A newspaper story last week explored the importance of mutual support in the human and animal worlds. Over the years, we have come to understand that animal species, and perhaps plant species, practice cooperation far more than competition. “Survival of the fittest” does not necessarily mean every animal for itself.
An article in the New York Times Science Times reported that “plenty of nonhuman animals practice the tither’s art.” For example, if a rhesus monkey discovers a source of high-quality food, it is expected to call out to its comrades, to share. Vampire bats sometimes regurgitate a portion of their meal, to feed other hungry bats. Several varieties of birds and fish give up part of their “wealth” to help the larger community.
Contributing to the larger community, voluntarily or through payment of taxes, became a universal practice among humans as well: “There’s not a human society in the world that doesn’t redistribute food to nonrelatives” – the article quotes Samuel Bowles, of the Santa Fe Institute. “Whether it’s through the state, or the chief, or a rural collective, or some other mechanism, food sharing of large nutritional packages is quite extensive and has been going on for at least 100,000 years of human history.”
These observations fulfill the predictions of a thinker far ahead of her times, Arabella Buckley, who wrote more than 100 years ago, that science would someday recognize: “that the "Struggle for Existence," which has taught [insects] the lesson of self-sacrifice to the community, [also teaches that the] devotion of mother to child, and friend to friend ... recognizes that mutual help and sympathy are among the most powerful weapons [of survival].”
As we strive to meet the challenges we face, let’s remember that mutual support, sharing, and collaboration lie deep within our genes. As well, they contribute to our collective ability to survive with all the other human inhabitants of this planet. Competition serves a function at one level of human existence; but cooperation provides a higher level function that we must not ignore.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Ending Homelessness - the Right Thing to Do, in a Smart Way
“Heading Home Minnesota” intends to eliminate homelessness in this state. Jim Frey, of the Frey Foundation, recently wrote that this initiative is “not just right, but smart”.
Why “smart”? He mentions several reasons. Among them: a) The design of the initiative derives from knowledge of what works; its designers paid attention to research. b) It stresses collaboration. No one sector can solve the problem – business, government, nonprofits, and community residents, including homeless individuals themselves, must participate in the solution. c) The initiative stresses a three-pronged approach: prevention, supportive housing, and outreach.
Wilder Research has worked in partnership with other organizations and groups to address homelessness since the early 1980s. Currently, our Homeless Management Information System provides information and insight on the system of services which the state’s homeless access. Our once-every-three-years homelessness survey (to occur in fall of 2009) provides in-depth knowledge about the conditions of the state’s homeless residents. Through both of these tools, Wilder Research has influenced policies and funding in ways that will benefit homeless individuals and families, Minnesota’s taxpayers, business owners, and pretty much everyone in the state. We will continue to provide this information – to ensure up-to-date understanding of homelessness issues, to promote accountability, and to monitor our communities’ progress – until someday, hopefully, we and others will work ourselves out of a job.
I suspect that Heading Home Minnesota will make progress; it might, or might not, completely achieve its goal. Regardless, we will learn more about what can work. We will learn how to spend money more wisely. We will learn how to collaborate more effectively – as institutions and as individuals. As Jim stated, “Our public and private investments must be productive. We should be investing in a system that promotes education, employment, health and responsibility among homeless children, youths, and adults. This is what homeless people want for themselves. This is what we want for our communities. This is what we need for our future.”
See Jim Frey’s full essay: Heading Home Minnesota – not just right, but smart
Why “smart”? He mentions several reasons. Among them: a) The design of the initiative derives from knowledge of what works; its designers paid attention to research. b) It stresses collaboration. No one sector can solve the problem – business, government, nonprofits, and community residents, including homeless individuals themselves, must participate in the solution. c) The initiative stresses a three-pronged approach: prevention, supportive housing, and outreach.
