The Lausanne Global Conversation is on the World Wide Open Network
Author: Justin Long
Date: 19.05.2010
Category: Partnership
My main focus is on “swarms”: decentralized networks of all volunteers. This month, the Lausanne Global Conversation is writing about “partnerships.” You might think there would be a natural convergence between the two topics. After all, isn’t a “swarm” a “partnership” between people? Are partnerships swarmish? Can swarms form partnerships with other organizations?
In my experience, a swarm is not typically a partnership per se. Partnerships came to life as business entities in which co-owners each shared in the profit or loss of a business. In the mission world, we think of partnerships as formalized and even perhaps contractual relationships between two organizations.
Is it possible for swarms to enter into partnerships? Yes, but with caveats. Swarms emphasize vision first, followed by community. Swarms are spontaneously created by people who share the same dreams, ideals, and ways of working, and who find they like to hang out together. Thus swarms have immense staying power–but they are highly informal. It is no mistake that “collaboration” is the third emphasis of a swarm, not the first or second.
When two swarms form a partnership together, the relationship is probably going to be highly informal: perhaps a one page document identifying shared vision and a few areas around which the two can collaborate. There will rarely be hard and fast expectations on an ongoing basis. A partnership might come together with a specific deliverable: say, a combined event. But it will be pretty fluid.
When a swarm tries to form a partnership with a hierarchical organization, however, the relationship is going to be trickier. One of the things hierarchical orgs often excel in is getting specific things done. Swarms, on the other hand, excel in community and endurance over time. Hierarchical organizations will expect specific timelines, deliverables, goals, etc. Often swarms have to reduce big tasks into smaller pieces because, with less formality, there is less desire to work and more desire to hang out. Getting a swarm to discipline itself to execute is a big challenge: apathy is the no. 1 killer of a swarm over time. Smaller pieces are more likely to get done than big projects, and can help build momentum.
Swarms can reach for a higher bar of execution by (1) making behaviors easier to understand (“simple”), easier to communicate (“sticky”), and low-cost to implement; and (2) advocating through influence for the discipline of execution. They might not make as big an immediate splash as an organization with resources, but with a swarm’s enormous staying power and potential to grow into large numbers, it can be quite effective over the long haul.
When dealing with an organization, a swarm needs to know that the organization is most probably looking for a relationship that is more formalized, with specific goals and timelines. The swarm’s leadership will need to anticipate and respond to this need without compromising the swarm’s own internal operating methods, cultures, and capacities. If it can’t, then it’s best not to enter into a partnership.
Organizations, on the other hand, need to understand how a specific swarm works, and what can reasonably be expected and what can’t. Look for places where resources can be shared, relational introductions can be made, and specific projects can be undertaken for specific dates. Each side should play to its strengths in a complementary relationship without expecting either side to become like the other.
One very good example of this is the relationship between Campus Crusade’s JESUS Film project and the many teams who use the JESUS Film. Campus Crusade itself is my best example of a hierarchical organization: strongly centralized, rigidly accountable. (I have many friends in CCCI, and I think it’s a great org–but I don’t think I could ever be part of it, because of the way it’s structured.) On the other hand, the JESUS Film teams often act very swarmishly. The relationship between the two sides is a classic example of the relationship between two very different kinds of organizations.
Another good example can be found in the relationships of a national political campaign to the networks of volunteers on the ground. Campaigns establish specific goals for their volunteers. They know that some will reach them, and some won’t. They can’t force the volunteers, because they are … volunteers. So they have different levels of achievement which they reward as incentives rather than try to hire/fire based on requirements.
One of the best ways to uncover potential partnerships is to look for organizations that first share your vision. Of those, find groups that have similar goals or plausible promises. Finally, narrow the list down to those who have similar organizational emphases. The list will get far more narrow with each “cut” – but in the end you’ll have a list of viable partners who need little persuasion to partner together with you, and with whom you’ll mix quite well. And if no one makes the cut then either consider loosening your requirements just a little, or find someone who shares your vision and empower them to start a swarm you can partner with!
