Fellowship Charter – joining up conversations

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 27, 2009 at 10:45

Hi David

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

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 27, 2009 at 14:25

Hi David

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tessy Britton on October 29, 2009 at 10:27

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 29, 2009 at 14:41

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Avril Baigent on October 29, 2009 at 15:06

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 29, 2009 at 15:30

Hi Avril

Thank you for your input.

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Avril Baigent on October 29, 2009 at 16:09

@Laura - you wrote in your first comment "How can you get involved? 1. View the Charter Exhibition online and leave a comment", but on the page this links to there is nowhere to leave a comment, just a list of pledges. A comment is not a pledge. And the other link that you provided doesn't go to a dedicated space to discuss the charter, but to the landing page for the regions. Where is the official space to discuss the Charter, rather than just agree with it?
The same thing happened on the first meeting of the fellowship council. One of the staff said "do go and view the exhibition and leave your comments", but again, there were only pledge cards. I'm afraid I'm not ready to pledge support to the Charter just yet - and it seems odd to ask people to commit to something which is still under discussion . . . I do support the RSA through my membership and involvement in the Council. Is this not enough?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Avril Baigent on October 29, 2009 at 16:37

@David - I agree about organisations pushing through value statements laden with unspoken assumptions. In my experience these tend to come apart pretty quickly once you get to the practical working out stage, or alternatively are dismissed as nice thoughts but unrealistic. For me, there is so much potential in the fellowship, the most important thing is for people to see the connections between their lives, and what might be, with the added value of the RSA. I just don't think you get there by making people feel guilty for not participating (and this is a good Catholic writing!) The what-might-be has to connect with individuals, has to make their lives easier and less complicated, rather than adding yet another project that they must get involved with. There have to be levels of commitment, which also function as ways into the organisation, with all recognised as valid. What we are in danger of producing is a dual level fellowship, with some (few) who are willing to participate in nings, and get involved in projects and sign pledges, and the great mass of the rest, who cannot see any way of squeezing yet more commitment out of already over-committed lives. Rather than moving the whole membership forward, we risk super-tracking the keenies, and leaving everyone else behind.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 29, 2009 at 16:59

Hi Avril,

Ah ok, I see what you mean. Apologies if my use of language wasn't clear.

I hope this post on the Council site can be a central space to link different conversations from other sources and discuss the Charter - which is what we are doing.

The link from here to the landing page for the regions is there because it lists all the other online sites at the bottom, and all the Networks managers have posted information about the Charter on these sites, to try and encourage feedback from as many Fellows as possible. I am going to comment on any discussion on each of these, to sign post this space as well.

There is now a comments book by the Charter in the House, so Fellows can write in what ever format they want to.

And yes, your support through your membership and involvement in the Council is very valuable! It's for every Fellow to decide what is enough for them, depending on their time, skills, interests etc. And adding information on what they do as a pledge is of course voluntary. The hope for the Charter was to bring a sense of shared values and possibilities, without being so prescriptive of the types activities this might entail that people felt their current contribution was undervalued

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Dickinson on October 29, 2009 at 23:45

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

Hi David,
You have addressed something absolutely fundamental in my view - I seem to recall we touched on it when we met in JA Street. We really have to address an old world attitude to the increasingly artificial and simplistic divide between private sector and voluntary activity.
For those of us who believe that corporate social responsibility is a way of working rather than a bolt-on, we make decisions daily about how much of our time we can contribute and how much we will have to bill. I have been helping to stimulate some really big projects on my patch, aspects of which will inevitably become commercial if they are to be sustained. The dilemma is should I back off now just in case they do become commercial and audit trails may be difficult to separate, limiting my involvement to something that I can contain and more importantly, prove containment, or should I hope that reasonable, transparent behaviour will be acceptable to the RSA. At some point we are going to have to grasp the nettle within the RSA and try to find more flexible approaches to private, public and third sector teams working together on socially important projects. It's a bit like the fear of litigation that has paralysed outdoor pursuits in schools. If the RSA takes too firm a stance on this the projects undertaken by Fellows will be equally small, safe and contained. There is a clear relationship between sustainability and reasonable commercial viability and an equally self-evident one between largesse and unsustainability. Sorry if this is a rant - I will be in the Gerrard Bar Monday 2nd Nov around 5 if anyone fancies talking this through.

David Wilcox said:

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

--------

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

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

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

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

---------

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

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

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

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

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

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on October 30, 2009 at 11:33

@David Wilcox
There are wider points made here that I want to think about more before replying, but I wanted to come back on this one just now. You said "I'm assuming the Charter - and particularly the line "We will be generous with out time and abilities not seeking personal or financial gain and measuring our success by the impact that we have, not the recognition we receive" - reflects decisions taken by Trustees"

That's a pretty large assumption! I'm happy to explain how we got to where we are. The ideas and text of the draft Charter has been drawn together from several places over quite a long time. The first open House event in 2007 to ask Fellows what they wanted from their Fellowship, independent research and consulation with Fellows prior to that event, feedback from Fellows and learning over the following year and from the Networks project, the Manchester Exchange event with Fellows in 2008, organisation wide workshops with staff from all departments, our founding documents and charitable aims and, yes, the Trustees.

we had to put pen to paper at some point, or we'd never take a step forward! The text is proposed, and we are now in a period of feedback where we are trying to bring the issues and conversations to the attention of as many Fellows as possible. The Charter and the Exhibition in which we decided to launch the initiative, are designed to evolve and grow, in response to Fellows feedback. Of course I'm happy to take suggestions on the process of all this, but I'm personally more excited by the chance to develop some of the other ideas added here so far (e.g. finding a space for social enterprise and open source ideas, or the types of supporting information that is needed etc)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Laura Billings on November 4, 2009 at 13:35

@david

The idea of an accompanying statement and the offer from Bob to help develop this is very much appreciated, and has also been very useful to spark more conversations around how the Charter might work in action. As I said before, we are currently in feedback mode - so we're trying to bring the proposed Charter to the attention of as many Fellows as possible, and gather ideas, comments and conversations, such as the ones happening here. There is not a plan to revise the Charter before more people have had a chance to see the first version and comment if they wish. And to do so before taking feedback to the Council would also (in my opinion) disregard the fact that the Council are Fellows, elected by Fellows, and with a responsibility to help shape the future of Fellowship, including working together on the Charter.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page