Wilder Research has worked in partnership with other organizations and groups to address homelessness since the early 1980s. Currently, our Homeless Management Information System provides information and insight on the system of services which the state’s homeless access. Our once-every-three-years homelessness survey (to occur in fall of 2009) provides in-depth knowledge about the conditions of the state’s homeless residents. Through both of these tools, Wilder Research has influenced policies and funding in ways that will benefit homeless individuals and families, Minnesota’s taxpayers, business owners, and pretty much everyone in the state. We will continue to provide this information – to ensure up-to-date understanding of homelessness issues, to promote accountability, and to monitor our communities’ progress – until someday, hopefully, we and others will work ourselves out of a job.
I suspect that Heading Home Minnesota will make progress; it might, or might not, completely achieve its goal. Regardless, we will learn more about what can work. We will learn how to spend money more wisely. We will learn how to collaborate more effectively – as institutions and as individuals. As Jim stated, “Our public and private investments must be productive. We should be investing in a system that promotes education, employment, health and responsibility among homeless children, youths, and adults. This is what homeless people want for themselves. This is what we want for our communities. This is what we need for our future.”
See Jim Frey’s full essay: Heading Home Minnesota – not just right, but smart
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
An Award for Wilder Research - Some Lessons Learned
Wilder Research has received the 2009 Public Sociology Award, given by the University of Minnesota’s Department of Sociology in recognition of our efforts “to do research that directly informs public debates and engages wider publics.” We value and appreciate this honor, and we will continue to work to provide high quality social research that promotes effective community action, efficient services, better policies, and better engagement of all of us in improving our communities’ quality of life.
To be successful, we’ve learned that at least four ingredients are essential, and I would like to share them with you:.
1. Solid research. The quality of information depends on the methods used to obtain it. We do not have a “one size fits all” mentality. Rather, we identify the best method(s) for obtaining information, depending on the questions which we or others need to answer. We include social scientists from all disciplines on our staff, because we don’t feel that any one discipline has a corner on the market for searching for the right answers. We build on theories and previous research from all disciplines. When we use a method we make sure that competent staff gather, analyze, and interpret information in accordance with the highest scientific standards. Much of this occurs transparently, providing an unseen foundation. Nonetheless, this foundation enables us to construct studies which will withstand criticism and provide the opportunity to obtain sound, up-to-date knowledge.
2. Credible research. We do not strive to produce what people want to hear; we strive to produce what people need to hear. We do not seek to please; we seek to provoke thought and creativity and to enhance insight. We feel that our audiences deserve research results which any reasonable person would accept as legitimate, unbiased, reasonable, and relevant (even if that person disagrees with those results). Some research “think tanks” become associated with a “point of view”; they can please adherents of that point of view, but they struggle to gain acceptance of their findings and interpretations, no matter how valid they may be, among other audiences. We take steps to appeal to people with all sorts of predispositions. We do this, for example, by forming study advisory committees with diverse representatives who do not necessarily agree with each other and who challenge us to find a way to gather information that all sides of an issue will accept as credible. We take great pride in the many occasions where liberals and conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents have all cited Wilder Research data to support their conclusions and recommendations.
3. Practical research. Our work must answer questions that will guide long-term strategic decisions and short-term operational decisions regarding policies, funding, programming, and other activities. We involve decision-makers, in general and specific ways, to advise on the design of our work, and in critiquing our work after completion, for continued improvement. The greater the use of our findings, the more we feel we have achieved our goals for Wilder Research.
4. Mission-driven research. Above all, we carry out our efforts in humble dedication to the improvement of the well-being of all members of the community. This dedication motivates individuals to join the Wilder Research staff, and it sustains them to carry out the highest quality applied research.
As always, I welcome your comments – and even your challenges – to keep us on track, continuing to accomplish the best possible work.
To be successful, we’ve learned that at least four ingredients are essential, and I would like to share them with you:.
1. Solid research. The quality of information depends on the methods used to obtain it. We do not have a “one size fits all” mentality. Rather, we identify the best method(s) for obtaining information, depending on the questions which we or others need to answer. We include social scientists from all disciplines on our staff, because we don’t feel that any one discipline has a corner on the market for searching for the right answers. We build on theories and previous research from all disciplines. When we use a method we make sure that competent staff gather, analyze, and interpret information in accordance with the highest scientific standards. Much of this occurs transparently, providing an unseen foundation. Nonetheless, this foundation enables us to construct studies which will withstand criticism and provide the opportunity to obtain sound, up-to-date knowledge.
