reflecting on this question, I see a number of interconnected issues. The first has to do with the

question of leadership. As a culture, Waldorf Schools do not seem to understand, value or support

leadership. Secondly, despite the growing complexity and maturity of our institutional forms, and the

multitude of meetings and committees in which we participate, we tend to have a limited commitment to

learning the social and administrative skills necessary to make our non-hierarchical institutions work

effectively. Reluctant leadership, poor decision-making forms and limited social skills haunt our efforts to

create community. Connected to the resistance to learn the social skills necessary to help our institutions

work well, is the reluctance to meet humanly at deeper levels, to work on our relationships truthfully so

that disagreements can become the basis of karmic healing and transformation. Lastly, while we think of

Waldorf Schools and other institutions connected to the work of Rudolf Steiner as being committed to

service, I am not convinced that we have developed a deeper understanding and commitment to being a

service culture, with the important exception of our commitment to children and to child development in

the classroom.

In pointing to these limitations, I do not intend to minimize the real accomplishments of many individuals

and groups, but rather to call for a rededication of effort and a shift in awareness.

Read more…

DECISION MAKING

Making Good Decisions*, Michael Soule

When a faculty or board needs to make a decision of major significance, how does the group assure that the decision is well considered and supported by everyone who needs to be involved?

Shared decision making can be a challenging area for a Waldorf school. It involves building agreement for decisions and creating clarity around decision making authority and processes.

A good decision is the result of both having the organizational culture and structure that supports timely and thorough processes, and assuring that various groups and individuals, who have the authority to make decisions in their respective areas, understand and follow those processes.

Consensus

There’s a general agreement in most Waldorf schools that both committees and the school as a whole should operate by consensus and that when consensus can’t be reached an alternative path (usually a vote with majority rule) should be taken for the sake of timeliness.

There’s also an underlying idea in most schools that, since everyone cannot be involved in every decision, smaller groups ought to be given the responsibility to make decisions on behalf of the whole. The decision-making authority given to a group is usually outlined in its mandate. (Search the resources section for more information on mandates)

Both of these ideas, consensus and mandates, are important. But they are not always fully understood or practiced. There are many reasons for this, including:

The regular turnover of volunteers and other leadership;
The lack of ongoing training in consensus or mandate creation;
Confusion about which process might be best applied in a given situation.

Here are some basic guidelines to help every school improve their decision-making process:

Decide before you decide.

Every group will be faced with having to make small or large decisions to complete its work. The most effective groups always decide how they are going to make decisions before they start their work. A reflection on their decision making should be part of their annual review. This sounds easier than it is, which leads to the second point.

2. Know your tools.

Each group must have a good grasp of the nature and practice of different decision-making processes. Once they understand the various processes, it’s important to provide training to help groups find and adopt the best processes for their organization. Training in consensus and mandates, therefore, should be a part of every teacher’s or major volunteer’s orientation. Otherwise, schools will end up with groups that don’t know how to function well. As a result, decision-making is often, by default, dominated by a few individuals. This leads to the third point.

Decide who decides.

Know the roles and responsibilities of each group and individual in the school, including which group or individual makes which kinds of decisions. This takes time to develop but can greatly help groups avoid spending a lot of time on decisions that are easily delegated or, on the other hand, handing over major decisions to a few individuals when everyone’s input and buy-in should be achieved. (Note: there is a very helpful tool, called the RACI model, developed to help organizations identify which levels of activity need what level of involvement from which individuals. (See the resources section for a good article on this.)

Tough it through and respect the process.

When a decision requires consensus, then use the process all the way to its conclusion. The process of consensus, when used well, is a remarkable tool for building community and making well considered, and broadly supported decisions. By the same token, when a task is mandated or delegated, it is best to be clear about the group’s decision- making authority in the beginning and support the group by trusting them to fulfill their task. Decisions can always be reviewed later to learn how a process could be improved. Trust can easily be undermined and social harmony weakened if groups are not allowed to exercise their mandated authority and to be responsible for the decisions they make. (The resources on consensus in our resource center have good insights into how to navigate tough situations.)

The path to a good decision is not easy but we can develop our understanding of the processes and get better as we move forward.

11. On The Use of Consensus, Committees and Mandates

By Lysbeth Borie

Often, when groups first begin to use consensus, most if not all decisions are made by the group as a whole. Groups come to understand that this is what it means to function by consensus. Over time, however, most groups begin to look for ways to function more efficiently. Frequently, they turn to the use of committees and mandate groups.

It is important to understand that consensus and the use of mandating are not mutually exclusive. The two can be used together. In fact, a mandate group is simply a specialized type of committee, with its mandate framed in a certain way.

Consensus can be defined as “a group decision-making process in which all present must agree before action is taken.” But that does not mean that all members of the entire organization must make all decisions together. In the early stages of group development, this can be very helpful, to help a group develop a common culture, set of shared values and procedures, and most of all, to develop trust. However, as the group develops further, continued use of the largest group to make all decisions becomes inefficient.

Consensus is about process—a response to the question, How do we decide? Committees and mandate groups are about structure—a response to the question, Who decides?

In its most developed forms, consensus decision making lives within an organizational structure that delegates as many decisions as possible to smaller groups and individuals, while keeping the most important decisions to be decided by the whole.

Within this type of structure, consensus decision making is both the process and the spirit that guides the decisions of the whole organization. It is used by the largest groups (faculty, college of teachers, and board) and by all committees working within it, including mandate groups.

There are three keys to making committees and mandate groups function effectively.

Set your committees and mandate groups up for success. Specifically, have clarity about roles, rights and responsibilities of each body, especially in relationship to other bodies.

Every group and individual role within the organization—not just mandate groups—should have a clear mandate or job description, including its purpose, areas of responsibility, degree of empowerment, and specifying lines of communication and to whom it is accountable. This should include clarity about the realm of decisions for which the group is responsible, and its degree of empowerment in making those decisions.

For example, an ad hoc committee might have authority only to research a question, develop a proposal and bring it back to the faculty for a decision. A mandate group, in contrast, typically would have the authority to gather information, share the information with other roles or bodies and gather input, then make a final, binding decision.

In either case, the larger group is almost always included at some point in the decision-making cycle—whether as the place where the spark of an idea is first generated, where it is developed and worked out, where the final decision is made, or where the decision is reported.

Is the decision to be made one with larger ethical, pedagogical or financial implications? Keep it in the larger group. Is the task mostly one of implementing established agreements? Delegate. If it is a mix, sketch out the larger guidelines in the large group, then delegate and bring back to the larger group for a final decision or to report on the decision made.

Give input, but let go of attachment to the outcome; resist the temptation to rework the work of committees and mandate groups.

One of the hazards of using consensus—especially within a workplace, such as a Waldorf school—is that while people feel the empowerment of consensus and want to have input into many decisions, the organization must function with some degree of efficiency. It is important to remember that rights and responsibilities are proportional to each other. When we delegate a task to a committee or mandate group, we must provide enough support and guidance to help the group to do its best work, then step back, receive the finished product, and thank its members for their efforts.

In the ongoing work of a consensus-based organization, this is one of the most important and frequent places where we as individuals may need to do some letting go, exercising our own discernment to distinguish matters of principle from matters of preference.

Balance trust, delegation and empowerment with inclusion.

Remember that committees and mandate groups are among the most effective “power tools” of consensus decision making. To the degree that the larger group is able to provide adequate support and guidance to committees and mandate groups, then receive their work with grace and gratitude, the more trust will develop. The higher the level of trust in the group, the more can be delegated, and the more effective the organization as a whole will become.

Lysbeth Borie

Eugene, OR

2014

For further exploration of this topic, see the article “Committees and Mandate Groups”, by Caroline Estes and Lysbeth Borie under resources.

Affirming Decisions*, Torin Finser

This is an excerpt from “School Renewal, A Spiritual Journey for Change” by Torin Finser.

Understanding the importance of framing issues can lead us to the best ways to reach decisions in a group setting.

A decision is a form of free human action. When a human being actively searches out and grasps a concept or intuition thereby bringing it to full consciousness, a self-sustaining decision can arise.

Individuals, not groups, make decisions.

Where do decisions come from? For me at least they have a mysterious quality. It is hard to determine what is really happening in the moment in which an individual makes a decision.

There were certainly important elements of preparation, but the second in which one realizes a decision there’s a magical element at work. There’s an intuitive quality to the act, and intuition is connected to the will, the motivational aspect of our constitution. It is as if we were to dive into the lake of decision and really know what we have come to only a split second after we emerge on the surface.

Decisions are bigger, more encompassing than we realize, and our consciousness grasps just a portion of what we were really at work in the act of deciding. Each person in the group goes through a slightly different process; usually, one person surfaces with the decision, and others in the group recognize the validity of the decision and affirm it.

Much confusion occurs in schools and groups that do not understand the nature of decision-making. Blame, hurt, isolation, and social pressure can result from the inability to perceive what is truly at play when decisions are at hand. Experience at first on a personal level, the teacher or parent may gradually lose trust in the group, and the community suffers.

One of the great myths that surrounds decision-making in many Waldorf schools is that consensus is the only way to work and that the inner circle has a lock on all things spiritual. This becomes a lethal combination that can create self-enclosed groups that have the aura of esotericism, thus becoming unapproachable, mysterious, and seemingly superior.

The difficulty arises when the surrounding community observes the quality of decision-making and realizes that those participating in the inner circle are less than divine. Often a crisis in confidence ensues, with much painful learning on all sides. Those parents and teachers who have been through a few of these crises become wiser, learn to work together over time, and see that it is best to enlist the striving intentions of all adults who wish to serve the best interest of their children.

As we have seen, there are also casualties along the way. Teachers grow tired of endless meetings and withdraw to their own classrooms. Parents get fed up with the general dysfunction experienced in decision-making and communication and either leave, or just opt to support their child’s class and not participate actively in all school events. Either way, the school loses vital human resources.

I suggest that a school seeking renewal spend time looking at the nature of decision-making and find ways to differentiate between the types of decisions needed in various situations. For example, one might look at the following possibilities:

Unilateral decisions are the ones needed when there is an emergency, when there is little time to gather a group, and when the task at hand is clear and universally recognized.

Majority decisions can be helpful when a procedural issue needs to be resolved and the group is unwilling to spend the time on a minor issue, such as the starting time of an open house. Some may want it to begin at 1 PM on Sunday and others later in the afternoon. Either way, the event could work well, and a simple majority can make the decision so the more important planning can be done. In the end, it is better for the school that the decision is made rather than waiting until the last moment and leaving too many people mystified or confused. A majority vote also might be taken when the group has spent enough time on an issue and some wish to give over the decision making to a mandate group.

Mandated decisions are those that are entrusted to a smaller group that will act on behalf of the whole. It is important that the whole group knows what the mandate is ahead of time and that the assigned group is trusted to do the required job.

Consensus decisions can bring a collection of individual decisions to a place of mutual recognition. This can be an exhilarating moment in a group; there is a sense of unity that is precious and sometimes fleeting but well worth the effort with the right group. I have found that consensus as a way of decision-making works best in the following context:

The group has a stable membership.
The group meets regularly, that is once a week.
The rhythm of meetings exercises more influence than most realize. The weekly rhythm works well with a highly conscious approach and is needed to support the interconnections necessary for consensus decision making. The weekly meeting cycle thus works more with that part of us that returns to full consciousness over time, whereas monthly meetings are more connected to the cycles of the life forces that work in and around people participating.
The group is not too large. I prefer groups of 5 to 12 but I have experienced groups as large as 18 to 24 that in certain circumstances achieve real consensus.
The members of the group are committed to the long-term development of the school or institution.
The members of the group share a common spiritual striving.

This description of consensus from M Scott Peck describes the delicate nuances involved:

Consensus is a group decision (which some members may not feel is the best decision, but which they can all live with, support, and commit themselves not to undermine), arrived at without voting, through a process whereby the issues are fully aired, all members feel they have been adequately heard, in which everyone has equal power and responsibility, and different degrees of influence by virtue of individual stubbornness or charisma are avoided so that all are satisfied with the process. The process requires the members to be emotionally present and engaged; frank in a loving, mutually respectful manner; sensitive to each other; to be selfless, dispassionate, and capable of emptying themselves, and possessing a paradoxical awareness of the precociousness of both people and time including knowing when the solution is satisfactory, and that it is time to stop and not reopen the discussion until such time as a group determines the need for revision.

One way to foster renewal in schools is to practice honesty with regard to intentions. Do we intend to be a group of the type described here? If we are, then are we willing to put in the work required? If not, can we find alternatives to consensus that we can live with?

It annoys me when these questions are not addressed and a kind of hypocrisy creeps in. We pretend to work with consensus studiously to avoid the fact that we are not working out of a shared philosophical basis. “We are all entitled to our own spiritual practices, after all.“ Likewise, our commitment to the group changes, depending on personal needs and interests. So I attend some meetings but not others, hoping to express my opinions regardless. Schools then wonder why they are not successful, why salaries are low, and why education is not respected in the community. In my view, it is better to have an enlightened leader and than dishonest group processes.

One phenomenon in most schools is that even if one group in the school can say yes to the cited criteria, other groups, by definition, cannot. Most parent groups, for instance, will not be able to meet as regularly as the teachers, limit the size of the group, make the same commitment, and achieve such commonality in terms of spiritual striving. Yet schools need active parents. A central question then becomes: can we be flexible enough as human beings to adapt our membership skills and leadership styles to the needs of the group? In other words, can we let go of ideals that cannot be met by the reality of situations? To answer the needs of the group with flexibility becomes a matter of collaborative leadership. Let me point out here that mixed groups, that is, groups of parents and teachers and other combinations, provide a resource that is far from realized in most schools.

A final thought on the misuse of consensus: there are times when the attempt at consensus, however well-intentioned, can have serious side effects that often go unnoticed at the time but have long-term repercussions for the health of the school. Because it is often socially unacceptable, or personally repugnant to block a decision, the effect can be to silence an individual’s misgivings or drive them out of the meeting into less productive channels of communication. In the worst cases, this kind of individual silencing leads to a kind of repression of true feelings and the expression of opposing thought. As we saw in Sarah’s story, (editor’s note: Sarah’s story is told earlier in the book) a teacher who has felt the social pressure to conform can leave a meeting with knots in the stomach and much to unburden at home. Over time, personal health can suffer, and the home fabric can become frayed. What is not tended to at school is often transferred to the home, eroding preparation and, over time, marriage and family joy.

Some groups pretend to work by consensus when, in fact, they use alternatives that are thinly disguised. Here are a few examples:

Majority rule. When we see where most people stand on a particular issue we can force the decision through using the adjournment time or any other rationale to make the minority acquiesce. Often those in the majority do not even know that there was a sizable minority view, and the insights of the few were not able to improve upon the will of the majority.

Unilateral decisions based on the unspoken hierarchy. This way of working takes the form of having a discussion until one or two particular persons speak up, at which time the different perspectives that were in the room suddenly become one. The fact is that some people carry more influence than others. To have influence is not necessarily a bad thing, but when it is obscured under the guise of consensus, it is a real social injustice. It would be far better to say: “we will have a discussion on this topic until our senior colleague or faculty chair feels he or she has enough information to make a decision on behalf of all of us.”

Decisions that are made by groups that are not mandated outside the context of the regular meetings. This is the form that most infuriates me. There is a general meeting with general discussions on a topic. There's no closure or indication at the end of the meeting about what will happen next, but in the intervening week a decision appears. It remains unspoken that a small group met, without the sanction of the whole, and made a decision. If the decision is questioned at the next meeting, the response of that small group will be: you are not being supportive of your colleagues. Who wants not to be supportive? In this way, the issue is twisted instead of being rightly viewed as a gross violation of group process; it is contorted into an issue of support. Many conclude after a few such experiences that it is best not to rock the boat – let others handle those administrative matters they say, I’ll just focus on my teaching.

Thus periodic review of how everyone is doing can redress and balance what is not well. I have found that groups in the school need to hold each other accountable, with minutes that are freely circulated. It is best to write down clearly who was in attendance, what the issues were, which decisions were made and how, and which items were slated for action, along with specific names of the people who are meant to follow through. At the next meeting there must be a review of the decisions, with the expectation of a high standard of performance. To say that there is not enough time is not a valid excuse if tasks are neglected repeatedly. Setting priorities on a monthly basis can be helpful, so that the group is making decisions out of the larger picture. With regular care and tending, a school can adopt the forms of decision-making that respect the reality of the groups within the community.

Torin is chair of the Education Department at Antioch University in Keene NH, Director of the Center for Anthroposophy and General Secretary of the Anthroposophical Society of America. Torin was a Waldorf student, a Waldorf teacher, teacher trainer and is author of numerous books relating to Waldorf education and Organizational Development, including

“School as Journey,” “Organizational Integrity,” “In Search of Ethical Leadership,”

The Art of Participatory Decision Making

A Summary from the Facilitators Guide to Participatory Decision Making, by Sam Kaner

See the link to this book in the table of contents.

