This book is about how to cultivate impact networks that enable diverse groups of people to connect, coordinate, and collaborate within and across organizations to do more together than is possible alone.
- Location 85
-

Collaborative networks may be called many things: associations, alliances, coalitions, collaborations, collective impact initiatives, consortia, and more.
- Location 93
- collaborative networks,
- [note::"Interested in collaborative networks" - I'd like to include this in my website bio/mission statement"]

Monitor Institute, the social sector wing of a global management consulting firm.
- Location 101
-

Building Smart Communities through Network Weaving, by Valdis Krebs and June Holley, a white paper about how we can strengthen our communities by recognizing and cultivating the networks of connections that underlie them.
- Location 105
-

handbook Net Gains, by Peter Plastrik and Madeleine Taylor, an early resource for network builders seeking social change.
- Location 107
-

RE-AMP Network, a massive collaboration of more than one hundred organizations working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the midwestern United States;1
- Location 108
-

We have been fortunate to partner with more than fifty different impact networks in the past ten years, and through these experiences we started to notice consistent patterns among networks, even when their context and focus varied widely. While the whys and whats were unique to each network, the hows—the principles and processes used to create them—were quite consistent.
- Location 138
-

The Cynefin framework is helpful in differentiating simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic issues:2 Simple issues can be definitively solved, with a clear beginning and end, such as cooking a meal. Complicated issues involve many moving parts, but they can be defined and understood. They are technical in nature, with predictable solutions that can be implemented effectively by people with the right expertise.3 Planning and implementing the logistical operations for an event is complicated but not complex. Complex issues are difficult to define, as they have no clear beginning or end. They also have no readily apparent solution, and we cannot accurately predict the path ahead. Consequently, we have to be able to adapt to changing circumstances and modify strategies as we learn what works and what does not. An example of a complex challenge is equitably eliminating greenhouse gas emissions across a large region. We will return to this issue later. Chaotic issues, like their complex counterparts, cannot be accurately predicted or controlled. They are also turbulent, dangerous, and rapidly evolving. Chaotic situations—such as a humanitarian disaster—often require that we act quickly to save lives or tend to emergencies before working to establish some sense of order. They call for a rapid response to distribute information and resources to where they are needed most, before addressing the underlying issues.
- Location 171
-

Most people love the idea of collaboration . . . as long as it promises to do exactly what they want it to do. But that is not how collaboration works. Collaboration (as we talk about it) is not forced or coerced. It requires you to give up control. And because it’s not predetermined, it requires you to give up certainty.
- Location 197
-

We need collaborative structures that are flexible enough to shift on a moment’s notice, that are resilient enough to withstand turbulence and disruption, and that bring people together as equals to share leadership and decision-making.
- Location 204
-

RE-AMP Network, a collection of more than 140 organizations and foundations working across sectors to equitably eliminate greenhouse gas emissions across nine midwestern states by 2050.
- Location 227
-
- [note::In what ways do they organize themselves?]

100Kin10 is a massive collaborative effort that is bringing together more than three hundred academic institutions, nonprofits, foundations, businesses, and government agencies to train and support one hundred thousand science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) teachers across the United States in ten years.
- Location 231
-
- [note::In what ways do they organize themselves?]

Justice in Motion Defender Network is a collection of human rights defenders and organizations in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua that have joined together to help migrants quickly obtain legal assistance across borders.
- Location 235
-
- [note::In what ways do they organize themselves?]

the Clean Electronics Production Network (CEPN). CEPN brings together many of the world’s top technology suppliers and brands with labor and environmental advocates, governments, and other leading experts to move toward elimination of workers’ exposure to toxic chemicals in electronics production.
- Location 239
-
- [note::In what ways do they organize themselves?]

Impact networks build on the life force of community—shared principles, resilience, self-organization, and trust—while leveraging the advantages of an effective organization, including a common aim, an operational backbone, and a bias for action. Through this unique blend of qualities, impact networks increase the flow of information, reduce waste, and align strategies across entire systems—all while liberating the energy of multiple actors operating at a variety of scales.
- Location 248
-

You can find all these and more in the Converge Network Toolkit, hosted at converge.net. There you will find a library of free tools and facilitation guides, color versions of the network maps contained in this book, invitations to learning experiences, and opportunities to connect and share with other network leaders.
- Location 259
-

Part 1, “Working Through Networks,” provides an overview of what networks are and how they work. Chapter 1, “The Web of Change,” introduces the different forms of impact networks and explores two case studies illustrating how networks develop and grow their impact over time. Chapter 2, “The Network Mindset,” defines the core tenets of the network approach, how networks and hierarchies are distinct yet related, and how working through networks changes the way we think of leadership and strategy. Chapter 3, “Making Networks Work,” expands further on the primary forms of impact networks, with diagrams explaining how they are structured. It also summarizes the process of cultivating impact networks, outlining five core activities that are expanded in detail in part 2. Chapter 4, “Network Leadership,” describes four network leadership roles along with four fundamental principles of network leadership: foster self-organization, promote emergence, embrace change, and hold dynamic tensions. Part 2, “Cultivating Impact Networks,” dives deeply into five core activities of impact networks, offering a practical guide for network leaders. Chapter 5, “Clarify Purpose and Principles,” describes how to catalyze a new impact network, find common purpose, and define shared principles to guide networks as they evolve. Chapter 6, “Convene the People,” explores who to bring together and offers key considerations for designing and facilitating transformative network gatherings. Chapter 7, “Cultivate Trust,” provides practices for weaving connections, deepening trust, and holding courageous conversations. Chapter 8, “Coordinate Actions” contains tactics for accelerating the flow of information across a network, practicing reciprocity, and responding to moments of crisis. Chapter 9, “Collaborate for Systems Change,” describes practices for making sense of a system and identifying high-potential areas for action. It also presents pathways for catalyzing systemic change, including shifting social norms and growing a movement. Chapter 10, “The Enabling Infrastructure,” concludes the body of the book with practical advice on how to structure an impact network, how to craft agreements for participation, how to make decisions collectively, how to embed evaluation to generate key learnings that will inform the network’s development, and how to resource networks, including pivotal practices for network funders.
- Location 263
-
- [note::Chapter topics]

Impact networks take three primary forms: learning networks, action networks, and movement networks. Each form is best suited for a particular function. Learning networks are focused on connection and learning. They are formed to facilitate the flow of information or knowledge to advance collective learning on a particular issue. Action networks are focused on connection, learning, and action. They are formed to facilitate connection and learning in service of coordinated action. Movement networks link many other learning and action networks together, creating a network-of-networks. While they often function much like a learning or action network at their core, movement networks also facilitate information sharing and coordinate actions among multiple different networks for a common aim.
- Location 307
-

Relationships are at the heart of everything that impact networks accomplish. From two decades of research on networks and other multistakeholder collaborations, Jane Wei-Skillern of the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, finds that “the single most important factor behind all successful collaborations is trust-based relationships among participants. Many collaborative efforts ultimately fail to reach their full potential because they lack a strong relational foundation.”11
- Location 441
-

In the absence of relationships, effective collaboration is not possible.
- Location 449
-

The network mindset is captured most succinctly by four principles championed by Jane Wei-Skillern.3 Leaders who have adopted a network mindset focus on the following: • Scaling impact, not growing their organization or function • Being part of an interconnected system, not the center of it • Sharing leadership and credit with peers, not hoarding power or trying to be a hero • Building trust-based relationships, not systems of control
- Location 498
-

hierarchical structures are a poor choice for multistakeholder collaborations. By holding on to control, the people at the top of hierarchies limit the self-organizing potential of the rest of the system. By maintaining a rigid structure that ranks some people over others, hierarchies create unequal access to information and power, which erodes trust. And in collaborative environments, there is often no central authority or shared governing body capable of directing the many diverse stakeholder groups involved. Or worse, there is a single point of command whose response imposes too much bureaucracy and fails to incorporate the diverse perspectives required to navigate complexity.
- Location 530
-
- [note::Shortcomings of hierarchical structures. What are the strengths? Decision-making agility?]

