Like most community organizers and policy advocates, I have spent A LOT of time in coalition meetings. I have invested considerable energy in forming coalitions, trying to improve the functioning and increase the power of those of which I have been a part, and figuring out how to gracefully exit those that are no longer providing me with any real benefit. I have learned that, while coalitions are absolutely essential in many of our campaigns for policy change (because very few nonprofit organizations have adequate power on their own to push through our agendas), there is such a thing as a counterproductive alliance. Coalition work is practiced by almost everyone, yet few people do it really well, and marginal or actually destructive coalition experiences are all-too-common. During my years of advocacy practice, I was part of many coalitions: United we DREAM, Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride, Campaign for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Low-Wage Immigrant Workers, Faith/Labor Alliance, Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras, Coalition of Hispanic Organizations, Missouri Immigrant and Refugee Advocates, and more. Some of these experiences were very positive, some were OK, and some were, at times, toxic and painful.
When I stepped away from full-time advocacy to teach, then, one of my areas of research interest was in coalition practice–figuring out what scholars have learned about what makes coalitions work (and not), what principles need to be incorporated into coalition practice, and even the conditions in which coalitions may not be worth it! I didn’t find as much as I would have liked, and I still have a lot of unanswered questions, but several readings, including a few by Terry Mizrahi, who has done more thinking than most social workers on this topic, have shed some light on some of what I found in the field.
For one of the class sessions in my Advanced Advocacy Practice class, I present some content on the essential tasks of a social change coalition, drawing comparisons to social work group practice and the stages of group development with which my students are usually more familiar, and then we spend quite a bit of time discussing some scenarios of coalition practice. I challenge students to think about how they would handle these situations and to practice simultaneously attending to the coalition’s internal development and its pursuit of its external goals, a balancing act I consider the preeminent challenge of coalition practice. Too often, I see that coalitions develop rather organically, without adequate attention to questions of membership, roles and responsibilities, and processes for decision-making, so, then, we should not be surprised when these same issues cause problems in coalitions later.
Here are some of my thoughts about coalitions, with a link to the scenarios I have developed (all reflective of actual issues from my own experience, with some significant modifications). If you are involved in an advocacy coalition right now, how is it going? What are the coalition’s strengths and weaknesses? How might you improve the coalition’s functioning? Why did you develop a coalition, and do you still believe that it was necessary? How might you have accomplished your goals without a coalition?
Tasks in Development for Social Change Coalitions–asking the often-unasked questions:
I have been part of coalitions that resulted in deep new friendships, powerful political victories, and truly transformational practice. I have been part of (indeed, played leadership roles in) coalitions where people just went through the motions and continued to operate in isolation. And I have been part of coalitions that were paralyzed by dissent, overcome with personal attacks, and ultimately distracting us from the work at hand. I believe that social workers’ skills in attending to the person in the environment and dealing with interpersonal relationships as well as task functions can be especially valuable in coalition practice. One of our jobs, then, is to figure out how to make our coalitions work, and to bring our formidable talents to the development of this tool for advocacy.
Time to practice:
Scenarios for Coalition Practice
New (?) Thinking: Megacommunities
I was pretty excited to get this book at the library; I heard about it on the awesome Rosetta Thurman’s blog as a recommended book for an elite group of nonprofit folks and leading thinkers about the future of leadership to address social problems. It took me awhile to track it down in the library system, and then I dove in.
And, really, while there are some pieces in here that I found quite useful, I had a little of the Emperor’s new clothes feeling the whole time…um, aren’t they really just talking about really good coalition building? And what about that is really new?
Megacommunities is written from a pretty corporate perspective (when they called the World Social Forum anti-globalization, that was a hint). Some of that was actually helpful; for example, they argue that having multisector career experience aids in building relationships and building the ability to understand multiple perspectives, which made me think that, in my own work, I could probably really benefit from working within the government, so that I can best understand how to influence it (if I could stomach it, noncomformist that I am).
The basic thesis of the book is that we need to be building ‘megacommunities’ to address our most difficult social problems–defined, rather loosely, as coming together of corporate, nonprofit, government, and community interests to address common concerns with a mentality that surpasses a ‘winner takes all’ approach. This collaboration must be based on self-interest, not altruism; must reflect empathy for other sectors’ constraints; and must optimize, not maximize, benefits for each interest. This is where they really started to lose me, because, again, doesn’t that sound like putting together a really strong coalition?
They make the case that there are latent megacommunities all around, just waiting to be activated, and I can’t really take exception with that–they give examples of fair trade coffee and health care in Rhode Island, and those are pretty good cases. But, at the end, I just can’t buy either the idea that this is really groundbreaking (include opponents as stakeholders, overcome hubris and defeatism to build authentic connections, take advantage of weak ties to present a more effective advocacy position, learn to see conflict as an opportunity for your communication…this is basically what I teach aspiring coalition leaders) or, perhaps more importantly, that somehow bringing these folks together is the key to all of our problems. Bill Clinton (a leader of a ‘megacommunity’, apparently) is quoted in the book stating that, with alliances in other sectors, civil society can make up for the erosion of the public sector. I fundamentally, wholeheartedly do not agree that that’s either a wise nor a truly achievable goal, and if building megacommunities makes an excuse for more attacks on our safety net, then we’re headed in the wrong direction.
I took away some value from the book–they have a great diagram on weak ties within a network that is helpful for thinking about why diversity of sector/experience/position works in advocacy, and they talk about the importance of identifying hubs with the resources to serve a pivotal role in the (my words) coalition building. And, towards the end of the book, they make the claim that we are nearing the end of planning, that things are changing so quickly that long-term plans, and the process of long-term planning, is really becoming obsolete. That’s the kind of statement of which I’m generally quite skeptical, but they presented it somewhat compellingly, and I’m still thinking it over.
On the whole, though, I’m a little concerned. Not, really, by the book. I’m sure that the authors are nice, bright people, and probably readers with less coalition background could take away some valuable insights. Nothing they say is really harmful in any way. No, what concerns me is that this, in particular, was seen as required reading for those tasked with figuring out how the nonprofit sector is going to confront the greatest challenges of our times.
I’ve been part of a lot of coalitions. I’ve organized several coalitions. I believe in the power of coalition work, even as I cringe at some of the baggage that comes with it. But I do not labor under the belief that a coalition, no matter how multisectorial or well-funded or visionary, can change the world. And that’s the kind of new thinking we really need.
Share this:
Like this:
→ Leave a comment
Posted in Analysis and Commentary
Tagged coalitions, reviews