The Basic Goals of the Decisioning Process

Full Participation
Mutual Understanding
Inclusive Solutions
Shared Responsibilities
Understanding, Connection, Progress

A Picture of the Process

Aspects of the Divergent and Convergent Zones

Moving from all voices to one voice

Divergent Zone Strategies

Generate

Open

Invite

Gather

Encourage

Express

Listen

Convergent Zone Strategies

Summarize

Sort

Evaluate

Amend, Adjust

14 More articles on Consensus

All of the supporting articles below can be found at Leadtogether.org Click on them to link to the articles

Facilitators Guide to Participatory Decision Making

A Short Guide to Consensus Building

By the Public Disputes Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School

This article on consensus offers a brief look at some aspects of consensus decision-making, definitions of the difference between consensus, facilitation, and mediation, and a look at what’s wrong with Robert’s rules of order.

A Checklist for the Consensus Process

Edited by Randy Schutt

This one page checklist outlines the various aspects of the consensus process and offers a list of tasks and responsibilities for the various roles in the process along with a listing of various tools for facilitation.

Seeds of Change

This 8-page booklet is a very readable summary (with lots of charts and graphics) describing the consensus process. This, and it's longer version below, would be helpful basic reading for any group.

Seeds of Change

This 24-page booklet goes more into depth about the background tools and practice of consensus decision making. It is a very helpful study for anyone in a position leading a group through consensus decisions. It offers sound experienced advice for consensus leaders along with troubleshooting tips.

Functional Consensus

www.functionconsensus.org

This three-page set of discussion, charts and diagrams is a very helpful overview of the consensus process. It has a good section on when consensus is most effective and when other forms of decision-making might be better. A quick read and handy guide taken from the Function Consensus website, which has lots of detailed information on consensus and is a good resource for those leaders and students of consensus.

On Conflict and Consensus: A handbook on Formal Consensus decision-making

CT Lawrence Butler and Amy Rothstein This little booklet (63pp) is the one definitive guide to Consensus decision-making. It has chapters on conflict, decision-making, roles, evaluation, techniques, and a good intro chapter on the advantages of consensus.

FACILITATION

A compilation of meeting and facilitation guidelines, M Soule

There are three sets of three elements to consider for every meeting – the content, which is the purpose of the meeting, the process, which is the flow of the meeting and the interaction between people, which is the social aspect of the meeting. This threefolding is reflected in the overall planning, conducting and follow up of the meeting as well as in the conducting of the meeting itself. As a facilitator, one’s task is to watch the flow of the meeting, the participation and interaction between people and the actual topics. At the end of a good meeting, people should be able to say, “we learned something” (that’s the content part), “we accomplished something”, (that’s the process part) and “we grew in our relationships” (that’s the interaction part). The following guidelines are intended to help us accomplish those three things.

Preparation

Who is coming (called the people and social interaction)

Has everyone been notified and given an agenda?

Do people know what their part is (if they need to make a report or bring a topic)

What is the purpose of the meeting and what topics are there (the content or meaning)

Are the meeting goals clear?

Do we know all the topics?

Do we know which items are reports, which are discussions, and which need decisions?

How will things be ordered (space, agenda, time, pre- communication) (the process flow)

Is the space ready?

Did we make an agenda? Does everything fit into the time allotted?

Do we have a facilitator?

During the meeting

The topics needing to be discussed (the content)

Are we staying focused? How to deal with gnarly issues or with new topics that arise?

The people and the discussion (the interaction)

Is the interaction and participation balanced? How to deal with feelings or conflicts

that arise?

The flow, the time and agenda (the process)

Are we keeping on time? How to deal with topics and discussions that take longer

than expected?

As a facilitator, one is responsible to support the will of the group. It is helpful during the meeting

to touch in with everyone to see how it is going? Is there a general consensus?

Follow up

What did we accomplish (the content)

Do we have clear notes? Are we clear about our decisions?

Who needs to be communicated with (the interaction)?

What follow up is needed (the process)?

Who will follow up on decisions?

Facilitators Guide to Participatory Decision Making

Listening and Leading Skills of Facilitator

from Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making by Sam Kaner

Respecting Diverse Styles

Has the benefit of stretching the limits of tolerance
If we’re going to be more inclusive we have to be more inclusive
Strategies for responding to repetitiveness, awkwardness, exaggeration, distortion, intense feeling, tangents

Paraphrasing/Mirroring

Helps participants feel heard
Allows the group to hear the contribution a second time in a different way
Say what you think you heard in your own words
Summarize in fewer words “It sounds like…” “Let me see if I understand…”
Then ask: “Did I get it?”

Drawing People Out

Helps clarify, refine, and develop ideas
“Can you say more?”
“What do you mean by…?”
“What matters to you about that?
“Can you give us an example?”
“You’re saying that because?”

Gathering Ideas

Gets lots of ideas out efficiently
Opens space for creative thinking
Start with a concise description of the task
Set a time limit
Suspend judgment/all contributions welcome
Paraphrase/mirror
Honor

Stacking/Tracking

Helps people take turns and know they will have time to share so they listen better
Limits waiving hands and verbal interruptions
Ask those who want to speak to raise their hands
Create an order (stacking)
Call on people
Ask if anyone else wants to speak and stack again
Keep track of the lines of thought emerging/notes help (tracking)
For tracking: say that you are stepping back to summarize
Summarize what you’ve been tracking
Ask if you’re getting it

Balancing

Broadens the discussion
Helps first thoughts to not dominate
Contradicts “silence means consent”
Elicits fresh thoughts when polarization starts to happen
“Are there other ways of looking at this?”
"We’ve heard the challenges; does anyone want to speak to the benefits?”
Straw poll: “Who agrees with this perspective?”
“We’ve heard from ________ and from _____ for their points of view. Are there others?”

Space for the Quiet Person

Creates opportunities for those who are quieter but have important thoughts to share
Moderates the influence of the constant contributors
Values broadening thinking
Keep an eye out for the quiet ones
“Was there a thought you wanted to express?”
“I thought I saw you almost raise your hand.”
“_____, we haven’t heard from you.”

Intentional Silence

Gives everyone a breath
Gives the facilitator time to gather their thoughts
Helps groups settle
Allows for reflection
Honors the moment
Helps move through an awkward moment
10 seconds or so
“Let’s take a few moments to reflect/center…”

Listening for Common Ground

Helps work through polarization
Reminds people about where they agree/what they share in common
Can identify or remind people of shared values, beliefs, or goals
Helps get back-on-track if things are starting to drift
Indicate you are stepping back to summarize common ground
Share a summary of what you see as the group’s differences and similarities
Check for accuracy
Be especially attentive to including all parties/points of view

Summarizing

Vigorous conversation can be hard to close
Making summarizing statements helps participants consolidate their own thinking
Restatement of key themes, categories, and main points improves understanding
Make smaller summaries as you go along
Restate the focus of the discussion
Gather in themes “I think people raised three themes…”
Name each along with one or two points related to it
Give it some qualitative support (“We’ve done a good job of…”)
State next steps, if possible (who/what/when/how). “Jack will circulate the draft proposal by Friday so we can act on it in our next meeting.”
“Anything else before we move on?”

Stanford Facilitation Guide, from Stanford Univ.

Stanford Facilitation Guide

Preparation

Decide who should facilitate the discussion. Consider who knows the topic, can assume an "objective" role, will be accepted by the group and has group experience. Consider what you know about the topic, whether your views are known to students, and whether that makes your role as a facilitator too difficult.
Consider co-facilitating with another person. Whenever possible, use co-facilitators who represent different gender, racial or cultural backgrounds, especially when discussing personal or emotional issues.
Know yourself before you begin as a facilitator. Consider:
- What are my personal beliefs, values and stereotypes about the issue?
- Can I assume an objective role in the discussion?
- What role should I assume as a facilitator?
- How do I establish trust and openness among the group?
- How do I show respect for the opinions of others?
- How do I tactfully mediate conflict?
- How do I keep discussion flowing smoothly?
- How do I encourage the participation of everyone and avoid domination by a few?
- How do I deal with someone showing disrespect for another?
- What should I do when I don't know how to respond to a comment or question?
- Will I feel comfortable facilitating a group discussion on this issue?
Identify the goals of the session. What are you trying to accomplish?

Plan the format of the discussion. Will it be a small group? a large group? a group of people who know each other well? only somewhat? not at all? Will it be formal (see the suggested discussion models attached in Appendix B) or informal?

Schedule tentative time blocks, so that the introduction and key points will be covered before the end of the discussion.

Plan the physical environment so that participants can talk to each other (not just to you) without visual or height barriers. Hint: people sitting in circles tend to talk more with each other, rather than focus on the facilitation.

Be prepared with some interesting/challenging questions to get discussion started and to keep moving.

Plan for any materials or help you will need. Will you need a writing surface such as a blackboard, or newsprint and marker pens. If it is an event where you will be writing down information, ideas, choose someone else to be the recorder. Hint: It is very hard to facilitate a discussion and be the one doing the recording.

Starting Off

Introduce the purpose of the discussion and ensure that the participants have the same understanding.

Explain the organization and structure (including the timeline) of the discussion, when it will end, and whether or not there are formal follow-up plans. ("We'll speak in small groups for an hour then spend a half-hour in general discussion. We will end at 9 p.m. and anyone who wants to continue the discussion can stay in the lounge. Depending on interest we will have a follow-up discussion on Thursday night.")

Explain your role as facilitator - a person whose role it is to remain neutral or objective, to keep the discussion focused and energized and to create an environment for all to have a chance to participate. This does not mean that you are neutral and have no opinions, but as a facilitator you need to play an objective role.

Set the appropriate tone. Show your comfort with the topic so that others feel comfortable. Create a safe and open environment so that the participants will feel comfortable and share their views openly and honestly.

Do introductions. How you do the introductions will help set the tone for the discussion--the amount of information and the degree of self-disclosure that will occur.

Establish ground rules for the discussion so that the participants feel the environment is safe to speak about their ideas and feelings. Ground rules should be explicit. You need to take a little time to discuss the cultural relativity of these ground rules. Ground rules may not fit everyone because we have different cultural backgrounds. Ask the group if these rules make sense and if everyone can honor them. The following are some suggestions (add your own):

We ask that you speak from your own perspective; personal "I" statements are useful ways for keeping your viewpoints personalized, and keep you from generalizing about what others think or feel

We ask that you respect the viewpoints of others--that you listen respectfully and attentively, and that you withhold judgment about other's views. Our goal here is not to persuade each other of our ideas, but to get ideas out on the table so people can make their own decisions.

We ask that you maintain confidentiality about what is said in the room during this discussion--that you don't talk about what others say here to others who are not part of this discussion.

To show your respect for others in the room, we ask that you stay focused on the discussion and avoid side conversations. We ask that you make a conscious effort to listen actively to hear what is being said.

We expect that everyone here will try to make this experience a good one; that we are all responsible for how this discussion goes.

We ask that you be willing to voice disagreements, but we ask that if you disagree with someone's idea that you criticize the idea, not the person. With sensitive issues, people take things personally. Please try to be sensitive to each other's needs and concerns. Try to speak up if you feel hurt in any way. Avoid derogatory or sarcastic comments at the expense of others.

We ask that you don't interrupt each other.

All questions are good ones. We encourage you to ask questions of each other no matter how simplistic you might think they are. Chances are there are others who have the same question. The goal of the discussion is to learn and explore.

We ask that you limit your exchanges with one person to no more than 3 exchanges. If it goes beyond three then others need the chance to express their opinion.

We ask that you don't make assumptions about what others think or mean. Remember that others will not always attach the same meanings to words that you do or perceive the world the same way you do.

(A useful ground rule for managing hurt) We will establish an "ouch" list as we go along. We ask that you write down any statements that hurt you and post them on the wall. We will agree to discuss the "ouches" at some point in the discussion.

Find out if some people are leaving early or coming late and decide how you want to deal with that.

Getting the Discussion Started

Pose an interesting question or set of questions. Remember to come to the discussion with some prepared questions.

Open questions requiring more than a "yes" or "no" response (as opposed to closed questions which lead to a one word response) generate discussion and stimulate thinking. (keywords: "how", "why", "what", "what if", "tell us about")

"How do you feel about the points made in the presentation?"

"What in your experience has led you to the view that you just expressed?"

Group oriented questions encourage group participation and tend to stimulate everyone's thinking. (keywords: "who", "anyone")

"Would anyone be willing to share their reactions to the program?"

"Does anyone have any ideas about how we should start this discussion?"

"Does anyone have an issue or concern that they would like to raise to get us started?"

"What experiences have any of you had with this issue?"

Individual oriented questions encourage individual response (but may put people on the spot) and can tap known resources of a "expert" in the group:

"Tom, what do you think about the issues raised in the article?"

"Allison, how do you feel about what is happening in the dorm now, on the topic of X?"

" Eric, you have done a lot of reading in this area, how do you see the issue?"

Factual questions seek information. (keywords: "what", "which", "how much")

"What are some of the major pros and cons from your perspective?"

"What statements did you actually hear made during the presentation that made you upset?"

"Who on campus is best suited to talk further about this issue?"

During the Discussion

Checking Yourself

Remain neutral (objective and open). This does not mean that you don't have opinions, but facilitators usually do not offer their own views; they help group members share theirs. Your role is to facilitate the group's discussion. If you have valuable ideas or opinions that are essential to what is being discussed, put your facilitator role aside and ask someone else to act as facilitator while you give your input

"How do some of the rest of you feel about that?"

"That may be your experience, but others may see things differently. Do any of you have a counter example or opinion.?"

"I have an opinion I would like to share, so I am taking my facilitator hat off for a comment."

Stay off the soapbox. Successful facilitators listen rather than talk. Watch for danger signals:

- Talking too much

- Feeling the need to address all questions

- Talking more than your co-facilitator(s)

- Seeing the group interacting more with you rather than with each other

- Engaging in dialogue with individual members of the group

Avoid being put in the position of the "expert". Some may look to you to provide the answers to challenging questions or situations. Refrain from immediately providing "your answer" to the issue at hand. Turn the situation back to the questioner or ask the question of the whole group. If you are stuck or lost, admit it honestly to the group; someone is almost always likely to come to your rescue.

" How would you handle that?"

Stay aware of your own "hot buttons". Know where you stand on the issues, where your own prejudices/biases lie and where you are in your own personal discovery. If you feel you won't shut down discussion you could own up to them at the very beginning of the discussion and say that although you have deep feelings about the issue, you are committed to creating an environment where all feelings can be heard and respected.

Gatekeeping

Acknowledge contributions, validate people's ideas, and give credit where credit is due.

"Thanks for saying that Linda. No one had mentioned that before."

"Thanks for that helpful contribution. It is not easy to share such a personal experience. That was very courageous."

"Dave, I appreciate your offering a different view."

"You made a strong general statement, Mary. Is that what you think (or feel)?"

"Could you restate your point using 'I' instead of 'we' or 'you' or 'people think'?

Keep the focus on ideas not individuals. Some ways to do this are:

- Ask the group to brainstorm ideas - Ask the group to identify pros and cons of a position rather than having individuals explain or defend a position

- Divide the group in half, being sure each half includes representatives of different viewpoints and ask each group to develop one side of the argument

- Go around the circle asking everyone to say something about the topic and indicate in what ways he or she agrees with previous speakers. Then ask a recorder to summarize the primary feelings expressed by the group

- Create small groups, each with a reporter who will bring ideas of the small group back to the whole group

- Redirect people who make personal comments about others.

Try to keep the discussion concrete rather than abstract. People tend to talk abstractly especially when dealing with uncomfortable topics. Suggesting that people share real experiences can be effective.

"Can you give an example of what you are talking about from your own experience?"

Keep the focus on the subject without restraining free expression of ideas.

"You have made an interesting point, but how would you say that relates to X (the topic under discussion)?"

"It seems that we have started another topic without finishing the first. Should we return to the issue we were discussing before going on?"

Get participants to "own" their comments rather than speaking in generalizations about what others think.

Summarize or synthesize statements as a way of keeping track and bringing focus on where the discussion is going/has gone.

"Some of the main points I have heard are..."

"What were some of the main themes here tonight?"

"Can someone give a brief distillation of the discussion that we just had?"

Be patient with silences. Don't jump to fill in the silence. Silence can be an important time for some and may spur others to talk.

Know and emphasize the importance of pause time. Encourage each person to be aware of his or her own pause time before jumping in. As a facilitator don't jump in too quickly.

Read non-verbal cues. Are a few people dominating the discussion? Are there many interruptions? Observe who is participating and who is not? Are people looking bored? Angry? Impatient? What is the level of energy in the discussion?

"People seem a little restless, why don't we take a break."

"It looks as if people are uncomfortable with what we have just been discussing."

"The energy of this discussion seems low, should we wind this up for now?"

Pose disagreement constructively. If there is disagreement and the discussion is stuck, have the participants agree to disagree and move on to another subject.

"Can we explore each of the viewpoints as a group and try to understand them rather than having one or two people defend each view."

"It's clear that there is no agreement on this issue which is perfectly fine. Can we all agree not to be in agreement on this and move on to consider another facet of this issue.."

Minimize attacks. Protect individuals and their ideas from attack by other members of the group.

"Let's remember our ground rule about not attacking each other."