2. Credible research. We do not strive to produce what people want to hear; we strive to produce what people need to hear. We do not seek to please; we seek to provoke thought and creativity and to enhance insight. We feel that our audiences deserve research results which any reasonable person would accept as legitimate, unbiased, reasonable, and relevant (even if that person disagrees with those results). Some research “think tanks” become associated with a “point of view”; they can please adherents of that point of view, but they struggle to gain acceptance of their findings and interpretations, no matter how valid they may be, among other audiences. We take steps to appeal to people with all sorts of predispositions. We do this, for example, by forming study advisory committees with diverse representatives who do not necessarily agree with each other and who challenge us to find a way to gather information that all sides of an issue will accept as credible. We take great pride in the many occasions where liberals and conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents have all cited Wilder Research data to support their conclusions and recommendations.
3. Practical research. Our work must answer questions that will guide long-term strategic decisions and short-term operational decisions regarding policies, funding, programming, and other activities. We involve decision-makers, in general and specific ways, to advise on the design of our work, and in critiquing our work after completion, for continued improvement. The greater the use of our findings, the more we feel we have achieved our goals for Wilder Research.
4. Mission-driven research. Above all, we carry out our efforts in humble dedication to the improvement of the well-being of all members of the community. This dedication motivates individuals to join the Wilder Research staff, and it sustains them to carry out the highest quality applied research.
As always, I welcome your comments – and even your challenges – to keep us on track, continuing to accomplish the best possible work.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Overcoming Current Economic Challenges
What are key ingredients for succeeding in these tough economic times? What will increase the chances that foundations will award your organization a grant? Some corporate and foundation leaders made loud and clear suggestions at a seminar* this past Friday. Three major themes cut across their remarks:
1. Focus on what is “mission critical.” Identify the activities absolutely essential to your mission. Get rid of the rest. Focus on core values. If others can do something as well as you, maybe you should let them. Don’t be drawn off mission by “seductive RFPs.”
2. Form strategic alliances. Collaborate with others in whatever way makes sense. Be willing to give up your independence. Speakers questioned why multiple agencies should provide the same services, why they should all spend money on fundraising intended to support delivery of the same service to the same population, why they should have independent “back room” operations duplicating one another’s efforts.
3. Board members, step up and take charge. Boards must take ownership of the tough, high-level decisions. Staff can then move ahead, based upon those decisions, to operate the organization as effectively as possible. Most organizations have “800 pound gorillas” and “sacred cows”. Board action should eliminate these and support executive directors to move ahead. As Ellen Luger of General Mills said, “Be open to new ideas; don’t just think the old way.”
Organizations who incorporate these themes into their planning and action will: (a) increase their impacts; (b) improve the economics of service delivery; and (c) appear more attractive to corporate and private funders (all of whom are experiencing decreases in their endowment income and other sources of revenues).
The worldwide economic downturn will continue for a while. The current recession will include the deepest slide in economic indicators since World War II. State Economist Tom Stinson stated that economic recovery similar to the rebound from the recession of the early 1980s will not occur for two reasons: first, no “pent-up demand” exists to get money flowing to end the recession; second, demographics are not in our favor – older people tend to save, while younger people spend. In the 1980s, the ‘baby boomers” were young; now, they are older and more concerned about saving for retirement.
Significant recovery for nonprofit organizations will lag the overall improvement in the economic environment. Recovery for nonprofits will likely take at least two years, if not more. Full recovery will perhaps take 10 years.
Jon Campbell, CEO of Wells Fargo Minnesota mentioned something he learned from his father: “When things seem as bad as they will get, they are likely to get a little bit worse.”