In a heterarchy, formal power and decision-making is distributed—nobody has a baked-in, structural advantage over others. At the same time, some people may have more influence than others on specific issues based on their knowledge, experience, or role.
- Location 577
-

Self-organizing happens when people are invited to notice and act on opportunities based on their own judgment. When people are free to try new things, initiate experiments, and connect and collaborate with others from across the system, networks become “leader-ful.”10
- Location 628
-

self-organizing potential of a network is fostered by servant leaders (to borrow a term coined by Robert Greenleaf11) who cultivate the conditions for connection, learning, and action to arise.
- Location 636
-

(the process of determining participation criteria is known as bounding a network
- Location 672
-

Participants may also form learning circles, gathering together to hold conversations, share knowledge, and collect information on a specific topic related to the network’s purpose.
- Location 673
-

Action networks have been called many things, including alliances, coalitions, collective impact initiatives, consortiums, innovation networks, and more.
- Location 698
-

The work of cultivating and sustaining impact networks involves five core activities. For ease of reference, they are referred to as the “Five Cs”: • Clarify purpose and principles • Convene the people • Cultivate trust • Coordinate actions • Collaborate for systems change
- Location 726
-

Due to their self-organizing nature, impact networks cannot be controlled. They can, however, be oriented toward a shared purpose. This is how they stay coherent even as they grow. Purpose is “the invisible leader,” writes Samantha Slade, author of Going Horizontal.
- Location 740
-

Although it is widely accepted that trusting relationships are beneficial when it comes to collaboration, the common assumption is that trust is a by-product of other activities and that it takes a long time to develop. Rather than deliberately building trust, the norm is to focus on getting to action and letting relationships develop naturally over time. However, we have consistently found that trust is the single most important factor behind successful impact networks; networks move at the speed of trust.4 Therefore, trust should be deliberately nurtured from the outset of a network’s development.
- Location 764
-

The puzzle metaphor exemplifies three conditions that make a network approach so valuable: • Local knowledge: People are engaged with different parts of the system, with expertise in their piece of the puzzle. • Separation: People are disconnected and unable or unwilling to share knowledge and resources with one another. • Complexity: The system is more complex than anyone can grasp on their own. Only by bringing the pieces together can groups make sense of the whole puzzle.
- Location 784
-
- [note::Why networks matter]

To answer this question, it’s helpful to think of networks as like a garden. Unlike machines, which can be built to exact specifications, gardens cannot be forced to grow in a certain way. No two gardens are exactly the same, because every plant grows in relationship with its neighbors, soil, and climate. It’s also not possible to grow a garden overnight: it takes time for the plants to develop, no matter how much attention you give them.
- Location 794
-
- [note::Same analogy used in "Cultivating Community"]

Network leadership is rooted in trusting relationships, collaboration, and shared power; it is adaptive, facilitative, and grounded in the wisdom of living systems. Network leadership is also distributed—anyone can demonstrate network leadership, from wherever they are, in many different ways. This more inclusive understanding of leadership inspires self-organization and provides a source of creative potential that makes networks such a powerful vehicle for innovation and change.
- Location 815
-
- [note::Characteristics of network leadership.]

we see four primary leadership roles that appear at different moments in a network’s life cycle: catalyzing, facilitation, weaving, and coordination: • Catalyzing is the art of crafting a vision and inspiring action. Catalysts are particularly instrumental in forming new networks: they bring people together for the first time to explore the potential and get the effort off the ground. Once a network is launched, catalyzing continues to be needed to organize new project teams, raise resources, and foster new opportunities to expand the network’s impact. • Facilitation is about guiding participants through group processes to find common ground and collaborate with one another. Facilitators design and lead convenings, hold space for different points of view, and help conversations flow. • Weaving involves fostering new connections and deepening relationships. Weavers engage with participants to gather input, introduce participants to each other to inspire self-organization, and build bridges with new communities to help the network grow. • Coordination is the work of organizing the network’s internal systems and structures to enable participants to share information and advance collective work. Coordinators establish and maintain network operations, support knowledge management, and assist network teams.
- Location 830
-
- [note::I'd like to diagram this.]

Following are four principles of network leadership we have experienced and observed across impact networks at every scale: • Foster self-organization • Promote emergence • Embrace change • Hold dynamic tensions
- Location 851
-

One of the primary responsibilities of network leaders, then, is to cultivate the conditions for greater levels of self-organization to arise. Network leaders have the humility to step back and follow the lead of others. In Converge we follow the maxim of the Enspiral network: “No one should lead all the time, and everyone should lead some of the time.”5 This is what distributed leadership is all about.
- Location 880
-

Management theorist Henry Mintzberg writes that all strategy is both deliberate and emergent.7 Deliberate strategies set their sights on accomplishing a series of planned actions to realize a set of well-defined outcomes. At the same time, strategy also tends to emerge over time as planned activities collide with reality and are then adapted to accommodate a changing experience. Emergent approaches to strategy recognize that we simply cannot predict the future, and that it is often necessary—particularly in the face of complexity—to learn your way into what needs to be done and how to do it.
- Location 892
-

Or as E. L. Doctorow said about the process of writing a book, “It’s like driving a car at night. You never see further than your headlights, but you can make the whole trip that way.”8
- Location 898
-
- [note::Useful analogy for agile project management or network leadership]

As activist and educator Grace Lee Boggs has said, “In this exquisitely connected world, it’s never a question of ‘critical mass.’ It’s always about critical connections.”
- Location 918
-

We prefer to use the term resilience, defined by the Stockholm Resilience Center as “the capacity of a system, be it an individual, a forest, a city or an economy, to deal with change and continue to develop.”15 Resilience is a measure of how well a system can absorb shocks and use disturbances to spur renewal and innovation.
- Location 937
-

Two approaches for increasing a network’s resilience are to decentralize connections and create redundancies.
- Location 942
-

Creating redundancies in networks through wide bridges allows resources and information to continue flowing even when certain individuals are unresponsive or unavailable.
- Location 969
-

As impact networks evolve, they are bound to face a number of dynamic tensions: “dynamic” because they are always in flux, “tensions” to signify a relationship between ideas or qualities with seemingly conflicting demands or implications. If managed effectively, these tensions, also known as polarities, can be a powerful source of energy. Having “no tension in a system signifies no aliveness, no learning, no evolution,” write Giles Hutchins and Laura Storm in Regenerative Leadership.
- Location 971
-
- [note::Where there is no conflict, there is no innovation.
First time coming across this topic - might have to engage more.]

different tensions could arise as networks develop, but we have seen six in particular that show up time and time again: • Building trust and taking action • Participation and pace • Self-interest and shared interest • The parts and the whole • Planning and emergence • Divergence and convergence
- Location 975
-

Dynamic tensions aren’t problems to be solved; they are polarities to be aware of, integrated, and held with care throughout the life cycle of a network.
- Location 990
-

altruistic concerns alone are rarely enough to justify participants’ continued engagement in a network, given busy schedules and competing priorities. For people to continue participating over the long term, the network will also need to advance their self-interests in some way—for instance, by facilitating valuable connections, generating new learnings, or advancing individual and organizational priorities.
- Location 1012
-

“Deliberate process, emergent results.”
- Location 1035
-

FIGURE 4.2. Divergence (expressing different perspectives) allows for convergence (bringing ideas together), which leads to emergence (discovering new possibilities).
- Location 1050
-

To quote the prolific writer Seth Godin, “You are more prepared than you realize. You probably aren’t ready, and you can’t be ready, not if you’re doing something worthwhile.”20
- Location 1066
-

Make Sense of the System, and Build on What Already Exists Start by doing your homework to understand what’s really going on. This means having conversations with lots of different people who are engaged in the issue. Where is there common ground? Where is there disagreement? Is there a shared purpose that can bring people together? Do the people doing the work see the need or opportunity for greater connectivity and collaboration? Examine the work through an equity lens. Why is the system the way it is? Who has power, and who doesn’t? What needs to be centered in this work? Which people and perspectives are historically or currently underrepresented or marginalized?
- Location 1113
-

Sharing personal motivations also helps to humanize participants when they are used to seeing each other in a purely professional context. One particular exercise we use to accomplish this is called Purpose Stands. In this exercise, each participant delivers a one-minute timed speech that answers a central question: Why do I do what I do? This question reveals a person’s mission in the world, which may or may not align with the responsibilities of their day job. These one-minute speeches don’t focus on the practical what but on the personal why that defines one’s work. The full instructions for leading Purpose Stands can be found online in the Converge Network Toolkit (visit converge.net to access this and other tools referenced in the pages ahead).
- Location 1213
-

After more time for ideation, participants were asked to consider a shortened time horizon: “For that fifty-year vision to happen, where do we have to be in twenty-five years?” With each step, participants were challenged to bring their vision closer and closer to the present day, identifying potential strategies that could be transformational over the long term. Working backward in time, people were asked, “Where do we have to be in two years?” and finally, “Where do we have to be, right now?”
- Location 1262
-
- [note::This seems like a useful exercise - "chronological ideation"]

Charters typically include context for why the network was formed, the network’s purpose and principles, and a high-level summary of who is involved. Charters may also include the network’s priorities or focus areas. Additional operating agreements can be captured in a corresponding document, including governance and decision-making processes, operational structure, and participation agreements (see chapter 10 for more information on establishing participation agreements). Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to access a Network Charter Template containing section headings, sample content, and prompts for developing a charter.
- Location 1331
-

The world doesn’t change one person at a time. It changes as networks of relationships form among people who discover they share a common cause and vision of what’s possible. —MARGARET WHEATLEY AND DEBORAH FRIEZE, “Using Emergence to Take Social Innovations to Scale”
- Location 1375
-

People often join a network because they are inspired by its purpose, but they stay because of who is involved. Who is part of a network may be just as important, if not more important, than why the network exists.
- Location 1378
-
- [note::"Start with Who"]

writes Vu Le, author of the popular Nonprofit AF blog. “Marginalized people and communities don’t have the same access to relationships: Relationships are not equitably distributed.”3 Therefore, one important step that network leaders—and catalysts in particular—can take to avoid replicating patterns of inequity is to center people who are affected by the issue at hand, as well as those who typically are excluded from networks—from the very beginning. This doesn’t mean “letting them participate,” it means listening and following their leadership.
- Location 1401
-

“the network effect” tells us that networks become more valuable as more people are connected to them.5 But this phenomenon holds up only to a point. Human and biological networks (like the networks of neurons in our brains) in particular have been shown to have a “breakpoint,” above which the network effect no longer rings true. This is the point at which further growth is no longer beneficial and the network begins a pruning process, shrinking until it reaches an equilibrium—the ideal size for the network at that time. Ultimately, as Jeff Stibel, author of Breakpoint, attests, the quality of a network’s connections is much more important than its size.
- Location 1418
-