Minimize disruptions such as inappropriate humor, people walking in and out, private/side conversations, etc. Confront other problem behaviors that interfere with the progress of the discussion. (See Troubleshooting below)

"It is really hard to focus on what is being said here. There are so many side conversations."

Encouraging Participation

Create (and recreate) a safe and trusting environment. Monitor excessive talkers (see Troubleshooting below) and prompt the quieter members. - Consider breaking up into smaller groups or pairs(dyads) or trios for mini-discussions as a way to involve the quieter people

"We hope that you will say what is on your mind. What we say here today is for the group and will not go beyond the group."

Set and reinforce a pattern for participants to talk to each other, not to you. Keep reminding the group that this conversation/questioning focuses on you.

Notice silences. Who is talking a lot, who is not talking? Is there any pattern?

"The men in the group have been pretty quiet. We'd be interested in what you think."

"I have noticed that some of you have not said what you think. I hope you will find a way to let us hear from you at some point" (be careful of this kind of statement; it may put people on the spot)."

" I have noticed that some of you haven't said anything. Please feel free to jump in at any point."

"John, you made some good points; let's hear from someone else."

Acknowledge the feelings of people in the group.

"Sam, I can see how upset you are. what would you like to hear from the group?"

"I bet you are not the only one here who has that reaction. Has anyone else ever felt the same way?"

Ask individuals and the group how to respond to expressions of emotions.

"It seems to me that the discussion has brought up painful feelings for several people. What shall we do at this point? Would you like to talk about feelings that have been expressed? Do you want to keep going? Shall we take a break?"

"This seems to be where a lot of discussions on this issue break down--how can we keep going and get past this point?"

"When I see people angry it is hard for me to listen because I am worried about people getting (emotionally/physically) hurt. Could we just take a minute here to breathe, and make sure we can talk about this respectfully"

Reaffirm that the group is trying to deal with emotionally difficult issues.

"People are expressing many different and deep emotions here which may feel hard and uncomfortable, but that is the reason we are all here, to try to come to grips with emotionally difficult issues."

"It's not easy to share such a deeply held beliefs"

Advancing and Deepening the Discussion

Invite amplification of new points. Encourage the contributors to explain the background behind their ideas/opinions. o Help "fact spouters" get more personal.

"What is your opinion, given the facts as you have said them?"

"When I hear those facts, it makes me feel like.....?"

"These are interesting facts; would you like to share how you feel about them?."

Encourage people to take risks

- Take some risks yourself, including admitting your mistakes

- Take a risk yourself and be vulnerable by sharing a personal experience or risky feeling

Ask open-ended questions. (What?, How?, Why?)

Ask follow-up and/or probing questions (if others don't).

"Can you say a little more about that?"

"What do you mean by that?" "Can you give us an example?"

"How did you come to this view?."

"What convinced you of your opinion?"

Paraphrase (or getting others to paraphrase) what people say; paraphrasing can help legitimize people's views, and is especially useful in legitimizing an unpopular or risky opinion/idea.

"As I understand what you are saying, ..."

"Let me see if I understand what you are saying, ..."

Clarify, without interpreting.

"Can you clarify that last comment, I am not sure that I understood what you were saying."

"Can I try to clarify what I think you just said."

"Can you restate that in a different way?"

"What do you mean by that?"

Call attention to alternative viewpoints. Beware of "group think" Sometimes a group will discuss a topic without awareness of a different approach to the same problem.

Encourage feelings as well as ideas. Remember that "I feel like..." and "I feel that ..." are not statements of feelings. Feelings are expressions of emotions -- anger, frustration, joy, happiness, etc.

Troubleshooting During the Discussion

No one responds.

- Ask for any comments

- Suggest an answer and ask for agreement or disagreement

Someone who doesn't take the discussion seriously or gives silly comments.

- Find something in their answer that is close to a serious answer and in a serious tone repeat it to the group.

- Ask them if they can think of another answer

- Compliment them when they give a serious answer

"I think most people are here because they think the topic is a valuable one. Does anyone feel differently about this?"

"Please try to respect other people's feelings here; this is a serious issue."

"I know that laughter can mean that people are nervous or feeling uncomfortable. Does anyone have any special concerns?"

People monopolize the discussion.

- Say, "I'd like to hear what the rest of the group has to say."

- Ask another person a question just as soon as they pause.

- Ask for agreement or disagreement from others.

- Explain that you appreciate his or her comments, but it is important for everyone to have a chance to talk.

- Establish ground rules at the beginning (or mid-stream) that one of the goals is to provide everyone an opportunity to share.

Someone keeps changing the subject or goes on tangents.

-Say, "That is very interesting but how do you feel about .....?"

-Refocus their attention by saying "I know you are enjoying sharing your experience with each other, but there are some issues I would like to share with you now."

- Say, "In order to accomplish our goal today, we really need to move on. Perhaps we can go back to this topic later."

People keep interrupting.

"Could we remember just to have one person talk at a time and let people finish their statements."

"Okay. First Sarah, then Randy, then Marie."

"Jim, you have got a lot of good points, but it is important to let Renee finish, and then I know that Tom is dying to say something as well."

Hostile or belligerent group members

-Keep your cool. Try to incorporate negative comments in a positive way. "That's an (interesting, unique, different) way to look at this situation. I appreciate your contributing that different point of view."

-If it continues, try to meet with the person at a break and confront them on their behavior. If it is really disruptive, tell them that if they choose to stay, you would like their cooperation. o Someone puts another person down.

-Remind the group that there are no wrong answers. Everyone has the right to his/her opinion.

The group gets stuck (lacks sufficient information to go on) Refer to resources. Suggest the need for further information if you or someone else in the discussion does not know the answer.

Inappropriate humor

- Don't let inappropriate humor go by.

" I realize that you may not have intended it, but this is a pretty sensitive topic, and that kind of humor makes a lot of people very uncomfortable."

"I don't find that remark very funny personally. Were you aware that some people might find that remark offensive?"

You are running out of time.

- Don't panic or start rushing. Get as far as you can. - Prioritize questions/points. Try to address the important ones

- Decide on a time for a follow-up session

Someone challenges your role as group leader.

- Don't become defensive. Let the group air their dissatisfactions. Express your feelings after they have cooled off. Discuss solutions with the group.

People keep addressing their questions to you.

- Redirect the question to the group

- If no one in the group has a response, defer the question by having someone in the group come back with pertinent information at a later time.

Conflict occurs

- Don't take sides

- Remind people of the areas of agreement - Ask people in conflict to agree to restate what they heard before they state their arguments.

- Remind people that they are not there to judge others or to persuade others of their views, but to further mutual understanding.

- Summarize the conflict and ask for ideas from the whole group as to how to proceed.

- Acknowledge the disagreement and agree to move on. Tell the group that conflict is a healthy part of group dynamics, and can enhance learning.

- Try to put yourself in each person's position and try to understand the emotional impact that the situation is creating for them. Empathize verbally with each side.

- Acknowledge each person's concerns and needs.

- Try to elicit where each person's ideas may have come from in their experience.

Inability to move to another topic because people are overly engaged in a lively discussion

- Try to be flexible about time. If something good is happening, assess the value of leaving that discussion in favor of completing an agenda. Get the group to help make this decision.

- Give a two-minute warning or some other transition time to prepare the group to change direction.

- Acknowledge at the beginning of the session that time will be a factor and that some issues may not be discussed.

- Acknowledge the difficulty of leaving a good discussion and get the group to decide how to proceed, or set up another time to finish the agenda.

Something inappropriate is stated, i.e., something offensive, misinformation

- Legitimize dissenting opinions/ideas. Don't let misinformation stand. It implies that you agree with it. Ask for other opinions/ideas ("Are there other views?" "Does everyone agree?"

- Agree to disagree to give people space to object without destroying the discussion.

- Acknowledge discomfort over a comment...but own it as your discomfort. Don't speak for the group.

Wrapping Up

Keep to the committed ending time, unless you ask the group if they would like to continue for a specified period of time. (Remember, ending a little too soon is better than discussing a topic to death. Ending on a high note will encourage the discussion to continue at a later time.) Indicate that you will stay around for a while if anyone else wishes to continue the discussion.

Summarize (or have a participant summarize) the major thrust of the discussion.

- The major points of agreement and disagreement, if appropriate.

- Issues that were discussed but not resolved

- Where action has been agreed on, the decision should be stated and the next steps and the person responsible should be identified.

Comment on (or have the group comment on) how the discussion went

- How do participants feel about their own participation? - What was good about the discussion and what could have been better?

- Did people feel free to express their opinions?

- Do they have suggestions for better facilitation?

- Did people feel free to express their opinions?

If appropriate, help the group decide what the next steps should be if any. Decide if people want to continue the discussion at a later time. Determine a starting point for the next discussion. Decide if people who did not attend the first discussion should attend the second.

Emphasize the commitment to confidentiality and sensitivity to the comments shared by members of the group.

Indicate that you (and other residence staff members) will also be available to discuss related issues at another time, especially if this discussion has brought up difficult or painful experiences.

Thank everyone for the discussion...for their honest participation, etc.

Post Discussion Review

After the discussion is over, take a few minutes (with your co-facilitator) to reflect on the content and process of the discussion; a few written notes for future reference might be helpful. Consider:

How well did the group stay focused on the topic? What contributed to this?
How did the structure and timing contribute to the discussion? What changes, if any, would you make?
How involved were individuals in the discussion? Were there any individuals noticeably silent, angry or upset? Usually, it is best to avoid questioning or confronting the behavior afterwards, but it may be important to keep your eye on the individual. Sometimes the behavior you observed in the discussion might indicate serious personal difficulties. If in doubt what to do consult with your RF or RD.

Seek feedback from others (other staff members present or participants). You will learn much from seeking feedback from others, especially from your co-facilitator or other staff members. Ask what you did that went well (what you did to keep the discussion moving, motivate others to take risks and set the appropriate tone., etc.) and what improvements they would recommend.

BUILDING COMMUNITY

Four Keys to Returning to Full Community Life

By Lisa Mahar

Longer, warmer days and the tentative emergence of buds and blossoms let us know that spring is underway.

In our schools we are all happily anticipating our return to community celebrations and festival life after many months of limited contact, modified events, and sustained precautions. With a pandemic that impacted three school years, many school leaders have observed that large portions of their student bodies and their parent bodies have yet to experience the full rhythm and richness of our Waldorf community celebrations, festivals, special events, and school traditions. Introducing a renewal of community life promises a special kind of refreshment, nourishment, and sustenance we long for.

With this renewal, we are presented with a unique opportunity to pause and ask:

How do we best renew our community activities?
What new opportunities present themselves for nurturing a fulfilling community life?
How might we adopt and incorporate our ongoing and meaningful work aimed at broadening circles of inclusion and welcome?
Which traditions still pulse with life, and which are ready to become meaningful memories of a past time?
What new events and celebrations are peeking over the cradle’s rim ready to be taken up?

Each school community will answer these questions in its own way. What follows are some reflections and insights from the work of Jorgen Smit on elements that make up a healthy, vibrant, balanced community life. Schools might find these insights useful as they plan for a full return to community life.

Jorgen Smit studied the human community and observed human relationships. He developed his observations and experiences into a picture of the healthy human social organism, based on four dynamics of community life: Warmth, Initiative, Form, and Continuity. When each of these four dynamics is present and lively and when these dynamics are actively and consciously balanced and rebalanced, a living and vibrant sense of community carries us all.

Warmth

Community warmth creates an atmosphere of welcome, of extension toward the other, of striving for connection. Warmth is interest, curiosity. Warmth flows through and breaks down any separation between the long-time members of the community and the brand-new ones.

Warmth brings a sense of welcome, comfort, acceptance, enthusiasm. Diversity, and its essential companion, inclusion, thrive in a community permeated by human warmth. In such a community, even challenges are welcomed because they often generate “heat” in our human connections. Warmth is a necessary condition for growth, raying out and engaging those it touches.

Initiative

Proposing, exploring, and manifesting new approaches demonstrate a commitment to our healthy future. Initiative asks questions, is willing to experiment, and takes risks. Balanced with warmth, form, and continuity, it’s the fuel that moves a community forward. Vibrant wholeness and energy characterize communities friendly to initiative.

A school community that works to sense the future welcomes initiative from all quarters, including from new teachers, new staff members, new parents, and from the students themselves. After all, our new and our young community companions bring us the gift of fresh eyes. When balanced with warmth, form, and continuity we find initiative to be an inspiring energizer keeping us fresh and engaged.

Form

Form is the structure of the community and its policies, procedures, protocols. Form reflects our living values, what is important to us. It holds us up and holds us together. If we are committed to professional development for teachers, our budget supports it. If we are committed to financial accessibility for all, our tuition policies make that possible. If we are committed to diversity and inclusion, our curriculum, staffing, enrollment, festivals, and celebrations bring these commitments to life. We experience form as a framework: our values lead to principles; principles lead to policies; policies lead to practices. Form has a sturdiness and durability to it. We can count on it. Form is, of course, open to transform. It is, at best, the set of firm yet supple golden threads that weave our school community together.

Continuity

Continuity embraces and continually refreshes what is valuable, inspiring, and working well. It lives in community rhythms, predictability, tradition, accountability, and the honoring of history. Continuity is carrying forward what is lively and true. Continuity gives new ideas time and space to work. Continuity is sensing and celebrating what we can rightly rely on: it was, it is, it will be. This is a gift for our children, a source of strength, trust, and security. Dynamic continuity calls us to be attentive, perceptive, and especially awake, avoiding doing a thing because “we’ve always done it”.

Warmth, initiative, form, continuity, these four elements are guiding lights illuminating the path of community health and well-being. As we reflect on our own school communities, we can ask ourselves:

Are all of these elements present in our school community?
Which element are we especially good at?
Does one or another need to be strengthened?
How does each show itself in the life of the school?
Are these elements well-balanced with one another?
Are there groups or individuals especially gifted in holding one or more of these elements?
Where do we see opportunities for further growth and development of warmth, initiative, continuity, and form?

In this new moment we are offered a unique opportunity: returning to full expression of our vibrant community life. With a nod to the thoughtful work of Jorgen Smit, we look forward to making the most of the compelling possibilities that lay ahead. Kind thoughts to all as you examine, strengthen, and renew your community relationships and deepen your school culture now and for our future. Happy Spring!

To learn more about Leading with Spirit and our summer course offerings in The Art of Administration, please visit Leading with Spirit or reach out to Lisa Mahar at lisamahar5@gmail.com.

Jorgen Smit,1916 – 1991, was a Waldorf Educator—a class teacher, trainer of teachers, international pedagogical leader, and one of the founders of the anthroposophical center in Jarna, Sweden, which now includes a teacher education seminar, a cultural center, hospital, school, biodynamic farm, dairy, and the international Youth Initiative Program (YIP). Jorgen Smit was a warm–hearted, compassionate human being, deeply interested in others. He inspired many young people to pursue careers of service in Waldorf Education and other anthroposophical based initiatives. Stories abound of his interest in others, his humor, curiosity, and encouraging guidance.

Lisa Mahar is a co-director of the Art of Administration summer training program of Leading with Spirit, offering week-long administrative training focused on the foundations of Waldorf education, explorations in school governance, school communication, meeting facilitation, roles and responsibilities, community building, leadership development, collaboration, and more.

Other resources

The Child, the Teacher, and the Community, Jorgen Smit

This book containing four lectures is available here in PDF format:

INSPIRATIONS

Verses

The Motto of the Social Ethic

The healing social life is found
When in the mirror of each human soul

The whole community finds its reflection

And when in the community
The virtue of each one is living.

Rudolf Steiner

Interconnectedness

“All I'm saying is simply this: that all mankind is tied together;

all life is interrelated, and we are all caught in an inescapable

network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of identity.

Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. For some

strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are

what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to

be until I am what I ought to be - this is the interrelated

structure of reality."

Dr Martin Luther King

The College Imagination from Foundations of Human Experience

A description of the spiritual imagination of working in groups by Rudolf Steiner

Handbook for Waldorf School Trustees, Leading with Spirit

The GUIDEBOOK FOR HEALTHY BOARD DEVELOPMENT

Deepening Our Work Together, K Jefferson

This booklet was written by Keith Jefferson (Themba Sadiki) while working at the Seattle Waldorf School in 1986. Keith/Themba was a class teacher, talented social development thinker, and creative influencer at the school.

Deepening Our Work Together notes by K Jefferson

Summer 2020 Leadership Training Course East Coast

LWS Draft FLYER 2020 HV FINAL 2.0

When In Wilderness: Applying wilderness wisdom to navigating the current pandemic

By Karl Johnson M.A.

Our present situation with the novel coronavirus has thrust us all into new terrains - a wilderness of uncertainty. When that happens, it’s easy to feel disorientation and even trepidation - especially if one is unaccustomed to traversing such terrains. The complexity of wild environments and shifting variables, such as weather, all necessitate the need to steadfastly and bravely assess and meet new situations head-on with commitment. Being in wilderness can also evoke a feeling of excitement and curiosity. The unknown holds opportunities. A sense of adventure can arise. In life, adventures invigorate us.

Here are some guiding thoughts gleaned from many years of leading wilderness experiences. May these be helpful metaphors in navigating our current, uncertain landscapes.