Originally posted at http://www.justinlong.org
Keywords: partnerships, decentralized networks, swarms
Views: 10971
Comments: 11
Recommendations: 3
Conversation Post Comment
India
Decentralization Networks are need of the hour
14.04.2011
South Africa
Community farms: (Kibbutz)
4 land & wealth redistribution, to evangelise the community: To train, educate, work, live and have a base from where to launch missionaries into the community. A community farm is where the Christians in the community corporately owns the property. Our corporate finances provide cost of the farm, infrastructure & accommodation for those working on farms. Investors, invest directly in the crops to secure food and jobs for the people. Thousands of jobs will be created where people could be evangelise, reconciled, unity restored and worldviews changed to a Biblical one. Farms will act as a place of employment, a basic income, a missionary training School, an orphanage and launching pad to send trained missionaries. Here Christ Jesus will be a way of living where the community will see what we preach!
Three legs: (Operating separately)
1. Accommodation and employers Lodges/Hostels on farms with infrastructure:
2. Education, “Skills” development, Discipleship training & orphanages.
3. Agricultural projects – investment arm. (Project financing). Outside investors.
Full scale business to create a holistic cosmos to the missionary to have the infrastructure needed to live and operate in without lack or limitations.
Shammah Foundation: Marius Brand: Cell 082 9210 275, e-mail - mariba@zsd.co.za. www.koevoet4christ.co.za
18.10.2010
United Kingdom
Hi Justin
thanks for this piece - i really appreciated the language you have given for another model of partnership. I think there are many many good things about the language and i have begun to use it to describe a movement we are driving forward called www.biblefresh.com .
Swarms are stepping stones I believe towards the unity that christ calls for - but they are to fragile and market driven to be the whole story.
Thanks again for your piece
blessings
krish
26.05.2010
United States
@ kkandiah:
Thanks, Krish. I agree that swarms are never the whole story. We need orgs for example like Campus Crusade (not swarmish at all) and orgs like YWAM (very very swarmish). There’s plenty of room for both!
26.05.2010
United States
Justin, as I read about swarms I have this question. What unites a swarm or loose network of volunteers. Is it a cause or does it have to be a defined event with very specific outcomes that they are all swarming around :) ?
19.05.2010
United States
@ Jon_Hirst:
Depends on how long you want the swarm to last, and what you want to achieve. Swarms can and do coalesce around a specific event, but they are more typically surrounding a longer-term vision.
19.05.2010
United States
@ justinlong:
Much like this global conversation itself?
19.05.2010
United States
@ Rinchen:
This conversation is definitely swarmish. Often these kinds of things are more "crowds" - people who share without a long-term purpose. The swarmish element here is that we are contributing together to specific conversations in preparation for the Cape Town meeting. Swarms always have (1) Vision (2) Community (3) Collaboration (4) Openness/Generosity (5) Adaptability (6) Cultural Influence (7) Multiplication...
20.05.2010
United States
@ justinlong:
This distinction between swarms and crowdsourcing is very helpful Justin. I was not clear on that differentiation. I think that the list you provided is very helpful as well.
20.05.2010
United States
@ justinlong:
That’s a really useful distinction-- can you expand on each of those in a sentence or two?
20.05.2010
United States
@ Jon_Hirst:
We should distinguish between "crowds" (which may be swarmish but a swarm generally is not, because crowds just share while swarms have a specific purpose) and "crowdsourcing" (which is a method that a swarm will often use.)
For example, participants in say Flickr are a crowd. They are sharing photos. But there is no long term purpose or vision aside from the sharing.
Crowdsourcing, on the other hand, is when you get the crowd to do something for you that is critical to your purpose. Threadless.com, for example, crowdsources t-shirt designs to its audience (gets them to submit designs), t-shirt selection to the audience (gets them to rate the designs), marketing to the audience (gets them to promote their own designs), and then (surprise!) sells the best-rated T-shirt to the crowd and makes money off of it. (LOL).
A swarm with a purpose - let’s say A political campaign - for example, the Obama or McCain campaigns - used crowdsourcing for a number of things - particularly get-out-the-vote (mobilization) and fundraising and phone calling - to the volunteers who followed them.
21.05.2010
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you don’t have an account, you can sign up now (it’s free and easy!).