We have found that most groups are able to hold a single conversation with up to about twenty-four people, though it requires a thoughtful design, well-planned room setup, and skilled facilitation. Other experts in the field agree: “12 is large enough to offer a diversity of opinion and large enough that it allows for a certain quotient of mystery and intrigue, of constructive unfamiliarity,” writes Priya Parker in The Art of Gathering.
- Location 1425
-

adrienne maree brown uses a guideline that the amount of time needed for a meaningful full-group conversation is about five minutes per person.8 Given that the average person can only pay attention for about 90 to 120 minutes at a time before their eyes completely glaze over,9 a group of twenty-four people at five minutes each brings you right up to the upper limit.
- Location 1429
-

However, networks that grow too large may lose their sense of intimacy and take too many resources to sustain. “If inclusion is the purpose and identity of the gathering, a porous boundary is fine, even perhaps necessary,” writes Parker. “But gatherings with many other, wholly admirable purposes can suffer from over-inclusion.” If you’re unsure how to proceed, ask yourself, “Who is this network for first?”
- Location 1443
-

And an assortment of in-person and online activities provide spaces for people to engage around shared interests, such as network calls and webinars, site visits, learning journeys, meals organized around a conversation topic, professional development opportunities, and peer assists. Network leaders are always looking for opportunities to facilitate connection and accelerate the flow of information.
- Location 1449
-
- [note::Ideas for facilitating connection]

But we are convinced that the design—including agenda and structure—is even more responsible for a convening’s ultimate success. Though every convening should be customized to fit the particular context of the network, we have learned a few key lessons that inform each one of our designs: • Put relationships first • Embrace the magic of small groups • Focus on the framing questions • Cultivate deeper experiences • Incorporate space • Infuse energy into the network
- Location 1478
-

Far too many meetings are designed primarily around content. But the most valuable resource at any gathering is the people who attend. The rare opportunity of having people together at one time is too often wasted with presentations that could be recorded and broadcast online instead. We recommend moving far away from the “sage on the stage” approach, where so-called experts are the only ones talking and everyone else is passively listening. Recognize that everyone in the room is an expert about something. Everyone has something to contribute. Draw on the wisdom of the crowd, and create spaces where people are regularly interacting with one another, learning from one another, and finding ways to support each other’s work.
- Location 1490
-
- [note::YES. Lol'd at "sage on a stage".]

For people to engage most fully, they need to be in small enough groups that they can see and interact with each other simulta neously. Small groups are uniquely powerful as sites of practice; they function as fractals, microcosms of the whole. As Peter Block writes, “The small group is the unit of transformation and the container for the experience of belonging.”12
- Location 1496
-

As a general guideline, think of the full group as a place for framing and summarizing, and use small groups to dig into content and discussions.
- Location 1500
-
- [note::Useful dilution]

Getting the framing questions right is the key to this equation. The right questions help groups focus their attention on what matters most. Otherwise, conversations might range widely from group to group, creating a lack of cohesion across the convening. We spend as much time in our designs crafting thoughtful framing questions as anything else. The best questions get to the heart of the matter. They invite people to bring their own meaning forward, based on their own experiences. They have an edge that creates palpable energy when people offer their response. Often the most important piece of the design is to get the questions right, put them in the right sequence, and then pair each question with a group size and amount of time to do it justice.
- Location 1502
-

One of our favorite techniques is to rotate people through a series of quick pairs or small groups with a set of framing questions. At the beginning of a session, questions such as “Why does this work matter to you?” and “What are your hopes for our time today?” help to set the context for the work ahead. At the end of a session, questions like “What is something important you learned at this convening?” and “What is one thing we absolutely must keep in mind moving forward?” provide closure to the gathering. Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to access a list of our favorite Framing Questions for Small Group Conversations.
- Location 1508
-

As you plan out your convening, keep the following considerations in mind: First, things will almost always take longer than you expect. The more people there are, the longer things will take. Introductions will run long, conversations will run long, and breaks will most certainly run long. If they don’t, that’s great! You’ve found yourself a few extra minutes. But to be safe, assume that nearly every part of the agenda will require more time than you initially imagined, and plan accordingly. Second, conversations need space to breathe. Space for conflict, space for tension, space for people to introduce new perspectives. Create enough space so that every person who wants to speak their mind can do so, especially the introverts and people who are usually on the margins of conversations. Rushing a conversation to stay on time is an easy way to shut down creative thinking and frustrate a group. Few things are more annoying than a facilitator cutting off a conversation just as it was getting to the heart of the matter. Third, magic happens in unstructured time. Provide long breaks that allow participants to reflect and recharge. And create social spaces where participants can informally connect and have the conversations they need to have—on their own terms and in their own time. On countless occasions, we’ve seen the most memorable, productive, hilarious, and intimate moments of the day happen after the formal agenda has concluded.
- Location 1527
-

Alternate between activities that center the head (conceptual), the heart (relational), and the hands (actionable). Create time for both divergence and convergence. Gather both in the large group and in small groups. Shift back and forth between moments of high intensity and low intensity, balancing interactive activities with periods of reflection and stillness.
- Location 1546
-

In nearly every single one of the convenings I’ve been a part of, the agenda has evolved significantly as we progressed through the day. A huge part of embracing the emergent nature of networks is to be prepared to follow the energy of participants and adapt in real time during facilitation, rather than sticking steadfastly to an agenda that is rapidly becoming obsolete.
- Location 1555
-

The crux of good facilitation, according to Adam Kahane, author of Facilitating Breakthrough, is not to get people to work together, but to remove the obstacles to connection and collaboration—obstacles like disconnection, debilitating conflict, and other forms of “stuckness.”13 After all, the Latin translation of the word facilitate is “to make easier.” Picture a river: while you can’t push a river to move in a certain direction, you can remove rocks and logs impeding its path to allow the water to flow by itself. Good facilitators do not force things forward; they hold space for all points of view to be acknowledged while helping the conversation to flow.
- Location 1570
-
- [note::Facilitation is about removing obstacles, like taking rocks out of a stream. What other analogies might there be for facilitation?]

As with any facilitation, it’s important to set the context for the gathering, ask good questions, and invite divergent perspectives. Facilitators also need to be able to acknowledge and disrupt harmful power dynamics to ensure that people have maximum agency to contribute.
- Location 1576
-
- [note::This is probably the hardest but most important part of facilitation - addressing behavior that "kills the vibe" and influences others to not contribute as much as they otherwise would.]

Invite divergence
- Location 1587
-
- [note::This is something I could do more of, especially at EA events where there's an incentive to support "standard" EA ways of thinking.]

There will inevitably be moments in network convenings when the temperature in the room starts to rise. These are times when the conversation gets tense, people feel on edge, and nobody wants to openly acknowledge it. At this moment, many people will be tempted to retreat into what Robert Solomon and Fernando Flores call “cordial hypocrisy”—nice, polite conversations where real issues are swept under the rug.15 The facilitator’s role here is to acknowledge what’s happening, invite people to take a breath, and then hold space so that the real issues can be worked through. Acknowledging what is happening can take the sting out of it, reducing the anxiety that the discomfort brings. Reminding people to stay present in the conversation may help them avoid falling into a stress response of “fight, flight, or freeze.” These are the moments of truth in networks, the times when groups can either fall back into what’s comfortable or sit in the tension long enough to acknowledge unspoken realities and address critical issues.
- Location 1606
-
- [note::Could do this a lot more - as a person with a highly avoidant attachment style, I tend to automatically try to ignore or "smooth things over" when the temperature of a conversation rises. I need to be better about acknowledging my observations and allowing time for things to cool down ("I'm noticing the temperature of this conversation rise and would like us all to take a moment and process how we're feeling")]

As a facilitator, instead of avoiding the disruption, turn to that person with your full attention and ask them to elaborate. Then, check to see if others feel similarly. If nobody does, you still need to validate that person’s perspective. It doesn’t matter if you agree or disagree with their opinion; what matters is making the room a safe place for different perspectives to be shared and honored.
- Location 1618
-
- [note::There's a kind of tension between inviting divergence and maintaining a psychologically safe discussion space. Divergent thinking encourages sharing perspectives that not everyone may agree with.]

If you become stuck when something is going on in the room and you’re not sure what to do, put your faith in small groups or pairs. Quickly break the participants into groups of two to four, and ask them to discuss what’s happening in the room and what they think needs to happen next. Reflections can then be shared in the full group, which may give you a clue as to how to proceed (this might be a great time for a break as you quickly redesign the agenda!). This is one of Peter Block’s favorite tactics. “In doing this,” he writes, “we ask the community to take responsibility for the success of this gathering and express faith in their goodwill, even if they are frustrated with what is happening. . . . Doing this is an acknowledgment that critical wisdom resides in the community.”17
- Location 1626
-
- [note::Huh - interesting meta-facilitation technique here. Might be useful.]

The act of facilitating is an act of exercising power. Network facilitators use that power thoughtfully to make the gathering as welcoming, equitable, and open to shared leadership as possible.
- Location 1643
-

When facilitators are too passive, they fail to fulfill some of the critical responsibilities of the role. “Far from purging a gathering of power,” passivity creates a power vacuum that others can fill “in a manner inconsistent with your gathering’s purpose,” writes Priya Parker.19 Instead, we recommend practicing what Parker calls “generous authority”: lead the meeting confidently but also with humility, owning the power you’ve been entrusted with while using that power in service to others and to the network as a whole.
- Location 1648
-
- [note::"Generous authority" - A method of leading marked by kindness, agency, and equitable distribution of power.]