Orient Yourself to Your New Surrounding and to Those with You:

Start to pay attention to what is around you. What resources do you have? Where is your water? What is your orientation to the earth and sky? Who is with you? Being observant, alert, and identifying your essential resources that will help you survive physically, mentally, and spiritually. How do we take stock of what useful resources we have with us right now and what is close at hand?. Have we been practicing for contingencies? Do we have a resource of people in our community we can count on? Is there a way to accentuate strengths right now? Are there new opportunities that we see around us in this new landscape? Remember the essentials. Find the “waters” that will sustain you and protect the source. Make sure you keep practicing as a meditant to keep those “waters” flowing. Trust in life and the guidance of the spiritual world.

Establish your Camp:

Create a safe shelter. Protect oneself from the elements. Be prepared for sudden changes in the weather. Choose your site carefully. A home base is the foundation of safety in your journey. It allows you protection, support, and security. By having a secure base, one can venture forth, but also retreat. There may be dramatic shifts in the “weather,” but you can take shelter in what you have created as a “ base camp.” Safety and security are foundational. Ground yourself nightly in the security of what is your well-made and well-maintained shelter. This can be your actual home, but also the safety and security of one’s nightly practice, which we build up every evening. “Building one’s hut” gives one the opportunity to begin to practice gratitude. Gratitude is the attitude that will change everything.

Quiet your Mind:

Stay calm. Mindfulness, on the trail and at home, is key to being resilient, flexible, and centered. Remember you are the “decisive element” in this moment in the wilderness. Practice mindfulness and steadfast courage. As the saying goes, “Worry never lessens tomorrow’s problem, but rather robs today of its strength.” Focus on the positive. Take deep breaths. Cultivate a still mind even amid the thunderstorms of the wilderness.

Listen to All that is Around You:

Listen intently. Attune to what is being intoned in the wilderness around you. Notice the wind. Listen to the “voices” around you. The capacity to listen in many different ways – to yourself, to your body, to others around you, and to the world at large is key to helping you stay focused. This includes all who are near and dear to you. And especially the “quiet “voices that we only hear if we ourselves are quiet. There may be other voices clamoring for our attention. We should learn how to listen carefully to dissenting voices. But learn also how to separate what is “essential from what is not essential.” Seek to hear the quiet voice of inner guidance.

Be Aware of the Sun:

When and where is the sun rising? When and where is it setting? What is its arc during the day? Can you orient to the sun and find the right daily rhythms? The path of the sun through our days and regular daily rhythms are essential in new (and even in familiar) environments. In rhythm is strength. Be aware of the “Sun” - the big picture of guiding forces in our lives. Remember there are larger patterns in motion. Through these larger motions, seek to find your rhythms and steadfastly maintain them. Rhythm replaces strength - and rhythm awakens life. We also benefit greatly when we remember that “wisdom lives in the light.” Focus on the light.

Tend Your Fires:

At the end of every day, the night will come. Have you gathered your woodpile? Have you kept your tinder dry? Warmth is an essential of survival – whether in the wilderness or in your daily life. Especially when the new technology provides no supportive physical warmth – like a fire that won't stay lit or burns too small. When the light fades, we can tend our fire. Through the darkness, can we remember our core passions? What actually inspires and motivates us? How do we attend to those motivations when darkness encroaches? Remember, we need some preparation beforehand. Gather and sort the resources of your “woodpile.” Lay your fire well. Start small and feed it carefully. If we are not careful our “fire” can easily become wild. A well-laid and well-tended fire will burn steadily and then, at evening's end, we can enjoy the abiding, glowing embers of our efforts.

Notice the Stars:

When the fire dies away, gaze upward. The stars, which have always been there, will now be revealed. Take time to marvel and ponder. A sense of wonder and awe are not just gifts but significant aspects of any journey. The stars are always above us at night, but do we take the time to notice? What secrets are arrayed before us in their nightly sweep?

What are the patterns which have “constellated” for us in this lifetime? Can we truly “re-member?” In other words, can we integrate all those parts of ourselves - even from pre-earthly existence - and remember what we said we would do in this lifetime? In so many ways, life is about remembering what we said we would do - before this incarnation - and doing it. The stars can help us “re-member”...

Karl Johnson, presently the Pedagogical Chair for the Santa Fe Waldorf School, is approaching his 35th year as a Waldorf Educator. He has also been an Outdoor Educator for the National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS) and founded the Santa Fe Waldorf High School Wilderness Experience Program. If you are planning real wilderness journeys for yourself or for your school or if you need help navigating the strange, new world we are experiencing, feel free to contact Karl for some advice. A guide is always helpful. An experienced mentor, consultant, and trainer, Karl Johnson has mentored and trained teachers at dozens of schools in the U.S. and internationally. He still goes out to rejuvenate himself in the wilderness at every opportunity.

kjohnsoneducator@ gmail.com website: www.karljohnsoneducator.com

All Resources

Title	Date
Creating Social Sacraments, Bruell	2026/01/09	2026-01-09 22:09:18
The Social Mission of Waldorf Communities, Chris Schaefer	2026/01/08	2026-01-08 20:16:21
The Art of Facilitation and Meeting with Soul	2024/11/06	2024-11-06 16:23:33
Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision Making	2023/11/09	2023-11-09 13:41:16
Handbook for Waldorf School Trustees, Leading with Spirit	2023/09/11	2023-09-11 09:16:50
Navigating Leadership Transitions, a compilation of guidelines from LWS	2023/08/10	2023-08-10 13:39:18
Deepening Our Work Together, K Jefferson	2023/01/12	2023-01-12 15:20:13
Returning to a Renewed Community Life in Our Schools – Lisa Mahar	2022/05/14	2022-05-14 12:51:31
Finding Strength in Spirit: Growing Hope	2022/03/30	2022-03-30 07:02:51
Summer 2020 Leadership Training Course East Coast	2020/05/22	2020-05-22 21:47:11
When In Wilderness: Applying wilderness wisdom to navigating the current pandemic	2020/05/11	2020-05-11 19:51:14
Working Together Digitally and Staying Whole	2020/05/11	2020-05-11 19:45:46
All Resources	2020/01/10	2020-01-10 22:23:26
Love, Power and Wisdom	2019/06/07	2019-06-07 21:20:35
The Art of Facilitation Newsletter, Intro	2019/05/13	2019-05-13 22:06:21
Love and its Meaning in the World, A lecture by Rudolf Steiner, Dec 1912	2019/03/18	2019-03-18 23:10:42
The Threefold Social Organism and Collaborative Leadership, a lecture by Jessica Ziegler	2019/02/08	2019-02-08 07:37:43
Between Our Demons and Our Gods: Human Encounter in the Light of Anthroposophy – Elan Leibner	2019/02/08	2019-02-08 06:37:06
Institutions of the Spiritual Life, B. Lievegoed	2018/07/05	2018-07-05 11:26:02
New Impulses in Waldorf School Administration, Leadership and Governance, M Soule and M Stewart	2018/04/25	2018-04-25 23:01:33
Highlight 2, 8-25-2014 The Phases of Development in Spiritual Organizations	2018/03/30	2018-03-30 17:10:34
Highlight 17, Enlivening Spaces	2016/02/04	2016-02-04 12:57:02
A New Image of Waldorf School Organization – M Soule	2016/01/17	2016-01-17 04:37:16
Where the Spirit Leads – the Evolution of Waldorf School Administration	2016/01/17	2016-01-17 04:30:36
Management and Governance – Dianna Bell	2015/07/10	2015-07-10 05:39:18
Good Governance Checklist from CWP	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 23:33:36
Policy Governance Introduction by John and Miriam Carver	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 18:02:11
Renewing Governance	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 07:44:39
Understanding Governance by Michael Soule	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 06:48:58
Governance Models, An Essay by Nathan Garber with Reflections by Michael Soule	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 05:07:31
Self Administration and Governance in Waldorf Schools, Chris Schaefer	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 04:09:42
Personal Reflections on Waldorf School Governance and Effective Practices, Lynn Kern	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 03:33:55
Identity and Governance, An essay by Jon McAlice	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 02:57:40
More Governance Resources	2015/07/09	2015-07-09 01:12:34
Enlivening Spaces by Michael Soule	2015/07/08	2015-07-08 23:42:08
Holocracy: A new model for collaborative organization	2015/07/04	2015-07-04 19:31:19
School as Living Entity, ebook by Rea Gill	2015/07/04	2015-07-04 06:35:32
Principles of a Learning Organization, Five Disciplines, Senge	2015/07/04	2015-07-04 06:31:57
Basic Principles of a Living Organization, by Rea Gill	2015/07/04	2015-07-04 06:21:15
Leading with Spirit Summer Leadership Workshops 2017	2015/06/02	2015-06-02 03:49:55
Chaos in Life: Cleaning and Caring by Linda Thomas	2015/05/20	2015-05-20 05:19:45
Redefining Accountability and Transparency: LeadTogether Highlight #15 3-15-15	2015/04/19	2015-04-19 20:05:20
Exploring Accountability: An Introduction	2015/03/26	2015-03-26 03:28:14
Accountability, the Individual and Integrity	2015/03/24	2015-03-24 22:08:42
Six Principles for Building Accountability and Agreements in an Organization, Michael Soule	2015/03/24	2015-03-24 22:08:00
Managing Horizontal Accountability, Ray and Elder, IPC	2015/03/24	2015-03-24 22:07:14
Organizational Accountability: One World Trust and GAP	2015/03/24	2015-03-24 21:57:43
Faithfulness by Rudolf Steiner	2015/03/18	2015-03-18 01:21:22
Performance Management	2015/03/15	2015-03-15 03:53:45
The Art of Handling Complaints: LeadTogether Highlight #14 1-20-15	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:37:27
The Art of Being A Mentor by M Soule	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:11:03
Mentoring: From Observation to Conversation by Holly Koteen Soule from NW Mentorship Seminar	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:10:47
Five Strategies for Mentors, from Working Wisdom by Robert Aubrey	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:09:57
Goethean Observation: Two Articles by Craig Holdrege	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:08:57
More Mentoring Resources 2	2015/01/20	2015-01-20 05:07:13
“Light in the Soul“ from More Precious Than Light by Margreet Van Den Brink	2015/01/17	2015-01-17 19:13:20
Mentoring and Coaching: 25 differences	2015/01/16	2015-01-16 05:15:15
Complaints: LeadTogether Highlight #14, 1-13-15	2015/01/13	2015-01-13 06:23:31
Complaint Assessment Checklist from One World Trust	2015/01/13	2015-01-13 06:21:03
The Art of Fruitful Conversation, Griset and Raymond, WECAN	2015/01/11	2015-01-11 07:28:49
Mentor in Greek Mythology	2014/12/09	2014-12-09 05:41:50
Mentoring: Key Aspects for a Successful School Mentoring Program	2014/12/09	2014-12-09 05:30:38
Mentoring an Untrained Teacher	2014/12/09	2014-12-09 05:20:13
Mentoring in Waldorf Early Childhood Education, WECAN	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 16:38:34
Working Together: An Introduction to Pedagogical Mentoring	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 16:03:49
Alignment: LeadTogether Highlight #12 11-24-14	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 06:29:39
Positivity: LeadTogether Highlight #13 12-1-14	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 06:22:33
Appreciative Inquiry, an introduction	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 06:10:04
The Six Basic Exercises for Esoteric Development by Rudolf Steiner	2014/12/01	2014-12-01 06:06:10
Transitions Handbook for New Teachers, short form, Teacher Education Network, AWSNA	2014/11/30	2014-11-30 00:14:54
Transitions Handbook for New Teachers, Teacher Education Network, AWSNA	2014/11/30	2014-11-30 00:04:47
Mentor Qualifications and Scheduling, AWSNA Effective Practices	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 23:54:58
Evaluations and Mentoring, ASWNA Effective Practices	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 23:09:39
The Mentoring Program, AWSNA Effective Practices	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 22:48:37
School Mentoring Program Assessment Form, Sound Circle Mentoring Seminar 2008	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 22:31:25
Mentoring a New Teacher from Transitions Handbook, Teacher Education Network, AWSNA	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 22:27:34
Mentoring and Evaluating Terms: Definitions and Clarifications, D Gerwin, M Soule AWSNA	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 22:22:20
Mentoring: Oversight and Review of the Mentoring Program, AWSNA Effective Practices	2014/11/29	2014-11-29 22:19:20
Alignment and Orientation: LeadTogether Highlight #12 11-24-14	2014/11/24	2014-11-24 21:06:35
More Mentoring Resources	2014/11/11	2014-11-11 21:43:28
Waldorf in China by Ian Johnson, The New Yorker	2014/11/06	2014-11-06 13:48:56
A Note from China – LeadTogether Highlight #11, 11/5/14	2014/11/06	2014-11-06 12:15:18
Forming a Spiritual Organ in a School: LeadTogether Highlight #10, 10-27-14	2014/10/26	2014-10-26 15:41:28
The Virtue of Each One: LeadTogether Highlight #9 10-20-14	2014/10/20	2014-10-20 04:22:52
Supporting Conscious Development: LeadTogether Highlight #8 10-13-14	2014/10/13	2014-10-13 06:11:19
AUTONOMY, ACCOUNTABILTY AND INTENTION: Publicly Funded Charter Schools Using Waldorf Curriculum and Methods by: George Hoffecker	2014/10/13	2014-10-13 02:12:28
Engaged Community: A new book by Jon McAlice	2014/10/09	2014-10-09 04:26:47
Leadership and Self Administration: LeadTogether Highlight #7 10-6-14	2014/10/06	2014-10-06 02:27:38
Leadership and Self Administration: Michael Harslem	2014/10/06	2014-10-06 02:18:23
Resource List	2014/09/27	2014-09-27 13:26:25
The Call of Michaelmas – LeadTogether #6, 9-21-14	2014/09/22	2014-09-22 04:59:06
Healthy Communications in a Young School	2014/09/20	2014-09-20 03:54:15
Healthy Conversation, Communication and Agreements	2014/09/19	2014-09-19 17:50:48
Group Moral Artistry, The Art of Goethean Conversation	2014/09/19	2014-09-19 17:42:41
Communication by Connie Starzinski, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/09/18	2014-09-18 23:36:58
Feedback that Works	2014/09/18	2014-09-18 17:45:40
Meeting Each Other: The Human Encounter, a lecture by Heinz Zimmerman	2014/09/17	2014-09-17 03:12:47
Speaking, Listening and Understanding by Heinz Zimmerman	2014/09/17	2014-09-17 02:56:40
Non-Violent Communication: An Instruction Guide	2014/09/16	2014-09-16 13:35:06
A Sample Community Covenant	2014/09/16	2014-09-16 13:27:45
Personal Readiness for Collaboration	2014/09/16	2014-09-16 13:20:43
The Art of the Apology	2014/09/16	2014-09-16 04:58:32
Feedback that Works	2014/09/16	2014-09-16 04:56:09
Healthy Conversation, Communication and Agreements: More Resources	2014/09/15	2014-09-15 03:57:14
Remembering Marjorie Spock: LeadTogether Highlight #5, 9-15-14	2014/09/14	2014-09-14 17:09:09
Marjorie Spock: Eurythmy, Biodynamics, Waldorf Education, Anthroposophy	2014/09/14	2014-09-14 16:39:46
New Meeting Forms: LeadTogether Highlight #3 9-1-2014	2014/09/01	2014-09-01 03:05:59
New Meeting Forms: Open Space and World Cafe	2014/09/01	2014-09-01 03:04:06
Building Regenerative Communities: Strength in Collaboration	2014/08/29	2014-08-29 01:30:16
How Spiritual Organizations Develop – LeadTogether Highlight #4 9-8-14	2014/08/24	2014-08-24 22:51:16
LeadTogether Highlight #2 8-25-14, Core Principles of Waldorf Education	2014/08/24	2014-08-24 22:20:14
Core Principles of Waldorf Education from the PSC, 2014	2014/08/24	2014-08-24 22:15:07
Highlights: an Introduction Aug 18, 2014	2014/08/18	2014-08-18 04:14:12
Sustainability: Associative Economics	2014/08/14	2014-08-14 03:44:39
The Basics of Consensus Decision-Making by Tim Hartnett, PhD	2014/08/14	2014-08-14 03:36:45
Creating Effective Board Agendas by Judith Lindenau, JWL Associates	2014/08/11	2014-08-11 05:11:52
Meeting	2014/08/11	2014-08-11 04:53:56
Working Together to Improve Meetings	2014/08/11	2014-08-11 01:41:31
The Art of Planning and Preparing for Meetings	2014/08/10	2014-08-10 10:35:03
The Art of Creating an Agenda	2014/08/10	2014-08-10 09:20:57
Working Together	2014/08/10	2014-08-10 08:28:27
The Artistic Meeting: Creating Space for Spirit	2014/08/10	2014-08-10 07:21:34
More Resources for Creating Effective Meetings	2014/08/10	2014-08-10 06:44:35
Using Consensus to Enlighten, Not Limit, Decision Making	2014/06/30	2014-06-30 04:22:57
Making Good Decisions	2014/06/30	2014-06-30 04:21:42
On The Use of Consensus, Committees and Mandates	2014/06/30	2014-06-30 04:20:31
Affirming decisions	2014/06/30	2014-06-30 04:19:20
More resources for Consensus Decision Making	2014/06/30	2014-06-30 04:17:32
Leadership and Self Administration, Michael Harslem	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 23:20:52
A SHORT GUIDE TO CONSENSUS BUILDING, the Public Disputes Program, Harvard	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 23:10:28
Consensus – Simple Steps Handout	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 23:08:02
Consensus Summary, Seeds of Change	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 23:06:17
Consensus Briefing, Seeds of Change	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 23:04:06
On Conflict and Consensus, by LT Butler and Amy Rothstein	2014/06/29	2014-06-29 22:58:22
Learning in Organizations – theory and practice	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 19:40:17
Sociocracy, a creative approach to organizational development	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 18:41:30
Theory U: two views on the work of Otto Scharmer	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 18:27:34
Organizations as Living Organisms by Magda Lissau	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 17:33:52
The Living and Learning Organization – May Focus	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:43:25
Basic Principles of a Living Organization	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:18:34
Phases of School Development	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:10:58
School as a living Entity : Emerging Hypothesis	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:08:10
Organizational Integrity	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:06:11
Other Resources on Living Organizations	2014/05/15	2014-05-15 06:04:38
Seven Keys to Sustainability, full version	2014/04/17	2014-04-17 06:10:18
Sustainability	2014/04/08	2014-04-08 02:43:55
Seven Keys to Sustainability	2014/04/08	2014-04-08 02:42:59
Sustainability Resources	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 23:29:17
Intimations of a New Economic Story, John Bloom	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 21:21:36
Creative Approaches to Tuition: The Free Education Group at Michael Hall in England, 1977-80	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 20:20:16
Sustainability: History of Funding for Waldorf Schools	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 20:17:09
Waldorf Tuition: Gift or Investment or Something In Between?	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 19:43:17
Funding for Australian Steiner Schools: Benefits, Challenges and Lessons of Government Support	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 19:40:47
The Free Education Group at Michael Hall School in England : 1977-80	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 19:38:11
Centre for Associative Economics, UK	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 19:13:14
Sustainability: Enrollment and Fundraising	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 05:01:34
Fundraising 101, AWSNA	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 05:00:41
Independent Schools and School Choice 2009, Gary Lamb, AWSNA	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 04:44:02
Sustainability: School Finances and School Choice	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 04:42:20
Sustainability: Rethinking Tuition	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 04:14:15
The Genius of Money, a book by John Bloom	2014/04/07	2014-04-07 03:40:05
Creative Approaches to Tuition: Accessible to All Tuition, a review by Beth Henderson	2014/04/04	2014-04-04 22:30:11
Sustainability: Government Funding	2014/04/04	2014-04-04 20:09:20
How to Run a Waldorf School: Notes from a Conference in UK	2014/04/01	2014-04-01 02:29:53
Creative Approaches to Tuition: Accessible to All Tuition Model	2014/03/31	2014-03-31 19:58:47
Funding Education: A review of Freeing the Circling Stars by Christopher Houghton Budd (review by Arthur Edwards)	2014/03/31	2014-03-31 19:21:52
Creative Approach to Tuition: Three Tiered Model at Brooklyn Waldorf School	2014/03/31	2014-03-31 18:40:39
Associative Economics by Gary Lamb, AWSNA	2014/03/31	2014-03-31 18:32:07
Underlying Themes in the Economics of Waldorf Schools, Werner Glas	2014/03/29	2014-03-29 02:41:27
Parent Associations, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/02/05	2014-02-05 09:25:27
Welcome Orientation	2014/02/04	2014-02-04 17:57:52
Communications Flow for Increasing Enrollment, from NAIS Independent Educator	2014/02/03	2014-02-03 23:56:04
Preparing for Crisis Communications, from NAIS	2014/02/03	2014-02-03 23:31:32
9 Steps to Stronger Board Performance, from Associations NOW	2014/02/03	2014-02-03 23:14:19
Global Trends Affecting the Capacity for Organizations (including Waldorf schools) to practice collaboration	2014/01/27	2014-01-27 23:02:20
A Guide to Full Enrollment, Siegfried Finser	2014/01/26	2014-01-26 04:41:17
Forming School Communities, The Renewal of the Social Organism, M Karutz, AWSNA	2014/01/25	2014-01-25 22:22:17
Empowerment in Organizations: The Theory and Practice of a Mandate System, C Pieterse	2014/01/24	2014-01-24 18:06:41
The Mandate System, C Pieterse from Administrative Explorations, AWSNA	2014/01/24	2014-01-24 18:02:49
Starting a School, A Summary of Suggestions from AWSNA	2014/01/24	2014-01-24 17:47:25
Meeting the Financial Crisis, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:36:06
Healthy Organizational Practices, WECAN	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:30:54
WECAN Resources for EC	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:27:48
Governance, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:21:57
Mentoring and Professional Development, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:15:18
Pedagogy, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:12:58
Pedagogical Operations, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:11:01
School Operations, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:07:11
Community Life, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:05:29
Finances, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:03:25
Working With Parents, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 22:01:12
Report Writing and Documentation, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 21:59:13
Long-Range And Strategic Planning, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 21:07:35
Enrollment, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 21:04:47
Human Relations, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 20:59:32
Development, Effective Practices, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 20:51:09
Lessons from Jazz Bands and the New Conductor-less Orchestra for Organizations Practicing Collaboration	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 06:40:18
Excerpt from The Faculty Meeting as Heart of the School, Jorgen Smit	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 06:37:52
Review and Comments on “Collaborative Leadership”, an article by Arnoud DeMeyer of Cambridge, UK, about the trends affecting modern day organizations and the need for collaboration.	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 06:31:39
The Conductor less Orchestra, H Seifter	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 06:30:27
Jazz and Collaboration, A Cho	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 06:28:50
From Co-Creation to Association, John Bloom	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 05:32:17
Building a Culture of Leadership, Learning and Service in a Waldorf School Community (Chris Schaefer PhD)	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 05:18:55
Misconceptions about Waldorf Education, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 00:16:12
The Waldorf Movement as Potent Social Force, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 00:14:08
Working Together, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 00:12:01
Broad Based Funding for Waldorf Schools, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/23	2014-01-23 00:01:30
Private Funding, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 23:58:57
Self Administration, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 23:56:52
Waldorf World School Assn, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 21:04:01
Founding of the First Waldorf School, G lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 21:00:56
The Threefold Nature of Social Life, G Lamb from The Social Mission of Waldorf Education, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 04:58:38
The Social MIssion of Waldorf Education, G Lamb	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 04:25:14
Wellsprings of the Art of Education- Three Reversals, C Wiechert	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 02:29:16
Administrative Forms and Lists, D Mitchell et al from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 02:04:47
Board of Trustees, A Dancy from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 00:40:53
Working Together, C Pieterse from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/22	2014-01-22 00:37:00
Evaluation, D Mitchell, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:54:47
Community Relations and Outreach, C Pietzner, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:51:16
Admissions and Parent Education, A Mitchell from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:48:02
Administrative Roles, D Alsop, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:45:50
Committee Structure, S Van Sant, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:43:56
The College of Teachers, J Pewtherer from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:34:04
The Faculty Meeting, by T Finser, from The Art of Administration, AWSNA	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:22:03
The Art of Administration, D Mitchell et al, AWSNA Publications	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 23:10:17
Work Song, part 2: A Vision	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 21:52:59
The Basic Qualities of Collaboration	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 21:50:53
LeadTogether: The Practice of Collaboration	2014/01/20	2014-01-20 21:48:59
The Art of Administration: Edited by D Mitchell, AWSNA Publications	2014/01/16	2014-01-16 20:13:24
Democracy in Education: Kevin Avison reviews an article by Phillip Woods	2014/01/16	2014-01-16 02:37:18
AWSNA Effective Practices: Contents	2014/01/14	2014-01-14 10:12:26
Useful Links	2014/01/14	2014-01-14 09:58:06
The Spiritual Impulse of Waldorf Education – Jorgen Smit	2014/01/10	2014-01-10 20:04:27
Developing a Culture of Leadership, Learning and Service in Waldorf Schools – Chris Schaefer	2014/01/08	2014-01-08 23:14:19
Quality Considerations in Waldorf Education: An essay by Kevin Avison, SWSF UK	2013/12/26	2013-12-26 18:56:56
Editorial Policies	2013/12/01	2013-12-01 19:12:00
And Who Shall Teach the Teachers? A compilation by the Pedagogical Section Council published by AWSNA Publications	2013/11/22	2013-11-22 19:13:28
From Co-creation to Association: A Social Challenge for the New Economy by John Bloom	2013/11/22	2013-11-22 18:43:52
Waldorf Graduate Study finds Waldorf Grads tend to study and pursue careers in science	2013/11/07	2013-11-07 16:52:16
Austrian Research Institute Recommends Waldorf schools as models for teaching science	2013/11/07	2013-11-07 16:38:01
Vision In Action: Working with Soul and Spirit in Small Organizations: C Schaefer and T Voors	2013/11/07	2013-11-07 03:51:48
Lead Together Interview with Elan Leibner: Working with the Spirit in a School.	2013/11/06	2013-11-06 21:34:31
Nobel Prize Awarded to Waldorf Graduate.	2013/10/08	2013-10-08 17:06:40

