Adaptation, integration, and collective will

Implementing a people, structure, and culture model within organizing spaces

Organizing can be empowering. It can build connections, facilitate healing, provide hope, and bring us closer to the world we want to see. It isn’t always easy, however, to be involved in collective endeavours. Many people are trying to stay involved while working multiple jobs, doing night shifts, balancing family responsibilities, or studying full time. 

As organizing spaces continue to reckon with strengthening their capacity, I spoke to a few organizers who found themselves trying to balance showing up for collective action and tending to other parts of their lives.

Pénélope Langlais-Oligny, a Montreal-based migrant justice organizer, expressed appreciation for being able to return to the same group she was involved in before she started a full-time job. “Flexibility in terms of what I can do and how many meetings I can be [at] really helped me with reintegrating myself,” she says.

Iman Sattar, an organizer in the Palestine solidarity movement, articulated the innate desire to be part of organizing: “My commitment to remaining involved in various groups despite holding down a full-time job stems from a profound shift in perspective. I recall a thought-provoking statement that resonated with me – we're not freeing Palestine; rather, Palestine is freeing us."

When navigating how to grow collective capacity, and by extension, work toward collective liberation, it is important to understand how the structure of the groups and the culture within organizing interact to enhance or hinder the involvement of people.

Kristine,* a long time migrant justice organizer, started in a profession that provided little flexibility but allowed for some organizing. When she became a parent, organizing required a different kind of readjustment. “I needed to find places that were adapted to my new reality as a mother – having integrated child care became an important prerequisite for me.”

“I don't think I have much to say on activism right now [...] Most of it is in the context of my job. I can go to an event if there is child care [...]  if there isn't, then not so much. Meeting times are almost never possible” she adds.

For organizer Titas Banerjee, the ability to “rest and know when to step away, if needed” was one of their requirements to balance being involved and being able to pay the rent. 

The common thread among the interviewees was a concern around finding ways to carve out their place within organizing spaces and continue to make an impact while staying involved in the fight for justice. 

Our research, which examined student organizing in Quebec and the U.S., and highlighted “the importance of an optimal mix of all three [people, structure, and culture] elements [to grassroots organizing], as one facilitates and strengthens the others and provides a means of self-perpetuation catalysed by mobilisation.”

Iman Sattar, an organizer in the Palestine solidarity movement, articulated the innate desire to be part of organizing: “My commitment to remaining involved in various groups despite holding down a full-time job stems from a profound shift in perspective. I recall a thought-provoking statement that resonated with me – we're not freeing Palestine; rather, Palestine is freeing us. This liberation is from the clutches of individualism, the influence of mainstream media, and the shackles of societal complacency. It has opened my eyes to the essence of community, fostering a deep understanding of rallying around a cause for justice while exposing the contradictions and hypocrisy ingrained in our system.”

Organizational structure and culture

Data gathered for this article comes from individual interviews, questionnaires, email exchanges, and informal conversations with people involved in grassroots organizing spaces while holding day jobs, along with my own research in the area of student organizing, and internal dynamics and political ideologies. 

Conversations pointed to a couple of broad areas for intervention; namely the structure and culture of organizing groups. My book chapter, “Affinities and Barricades: A Comparative Analysis of Student Organizing in Quebec and the United States,” co-authored with Ryan Thomson, detailed how both can enable or hinder involvement. Our research, which examined student organizing in Quebec and the U.S., and highlighted “the importance of an optimal mix of all three [people, structure, and culture] elements [to grassroots organizing], as one facilitates and strengthens the others and provides a means of self-perpetuation catalysed by mobilisation.” These elements can be thought of as Lego blocks that can be adjusted to find the right fit.  

"In my work at Politics & Care [...] we have often used the analogy of chairs in a circle: when a new person joins an existing circle, everyone needs to move their chairs to make room for them, making the circle bigger."

Broadly speaking, structure can refer to many different elements such as the number of meetings, where decisions are made, whether people need to be in a meeting to contribute meaningfully or if there are other ways for them to do so, and committee structure.

Culture, on the other hand, is how we function, what our practices are, and how we enact policies, the way we treat each other, how care is present in our work, how we welcome new and old members, the levels of transparency, accountability, and inclusion we adhere to, how we transfer knowledge, how information circulates among and outside of committees, and so on. Organizing culture thus plays a significant role in inclusion and integration work, and its success depends on the meaning we give to these processes.