In healthy networks, power is not used over or against others to force a decision or to gain superior status. Instead, power is used with and among, in support of others and in the pursuit of a common purpose. Power is also accessed within, such that participants feel able to speak, act, and show up as their whole selves.
- Location 1658
-
- [note::Reminds me of "design with, not for" in the Being a Changemaker book.]

“Getting out from under dominant power relations and mastering power dynamics is perhaps the most essential skill for change agents across all sectors seeking to ignite positive change in the world,” asserts Cyndi Suarez in The Power Manual.20
- Location 1668
-
- [note::Good food for thought. What are the most effective ways of "getting out from under power relations?"]

“Power is not a finite pie,” write Cynthia Silva Parker, Kelly Bates, and Curtis Ogden of the Interaction Institute for Social Change. “Rather, it can be infinite, expanded, and shared among people and leaders.”21
- Location 1673
-

Some tips for attending to power dynamics in networks follow, building upon the work of Parker, Bates, and Ogden:22 • Co-create group agreements at the outset of the network’s development. Share responsibility with the group for monitoring agreements and periodically making updates (group agreements are described in more detail in the following chapter). • Ensure accessibility in all its forms, including visual, auditory, language, physical, and technological. Make sure that everyone has the information, resources, and space they need to contribute. • Include funders as participants, not as hosts or designers. In gatherings with significant organizational dynamics, you can also try removing professional affiliations from nametags. People can always figure out where they work later. Let them connect as individuals first. • Normalize discussion and acknowledgment of power. Power exists in all groups, whether or not you talk about it, and avoiding the issue creates a barrier to trust. Acknowledge power dynamics openly in the network, and think together about what issues of power might play out and how the network will work to resolve them. • Notice if certain people are always the first to speak. Invite others to speak up if they feel moved to do so. During breaks, check in with those who have talked the most to encourage them to make space for others, as well as those who have been the quietest to see if there is anything they want to share but have not yet been able to, or if there is something you can do as a facilitator to support them. • Have multiple facilitators at network convenings to better observe the room and notice the group’s patterns and energy. Likewise, designate a specific person to take notes so that the primary facilitator is able to fully direct their attention to those in the room. • Own your mistakes. When you make a misstep as a facilitator, correct it as soon as possible. Showing your openness to feedback contributes to a safe space for all.
- Location 1675
-

Our tendency, in the absence of trust, is to believe that our assumptions and projections are valid, that we know what others are thinking and feeling without asking them, and that maybe we are the only sane person in the room. Trust increases the likelihood that participants will listen with care, try on new perspectives, and engage with people they might consider to be very different from themselves.
- Location 1718
-
- [note::*and we know what others KNOW and can CONTRIBUTE]

June Holley, author of Network Weaver Handbook, defines network weavers as those who explicitly work to make the networks around them healthier and more inclusive “by helping people identify their interests and challenges, connecting people strategically where there’s potential for mutual benefit, and serving as a catalyst” of self-organization.4
- Location 1745
-

Defining a regular cadence of connection will go a long way toward maintaining a consistent practice of weaving. Sharon Farrell, a leader of the California Landscape Stewardship Network, has adopted the habit of holding time on her calendar on two days each week to call network participants she hasn’t spoken with in a while: “I’m a firm believer that if you create time for conversation, one that is an exchange and not just directed in one way, trust begins to build,” says Farrell.5
- Location 1760
-
- [note::I NEVER do this, but I'd like to.]

A helpful strategy in large networks is to split up the list of participants between multiple weavers. This ensures that each participant has a designated person they can contact at any time with questions or concerns. Each member of the Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network has a specific point person (called their “network liaison”) who is responsible for checking in with them at least every few months and who they can reach out to at any time. “We rely on this practice as an important feedback loop for sensing in a complex domain,” shares Michelle Medley-Daniel, a leader and liaison in the network. “We adapt network values and offerings based on member feedback, and also adapt our understanding of the complex fire systems and ways to change them based on the information we get through these trusted relationships.”6
- Location 1768
-

There are four primary ingredients that increase the likelihood that people will choose to trust one another, despite all the uncertainty that relationships bring:9 • Reliability • Openness • Care • Appreciation
- Location 1795
-

When people help each other by offering support or contributing to a project, it builds a foundation of goodwill. And when people prove their reliability time and time again by continuing to show up, stick around, and follow through, trust grows to a level of resilience that can withstand significant disruption.
- Location 1801
-
- [note::Group resilience is built through trust]

Without space for “no,” there is no weight behind “yes.”
- Location 1805
-

In the absence of openness, our true emotions and opinions are often guarded or hidden under a professional mask. We also remain closed to new information, stubbornly holding on to past beliefs and closing off new possibilities.
- Location 1811
-

By being open, we acknowledge interdependence and invite reciprocity. It’s sometimes assumed that being open with one another comes later, after trust has been developed, but openness is also a great catalyst of trust.
- Location 1813
-

At an individual level, sharing appreciations also helps to get people out of their heads and into a heart-centered space, creating room for deeper connections to form. This is why we often have people offer appreciations at the end of a convening, asking them to reflect on “who or what are you appreciating right now?” Sharing appreciations in this way serves to reinforce the prosocial behaviors that the network wants to promote.
- Location 1861
-

We typically only get to see each other’s external context: what people look like, what they say or do, their title and organization, and their online persona. But in order to form a deeper connection with other people, it is necessary to take the time to get to know their internal context: the why behind their actions, their underlying values and motivations, and the experiences that make them who they are.
- Location 1866
-
- [note::Internal v.s. External Context]

In this exercise, participants are evenly distributed into groups of three to five people. They are then asked to sit facing each other and invited to recount a life experience that made them who they are. The particular framing question can be adapted to fit the context. For example, people might be asked to share the story of a particular period of their life, the story of a mentor who had a big influence on them, or the story of how they came to do the work they’re doing today. Each person has a specific amount of time to tell their story, during which they will be the only one speaking (we usually provide four to seven minutes per story, depending on how much time we have for the exercise). We challenge participants to go as deep as they can without feeling like they’re oversharing. Then, for the next two minutes, listeners offer their reflections on that story—what resonated with them, what surprised them, and what stood out. Once the first person has finished telling their story and received feedback from their group, the next person tells their story, and the process continues. In total, the exercise takes about 45 minutes. You can access the full instructions for True Stories in the Converge Network Toolkit.
- Location 1879
-
- [note::True Stories Exercise]

One important consideration in choosing a storytelling activity, as noted above, is to remember that some participants have experienced significant trauma and oppression in their lives. As changemakers and facilitators, we must balance the desire to promote openness among participants with the potential for triggering trauma. In the containers we create, participants always have the option to pass and to choose how deep they go in sharing a personal story.
- Location 1888
-
- [note::This is something I am prediposed to not acknowledge]

The experience of understanding more about another person’s inner context through empathetic listening, and simultaneously the experience of being fully heard, bonds people together like almost nothing else.
- Location 1900
-

Generative conflict—conflict that is constructive rather than destructive—is central to progress. Great teams, relationships, organizations, and networks create a culture of respect that allows people to safely express disagreement.
- Location 1905
- conflict,
- [note::"Generative Conflict" - hadn't heard of this term until now. I like it.]

As the writer, poet, and activist James Baldwin understood, “Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced.”25
- Location 1930
-
- [note::Love this quote! New to me. Reminds me of "we do things not because they are easy but because they are hard". I like that this speaks directly to the necessity of persevering through change, which may seem impossible.]

To generate a list of potential agreements, consider asking participants to reflect on the following question: “What do you need from the people in this group for you to be able to participate fully?”26 Start by providing time for personal reflection, and then invite participants to share their thoughts, first in small groups and then in the full group. People might offer statements like “I need to know that the things I share will be kept confidential.” A corresponding group agreement around confidentiality might be, “Take the lesson, leave the details.” Others might say that they have a hard time sitting for long periods of time and need to be able to take breaks. A corresponding group agreement might be, “Practice self-care.”
- Location 1934
-
- [note::Generating ideas for group agreements.]

Consider building on an existing collection of group guidelines that have worked well in multicultural settings, such as the Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing,27 conversation guidelines for brave spaces,28 the Living Room Conversations agreements,29 or VISIONS, Inc.’s guidelines for effective cross-cultural dialogue.30 With group agreements, participants are usually more comfortable raising new perspectives, disagreeing with one another, and engaging in the kind of generative conflict that is necessary for good decision-making. Visit the Converge Network Toolkit for a list of our favorite Group Agreements for Networks.
- Location 1940
-

It’s good practice to check in regularly on how well group agreements have been attended to and to provide opportunities for participants to reflect on which group agreements they may want to commit to practicing further. For instance, as the gathering is getting started, you might ask participants to read through the group agreements and pick one in particular that they’d like to lean into over the course of the day. Then, at the end of the day, you can invite them to share in pairs how it went and what they will carry forward from the experience. Similarly, you can prompt the network to reflect as a whole on which agreements it is particularly good at incorporating and which agreements would benefit from greater attention.
- Location 1947
-
- [note::This seems super important - group norms are useless if members of the group feel like they aren't respected.]