New Impulses in Waldorf School Administration, Leadership and Governance, M Soule and M Stewart

Leading with Spirit

Sensing a new impulse in leadership and governance of Waldorf Schools

We are entering a new phase in the development of Waldorf education in North America: the relationship between the administrative work and the pedagogical work of the school is changing. We can see the signs that the old imagination of what was termed a “teacher- run” school is no longer effective and a new possibility is emerging. Schools are seeking to create a pedagogically and anthroposophically inspired administrative group working in true spiritual collaboration with the teachers, and supported by an anthroposophically inspired, policy-oriented Board.

The social form of the Waldorf School arose, not from Rudolf Steiner’s pedagogical work, but from his lifelong work on the inner aspect of the social question and the true nature of social life - and it came into practice in the Waldorf School through his years of leadership as he worked with the staff of the original school. Both of these culturally transforming streams, the pedagogical and social, have developed and matured over the past 100 years. There is a new possibility and opportunity to weave the streams together in an impulse for spiritual collaboration that could guide the future development of Waldorf schools in our culture. To achieve this ideal, we must overcome several obstacles.

One of the factors influencing the development of healthy administration in Waldorf schools is the shortage of trained teachers across the continent. A new generation of teachers is not flowing into the schools that would allow experienced teachers, with social and administrative capacities, to step into administration. The lack of qualified teachers creates a situation where experienced teachers are needed in the classroom longer, to teach, to provide training and support for practicing teachers, and to provide pedagogical leadership in the faculty circle. As a result, experienced teachers remain in the classroom and are not able to bring their practical experience fully into administrative leadership positions without draining the faculty.
In addition, administrative staff with an understanding of the social impulses arising out of anthroposophy and Waldorf education are difficult to find. Many administrative positions are filled by good people who do not have an adequate orientation to the overall spiritual, pedagogical and social dynamics of the school or the necessary support to help them be successful. The result has been marked: significant turnover in administrative staff, growing anxiety at the board level in many schools leading boards to institute reforms that appear practical but have no relationship to the social ideals of Steiner (policy governance, hiring heads of school, as examples), and unreasonable administrative burdens continually placed on teachers. Our schools often experience a lack of human and financial resources to provide the training and support needed by administrative leaders to be highly successful.
Independent, self- financed schools require significantly more time to manage and operate, and are frequently understaffed, leaving little time or resources for training and professional development. The practical demands and resources required to run a school outweigh the good intentions to provide deepening opportunities for administrative staff and pedagogical leaders. Yet without the inspiration and support provided by an understanding of the guiding principles that inform the pedagogy and our work together, staff often leave in exhaustion or disillusionment.
Schools often rely on consultants with backgrounds in organizational development that typically lack knowledge of Waldorf schools and culture and the guiding principles informing our work together. Our Schools require organizational development that is rooted in anthroposophy and an understanding of the social questions of our time. General ideas and approaches from outside the movement can be helpful but are not sufficient for long-term success.
Unspoken expectations of administrative and school leaders, power conflicts, patterns of undermining or sabotaging leadership within some schools, lack of clarity and agreement about roles and responsibilities, all contribute to the revolving door that is all too common in the administrative realm of many of our schools.

Here are a few guiding thoughts for how the Waldorf school movement could support schools in taking this transformative step to a stronger and more integrated administrative life.

Support everyone working in the schools to understand and see the connection between both the educational and social impulses that Rudolf Steiner brought forth.
Create and support new, widely accessible training for administrative staff equivalent to foundation studies in teacher training, designed specifically to inform their work in the schools out of Anthroposophy.
Ensure that existing teacher preparation programs offer a much greater exploration of, and exposure to, the social insights, principles, and practices of Rudolf Steiner and their practical applications in a school.
Encourage networks for administrative staff to connect around questions of how the practical work of administration and governance can be inspired by, and reflect, the social and pedagogical insights of Anthroposophy.
Make a significant investment in board resources and development to provide practical imaginations of how governance can work out of anthroposophy.

The seeds of this work have been planted over the last 10 years by independent initiatives that are growing in the Waldorf School movement across the world evidenced by:

Websites and social media groups dedicated to collaboration between administrative leaders in schools such as Waldorf Admin Central, Waldorf Marketing Group, ANA (Admin Network of AWSNA) Basecamp groups and the LeadTogether.org resource collection

Increased activities of ANA, the Administrative Network of AWSNA

Greater focus of activities from AWSNA and other national associations around anthroposophically inspired school administration

Emerging new anthroposophically inspired training programs for administrative staff such as Antioch’s Waldorf Administration and Leadership Development program and the Leading with Spirit Administration and Leadership Program and summer seminars
New articles, books and other resources focusing on anthroposophically inspired school organization and dynamics such as Partnerships of Hope by Chris Schaefer

A new widely read Waldorf related newsletter, Waldorf Today

A transformed website and resource site for Waldorf Schools through the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America

A renewal of the shared principles of Waldorf schools based on the anthroposophical Waldorf ideals articulated by the Pedagogical Section Council of North America
A new anthroposophical and Waldorf centered administrative training program in China

These are all promising developments. The factors influencing the growth and development of collaborative spiritual leadership in the schools are numerous. Identifying and understanding them is an important step in moving towards a more resilient school movement.

In order to achieve successful collaboration, however, we need to develop new competencies that go beyond knowledge of Steiner’s ideas about education or the social sphere. Intellectual understanding is only valuable when it leads to changes in our thinking, behavior and attitudes – when both teachers and administrators feel that their unique contributions are seen and valued – and when building and maintaining trust are priorities within the organization.

Along with deepening the work of administration comes the additional challenge of bringing the cherished goals of the classroom into the Administrative Group, the Coworker Circle, the College of Teachers and the Board of Trustees. In our leadership roles, do we strive to be worthy of imitation? Do we play fair, refrain from gossip, assume the best, and ask questions rather than jump to conclusions? Are we always helpful and kind? Do we practice observation? Are we awake and able to respond to what is living in the school now - or are we focused on a fixed solution, or caught in repeating the dynamics of the past? In order to be successful at collaborative leadership we need to strive for the freedom that is developed in meditative practices; to prefer listening over our own speech, to sense the work of the unseen world, and to draw on imagination, inspiration, and intuition.

We know that anthroposophically aligned boards, Waldorf trained and experienced administrative staff, and administratively capable teachers that understand the social organizational ideals of Waldorf education make all the difference in the health and success of school administrative life. The results of these strengths can be seen in practice in healthy schools across the continent.

The key to success of Waldorf schools in the coming years lies in the in the hands of current school leaders. The economic and social challenges for independent educational institutions like Waldorf schools will continue to become more difficult in the coming years. It is incumbent on us as school leaders to continually strive to find the balance between maintaining the good practices needed to sustain the institution effectively, and heeding the inspirations needed to sustain our mission, which arise out of true collaboration with each other and with our spiritual helpers. Sharing insights and experiences, asking the right questions, and actively supporting one another in a spirit of community, not just within our individual schools but also as a movement, are needed measures for Waldorf Schools to continue to be socially renewing institutions.

“Nothing else will do”, Rudolf Steiner says, “if our courage is not to fail. We must discipline our wills and seek the awakening from within ourselves every morning and every evening.” This inner discipline, self-responsibility, and awakening can lead us to re-imagine our work together as a community of servant leaders dedicated to doing our part in the radical, social renewal of our world.

Michael Soule

Marti Stewart

Leading with Spirit.org

January 2016

Highlight 17, Enlivening Spaces

Dear Friends,

When I get going too fast at work (every May in fact!), it becomes difficult to keep my desk and the spaces around me tidy. Things piles up faster than I can put them into their place, or create new places for ones that need places. I am aware of an increasing tension when this happens. As some point I find it necessary to take a few hours to bring everything back into order. Everyone has their own relationship to this cycle – some are more able to do it in a regular rhythm – and others whenever it is needed. I was reminded of the dynamics of this recently when studying some material on the nature and life of the elementals in relation to working with my garden.