Let’s heed Campbell’s words, not to foster pessimism, but to keep us vigilant. We can, and will, overcome the pressing challenges we face – if we keep ourselves informed, communicate and support one another, and open our organizations to opportunities to carry out our work in creative and effective ways. Wilder Research looks forward to addressing the challenges of our times, alongside our for-profit, nonprofit, and government colleagues with similar interests in improving our communities.
*Seminar: “UNITED FRONT: Engaging Nonprofit Board and Executive Leadership Facing Unprecedented Challenges”. Friday, March 13, 2009. Minneapolis. Sponsored by Greater Twin Cities United Way, General Mills, and Minnesota Council of Nonprofits. Thanks to those three organizations for offering a forum which provided objective data on current economic conditions, along with wise counsel on strategic approaches for dealing with these conditions! (Opening panel included: Jon Campbell, CEO of Wells Fargo Minnesota; Mayor Chris Coleman, Saint Paul; Suzanne Koepplinger, Minnesota Women’s Indian Resource Center; Ellen Goldberg Luger, General Mills Foundation; Mike Opat, Hennepin County Commissioner; Jon Pratt, Minnesota Council of Nonprofits; Tom Stinson, Minnesota State Economist; Christina Wessel, Minnesota Council of Nonprofits.)
1. Focus on what is “mission critical.” Identify the activities absolutely essential to your mission. Get rid of the rest. Focus on core values. If others can do something as well as you, maybe you should let them. Don’t be drawn off mission by “seductive RFPs.”
2. Form strategic alliances. Collaborate with others in whatever way makes sense. Be willing to give up your independence. Speakers questioned why multiple agencies should provide the same services, why they should all spend money on fundraising intended to support delivery of the same service to the same population, why they should have independent “back room” operations duplicating one another’s efforts.
3. Board members, step up and take charge. Boards must take ownership of the tough, high-level decisions. Staff can then move ahead, based upon those decisions, to operate the organization as effectively as possible. Most organizations have “800 pound gorillas” and “sacred cows”. Board action should eliminate these and support executive directors to move ahead. As Ellen Luger of General Mills said, “Be open to new ideas; don’t just think the old way.”
Organizations who incorporate these themes into their planning and action will: (a) increase their impacts; (b) improve the economics of service delivery; and (c) appear more attractive to corporate and private funders (all of whom are experiencing decreases in their endowment income and other sources of revenues).
The worldwide economic downturn will continue for a while. The current recession will include the deepest slide in economic indicators since World War II. State Economist Tom Stinson stated that economic recovery similar to the rebound from the recession of the early 1980s will not occur for two reasons: first, no “pent-up demand” exists to get money flowing to end the recession; second, demographics are not in our favor – older people tend to save, while younger people spend. In the 1980s, the ‘baby boomers” were young; now, they are older and more concerned about saving for retirement.
Significant recovery for nonprofit organizations will lag the overall improvement in the economic environment. Recovery for nonprofits will likely take at least two years, if not more. Full recovery will perhaps take 10 years.
Jon Campbell, CEO of Wells Fargo Minnesota mentioned something he learned from his father: “When things seem as bad as they will get, they are likely to get a little bit worse.”
Let’s heed Campbell’s words, not to foster pessimism, but to keep us vigilant. We can, and will, overcome the pressing challenges we face – if we keep ourselves informed, communicate and support one another, and open our organizations to opportunities to carry out our work in creative and effective ways. Wilder Research looks forward to addressing the challenges of our times, alongside our for-profit, nonprofit, and government colleagues with similar interests in improving our communities.
*Seminar: “UNITED FRONT: Engaging Nonprofit Board and Executive Leadership Facing Unprecedented Challenges”. Friday, March 13, 2009. Minneapolis. Sponsored by Greater Twin Cities United Way, General Mills, and Minnesota Council of Nonprofits. Thanks to those three organizations for offering a forum which provided objective data on current economic conditions, along with wise counsel on strategic approaches for dealing with these conditions! (Opening panel included: Jon Campbell, CEO of Wells Fargo Minnesota; Mayor Chris Coleman, Saint Paul; Suzanne Koepplinger, Minnesota Women’s Indian Resource Center; Ellen Goldberg Luger, General Mills Foundation; Mike Opat, Hennepin County Commissioner; Jon Pratt, Minnesota Council of Nonprofits; Tom Stinson, Minnesota State Economist; Christina Wessel, Minnesota Council of Nonprofits.)