An orientation toward fear leads to an exploitative and degenerative system. Fear of the unknown prompts people to create rigid rules and procedures in an attempt to establish as much certainty and control as possible.
- Location 1961
-
- [note::I think fear is what cause managers to micro-manage their employees - will they do the task or carry out the project in the way I envision?
I believe this fear is rooted in inadequacies related to being able to set clear expectations for employees and providing them with the feedback they need to course correct.
You hired them, dummy. Why don't you trust them? Most of the time, it's a manager issue, not an employee issue.]

It’s common for people to want to jump immediately into ambitious plans to change the system. In their eagerness to “get to action,” they launch new projects before building on the work that’s already underway. And when they encounter inevitable challenges or failures, they become demoralized, and their enthusiasm for the network fades. When this happens, participants might question whether the time they’re putting into the network is worth their while, and many will choose to disengage. As a result, the network’s full potential is abandoned before it has a chance to mature.
- Location 1986
-
- [note::Too real]

even if you have ambitions of forming an action network, start by cultivating a robust learning network. After all, the qualities of learning networks are foundational to action networks as well. A key aspect of developing a learning network, and therefore any impact network, is to accelerate the flow of information between participants and foster a culture of reciprocity. In doing so, people begin to coordinate their actions with one another: sharing promising practices, reducing unnecessary duplication, and finding quick wins that demonstrate the immediate value of the network.
- Location 1992
-
- [note::Learning network -> Action network]

“Most of what goes wrong in systems goes wrong because of biased, late, or missing information,” writes Donella Meadows in Thinking in Systems. “Information holds systems together.”2 A greater circulation of information means that more resources and expertise can be shared across the system. Learning increases as promising practices are disseminated, and unnecessary duplication is reduced as people learn what others are up to. Messaging comes into greater alignment, actions begin to reinforce each other, and as a result the whole system becomes more coordinated and coherent.
- Location 2002
-
- [note::Yesss - I wish FORT could understand this]

One of the most critical capacities of network leaders—and coordinators in particular, whose role is described in more detail later in this chapter—is enabling and accelerating the flow of information between participants.
- Location 2008
-
- [note::This goes for project managers, functional managers, community builders, etc.]

Impact networks can accelerate the flow of information in three primary ways: by bringing information in from the network as well as from outside sources, organizing and sending information out to participants and others who are interested, and creating pathways for participants to easily share information across the network with one another.
- Location 2010
-
- [note::This needs a diagram]

asset maps, searchable directories, and online databases. An interactive asset map, for instance, provides members with an easy way to identify the available resources, areas of expertise, and geographic regions present across the network—while also helping them to immediately connect with each other to follow through on what they learned. Detailed instructions for Building an Asset Map that also functions as a network directory can be found in the Converge Network Toolkit.
- Location 2026
-
- [note::Should do this for EA Philly]

subscribe to listserv groups and alerts,
- Location 2033
-
- [note::Is there a better alternative to listserv?]

One way to think about coordinators is as air traffic controllers. Air traffic controllers see and understand how all the planes in a given airspace are flowing. They don’t fly the planes, but they are trusted to help each aircraft get to its destination. They regularly communicate with the pilots to understand their plans and needs, and they use that information to help guide the whole system.
- Location 2055
-
- [note::Network coordinator = Air traffic controller]

They work to integrate many parts into a unified whole. Because of their unique position, coordinators are well equipped to identify and frame emerging issues, collect agenda topics, and support the design of convenings and calls. Embedding evaluation practices, such as those described in chapter 10, helps coordinators to track the network’s development and identify emerging needs and opportunities.
- Location 2059
-
- [note::Sounds a lot like project management]

Rather than doing the work of the network, coordinators cultivate the conditions that enable network members to do what they want to do, in service of the network’s purpose and in alignment with its principles.
- Location 2076
- network stewardship, community stewardship,

Technology is always changing, so rather than sharing specific tools in this book, we have compiled our favorites online in a continually updated list. Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to see our favorite Tech Tools for Impact Networks.
- Location 2082
-
- [note::Should absolutely check this out.]

Whenever we launch a new tech tool into a network, we take a few minutes during a convening or on a network call to introduce it, explain how it is intended to be used, and show the basics of what it can offer. If possible, we also allow a bit of hands-on time for participants to try it out.
- Location 2087
-

Taking the time to deliberately coordinate actions is a great way to serve the self-interests of participants. You can do so by providing space on calls and at convenings for people to share urgent needs and to connect with others who might be able to support their work. We call this activity Rapid Coordination, and we incorporate it into nearly every network convening we lead. The activity begins by inviting participants, one by one, to briefly share something they need help with or a potential collaboration they’d like to explore with others. After the first person shares what they need, others are invited to raise their hands if they believe they can help (by sharing information, having a follow-up conversation, or providing resources). The process continues until everyone has been given a chance to make a request.
- Location 2097
-
- [note::Reminds me of the lightning talks at EAGxNYC picnic.]

Whereas reciprocity is the practice of exchanging value with another person, generalized reciprocity is the practice of exchanging value with the network. People who practice generalized reciprocity give their gifts without the expectation of immediate return; they give with a sense of trust that their actions will eventually be reciprocated in one form or another by others in the network, although it isn’t clear how or when.
- Location 2108
-
- [note::i.e. Fostering an bundance mindset in networks]

Making systems work—whether in health care, education, climate change, making a pathway out of poverty—is the greatest task of our generation. —ATUL GAWANDE, “How Do We Heal Medicine?,” TED2012
- Location 2151
-

A system is a group of interacting or interdependent elements forming a unified whole.1 Systems may overlap—for instance, in the connections between health care and housing. And systems can be nested within other systems—a classroom is nested within a school, which is nested within a school district, which is nested within a state’s education system.
- Location 2157
-

Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to access facilitation guides for Constructing a Historical Timeline, Mapping the System, and Exploring Future Scenarios.
- Location 2186
-

FIGURE 9.1. 100Kin10’s system map of the “grand challenges” facing STEM education today. Each challenge is represented by a node, and links are created when two challenges are related to one another. With this data, social network analysis revealed seven clusters of highly interconnected challenges, which yielded the network’s seven focus areas. For an interactive version of this map and a detailed description of the process used to develop it, visit grandchallenges.100kin10.org.
- Location 2222
-

The effort to identify leverage points also led to an unexpected result: a massive increase in participant engagement. “When, as a network, you can choose to focus on a few critical opportunities—not because you or I thought they were the right places to focus, or because a panel of experts thought they were the right places, but because the whole community came together to identify them—it’s so mobilizing,” says Milgrom-Elcott.
- Location 2246
-

Fundamentally changing systems, however, requires reformation or transformation. Reformation aims to change the way a system works, altering its rules, structures, beliefs, and behaviors. Transformation is the work of creating a new system altogether.
- Location 2255
-

Research shows that once 25 percent of the actors in a system have adopted a given norm, a tipping point is reached, triggering a shift in the rest of the population.14
- Location 2288
-

Research from Leslie Crutchfield, author of How Change Happens, found that the most successful social movements incorporate a decentralized structure that fosters connection and coordination across the movement, rather than a top-down hierarchical structure that dictates the actions of its chapters. The organizations and leaders most central to the growth of these movements, writes Crutch-field, conceive of themselves “not as commander at the helm of an army, but rather a coordinator at the center of a network.”16 They “purposely push power out to the grassroots, vesting authority in local chapters rather than controlling from the top.”17
- Location 2310
-
- [note::I feel like CEA tries to be decentralized, but is ultimately perceived as top-down.]

But what often goes unnoticed is that in the process of cultivating a network, the system actually is shifting. When networks are cultivated, people and organizations start engaging with one another in new ways. Information and resources begin to flow as never before. People from opposite sides of issues find creative ways to collaborate. A once-fragmented system becomes interconnected, able to respond quickly to crises. New leaders emerge. Healthier norms start to develop and spread. And local actions may grow into a movement, creating a new system altogether.
- Location 2363
-
- [note::This is what I want to do with EA. The movement, at least in the US, seems highly fragmented and doesn't invest nearly enough resources into fostering relationships with organizations outside of EA. The reality is that we NEED to collaborate with these existing organizations in order to bring about the systems-level change needed. We can't just dismiss them as "not impactful enough" and do our own thing. We need to learn from them and incorporate them into the conversation, even if it means sacrificing short-term impact for long-term gain.]

As for the future, your task is not to foresee it, but to enable it. —ANTOINE DE SAINT-EXUPÉRY, The Wisdom of the Sands
- Location 2378
-
- [note::Like this. As a network builder, the goal is not to do the change but to setup conditions that allow the change to happen.]

We recommend that networks adopt a minimum viable structure—the simplest possible structure that will effectively serve its needs, and one that can evolve as the network develops.
- Location 2382
-
- [note::Seems sensible]

In the 1950s, US cities were designed such that people lived in one part of the city, worked in another, and shopped in yet another. In most cities this is still the case, and it has led to widespread social fragmentation and lengthy daily commutes. As Jacobs observed, this occurred because urban planners designed for what they thought should happen, neglecting the way that humans naturally organize themselves based on their daily lives. A better approach would have been to “acknowledge the city as a living organism in constant mutation, a highly complex network involving a vast number of variables . . . an open space bursting with overlap and spontaneity, where the natural conditions for creativity, recreation, and cooperation can easily prosper,” writes Manuel Lima in Visual Complexity, referencing Jacobs.1
- Location 2385
-
- [note::Huh, is this actually true? Seems like an ultra-capitalist, anti-humanist approach to designing cities. "Go to work" -> "Shop" -> "Go Home" -> "Repeat". Big sigh.]