Linda Thomas, who cleaned the Goetheanum for many years, wrote a lovely article about the spirit of cleaning. It is not just about having neat and clean spaces. The cleanliness and orderliness is important and necessary, but not sufficient for maintaining a living space around us that supports our work in a healthy way. Enlivened space requires awareness and consciousness. read more

Policy Governance Introduction by John and Miriam Carver

Carver's Policy Governance® Model in Nonprofit Organizations
by John Carver and Miriam Carver

Over the last decade or two, there has been increasing interest in the composition, conduct, and decision-making of nonprofit governing boards. The board-staff relationship has been at the center of the discussion, but trustee characteristics, board role in planning and evaluation, committee involvement, fiduciary responsibility, legal liability, and other topics have received their share of attention. Nonprofit boards are not alone, for spirited debate about the nature of business boards has been growing as well. Whatever the reasons for this intense interest in governance, the Policy Governance model for board leadership, created by the senior author, is frequently a primary focus of debate.

The Nature of Governance and the Need for Theory

The Policy Governance model is, at the same time, the most well-known modern theory of governance worldwide and in many cases the least understood. It applies to governing boards of all types—nonprofit, governmental, and business—and in all settings, for it is assembled from universal principles of governance. In this article, we will focus exclusively on its use in nonprofit boards, though many descriptions of its application in business (for example, Carver, 2000a, 2000c) and government (for example, Carver, 1996a, 1997d, 2000b, 2001; Carver and Oliver, 2002) are available elsewhere.

Governing boards have been known in one form or another for centuries. Yet throughout those many years there has been a baffling failure to develop a coherent or universally applicable understanding of just what a board is for. While comparatively little thought has been given to developing governance theory and models, we have seenmanagement of nonprofit organizations transform itself over and over again. Managers have moved through PERT, CPM, MBO, TQM, and many more approaches in a continual effort to improve effectiveness. Embarrassingly, however, boards do largely what they have always done.

We do not intend to demean the intent, energy, and commitment of board members. There are today many large and well known organizations that exist only because a dedicated group of activists served as both board and staff when the organization was a "kitchen table" enterprise. Board members are usually intelligent and experienced persons as individuals. Yet boards, as groups, are mediocre. "Effective governance by a board of trustees is a relatively rare and unnatural act . . . . trustees are often little more than high-powered, well-intentioned people engaged in low-level activities" (Chait, Holland, and Taylor, 1996, p. 1). "There is one thing all boards have in common . . . . They do not function" (Drucker, 1974, p. 628). "Ninety-five percent (of boards) are not fully doing what they are legally, morally, and ethically supposed to do" (Geneen, 1984, p.28). "Boards have been largely irrelevant throughout most of the twentieth century" (Gillies, 1992, p. 3). Boards tend to be, in fact, incompetent groups of competent individuals.

An extraterrestrial observer of board behavior could be forgiven for concluding that boards exist for several questionable reasons. They seem to exist to help the staff, to lend their prestige to organizations, to rubber stamp management desires, to give board members an opportunity to be unappointed department heads, to be sure staffs get the funds they want, to micromanage organizations, to protect lower staff from management, and sometimes even to gain some advantage for board members as special customers of their organizations, or to give board members a prestigious addition to their resumes.

But these observations—accurate though they frequently are—simply underscore the disclarity of the board's rightful job. Despite the confusion of past and current board practices, we begin in this article with the assertion that there is one central reason to have a board: Simply put, the board exists (usually on someone else's behalf) to be accountable that its organization works. The board is where all authority resides until some is given away (delegated) to others. This simple total authority-total accountability (within the law or other external authorities) is true of all boards that truly have governing authority.

The Policy Governance model begins with this assertion, then proceeds to develop other universally applicable principles. The model does not propose a particular structure. A board's composition, history, and peculiar circumstances will dictate different structural arrangements even when using the same principles. Policy Governance is a system of such principles, designed to be internally consistent, externally applicable, and—to the great relief of those concerned with governance integrity—logical. Logical and consistent principles demand major changes in governance as we know it, because these principles are applied to subject matter that has for many years been characterized by a hodgepodge of practices, whims of individuals, and capricious decision making.

Such a change is a paradigm shift, not merely a set of incremental improvements to the status quo. Paradigm shifts are difficult to cope with, since they often render previous experience unhelpful; they demand a significant level of discipline to be put into effect. But if there is sufficient discipline to use the Policy Governance model in its entirety, board leadership and the accountability of organizations can be transformed.

It is important that we underscore this point. Using parts of a system can result in inadequate or even undesirable performance. It is rather like removing a few components from a watch, yet expecting it still to keep accurate time. Unlike the traditional practices to which boards have become accustomed, the Policy Governance model introduces an integrated system of governance (Carver and Carver, 1996; Carver, 1997).

Greater effectiveness in the governing role requires board members first to understand governance in a new way, then to be disciplined enough to behave in a new way. Boards cannot excel if they maintain only the discipline of the past any more than managers of this new century can excel if they are only as competent as those of the past. Does this ask too much of boards? Perhaps it does ask too much of many of today's board members. Yet there are other board members—or potential board members who thus far have refused to engage in either the rubber-stamping or the micromanaging they see on boards—who would rejoice in greater board discipline.

The Policy Governance model requires that boards become far more enlightened and more competent as groups than they have been. If that means losing some board members as the composition of boards goes through change, then the world will be the better for it. The Policy Governance model is not designed to please today's board members or today's managers. It is designed to give organizations' true owners competent servant-leaders to govern on their behalf.

Board as Owner-Representative and Servant-Leader

In the business sector, we can easily see that a board of directors is the voice of the owners (shareholders) of the corporation. It is not always apparent that nonprofit organizations also have owners. Certain nonprofits, such as trade associations or professional societies, are clearly owned by their members. Beyond such obvious cases of ownership, however, it is useful to conceive that community-based agencies in the social services, health, education, and other fields are "owned" by their communities. In neither trade associations nor community agencies is there is a legal equivalent of shareholders, but there is a moral equivalent that we will refer to as the "ownership." Looking at ownership in this very basic way, it is hard to conceive of any organization that isn't owned by someone or some population, at least in this moral sense.

The Policy Governance model conceives of the governing board as being the on-site voice of that ownership. Just as the corporate board exists to speak for the shareholders, the nonprofit board exists to represent and to speak for the interests of the owners.

A board that is committed to representing the interests of the owners will not allow itself to make decisions based on the best interests of those who are not the owners. Hence, boards with a sense of their legitimate ownership relationship can no longer act as if their job is to represent staff, or other agencies, or even today's consumers (we will use that word to describe clients, students, patients, or any group to be impacted). It possible that these groups are not part of the ownership at all, but if they are, it is very likely they constitute only a small percentage of the total ownership.

We are not saying that current consumers are unimportant, nor that staff are unimportant. They are critically important, just as suppliers, customers, and personnel are for a business. It is simply that those roles do not qualify them as owners. They are due their appropriate treatment. To help in their service to the ownership, Policy Governance boards must learn to distinguish between owners and customers, for the interests of each are different. It is on behalf of owners that the board chooses what groups will be the customers of the future. The responsible board does not make that choice on behalf of staff, today's customers, or even its own special interests.

Who are the owners of a nonprofit organization? For a membership organization, its members are the owners. For an advocacy organization, persons of similar political, religious, or philosophical conviction are the owners. There are many variations. But for purposes of this paper, we will assume a community organization, such as a hospital, mental health or family service agency, for which we can confidently say that the community as a whole is the legitimate ownership. In this case, it is clear that in a community organization, the board must be in a position to understand the various views held in the community about the purpose of the organization. In short, if the community owns the organization, what does the community want the organization for?

Traditionally, boards have developed their relationships largely inside the organization—that is, with staff. Policy Governance demands that boards' primary relationships be outside the organization—that is, with owners. This parallels the concept of servant leadership developed by Greenleaf (1977, 1991), in that the board is first servant, before it is leader. It must lead the organization subject to its discoveries about and judgments of the values of the ownership.

We have thus far referred repeatedly to the board and very little to board members; that is intentional. Since we are now establishing the starting point for governance thinking, it is important that we start with the body charged with authority and accountability—the board as a group, not individual board members. It is the board as a body that speaks for the ownership, not each board member except as he or she contributes to the final board product. So while we might derive roles and responsibilities for individual board members, we must derive them from the roles and responsibilities of the board as a group, not the other way around. Hence, board practices must recognize that it is the board, not board members, who have authority.

The board speaks authoritatively when it passes an official motion at a properly constituted meeting. Statements by board members have no authority. In other words, the board speaks with one voice or not at all. The "one voice" principle makes it possible to know what the board has said, and what it has not said. This is important when the board gives instructions to one or more subordinates. "One voice" does not require unanimous votes. But it does require all board members, even those who lost the vote, to respect the decision that was made. Board decisions can be changed by the board, but never by board members.

The Necessity for Systematic Delegation

On behalf of the ownership, the board has total authority over the organization and total accountability for the organization. But the board is almost always forced to rely on others to carry out the work, that is, to exercise most of the authority and to fulfill most of the accountability. This dependence on others requires the board to give careful attention to the principles of sound delegation.

Since the board is accountable that the organization works, and since the actual running of the organization is substantially in the hands of management, then it is important to the board that management be successful. The board must therefore increase the likelihood that management will be successful, while making it possible to recognize whether or not it really is successful. This calls upon the board to be very clear about its expectations, to personalize the assignment of those expectations, and then to check whether the expectations have been met. Only in this way is everyone concerned clear about what constitutes success and who has what role in achieving it.

At this point, we wish to introduce the chief executive (CEO) role. (Policy Governance works in the absence of a CEO role, but the governing job is more difficult than with a CEO.) We are not concerned whether the CEO is called executive director, director-general, president, general manager, superintendent, or any other title. We are, however, concerned how the role is defined and we will use the term "CEO" to reflect the role definition we recommend.

We recommend that the board use a single point of delegation and hold this position accountable for meeting all the board's expectations for organizational performance. Naturally, it is essential that the board delegate to this position all the authority that such extensive accountability deserves. The use of a CEO position considerably simplifies the board's job. Using a CEO, the board can express its expectations for the entire organization without having to work out any of the internal, often complex, divisions of labor. Therefore, all the authority granted by the board to the organization is actually granted personally to the CEO. All the accountability of the organization to meet board expectations is charged personally to the CEO. The board, in effect, has one employee.

It is important that boards maintain a sense of cause and effect with respect to their CEOs. The board creates the CEO; the CEO does not create the board. As the board contemplates its accountability to the ownership, it decides that creating a CEO role will be a key method in fulfilling that accountability. It is true that a founding father or mother will sometimes be the inspiration for a new organization, so that the board then created occurs after rather than before the founder. If the founder becomes the new CEO, it will seem that the CEO is parent to the board. Boards established in this way make a grave error when they mistake an accident of history for a proper view of their accountability. The CEO role, as such, is even in these cases created and governed by the board (see Carver, 1992).

Consequently, in every case, the board is totally accountable for the organization and has, therefore, total authority over it—including over the CEO. We can say that the board is accountable for what the CEO's job is and that the CEO do the job well. But we cannot say the CEO is accountable for what the board's job is and that the board do its job well. Unfortunately, much of current nonprofit practice supports this board-staff inversion. CEOs are expected to tell their boards what to talk about (provide agendas), to pull their boards together when there is dissension, and to orient new board members to their job. Nowhere else in an organization are subordinates responsible for the conduct of the superiors. Yet virtually all nonprofit literature on governance falls into this fallacy of CEO-centrism. "Thus, we argue, the board's performance becomes the executive's responsibility," say Herman and Heimovics (1991, p. xiii), a position we contend excuses and prolongs board irresponsibility.

We have said being accountable in leadership of the organization requires the board (1) to be definite about its performance expectations, (2) to assign these expectations clearly, and then (3) to check to see that the expectations are being met. Traditional governance practices lead boards to fail in most or all of these three key steps.

Board expectations—which are instructions—when they are stated at all, tend to be unclear, incomplete, or a mixture of whole board and individual board member expressions. Board members form judgments of staff performance on criteria the board (as a whole body) has never stated. Regular financial reports report against few or no criteria. Staff members can be seen taking notes of what individual board members say, as if it matters and as if they work for the board members rather than the CEO. Boards decide whether CEO's budgets merit approval when they have never stated the grounds for approval and disapproval. Virtually every board meeting—other than in Policy Governance boards—is testimony to carelessness of delegation and role clarity.

Traditional governance allows boards to instruct staff by the act of approving staff plans, such as budgets and program designs. When the board has approved a staff recommendation, doesn't the resulting approved document become a clear board instruction? Actually, it does not. For example, when a board approves the CEO's personnel policies or budget, does it really mean as an instruction every tiny segment of that document? Does every budget line and the smallest issues of a program plan become a criterion on which the CEO will be judged? Certainly not. Even the most micromanaging board does not go that far. But to what level of detail should the CEO treat the approved document as being a board instruction, therefore a criterion for evaluation? The tradition-blessed habit of board approvals is a poor substitute for setting criteria, then checking that they have been met. Board approvals are not proper governance, but commonplace examples of boards not doing their jobs.

What about the clear assignment of expectations to a person or persons? In conventional practice, boards' delegation to a CEO is frequently compromised by delegating the same responsibilities more than once or by delegating to around the CEO to sub-CEO staff. An example of the former is when a board charges the CEO and a board finance committee for financial decisions. Delegating around the CEO occurs either when a board gives instructions to the financial officer or other person who reports to the CEO or when a board itself judges the performance of sub-CEO staff.

Finally, in the absence of clear instructions or clear assignment, evaluating performance is an exercise in futility. Yet boards receive volumes of information that purports to monitor organizational performance. The sheer amount of information masks the fact that proper monitoring is still not occurring. Because monitoring performance is the systematic disclosure of whether board expectations have been met, monitoring that is fair and incisive can only occur after clearly stated and clearly assigned board expectations.

Using the Ends/Means Distinction

The point was made earlier in this paper that the board is accountable that the organization works. Clearly, the word "works" must be defined; defining it establishes the board's expectations for the organizations, the performance that will constitute success. The board need not control everything, but it must control the definition of success. It is possible to control too much, just as it is possible to control too little. It is possible to think you are in control when you are not. The zeal of a conscientious board can lead to micromanagement. The confidence of a trusting board can lead to rubber stamping. Defining success is a matter of controlling for success, not for everything. How can a board control all it must, rather than all it can?

Boards have had a very hard time knowing what to control and how to control it. Policy Governance provides a key conceptual distinction that enables the board to resolve this quandary. The task is to demand organizational achievement in a way that empowers the staff, leaving to their creativity and innovation as much latitude as possible. This is a question of what and how to control, but it is equally a question of how much authority can be safely given away. We argue that the best guide for the board is to give away as much as possible, short of jeopardizing its own accountability for the total.

What is there to control? In any organization, there are uncountable numbers of issues, practices, and circumstances being decided daily by someone. The Policy Governance model posits that all of these decisions can be classified as those that define organizational purpose, and those that don't. But the model calls for a very narrow and careful definition of purpose: it consists of what (1) results for which (2) recipients at what (3) worth.

Let us define these more fully: Some decisions directly describe the intended consumer results of the organization, for example, reading skills, family harmony, knowledge, or shelter from the elements. Some decisions directly describe the intended recipients of such results, such as adolescents, persons with severe burns, or low income families. Some describe the worth of the intended results, such as in dollar cost or priority against other results.

In Policy Governance, this triad of decisions is called "ends." Ends are always about the changes for persons to be made outside the organization, along with their cost or priority. Ends never describe the organization itself or its activities. For example, the professional and technical activities in which the organization engages are not ends. In a school, for example, which students should acquire what knowledge at what cost are ends issues. Ends are about the organization's impact on the world (much like cost-benefit) that justify its existence.

Any decision that is not an ends decision is a "means" decision. In that same school, the choice of reading program, teachers' credentials, and classroom arrangement are means issues. Most decisions in an organization are means decisions; some are very important means. But even if a decision is extremely important, even if it is required by law, even if it is critical to survival, unless it passes the ends test (designation of consumer results, which consumers, or the worth of consumer results), it is not an ends decision. Hence, means include personnel matters, financial planning, purchasing, programs, services and curricula, and even governance itself. No organization was ever formed so it could be well governed, have good personnel policies, a fine budget, sound purchasing practices, or even nicely planned services, programs or curricula.

The ends/means distinction is critical. Many boards claiming to use the model routinely confuse the Policy Governance meaning of ends and means, thereby sacrificing much of the benefit the model can give. For example, means is not synonymous with "administration" as some have misinterpreted (Herman and Heimovics, 1991, p. 44). Ends is not synonymous with "strategic plan," as others have misinterpreted (Murray, 1994). The ends/means distinction is not comparable to any other distinction used in management or governance; it is not parallel to policies/procedures, strategies/tactics, policy/administration, or goals/objectives. Indeed, ends may include very small and specific decisions about a single consumer, while means may include very important programmatic decisions as well as how a board constructs its committees. The ends/means distinction is exclusively peculiar to Policy Governance (with the possible exception of Argenti, 1993) and, therefore, is governed by Policy Governance principles. In Policy Governance,means are means simply because they are not ends.