Each element of structure or culture, however tiny it might be, can have an impact on the broader whole. In my work at Politics & Care – a collective of artists and organizers who hold collective discussions, facilitate workshops, and look at care as both a personal and collective undertaking – we have often used the analogy of chairs in a circle: when a new person joins an existing circle, everyone needs to move their chairs to make room for them, making the circle bigger. Similarly, finding room for new people, changing realities, or new elements calls for understanding and adjustment by all parties.

“The bigger hurdle for me is parenting in the sense that all meetings seem to take place at kid bedtimes! Or have no child care and so require me to do child care at the same time and that’s just not possible,” Kristine says.

If we want to keep people involved within our movements and value what they bring in terms of capacity and experience, we might be more willing to grapple with what it means to move the chairs. In this case, flexibility around culture allows for adaptation of structure, as needed, which theoretically then leads to an increase in people who stay and flourish in organizing spaces and enhance collective capacity.

Providing child care

In Kristine’s case, a culture prioritizing intergenerational spaces in organizing would lead to a structure more likely to reduce the barriers she experienced in reintegrating into her prior organizing groups. 

“The bigger hurdle for me is parenting in the sense that all meetings seem to take place at kid bedtimes! Or have no child care and so require me to do child care at the same time and that’s just not possible,” she says.

The provision of child care in organizing spaces would mean finding a person who can take care of the kids, providing some toys, and even some extra space depending on where meetings are happening. 

Even then, including child care when organizing meetings first means  recognizing the significance of this work and its impact on not only accessibility, but also in combatting isolation and the disintegration of social fabric through neoliberalism. 

It is a collective responsibility that requires collective will.   

“Lately the only kind of organizing I can sustain is kid-centred, and has been spearheaded by other parents who really take into account all the accessibility issues that come with having young children [such as families for Palestine actions],” says Kristine. 

Power and privilege

Power and control often play a role in whom we make room for and who gets left behind. A study by the Centre for Community Organizations looking at the experiences of racialized women in Quebec’s community sector illustrates this phenomenon clearly. People claim to be anti-racist and anti-oppressive but in practice these dynamics are most difficult to challenge and thus to change. Power and privilege are also reflected in how the collective will is shaped – what structures are possible and how large the circle can be.

To create accessible and equitable spaces, our groups need to recognize the value that each member brings and that the main resource at hand for grassroots groups is first and foremost people. Often, those currently in the organizations are overworked; many burn out and quit or lose their passion and continue on resentfully. 

If we are mindful of making room for new or returning members, the group as a whole might also benefit from new perspectives around inclusion and accessibility. 

Personal and organizational adaptations

Banerjee identifies organizational culture that help them adjust to changing realities. “Lots of communication with group members, scheduling in advance, being straightforward with capacity – that's to say, not over-promis[ing]” are some of the practices that pave the way for flexibility both on the part of individuals wanting to get involved as well as for the group that can benefit from new and renewed energies.

If we are to grow our movements in a sustainable way, the effort of adjustment and inclusion needs to happen at both ends: individuals need to bring their own chairs and tend to their needs, and group members need to get up to move their chairs

While the onus of major aspects like child-care facilities or anti-oppressive practices may be on the group as a whole, many folks adapt their own ways of working and being that facilitate their involvement in the cause that is dear to their hearts.

Sattar, for example, chose to adjust her practices and change jobs to find the rhythm and the hours that fit her ability to stay involved in activism.   

“[Initially], I, as a young professional with no children, opted for weekend and [evening] actions to better align with my full-time job. However, the growing sense of burnout compelled me to re-evaluate the sustainability of a 9 to 5 routine,” she says. “Consequently, I transitioned to a role in the social work sector that offered shifts [...] working evenings, afternoons, or nights and allowing me to scale up or scale down my hours to do either full- or part-time work.” 

Culture shift

If we are to grow our movements in a sustainable way, the effort of adjustment and inclusion needs to happen at both ends: individuals need to bring their own chairs and tend to their needs, and group members need to get up to move their chairs so there’s more room – which involves adaptation of both structure and culture. Things like periodic debriefs may allow for some collective reflections as to where groups are stuck and how they can stretch toward collective growth and harness collective power.

Inertia can cause us to remain in our comfort zones, which keeps us from noticing when dynamics of power and privilege are at play. Learning how to examine these requires intentionality.

Ultimately, it’s in the interest of everyone to make room for the additional chairs. Movements which include people who were previously involved, have institutional memory, and understand organizational culture is a win for everyone. Adapting to their new realities requires work and care, but it’s worth it for everyone involved to grow our movement capacity exponentially.

* Kristine is a pseudonym used for privacy concerns.