When developing a network’s structure, let form follow function. Let the energies and interests of participants lead the way. Let the network’s natural evolution define its structure according to what it needs most in any given moment. “Collaborative networks don’t require building any structural elements or operational agreements until they are absolutely useful,” writes Ruth Rominger, a catalyst of the RE-AMP Network. “Putting just enough in place will keep the network connected yet flexible enough to adapt.”3
- Location 2398
-

Impact networks are commonly organized through four types of teams, each of which appears only when needed. Design teams form to help catalyze a new network and organize network convenings; core teams form to provide governance and advisory support; project teams form to advance collaborative work; and learning circles form to hold conversation and gather information on a topic of interest.
- Location 2405
-

Another difference from traditional hierarchies is that core teams rotate their members regularly. They usually consist of four to seven people, each representing a different participating organization or part of the network, who volunteer for the core team for a specific period of time (often from one convening to the next).
- Location 2417
-
- [note::Interesting - curious about the cadence of these rotations]

Questions to form a new team: Anytime a project team or learning circle is formed, it may begin by answering the following questions: • What is the purpose of this team? • Who is involved? • Who will lead this team at least until the next convening? • What tasks are required between now and the next convening? • Who is taking responsibility for each task, and by when? • What do we need from the network, if anything?
- Location 2454
-

We have found it useful to offer four primary levels of engagement to choose from: lead, partner, follow, and honor. These levels of participation can apply to the network as a whole, as well as to specific project teams: • Lead: “I will take responsibility for making this network/team happen.” • Partner: “I will actively work with the leaders to make this network/team happen.” • Follow: “I would like to stay informed about how this network/team is progressing.” • Honor: “Although I appreciate what you are proposing, this network/team is not of particular interest to me at this time.” When a network is just getting started, we ask participants to share their preferred level of engagement with the network as a whole, to get a better sense of who would like to attend future convenings and be kept in the loop with network communications.
- Location 2472
-
- [note::Reminds me of a RACI chart, but for preferred engagement level.]

As the network evolves, we ask participants to clarify their intended level of engagement annually to help leaders with planning, coordination, and budgeting.
- Location 2485
-

One of the responsibilities of network leaders is to provide many different opportunities for leadership, partnership, and followership to emerge, and to allow people to decline altogether. Trust that participants will self-organize to place their energy where they are most inspired to contribute and where they are most needed.
- Location 2492
-

In The Art of Community, Charles Vogl identifies “clear boundaries” as one of the core principles of belonging. Vogl notes that for a strong community to develop, people often need to know that being a part of the community means something and that not just anyone can join in on a whim. In other words, boundaries are less about exclusion and more about fostering greater inclusion within the network.7
- Location 2499
-

While this worked at first, over time the lack of boundaries created an unhealthy work environment when some people abused the high-trust atmosphere. As a result, Enspiral was forced to develop clearer agreements for participation, which they captured in their open-source “Handbook.”8 One of the key insights they took from the experience was that “a community without boundaries is no community at all.”9
- Location 2505
-
- [note::What does this look like for EA?]

In addition to clarifying expectations, participation agreements serve to provide some stability as a network grows. Participants might be asked to provide sufficient advance notice prior to leaving the network so they have enough time to introduce and integrate a new member of their organization before departing. Networks might also request that two individuals per organization attend convenings, in order to maintain continuity when one member is unavailable. Whatever participation agreements your network defines, remember to provide just enough structure to support the network, but not more. Prioritize relationship building first and foremost, instead of getting bogged down in the details before the network has even had a chance to provide value to participants or create any level of impact in the world.
- Location 2516
-

Simply stated, “Power is participation in decision-making,” writes Cyndi Suarez in The Power Manual.10
- Location 2528
-

We prefer an alternative approach: consent-based decision-making, which allows actions in the best interest of the whole to proceed without unanimous agreement. This approach is rooted in the “range of tolerance” principle borrowed from ecosystem science: when organisms find themselves in contexts that are too hot or too cold, some parts of the system die because the temperature is out of their range of tolerance. With consent-based decision-making, we find a decision that everyone can live with, even if it’s not their top preference.
- Location 2536
-
- [note::I believe The Ready/Brave New Work talks about this - "Zone of Tolerance" in decision-making.]

A Process for Consent-Based Decision-Making The consent-based decision-making process has three phases: context, clarification, and call for consent: Context frames the decision to be made: What are the relevant factors? What are the pros and cons that have been considered? What conversations have already taken place? And finally, what is the recommendation moving forward? Context is presented by those who took part in discussions to formulate the proposal. Clarification allows for any further questions or clarity needed by network members prior to voting. Facilitators should help ensure that the conversation doesn’t veer toward evaluation of ideas but stays with clarity on what is being recommended. Participants are encouraged to consider whether proposals are consistent with the network’s purpose and principles, and to think in terms of what’s in the best interest of the network as a whole, as opposed to what’s in the best interest for “me” as an individual or as a representative of an organization or special interest. Call for consent uses a 0 to 5 voting framework when the full group is ready to make a decision or assess the level of support and need for further discussion. First, the facilitator restates the proposal and asks participants to vote. Then, the participants respond with a number from 0 to 5 (using fingers, pen and paper, or other means) corresponding to their level of support. The process can also be completed digitally with polling tools if confidentiality is required, if voting with fingers or paper isn’t practical, or if detailed records need to be captured. When voting, participants are invited to choose from one of the following options: • 5—Lead: The proposal serves our network well, and I would like to be one of the leaders in implementing it. • 4—Partner: The proposal serves our network well, and I will partner to support the leaders in implementing it. • 3—Follow: The proposal may serve our network, but I can’t offer any capacity toward implementation. • 2—Concern: I have concerns about the proposal and will be tracking as implementation moves forward. • 1—Caution: I have major concerns about the proposal creating harm and would like to discuss further. • 0—Oppose: The proposed course of action is outside a range of tolerance and requires changes before any action is taken. The proposal goes forward as outlined if there are only 2s and above. If there are 0s or 1s, options include having real-time discussions to resolve objections or scheduling time for the 0s and 1s to meet with the 4s and 5s to resolve issues and find a way to move forward.
- Location 2542
-
- [note::Love how this empowers anyone from the network to lead/support initiatives.]

Four Fundamentals of Network Evaluation We propose four basic components of network evaluation, explained in more detail below, to help ensure that your network is continually learning and evolving in a positive direction: • Collaborative infrastructure • Network connectivity • Participant experience • Emergent activity
- Location 2587
-

To assess participation, network leaders can track network size (how many members there are at each tier of participation), representativeness (which groups or interests that current members represent), and growth/turnover (how many people and organizations joined the network and how many left the network in the past year).
- Location 2594
-

To assess network activities, network leaders can track convenings, including frequency and attendance, as well as other significant functions as applicable, such as participation on calls and subscriptions to the network newsletter. It is also helpful to cross-reference this information against specific participant characteristics (for example, sector, region, and demographic characteristics) to ascertain whether engagement varies across participants and where adjustments might be beneficial to engage all members.
- Location 2596
-

To help you map and analyze your network’s connectivity as it evolves, we have developed examples of how we have applied SNA in practice, along with a survey template you can adapt to capture the data needed to construct a network map. Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to learn the process of Conducting a Social Network Analysis.
- Location 2615
-
- [note::Would be interesting to do this in the larger EA community]

A healthy network is one where participants feel they have clarified a shared purpose and a set of shared principles. The network includes a broad cross section of participants who are well suited to address the network’s purpose and actively contribute to its development. Those participants are developing relationships of trust, and they feel they are able to engage in and resolve conflicts with one another. The network has defined whatever structures and agreements are necessary to organize the work and make good decisions. These structures and agreements should be flexible enough to allow the network to stay responsive to changes in the environment without feeling unnecessarily burdensome. Healthy networks have ample coordination such that necessary operational responsibilities are well accounted for. Relevant information is easily accessible and freely shared. Participants also feel that the network has adequate resources to sustain its activities and that funders are supporting the network without controlling its path. And last but not least, participants in healthy networks feel that they are receiving good value from the time they are investing. They feel that they are benefiting personally and professionally as individuals and that their organizations are benefiting from their involvement in the network as well.
- Location 2621
-
- [note::What makes a healthy network?]

Administering participant surveys at regular intervals provides a good assessment of the core indicators of network health. They offer a regular space for participants to provide feedback, supporting equity and ensuring that network leaders have a good understanding of participants’ perceptions of the network. The survey results help illuminate areas of strength as well as areas that would benefit from additional attention or support.
- Location 2631
-

Visit the Converge Network Toolkit to access a comprehensive list of Indicators of Network Health to track, along with a generic Network Participant Survey.
- Location 2637
- pink,

The magic of networks lies in their emergent outcomes, which cannot be defined in advance, will not be the same across networks, and therefore cannot be measured with standardized tools. Although the precise nature of these outcomes cannot be predicted in advance, it is still valuable to track them as they emerge. Specifically, tracking the coordinated work and collaborative projects that are sparked among participants is essential to understanding how the network is impacting the broader system. This information will help network leaders and participants advance promising opportunities and potential innovations, as well as tell the story of the network’s influence on the broader system.
- Location 2640
-
- [note::Could we do this with EA Philly?]

