Posted by: genevievetaylor | April 1, 2010

Book Review: Networks that Work

Networks that Work was a book that was given to me by Patricia Talbot and Jona Matevish at the Sonoma Valley Health Roundtable.   It was a timely gift.

Networks that Work

It seems that, as organizations are grappling with an entirely different economic and social landscape, they are realizing that they must collaborate with organizations who at best they have been ignoring, or at worst fully competing with.

This book was a practical guide, laying out a framework for thinking about “Networks” (they point out that these networks are as often called “collaboratives” or “coalitions”).  They describe three different types of networks which require varying levels of risk on the part of their constituents:

  1. Cooperative
  2. Coordinating
  3. Collaborating

Each varies in risk and complexity, (cooperative being the lowest, collaborating being the highest), and each serves a slightly different purpose.  The “collaborating network,” with its high risk, also lends itself to the highest impact outside of the group, and requires a commensurate amount of time, effort, and resource for it to be successful.

What I liked: I think what most impressed me about the book is the fact that even given its size (90 pages), it manages to clearly lay out the key elements needed for a successful network; how (and if!) to go about starting one; three ways to structure a network (Self-Governing, Lead Organization, and Network Manager); as well as directly answering many of the basic questions that come up when starting a multi-organization collaboration.

It also includes a robust appendix, with a sample network agreement or “charter”, a job description for a “network manager”, and several case studies that talk about both the successes and the challenges some networks faced in their process.

I also really appreciated their concluding summary of principles, found on page 61:

  • Focus on shared purpose
  • Start from pre-existing relationships
  • Determine network member tolerance for risk
  • Respect organizational and institutional autonomy
  • Assure up-front commitment from key players
  • Build new types of relationships
  • Emphasize equal partnership
  • Expect – even embrace – conflict, and develop practices for anticipating, surfacing, and resolving it
  • Secure needed resources for operation without letting suppliers distort or diffuse the network purpose

This is a list and concepts that I can use when working with my own clients, and is accessible to inspire the busy executive who knows change is needed, and knows that collaboration is the only way to achieve their vision.

What I would change: This is one of those times when, in my effort to give a well-rounded book review, I have to scratch my head and say, what WOULD I change?  I really admire how the authors have addressed some of the fundamental pitfalls in such a clear and concise fashion.  And while I wouldn’t change their brevity, it does leave one with some questions like, “What is interest-based negotiating?”, “What are my references for dealing with conflict or power?” etc.  They list a few resources; and there are more that could be listed.

The nice thing, however – it leaves room for consultants like myself to explain what those ideas are.  Perhaps that is the ultimate intention – to encourage visionaries to get the kind of support they need to work through conflict, engage in good negotation, and run good meetings – support that external trainers and facilitators are skilled at assisting with.

A thank you to Paul Vandenveter and Myrna Mandell for writing this excellent booklet – and to Patricia and Jona for passing it along!

Posted by: genevievetaylor | February 17, 2010

Avoiding Greenwashing

I recently attended the State of Green Business Forum, an annual event hosted by Greener World Media (they host greenbiz.com among others).  It was a provocative day of cutting-edge thinkers in green business, and representatives from many companies we would know, as well as start-ups, consultancies, etc.

One of the panels discussed the topic of “Green Marketing in the Age of Transparency.”  Several innovateurs were represented, including Dara O Rourke from Goodguide.com (download the app if you haven’t already!), Wendy Cobdra at Earthsense, Chris Nelson of UL Environment, and Stephen Linaweaver of Green Order.  They said the fundamental challenge for companies who are attempting to integrate sustainability into their marketing plan (of which many can count themselves, now) is the consumer’s love-hate relationship with the companies that they rely on.

On the one hand, consumers want companies to step up and become sustainable.

On the other, they don’t believe that those organizations are doing what they say they are doing.

Further, while everyone knows what a sustainable company is NOT, no one has yet really agreed on what it IS.

This puts good intentioned organizations in a tough spot.  They are trying to do what is right, but at the best are blundering in what they say about their efforts, either sharing too much or raising expectations.  At the worst, they are confirming the suspicions of their customers, with incidences of fraud, exposes of poor environmental, labor, or quality practices, etc.  In an era of Enron, how DO we move forward?

To complicate matters – the “them” in this picture is “us.”  Many of the same people who work in these organizations are those people who distrust what the organizations do. Why that is, we can only speculate.  But it certainly makes for a complex picture.

Enter: the Authentically Sustainable Company.

If you read my last post on this topic, you will see I have noted a series of organizational realms – internally and externally, and at the individual and collective level.

In this era of rapid communication and what some may call “Radical Transparency,” companies who portray themselves must do so with integrity.  Here are some tips, both from the conference as well as my own thinking:

  1. Define the Boundaries. Wendy Cobdra explained that many companies try to market themselves as a “sustainable company”, and then when something is leaked that doesn’t portray them in someone else’s brain as sustainable, they lose credibility.  If you are working on energy efficiency, then focus on that.  If your employees are satisfied and feel they are making a difference for their clients and their communities, let us know about that!
  2. Strive for Integrity. Even with all of Wal-Mart’s hailed work around sustainability, the world is still deeply suspicious because of their labor practices (low-paying, low-benefits, etc.) and their tendency to squelch rather than enliven local commerce.  While they are still making truly astounding change, they will not make the kind of change that is needed.
  3. Don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect. This is a reminder to all of us: a certain amount of compassion and encouragement is in order for all of us.  None of us has it right, yet, and as I have said in previous posts, inspiration is a fundamental avenue for change.

Now, having said all of that, we had a great conversation at the Leadership Institute for Ecology and the Economy recently about B-Corporations – which certainly encourage a holistic perspective on what  sustainability in businesses could be.  In his presentation, founding member Christopher Peck showed a slide that summed it up very succinctly:

One Planet.  One Experiment. No Backup.

Which leads me to ask, is greenwashing even the real problem, if we can’t figure out how to create “one planet businesses?”

Do you know of any “One Planet Businesses?”

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started