Are ends the same as mission? Unfortunately, the answer is usually "no," because mission statements have not traditionally had to conform to the definition we have given ends. Consider the following mission statement of a mental health center: "The mission of the XYZ Center is to be a responsible employer, providing quality mental health services in a cost-efficient manner." This statement—quite acceptable in traditional governance—is entirely means, no ends. This organization can fulfill its mission even if consumers' lives are not any better. In contrast, consider this broad statement of ends: "The XYZ Center exists so that people with major mental illness live productive lives in an accepting community at a cost comparable to other providers." In the latter, unless the targeted group are benefited in the required way, the organization is not successful, no matter how good an employer it is and no matter how much "quality" its services have. Notice that the cost component in the first statement is the cost of staff activity (services), while in the second statement it is the cost of consumer results.

No matter how central ends are to the organization's existence, however, because the board is accountable for everything, it is accountable for means as well. Accordingly, it must exercise control over both ends and means, so having the ends/means distinction does not in itself relieve boards from any responsibility. The ends/means distinction does, however, make possible two entirely different ways of exercising control, ways that—taken together—allow the board to have its arms responsibly around the organization without its fingers irresponsibly in it, ways that for the staff maximize accountability and freedom simultaneously. The board simply makes decisions about ends and means—that is, it controls the organization's ends and means—in different ways, as follows:

Using input from the owners, staff, experts and anyone in a position to increase the board's wisdom, the board makes ends decisions in a proactive, positive, prescriptive way. We will call the board documents thus produced "Ends policies."
Using input from whoever can increase board wisdom about governance, servant leadership, visioning, or other skills of governance and delegation, the board makes means decision about its own job in a proactive, positive, prescriptive way. We will call the board documents thus produced "Governance Process policies" (about the board's own job) and "Board-Staff Linkage policies" (about the relationship between governance and management). Both of these categories are means, but they concern means of the board, not the staff.
Using input from whoever can increase its sense of what can jeopardize the prudent and ethical conduct of the organization, the board makes decisions about the staff's means in a proactive, but negative and boundary-setting way. Because these policies set forth the limits of acceptable staff behavior, that is, the unacceptable means, we will call the board documents thus produced "Executive Limitations policies."

At this point in our argument, we have used the ends/means concept to introduce new categories of board policies. These categories of board policies are exhaustive, that is, no other board documents are needed to govern except bylaws. (Articles of incorporation or letters patent are required to establish the nonprofit as a legal entity, but these are documents of the government, not the board.) We will not discuss bylaws here, except to say they are necessary to place real human beings (board members) into a hollow legal concept (the corporate "artificial person") (Carver, 1995). However, so that we might continue to discuss the concepts represented by the words "ends" and "means," yet distinguish the titles of policy categories, we will capitalize Ends, Executive Limitations, Governance Process, and Board-Staff Linkage.

The negative policies about operational means requires further discussion. Here is the logic: If the board has established Ends and has determined through monitoring that those Ends are actually accomplished, it can be argued that the staff means must have worked. In other words, the means by which Ends were accomplished, though interesting, is of little importance to the board. This logic is largely accurate, but there is an important problem with it. Some means can be unacceptable even if they do work. Means that are effective, but still "unacceptable" are ones that are improper treatment of people or assets, that is, means that are imprudent or unethical. Consequently, although there is no reason for a board to control staff means decisions for reasons of effectiveness, there is reason to control staff means for reasons of prudence and ethics.

Whoever is directly responsible for producing ends must decide which means to use. That is, one must be prescriptive about one's own means. But the board is not charged with producing ends, only with defining them. It is to the board's advantage to allow the staff maximum range of decision-making about means, for skill to do so is exactly why staff were employed. If the board determines the means of its staff, it can no longer hold the staff fully accountable for whether ends are achieved, it will not take advantage of the range of staff skills, and it will make its own job more difficult. Happily, it is not necessary for the board to tell the staff what means to use. In Policy Governance the board tells the staff or—more accurately—the CEO what means not to use!

Therefore, it is the board's job to examine its values to determine those means which it does not want in its organization, then to name them. The board can then tell its CEO that as long as the Ends are accomplished and the unacceptable means do not occur, the CEO can make all further decisions in the organization that he or she deems wise. It is in this way that extensive, albeit explicitly circumscribed, authority is granted to the CEO. Effectiveness demands a strong CEO; prudence and accountability to the board demand that the CEO's power be bounded.

This unique delegation technique has a number of advantages. First, it recognizes that board interference in operational means makes ends harder and more expensive to produce. Therefore, delegation which minimizes such interference is in the board's interest. Second, it accords to the CEO as much authority as the board can responsibly grant. Therefore, there is maximum empowerment inside the organization to harness for ends achievement. Third, it gives room for managerial flexibility, creativity and timeliness. Therefore, the organization can be agile, able to respond quickly to emergent opportunities or threats. Fourth, it dispels the assumption that the board knows better than the staff what means to use. Therefore, the board does not have to choose between overwork and being amateurs supervising professionals. Fifth, in this system all means that are not prohibited are, in effect, pre-approved. Therefore, the board is relieved from meticulous and repetitive approval of staff plans. Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, by staying out of means decisions, except to prohibit unacceptable means, the board retains its ability to hold the CEO accountable for the decisions that take place in the system.

Thus, when we say a board is responsible that its organization works, we simply mean that the organization (1) accomplishes the intended results for the intended people at the intended cost or priority—expressed in the board's Ends policies; and that it (2) avoids unacceptable methods, conduct, activities, and circumstances—unacceptable means expressed in the board's Executive Limitations policies.

Expressing Expectations in Nested Sets

We have established that Policy Governance boards express their expectations for themselves and for their organizations in four categories of board policies: Ends, Executive Limitations (the unacceptable means), Governance Process, and Board-Staff Linkage (the latter two are board means divided into two parts). The separation of organizational values into these categories is a major organizing principle for governing boards. These four categories completely embrace all possible organizational values (except those more pertinent to articles of incorporation/letters patent and bylaws)—no other policies or documents are needed. But another feature must be added to enable the board to address its desired level of specificity within these categories.

To ensure precision as well as completeness in policy-making, Policy Governance provides an additional principle, one which recognizes the varying sizes of issues and values. One Ends statement of a nonprofit board may be that persons without shelter should have adequate housing. Another may be that families with school age children should have housing that allows children of different genders to sleep in separate rooms. It is easy to see that the second example is more detailed, or "narrower," than the first. Notice that these two statements can be pictured as a set of nested bowls, in that the first is a broader value that includes the second one within it. Even more detailed choices exist within the second level, and so on to third, fourth, and more bowls until the specificity reaches a level where Mr. Smith rather than Mr. Jones gets a particular amount of shelter next week.

Now let's illustrate the "nested bowls" concept with an example of unacceptable means. One means value of a nonprofit board may be that the CEO not allow anything imprudent, illegal or unethical. Another may be that unbonded persons may not have access to material amounts of funds. The first example is a broader prohibition than the second, but less specific. Even more detailed "bowls" exist, of course, such as a further proscription against access to more than $5,000 on any one occasion or more than $8,000 cumulatively over a one year period.

Board values about ends and unacceptable means, as well as the board's own means, then, can be stated broadly, or more narrowly. The advantage of stating values broadly is that such a statement is inclusive of all smaller statements. The disadvantage, of course, is that the broader the statement, the greater is the range of interpretation that can be given to it. To take advantage of the fact that values or choices of any sort can be seen as nested sets, the Policy Governance board begins its policy making in all four categories by making the broadest, most inclusive statement first.

The board then considers the range of interpretation that such a statement allows, and determines whether it is comfortable with the statement being given any interpretation that is reasonable. If the board would be uncomfortable delegating such a range, that is a signal that the board must define its words more narrowly, moving into more detail one level at a time. At some point, the board will have narrowed its words to the point that it can accept any reasonable interpretation of those words. Now the board has reached the point of delegation.

As an example, consider an Executive Limitations policy in which the board is putting certain financial conditions and activities "off limits." At the broadest level, the board might say: "With respect to actual, ongoing financial condition and activities, the CEO shall not allow the development of fiscal jeopardy or a material deviation of actual expenditures from board priorities established in Ends policies." That covers the board's concerns about the organization's current financial condition at any one time, for there is likely nothing else to worry about that isn't included within this "large bowl" proscription.

However, most boards would think such a broad statement leaves more to CEO interpretation—even if reasonable interpretation—than the board wishes to delegate. Hence, the board might add further details, such as saying the CEO shall not: (1) Expend more funds than have been received in the fiscal year to date except through acceptable debt. (2) Indebt the organization in an amount greater than can be repaid by certain, otherwise unencumbered revenues within 60 days, but in no event more than $200,000. (3) Use any of the long term reserves. (4) Conduct interfund shifting in amounts greater than can be restored to a condition of discrete fund balances by unencumbered revenues within 30 days. (5) Fail to settle payroll and debts in a timely manner. (6) Allow tax payments or other government ordered payments or filings to be overdue or inaccurately filed. (7) Make a single purchase or commitment of greater than $100,000, with no splitting of orders to avoid this limit. (8) Acquire, encumber or dispose of real property. And (9) Fail to aggressively pursue receivables after a reasonable grace period.

A given board might go into less or more detail than in this example. But in any case, these principles stay intact: The language moves from a broad level toward a lesser level (we showed two levels in the example just given). The values that become policy are generated by the board's deliberations, not approved from a staff recommendation. The board, not the staff, decides what to say and where to stop. No matter where the board stops, the CEO is granted authority to use any reasonable interpretation of the board's words. The board can shrink, expand, or change the content of the policy at any time, as long as it does not judge performance retroactively.

This view of organizational issues—as values that can be specified moving methodically from the broadest to more narrow levels—allows the board to manage the amount delegated. The board is always clear about the authority being given away. The recipient of the board's delegation is always clear about the amount of accountability expected in return. There is a continuum of sizes of issues upon which, in Policy Governance, the board owns the broadest level, then successively smaller levels until it decides to delegate, after which it is safe to allow the remaining decisions to be made by others.

It is often observed by other governance authors that the distinction between what is board work and what is executive work is a naïve distinction. There is no universal rule, they contend, to mark where board policy stops and administration begins. Indeed, they are right as far as traditional governance is concerned, for the conventional approach to the board job is unable to make a policy-administration distinction that holds up in the real world. Policy Governance, however, introduces entirely different, more powerful conceptual tools— rigorous "one voice" clarity of delegation using descending levels of board control within the ends/means context. Even though there is still no predetermined or fixed point where board work automatically becomes executive work, each board using the principles we are describing can establish and, when necessary change, a distinct point of delegation applicable to its own organization. It is at that point, by the values of that board, for that organization, for that time, that governance stops and "sub-governance" begins.

To summarize the policy development sequence, Policy Governance boards develop policies which describe their values about Ends, Executive Limitations, Governance Process, and Board-Staff Linkage. Each policy type is developed from the broadest, most inclusive level to more defined levels, continuing into more detail until the board reaches the point at which it can accept any reasonable interpretation of its words from its delegatee. A step-by-step guide to such development of policy documents is available (Carver and Carver, 1997). Ends and Executive Limitations are delegated to the CEO, who is held accountable by the board for accomplishing any reasonable interpretation of the boards expectations in these areas. Governance Process and Board-Staff Linkage policies are delegated to the board Chair, who is given the authority to ensure that the board governs in accordance with its own expectations of itself, using any reasonable interpretation of the policy language.

Board Discipline, Mechanics, and Structure

It is clear that the Policy Governance model requires a board to govern in an organized, planned and highly disciplined manner. Boards which are accustomed to talking about issues simply because they interest individual board members will find agenda discipline to be a major challenge, as will boards that rely on their staffs to supply their agendas. Not everything is appropriate for board discussion just because it is interesting or even because the staff wants the board to make the decision. Matters that have been delegated to the CEO should not be decided by the board or by board committees, for in making such decisions, the board renders itself unable to hold the CEO accountable.

Policy Governance boards know that their job must result in the production of three deliverables. (1) The first deliverable is a systematic linkage between the organization and the ownership. This is not public relations. The board connects with the ownership in order to ascertain the range of ownership values about the purpose of the organization. If the board is to make Ends decisions on behalf of the owners, it must know what the owners in all their diversity think. (2) The second deliverable is written governing policies in the four areas, using the principles we have described. (3) The third deliverable is the assurance of organizational performance, that is, performance which can be shown to be a reasonable interpretation of the board's Ends and Executive Limitations policies.

We use "deliverables" to mean job products, outputs, or values-added. Since these summarize the purpose for the board's job, producing these deliverables is what board meetings are for. In fact, the list of job outputs can be considered to be a perpetual job description, for every agenda is an instance of the board's working to perform its job. A board can decide how much, in what detail, and at what level of excellence it will pursue its perpetual agenda in the ensuing year. By doing so, it takes control of its own agenda, rather than allowing its agenda to be staff-driven. Establishing its own job description and the longterm or midterm agenda is recorded as one of the board's Governance Process policies. As we shall shortly point out, if the board sketches its annual agenda only broadly, the specifics will be filled in by the board Chair, who is charged with taking care of Governance Process details.

Accordingly, the board must plan meetings that enable and guarantee the production of these deliverables. Being entertained or intrigued by staff jobs is no substitute for the board's accomplishment of its own job. While the board is entitled to any information it wants, it must be aware that collecting information about staff activities and even conscientiously listening to many staff reports does not substitute for governance. Let us again reiterate that the board, not the staff, is responsible that a board's meetings fulfill its governance responsibilities.

In taking responsibility for its own performance, the board confronts the difficulty of acting responsibly as a group of equals. Since the board is by definition a group of peers, no one has authority over anyone else. The first action of a group of peers is to create a position of Chairperson—a first among equals—to help it stay on task. Although it is important that each board member continue to take responsibility for the board's group behavior, the board grants the Chair extra authority required to make rulings that keep the board on track. To stay consistent with the superior role of the board as a group, however, in Policy Governance the Chair only has authority that is within a reasonable interpretation of the board's policies on Governance Process and Board-Staff Linkage. Hence, the Chair is truly the servant-leader of the board (Carver, 1999).

It is usual for nonprofit boards to expect the Chair to supervise the CEO, but in Policy Governance there is no need for the Chair to have authority over the CEO. Only the board has authority over staff operations, and it exercises that authority through carefully crafted policies. It is not only unnecessary, but harmful for the Chair to tell the CEO what the board wants, for the board speaks for itself. Consequently, both the Chair and the CEO work for the board as a whole, but their roles do not overlap because they are given authority in different domains. The Chair's job is to see to it that the board gets its job done—as described in Governance Process and Board-Staff Linkage policies. The CEO's job is to see to it that the staff organization gets its job done—as described in Ends and Executive Limitations policies.

Board Treasurers, as commonly used, threaten CEO accountability as well as the one voice principle. Treasurers are typically expected to exercise individual judgment about the financial dealings of the organization. But Policy Governance boards do not allow Treasurers to exercise authority over staff. (Rendering an official judgment of performance against one's own individual criteria has the same effect as exercising authority.) By creating a role with supervisory authority over the CEO with respect to financial management, the board cannot then hold the CEO accountable for that topic. The board should accept responsibility for financial governance (setting policy, then comparing performance) and require the CEO to be accountable for managing finances so that performance compares favorably to policy. The typical use of a Treasurer, when a Policy Governance board is required by law to have one, is to assist the board in making financial policy, never to judge CEO compliance against the Treasurer's own expectations. For more thorough treatment of the board's role in financial oversight, including commentary on the Treasurer and finance committee, see Carver (1991, 1996b).

In keeping with the "one voice " principle, the board can allow no structures or practices in which board members or board committees exercise authority over staff, any function of staff, or any department of staff. Typical nonprofit boards have a myriad of traditions that violate the one voice principle, such as placing the Chair between the board and the CEO. So it is common for boards to underestimate the amount of board member interference in operations. Such interference, even when well-intended, undermines the board's ability to hold the CEO accountable, for the CEO can argue that his or her actions were taken in compliance with a board member instruction.

Advice is a concept often carelessly used in nonprofit boards. This seemingly innocuous and well-intended practice can have the same deleterious effect as direct instruction by individuals or committees. It is common for the board, board committees, or individual board members to give advice to staff. But advice, if it is really advice, can be rejected. If staff has any doubt that advice given by the board or one of its components cannot safely be turned down, the clarity of board-to-staff delegation will be undermined. Policy Governance boards refrain from giving advice or allowing their members to give advice unless advice is requested. This protects the board's ability to hold the CEO accountable for his or her own decisions. The CEO and any of the staff can request advice if they need it, and they can request it from wherever they wish.

Traditional boards frequently create committees to assist or advise the CEO or staff, such as committees on personnel, finance, program, property maintenance, and other such staff means issues. In Policy Governance, such committees are illegitimate. They constitute interference in the CEO's sphere of authority and accountability, and damage the board's ability to hold the CEO accountable.

If, for example, the staff wishes to have an advisory committee, it is perfectly free to create one, then to use the advice or not as it deems wise. If, however, the board controls the mechanism of advice, a very different relationship between advisors and advisees is established. The wisest route is for the board to govern and leave advice and advisory mechanisms to the staff's own initiative. This way the staff gets all the advice it needs, role clarity and accountability are maintained, and board members are frequently spared unnecessary work.