Impact networks are typically resourced through one or more of the following sources: • Philanthropic funding • Organizational resources • In-kind contributions • Participant dues • Earned revenue from network projects
- Location 2674
-

As Philip Li, president of the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, puts it, “The challenge with networks is that they invite patience and long-term investment. Funders have to understand that you have to release control and let the network define what it wants to achieve. That invites a different kind of relationship between the funder and the network.” It’s not easy, but it is worth it, says Li. “The upside potential of a network being in place is really quite profound.”15
- Location 2698
-
- [note::This is probably the biggest challenge to EAs adopting a network/systems mindset - the outcomes of dollars invested in the network are emergent and thus hard to predict.]

According to Jennifer Husbands, a senior program officer at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, this requires that funders “understand how to walk a tightrope between providing structure and encouraging organic connections to develop and flourish.”17 As a network funder, be clear on what you are supporting: you are not funding the fulfillment of a production order or provision of services to a specific number of people; rather, you are supporting the capacity of an ecosystem to engage a spectrum of perspectives, learn together, and self-determine optimal responses to local challenges.
- Location 2712
-
- [note::Network funders must be okay with uncertainty and risk]

Although many recognize the need for greater coordination between organizations, collaboration remains underresourced. As Susan Wolf Ditkoff and Abe Grindle write in Harvard Business Review, “So few philanthropists meaningfully support or engage in [collaboration], even though most are frustrated with the inefficient proliferation of siloed change efforts.”23
- Location 2737
-
- [note::How do we incentivize collaboration?]

If you haven’t already, I invite you to visit converge.net to access additional tools and resources in the Converge Network Toolkit. There you can dive deeper into network concepts that didn’t make their way into this book and receive invitations to network leadership learning experiences. You will also find opportunities to connect and share directly with other network leaders.
- Location 2780
- pink,

Diana Scearce, Gabriel Kasper, and Heather McLeod Grant, “Working Wikily,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, Summer 2010, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/monitor-institute/us-monitor-institute-working-wikily.pdf.
- Location 2792
-

Jenny Johnson, “Fresno’s New Leadership Network—Case Study Executive Summary,” 2015, http://bit.ly/nlncasestudysummary.
- Location 2795
-

Niall Ferguson, The Square and the Tower: Networks, Hierarchies and the Struggle for Global Power (London: Penguin Books, 2018), xix.
- Location 2811
-

Anna Muoio and Kaitlin Terry Canver, Shifting a System, Monitor Institute by Deloitte, accessed December 17, 2020, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/us/articles/5139_shifting-a-system/DI_Reimagining-learning.pdf.
- Location 2814
-

June Holley has called them “intentional networks” in Network Weaver Handbook: A Guide to Transformational Networks (Athens, Ohio: Network Weaver Publishing, 2012). Peter Plastrik, Madeleine Taylor, and John Cleveland have called them “generative social impact networks” in Connecting to Change the World: Harnessing the Power of Networks for Social Impact (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2014).
- Location 2817
-

David Ehrlichman and David Sawyer, “Learn Before You Leap: The Catalytic Power of a Learning Network,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, July 27, 2018, https://ssir.org/articles/entry/learn_before_you_leap_the_catalytic_power_of_a_learning_network#.
- Location 2827
-

Developed by Valdis Krebs and June Holley, Building Smart Communities Through Network Weaving, 2006, http://www.orgnet.com/BuildingNetworks.pdf. Re-created by Jeff Mohr, “Building Intentional Networks That Drive Impact (Part 1),” In Too Deep, Kumu, July 15, 2016, https://blog.kumu.io/building-intentional-networks-that-drive-impact-part-1-90a7271c7a2a.
- Location 2830
-

Jane Wei-Skillern, David Ehrlichman, and David Sawyer, “The Most Impactful Leaders You’ve Never Heard Of,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, September 16, 2015, https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_most_impactful_leaders_youve_never_heard_of.
- Location 2848
-

Christopher Vitale, Networkologies: A Philosophy of Networks for a Hyperconnected Age—A Manifesto (Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2014), 20.
- Location 2853
-

Otto Scharmer and Katrin Kaufer, Leading from the Emerging Future: From Ego-System to Eco-System Economies (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2013), 2.
- Location 2854
-

Jane Wei-Skillern and Nora Silver, “Four Network Principles for Collaboration Success,” Foundation Review 5, no. 1 (2013), https://doi.org/10.4087/FOUNDATIONREVIEW-D-12-00018.1.
- Location 2856
-

Rob Cross and Andrew Parker, The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004), 3.
- Location 2866
-

Katrina Pugh and Laurence Prusak, “Designing Effective Knowledge Networks,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Fall 2013. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/designing-effective-knowledge-networks/
- Location 2875
-

Samantha Slade, Going Horizontal: Creating a Non-Hierarchical Organization, One Practice at a Time (Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2018), 56.
- Location 2878
-

Donella Meadows, “Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System,” Academy for Systems Change, accessed December 18, 2020, http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/.
- Location 2882
-

Joshua Vial, “More People Working on Stuff That Matters,” in Anthony Cabraal and Susan Basterfield, Better Work Together: How the Power of Community Can Transform Your Business (Enspiral Foundation, 2018), 20.
- Location 2895
-

Henry Mintzberg and James A. Waters, “Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent,” Strategic Management Journal 6, no. 3 (1985): 257–72, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250060306.
- Location 2900
-

Peter Block, Community: The Structure of Belonging, 2nd ed. (Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2018), 26–27.
- Location 2905
-

Giles Hutchins and Laura Storm, Regenerative Leadership: The DNA of Life-Affirming 21st Century Organizations (Tunbridge Wells, UK: Wordzworth, 2019), 172.
- Location 2907
-

Daniel Christian Wahl, Designing Regenerative Cultures (Axminster, England: Triarchy Press, 2016), 19.
- Location 2912
-

Patricia Patrizi, Elizabeth Heid Thompson, Julia Coffman, and Tanya Beer, “Eyes Wide Open: Learning as Strategy Under Conditions of Complexity and Uncertainty,” Foundation Review 5, no. 3 (2013), https://doi.org/10.9707/1944-5660.1170.
- Location 2915
-

Nick Martlew, Creative Coalitions: A Handbook for Change (Crisis Action, 2017), 43, https://crisisaction.org/handbook/contents/.
- Location 2931
-

Nicholas A. Christakis and James H. Fowler, Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives (New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company, 2011), 17.
- Location 2936
-

Peggy Holman, Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into Opportunity (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2010), 55.
- Location 2938
-

“Sterling Network NYC,” Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, accessed February 2, 2021, https://www.rsclark.org/sterlingnetworknyc.
- Location 2940
-

100Kin10, accessed December 19, 2020, https://100kin10.org/.
- Location 2942
-

Defender Network, Justice in Motion, accessed December 19, 2020, https://www.justiceinmotion.org/defender-network.
- Location 2943
-

“Workshopping the Worldview,” Resonance Network, accessed December 23, 2020, https://resonance-network.org/workshopping-the-worldview/.
- Location 2955
-

adrienne maree brown, Emergent Strategy: Shaping Change, Changing Worlds (Chico, CA: AK Press, 2017), 221.
- Location 2962
-

A. Stinchcombe, “Social Structure and Organizations,” in J. G. March, ed., Handbook of Organizations (Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1965), 132–93.
- Location 2979
-

Vu Le, “The Problem with Everything Being All about Relationships,” Nonprofit AF, February 9, 2020, https://nonprofitaf.com/2020/02/the-problem-with-everything-being-all-about-relationships/.
- Location 2981
-

James Currier, “The Network Effects Manual: 13 Different Network Effects (and Counting),” NFX, Medium, January 9, 2018, https://medium.com/@nfx/the-network-effects-manual-13-different-network-effects-and-counting-a3e07b23017d.
- Location 2988
-

Priya Parker, The Art of Gathering: How We Meet and Why It Matters (New York, NY: Riverhead Books, 2018), 51.
- Location 2994
-

Drake Baer, “Why You Need to Unplug Every 90 Minutes,” Fast Company, June 19, 2013, https://www.fastcompany.com/3013188/why-you-need-to-unplug-every-90-minutes.
- Location 2996
-

Adam Kahane, Facilitating Breakthrough: How to Remove Obstacles, Bridge Differences, and Move Forward Together (Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2020).
- Location 3002
-

Craig Neal and Patricia Neal, The Art of Convening: Authentic Engagement in Meetings, Gatherings, and Conversations (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2011), 55.
- Location 3004
-

Robert C. Solomon and Fernando Flores, Building Trust: In Business, Politics, Relationships, and Life (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001), 13.
- Location 3006
-

Marvin Weisbord and Sandra Janoff, Don’t Just Do Something, Stand There!: Ten Principles for Leading Meetings That Matter (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2007), 104–14.
- Location 3008
-

Sam Kaner, Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making, 3rd ed. (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2014).
- Location 3011
-

Cyndi Suarez, The Power Manual: How to Master Complex Power Dynamics (Gabriola Island, BC, Canada: New Society Publishers, 2018), back cover.
- Location 3014
-

Kelly Bates, Cynthia Silva Parker, and Curtis Ogden, “Power Dynamics: The Hidden Element to Effective Meetings,” Interaction Institute for Social Change, July 11, 2018, http://interactioninstitute.org/power-dynamics-the-hidden-element-to-effective-meetings/.
- Location 3016
-

Peter Plastrik, Madeleine Taylor, and John Cleveland, Connecting to Change the World: Harnessing the Power of Networks for Social Impact (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2014), 90.
- Location 3029
-