Sunday, March 08, 2009
The Genius and Hard Work that Our Communities Need
Wynton Marsalis and the Jazz at Lincoln Center Orchestra performed the music of Thelonious Monk on Friday; the concert reminded me how fortunate we can be, usually just a few times in our lives, to witness artistic genius first hand. I felt the same way while sitting in the open-air Delacorte Theater in Central Park, experiencing a live performance of King Lear, with James Earl Jones in the title role; the same as well seeing Zero Mostel as Tevye in the Broadway production of Fiddler on the Roof.
Master performers have an ability to take current models and conventions and work them into new forms. They challenge themselves and others – and they motivate others to challenge them. (Marsalis and his colleagues try to “arrange music too hard for one another to perform”.) Top performers have an ability to work with others. They seek ideas from others. They search constantly, both by themselves and in collaboration with others, for new ways of doing things.
We can learn a lot from observing brilliant people. I’m always struck by the combination of intellectual assertiveness and intellectual humility – groundbreaking efforts to achieve new ways to understand and to act, yet with great awe and all-encompassing appreciation for how little any of us, even geniuses, can really know and do.
As we face the issues our communities and our nations currently face, I hope we can develop our collective genius in a way that incorporates the traits of great performers like Marsalis. For example, we desperately need to change our system of health care. Will we just produce more of the same, bogged down by old ways of thinking and stymied by the baggage of the past? Or can we rearrange some old parts and create some new ones, to redesign an accessible, effective, equitable system? Can we arrange something “too hard to perform” and then accomplish the work and preparation that enables us to perform?
If and when “stimulus money” flows into our communities, will we seek to plug holes and maintain the past? Or will we creatively identify opportunities that will leverage the effect of the money, building on the energy and genius of our residents?
Top performers make difficult, complex efforts look simple. We can’t deceive ourselves. As Marsalis pointed out, sometimes practicing “18 or 19 hours in a day” is necessary. Similarly, to get our communities and economies back on track, we will need to work diligently. Quick, simple, and “politically correct” approaches will fall far short of what we need. We must challenge one another, give up turf, compromise and orchestrate some new music.
Master performers have an ability to take current models and conventions and work them into new forms. They challenge themselves and others – and they motivate others to challenge them. (Marsalis and his colleagues try to “arrange music too hard for one another to perform”.) Top performers have an ability to work with others. They seek ideas from others. They search constantly, both by themselves and in collaboration with others, for new ways of doing things.
We can learn a lot from observing brilliant people. I’m always struck by the combination of intellectual assertiveness and intellectual humility – groundbreaking efforts to achieve new ways to understand and to act, yet with great awe and all-encompassing appreciation for how little any of us, even geniuses, can really know and do.
As we face the issues our communities and our nations currently face, I hope we can develop our collective genius in a way that incorporates the traits of great performers like Marsalis. For example, we desperately need to change our system of health care. Will we just produce more of the same, bogged down by old ways of thinking and stymied by the baggage of the past? Or can we rearrange some old parts and create some new ones, to redesign an accessible, effective, equitable system? Can we arrange something “too hard to perform” and then accomplish the work and preparation that enables us to perform?
If and when “stimulus money” flows into our communities, will we seek to plug holes and maintain the past? Or will we creatively identify opportunities that will leverage the effect of the money, building on the energy and genius of our residents?
Top performers make difficult, complex efforts look simple. We can’t deceive ourselves. As Marsalis pointed out, sometimes practicing “18 or 19 hours in a day” is necessary. Similarly, to get our communities and economies back on track, we will need to work diligently. Quick, simple, and “politically correct” approaches will fall far short of what we need. We must challenge one another, give up turf, compromise and orchestrate some new music.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)