Policy Governance boards use committees only to help the board to do its own job. Hence, a committee which explores methods of ownership consultation about Ends options is legitimate, as is a committee that studies possible sources of fiscal jeopardy that the board might address in an Executive Limitations policy. But a human resources committee that advises on or intervenes in personnel issus is not. To request advice or assistance with one's own job is acceptable and does not compromise accountability, but to foist help or advice on subordinates is not only unnecessary but destructive of accountability as well.

Policy Governance takes seriously the normally rhetorical assertion that boards be visionary and provide long term leadership. The discipline required for this challenge cannot be overstated. In fact, Policy Governance has been criticized as a "heroic board" model that is romantically idealistic! Yet boards do, in fact, have a critical job to do; no amount of helping staff can substitute for getting its own job done. Boards must persevere with the arduous, complex task of describing purpose and ethics/prudence boundaries. Forming those values into clear policies is far harder than telling the staff how to do its job. Speaking proactively for the ownership requires strong commitment not to take reactive refuge in rituals, reports, and approvals.

This requires board member expertise relevant to governance, not management. Board members should no longer be recruited based on their having skills that mirror the skills of staff. Governance excellence requires members who can think conceptually and with a long term perspective, able to welcome a diversity of opinions but abide by group decisions. They must be able to speak on behalf of the ownership rather than merely from their own or some splinter group perspective. They must place organizational accountability above personal gratification. They must be able to view the board's task of assuring performance at arm's length—through setting expectations (using the ends/means principle and values viewed as descending "bowls"), delegating pointedly (to a CEO if possible), and monitoring. And it is to the function of monitoring or evaluation that we turn now.

Evaluation

Evaluation of performance is not extraneous to the board's job. It is as integral to the board's job as it is to any manager's. But, as we have shown, proper evaluation is impossible unless the board has first stated its expectations and assigned them to a specific delegatee. That is, evaluation of staff performance cannot occur appropriately unless the board has done its job first.

Moreover, if the board has a CEO, the results of proper evaluation of organizational success is the only fair evaluation of CEO performance. Since the CEO's job is to see to it that the organization meets the board's expectations, there is nothing more and nothing less to evaluate when assessing the CEO. Thus, the board's evaluation of organizational performance is the same as board evaluation of CEO performance (Carver, 1997a). Monitoring the evaluative data, as we shall see, is an ongoing activity—perhaps as frequently as monthly—and the board may wish to have a formal evaluation of the CEO once each year. However, the CEO's formal evaluation is only a summary of the accumulated monitoring data, not something in addition.

But let us consider the monitoring or evaluative information itself. Not all information is useful in monitoring performance. There are two types of information that are useful for other purposes, but not for monitoring: one is information for board decisions, the other is information simply to satisfy board members' casual interest. To examine evaluation or monitoring, we must first separate out these two types of information, for they do not qualify as monitoring against pre-established criteria.

First, information for board decisions is needed in order for the board to make wise policy in the first place. To create policies that are both realistic and demanding, boards require information from a variety of sources. These sources include staff, owners, experts, associations to which the board may belong, and others. This information is required for the board's own decision-making and does not judge staff accomplishment. Boards should invest a great deal of energy in gathering wisdom, spending perhaps half their time in becoming educated. So information for board decisions is essential for board performance, but not for monitoring staff performance.

Second, information for board interest is information about the organization or its environment that is not useful for board decision-making, but is of political, social, or technical interest to board members. This information does not include data that directly measure the degree of staff performance on board expectations, for that would qualify it to be called true monitoring information. This kind of information is incidental to the board's job of monitoring, but comprises most of what most traditional boards receive. There is nothing wrong with boards getting all the incidental information they want, but there is something very wrong with the delusion that they are at that time doing their job. In traditional governance, most staff reports, including most financial reports and reports that purport to be "evaluation" are incidental information simply because they are not data compared with previously stated board criteria.

Monitoring or evaluative information must speak directly to whether board expectations are being fulfilled. Consequently, it is always related to expectations set by the board in its Ends and Executive Limitations policies. This discipline not only makes it unnecessary for the board to trudge through the mountains of data staff are able to assemble, but it keeps evaluation fair. After all, it is only right that the CEO should know ahead of time the criteria on which he or she will be judged. Since monitoring information is only that information that describes actual performance compared to expected performance, it is evident that most reports collected, examined and approved by traditional boards constitute interesting information, but cannot be said to be effective monitoring reports. For example, boards that gravely approve (or accept) financial statements thinking they have thereby exercised fiduciary responsibility are simply engaging in a meaningless ritual, for without criteria they don't even know what in those reports would have been disapprovable.

When monitoring is defined as we have done here, reports tend to be straightforward and transparent. Each board member can follow the link from board criteria to management data, for the report is not cluttered with incidental information. Monitoring is not nearly as difficult or time-consuming when boards know what performance they are expecting to see proven. Monitoring is thus more exact and, simultaneously, requires negligible board meeting time. In fact, we recommend that monitoring data be mailed to board members, thereby preserving valuable meeting time for board education and deliberation. Getting monitoring largely out of board meetings allows those meetings to focus on creating the future rather than reviewing the past, because inspection of the past is now safely routinized. For each Ends and each Executive Limitations policy, the board will have set a frequency and a method of monitoring, after which the process runs automatically. The choice of method will be a report from the CEO, judgment by a disinterested party (for example, an auditor), or—less frequently—direct board inspection of organizational practices or circumstances. It turns out to be rare that monitoring needs to be discussed in the board meeting, except for board members to affirm that they have received and read the mailed reports.

To illustrate the nature of what is reported in a Policy Governance monitoring report, we will use two items from an Executive Limitations policy already shown. In that policy, among other unacceptable means, the CEO was told he or she cannot (1) expend more funds than have been received in the fiscal year to date except through acceptable debt and (2) indebt the organization in an amount greater than can be repaid by certain, otherwise unencumbered revenues within 60 days, but in no event more than $200,000. Here is what the monitoring data might look like for these two provisions: Item 1: Through the end of May, $3,694,800 has been expended. Receipts in the same period were $3,654,728. The shortfall of $40,072 was offset by a $60,000 short term loan. Item 2: Total debt is a 45 day working capital loan for $60,000 incurred on May 25. Revenues of $75,000 from our foundation grant, guaranteed by letter of May 5, are not otherwise encumbered and will be used, in part, to retire the debt prior to due date.

Notice that the data are rather bare-bones, only enough to answer the question, unobscured by incidental information. Board members should adopt a "prove it to me" attitude, so if the information submitted is insufficient to convince them, then more detail can be added. But the detail must be such that directly address the criteria. For example, what data prove the "not otherwise encumbered" statement? Obviously, the complexities of some organizations will cause the monitoring data to have more facets than in our simple example. Even then, however, the reported data should be as brief as possible and maintain a razor-sharp connection to the policy-based criteria being monitored. If more interesting, explanatory information, other than that directly addressing the criteria, is desired by the board or offered by the CEO, it should not clutter the monitoring report, but be distributed separately. Board members can know anything they wish, but they should never be in doubt about what is disclosure of performance on the board's criteria and what is not.

Using similar criterion-focused reasoning, when the board seeks to evaluate itself, it compares its actual behavior and accomplishment with the behavior and accomplishment it committed to in its Governance Process and Board-Staff Linkage policies (Carver, 1997b). Policy Governance boards tend to self evaluate on a frequent basis—we recommend every meeting—because a more sophisticated system requires continual tending.

Board Meetings

Because in Policy Governance the board is in charge of its own job, board meetings become the board's meetings rather than management's meetings for the board. Board meetings occur because of the need for board members to learn together, to contemplate and deliberate together, and to decide together. Board meetings are not for reviewing the past, being entertained by staff, helping staff do its work, or performing ritual approvals of staff plans. As a result, many board meetings may not look like traditional board meetings at all, but learning and studying sessions or joint meetings with other boards, particularly in communities where boards rarely talk with each other.

The CEO is always present, but is not the central figure. Other staff might be present when they have valuable input on matters the board is to decide. For community boards, with rare exceptions meetings would be open—not to please the law, but because a board commitment to transparency. The board is not merely a body to confirm committee decisions, but the body that makes the decisions. Board committees might be used to increase the board's understanding of factors and options, but never to assume board prerogatives or remove difficult choices from the board table. In contrast to the old bromide that "the real works takes place in committees," in Policy Governance the real work takes place in the board meeting.

Board meetings should thus be more about the long term future than the present or short term future . . . more about ends than means . . . more about a few thoroughly considered large decisions than many small ones. And by their very character, meetings should demonstrate that the board's primary relationship is with owners, not with staff.

Summary

The Policy Governance model recognizes that any governing board is obligated to fulfill a crucial link in the "chain of command" between owners—whether legal or moral in nature—and operators. The board does not exist to help staff, but to give the ownership the controlling voice. The board's owner-representative authority is best employed by operating as an undivided unit, prescribing organizational ends, but only limiting staff means, making all its decisions using the principle of policies descending in size. The model enables extensive empowerment to staff while preserving controls necessary for accountability. It provides a values-based foundation for discipline, a framework for precision delegation, and a long term focus on what the organization is for more than what it does.

The Policy Governance model provides an alternative for boards unhappy with reactivity, trivia, and hollow ritual—boards seeking to be truly accountable. But attaining this level of excellence requires the board to break with a long tradition of disastrous governance habits. And it offers a challenge for visionary groups determined to make a real difference in tomorrow's world.

References

Argenti, John. Your Organization: What Is It For? London: McGraw-Hill Europe, 1993.

Carver, John. "Redefining the Board's Role in Fiscal Planning." Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 1991, 2 (2), 177-192.

———. "The Founding Parent Syndrome: Governing in the CEO's Shadow."Nonprofit World, 1992, 10 (5), 14-16.

———. "Shaping Up Your Bylaws." Board Leadership, July-Aug 1995, No. 20, 4-6.

———. "Policy Governance Model Views Citizens as Owners." Nation's Cities Weekly, January 29, 1996a, 5.

———. Three Steps to Fiduciary Responsibility. The CarverGuide Series on Effective Board Governance, No. 3. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996b.

———. Board Assessment of the CEO. The CarverGuide Series on Effective Board Governance, No. 7. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997a.

———. Board Self-Assessment. The CarverGuide Series on Effective Board Governance. No. 8. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997b.

———. Boards That Make a Difference, 2^nd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997c.

———. "Reinventing the Governance in Government: The Next Frontier for City Councils." Nation's Cities Weekly, January 27, 1997d, 10.

———. The Unique Double Servant-Leadership Role of the Board Chairperson. Voices of Servant-Leadership Series, No. 2. Indianapolis: The Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 1999.

———. "The Opportunity for Re-inventing Corporate Governance in Joint Venture Companies," Corporate Governance � An International Review, 8 (1), January 2000a, 75-80.

———. "Remaking Governance: The Creator of 'Policy Governance' Challenges School Boards to Change," American School Board Journal, 187 (3), March 2000b, 26-30.

———. "Un nouveau paradigme de gouvernance: un nouvel équilibre entre le conseil d'administration et le chef de la direction", Gouvernance: Revue internationale, 1 (1), Printemps 2000c, 100-108.

———. "A Theory of Governing the Public's Business", Public Management, 3 (1), March 2001, 53-72.

Carver, John, and Miriam Carver. Basic Principles of Policy Governance. The CarverGuide Series on Effective Board Governance, No. 1. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996.

———. Reinventing Your Board. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.

Carver, John, with Caroline Oliver. Corporate Boards That Create Value: Governing Company Performance from the Boardroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.

Chait, Richard P., Holland, Thomas P., and Taylor, Barbara E. Improving the Performance of Governing Boards. Phoenix: American Council on Education and The Oryx Press, 1996.

Drucker, Peter F. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York: HarperCollins, 1974.

Geneen, Harold S. "Why Directors Can't Protect the Shareholders." Fortune, 1984, 110, 28-29.

Gillies, James. Boardroom Renaissance. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson and The National Centre for Management Research and Development, 1992.

Greenleaf, Robert K. Servant Leadership. New York: Paulist Press, 1977.

———. The Servant as Leader. Indianapolis: The Robert K. Greenleaf Center, 1991.

Herman, Robert D., and Heimovics, Richard D. Executive Leadership in Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991.

Murray, Vic. "Is Carver's Model Really the One Best Way?" Front & Centre, Sept. 1994, 11.

Self Administration and Governance in Waldorf Schools, Chris Schaefer

III

Self-Administration and Governance in Waldorf Schools

Seek the real practical life but seek it in a way that does not blind you to the spirit working in it. Seek the spirit but do not seek it out of spiritual egoism, from spiritual greed, but look for it because you want to apply it unselfishly in practical life, in the material world. Make use of the ancient principle: Spirit is never without matter, matter never without spirit.

– Rudolf Steiner

On April 23, 1919, Emil Molt, the owner of the Waldorf Astoria

Cigarette Factory in Stuttgart, Germany, asked Rudolf Steiner to take on the planning and leadership of a school. Steiner agreed, and on September 15, the first Waldorf School opened with 256 children and eight grades. The school was founded in connection to Steiner’s movement for the Threefold Social Order and was to be independent of state control and self-administered. “The school, therefore, will have its own administration run on a republican basis and will not be

Administered from above. We must not lean back and rest securely on the orders of a headmaster; we must be a republic of teachers and kindle in ourselves the strength that will enable us to do what we have to do with full responsibility.”1

From these statements three principles emerge about self- administration: Schools must be free of state control as part of a free cultural life, teachers must be centrally involved in the running of the school and in decision making, and the school should be organized along republican principles in which teachers are equal but delegate specific responsibilities to individuals and committees. So Waldorf schools from the very beginning had a non-hierarchical social form in

which individuals had to work on their relationships and experience the working of social and antisocial forces in themselves and in others.

In addition Steiner sought to integrate ideals from his work on broader social issues into the running of the first school. Salaries were not position- or job-based but needs based, meaning that they reflected the prevailing sense of equity in the school community. Teachers with more dependents received higher salaries than those without, and neither degrees nor length of service played into the financial support received. As the Stuttgart school was initially financed by the Waldorf Astoria factory and Emil Molt personally, tuitions were not charged to workers’ children, although families from outside the factory paid what they could. It was hoped that as the Waldorf School Movement grew, local, regional and world school associations would develop in order to provide the financial support for an independent school movement. For Steiner it was not only a question of providing support for independent Waldorf schools but to demonstrate the principles of a free cultural

life supported by the profits of economic life. “I am convinced that nothing is more important for the social development of humanity

than the foundation of such a world association of schools which would then awaken a real sense for a free cultural life and spiritual life in the widest circle of people.”2 Such a World School Association was never created and Waldorf schools have become tuition-dependent (in the United States, Britain, France, China and Brazil) or partially publicly- funded (in Germany, Holland and the Scandinavian countries) or, as in the U .S., have become public charter schools, with better salaries but greater government regulation.

Principles of Self-Administration

The idea of Waldorf schools, and indeed of all schools, being free of state control is not difficult to grasp. The primary reason for this perspective is that governments, when they function well, are oriented towards equality and will therefore seek to impose uniform standards on all schools as well as to prescribe curriculum requirements

Click here for the whole article

The Art of Facilitation and Meeting with Soul

The Basic Qualities of Collaboration

11. On The Use of Consensus, Committees and Mandates

During the Discussion

Checking Yourself

Gatekeeping

Encouraging Participation

Advancing and Deepening the Discussion

Handbook for Waldorf School Trustees, Leading with Spirit

Summer 2020 Leadership Training Course East Coast

When In Wilderness: Applying wilderness wisdom to navigating the current pandemic

All Resources

New Impulses in Waldorf School Administration, Leadership and Governance, M Soule and M Stewart

Highlight 17, Enlivening Spaces

Policy Governance Introduction by John and Miriam Carver

Carver's Policy Governance® Model in Nonprofit Organizations
by John Carver and Miriam Carver

The Nature of Governance and the Need for Theory

Board as Owner-Representative and Servant-Leader

The Necessity for Systematic Delegation

Using the Ends/Means Distinction

Expressing Expectations in Nested Sets

Board Discipline, Mechanics, and Structure

Evaluation

Board Meetings

Summary

References

USEFUL LINKS

Idea Exchange – Everything starts and ends with a question

Categories

CONTACT US

11. On The Use of Consensus, Committees and Mandates

During the Discussion

Checking Yourself

Gatekeeping

Encouraging Participation

Advancing and Deepening the Discussion

Carver's Policy Governance® Model in Nonprofit Organizations by John Carver and Miriam Carver

The Nature of Governance and the Need for Theory

Board as Owner-Representative and Servant-Leader

The Necessity for Systematic Delegation

Using the Ends/Means Distinction

Expressing Expectations in Nested Sets

Board Discipline, Mechanics, and Structure

Evaluation

Board Meetings

Summary

References

USEFUL LINKS

Idea Exchange – Everything starts and ends with a question

Categories

CONTACT US

Carver's Policy Governance® Model in Nonprofit Organizations
by John Carver and Miriam Carver