Bill Traynor, “Vertigo and the Intentional Inhabitant: Leadership in a Connected World,” Nonprofit Quarterly, February 23, 2018, https://nonprofitquarterly.org/vertigo-and-the-intentional-inhabitant-leadership-in-a-connected-world/.
- Location 3031
-

“Taking Accountability: How Do We Change Violence?” in Creative Interventions Toolkit: A Practical Guide to Stop Interpersonal Violence (Creative Interventions, 2012), 311–96, https://www.creative-interventions.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CI-Toolkit-Final-ENTIRE-Aug-2020.pdf.
- Location 3039
-

“The Ladder of Inference: How to Avoid Jumping to Conclusions,” MindTools, accessed February 6, 2021, https://www.mind-tools.com/pages/article/newTMC_91.htm.
- Location 3053
-

Frances Dunn Butterfoss, Coalitions and Partnerships in Community Health (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2007), 186.
- Location 3065
-

“Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing,” December 1996, https://www.ejnet.org/ej/jemez.pdf.
- Location 3075
-

Kristi Clemens, “From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue around Diversity and Social Justice,” in The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators, ed. Lisa M. Landreman (Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, 2013), 135–50.
- Location 3078
-

“Conversation Agreements,” Living Room Conversations, accessed December 23, 2020, https://www.livingroomconversations.org/conversation_agreements/.
- Location 3081
-

“Guidelines for Effective Cross-Cultural Dialogue,” VISIONS, Inc., accessed December 22, 2020, https://fusn.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Guidelines-for-Effective-Cross-Cultural-Dialogue.doc-1.pdf.
- Location 3084
-

Curtis Ogden, “Getting with the Flows: ‘Net Work’ as Change,” Network Weaver, September 23, 2019, https://networkweaver.com/getting-with-the-flows-net-work-as-change/.
- Location 3097
-

Donella H. Meadows, Thinking in Systems: A Primer, ed. Diana Wright (White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing, 2008), 173.
- Location 3100
-

Jessica Conrad, “How Collaborative Networks Lead Through Crisis—Part II,” Garfield Foundation, Medium, May 20, 2020, https://medium.com/@garfield_foundation/how-collaborative-networks-lead-through-crisis-part-ii-6d609d599d26.
- Location 3106
-

“Influencing Complex Systems Change,” Change Elemental, accessed December 23, 2020, https://changeelemental.org/influencing-complex-systems-change/.
- Location 3120
-

This process has been called “sensemaking,” a term first introduced by organizational theorist Karl E. Weick. See Karl E. Weick, Sensemaking in Organizations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995).
- Location 3122
-

found at systems.geofunders.org/tools-resources, as well as in Peggy Holman, Tom Devane, and Steven Cady, eds., The Change Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today’s Best Methods for Engaging Whole Systems, 2nd ed. (San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2007).
- Location 3126
-

Farrell, Kelly, et al., “Equity as Common Cause,” Othering and Belonging Journal no. 2.
- Location 3129
- processed,

Talia Milgrom-Elcott and Eric L. Berlow, “Ending Teacher Shortages with Network Mapping,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, April 25, 2018, https://ssir.org/articles/entry/ending_teacher_shortages_with_network_mapping.
- Location 3130
-

100Kin10, “Field Guide for Catalyzing Change,” accessed February 22, 2021, https://2019annualreport.100kin10.org/.
- Location 3133
-

Steve Waddell, Change for the Audacious: A Doer’s Guide (Boston, MA: NetworkingAction Publishing, 2016), 15.
- Location 3135
-

Damon Centola, How Behavior Spreads: The Science of Complex Contagions (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2018), 2.
- Location 3142
-

Leslie R. Crutchfield, How Change Happens: Why Some Social Movements Succeed While Others Don’t (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2018), 58.
- Location 3148
-

Leslie Crutchfield, “Why the Best Leaders Give Their Power Away,” Fortune, May 12, 2018, https://fortune.com/2018/05/12leadership-parkland-shooting-nra-gun-control-laws/.
- Location 3150
-

Mark Engler and Paul Engler, This Is an Uprising: How Nonviolent Revolt Is Shaping the Twenty-First Century (New York, NY: Nation Books, 2016), 71.
- Location 3152
-

Manuel Lima, Visual Complexity: Mapping Patterns of Information (New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011), 48.
- Location 3167
-

Ruth Rominger, “Systems Principles for Collaborative Networks,” Medium, Garfield Foundation, March 11, 2020, https://garfield-foundation.medium.com/systems-principles-for-collaborative-networks-d86fb3f22a2a.
- Location 3170
-

Charles Vogl, The Art of Community: Seven Principles for Belonging (Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2016), 33.
- Location 3180
-

Enspiral, Enspiral Handbook, accessed February 16, 2021, https://handbook.enspiral.com/.
- Location 3181
-

It’s important to keep in mind that social network analysis provides a representation of how participants perceive their connections with one another at a given point in time, but it is not a true reflection of reality. This is both because connections are changing all the time, so the data is never perfect, and because different people are likely to have different interpretations of how they would score their connections with others on the survey.
- Location 3188
-

David Nee and Curtis Ogden, “Distributing Leadership, Promoting Stewardship,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, September 30, 2015, https://ssir.org/network_entrepreneurs/entry/distributing_leadership_promoting_stewardship.
- Location 3199
-

Embracing Complexity: Towards a Shared Understanding of Funding Systems Change, Ashoka, Catalyst 2030, Co-Impact, Echoing Green, Schwab Foundation, Skoll Foundation, January 2020, https://www.ashoka.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/Embracing+Complexity_Full+Report_final.pdf.
- Location 3205
-

Susan Wolf Ditkoff and Abe Grindle, “Audacious Philanthropy,” Harvard Business Review, September–October 2017, https://…
- Location 3210
-

Networks: Webs of relationships connecting…
- Location 3216
-

Nodes: Individual parts of a network. Also known as…
- Location 3217
-

Links: Connections between the parts of a network. Also known…
- Location 3218
-

Clusters: Groups of people or nodes that are much more connected with each other than…
- Location 3219
-

Bridges: Connections between two clusters, networks, or parts of a system that would otherwise be disconnected. Wide bridges feature multiple connections, while narrow bridges feature a single connection. Those who create…
- Location 3220
-

Hubs: Highly connected nodes in a…
- Location 3223
-

Core: The most densely connected part of a network, often…
- Location 3223
-

Periphery: The less-connected part of a network…
- Location 3224
-

Impact network: A network that brings individuals and organizations together for learning and collaborative…
- Location 3225
-

Learning network: A form of impact network that primarily facilitates the flow of…
- Location 3226
-

Action network: A form of impact network that facilitates connection and learning in…
- Location 3228
-

Movement network: A form of impact network that connects many other impact networks together,…
- Location 3229
-

Network mindset: A worldview that embraces the reality that everything is connected. Those who adopt a network mindset see themselves as a part of a larger web of activity (not always as the central hub) and seek to develop…
- Location 3230
-

Catalyzing: A network leadership role that brings people together to explore and launch a new impact network, and that fosters…
- Location 3233
-

Coordination: A network leadership role that provides operational support to sustain network activities and develop the network’s ability to share information,…
- Location 3234
-

Facilitation: A network leadership role that guides participants through group processes to find common ground and…
- Location 3236
-

Weaving: A network leadership role that nurtures connection to foster…
- Location 3237
-

Core team: A group of participants who volunteer or are elected to help guide the work and…
- Location 3239
-

Design team: A group of diverse representatives from across a system who work to collectively clarify why an impact network is needed, who needs to be involved initially,…
- Location 3240
-

Learning circles: Groups of participants who gather together to hold conversations, share knowledge, and collect…
- Location 3242
-

Project teams: Groups of participants who collaborate to advance a specific body of work related…
- Location 3243
-

Convenings: Gatherings that bring all network members together simultaneously,…
- Location 3244
-

Emergence: The process of something new arising from learning…
- Location 3245
-

Leverage points: Places where targeted intervention can produce outsized impacts…
- Location 3246
-

Resilience: The ability to withstand disruption and adapt as…
- Location 3248
-

System: A group of interacting or interdependent parts that together form a larger whole.
- Location 3248
-

Systems change: The process of reforming or transforming the structures, relationships, policies, power dynamics, narratives, and norms in a given system to create positive social or environmental effects.
- Location 3249
-

Baker, Mila N. Peer to Peer Leadership: Why the Network Is the Leader. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2014.
- Location 3255
- processed,

Barabási, Albert-László. Linked: The New Science of Networks. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing, 2002.
- Location 3256
-

Bartlett, Richard D. Patterns for Decentralised Organising. Leanpub, 2018.
- Location 3258
-

Block, Peter. Community: The Structure of Belonging. 2nd ed. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2018.
- Location 3261
-

Brafman, Ori, and Rod A. Beckstrom. The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. New York, NY: Penguin Group, 2007.
- Location 3265
-

brown, adrienne maree. Emergent Strategy: Shaping Change, Changing Worlds. Chico, CA: AK Press, 2017.
- Location 3266
-

Butterfoss, Frances Dunn. Coalitions and Partnerships in Community Health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
- Location 3267
-

Cabraal, Anthony, and Susan Basterfield. Better Work Together: How the Power of Community Can Transform Your Business. Enspiral Foundation, 2018.
- Location 3268
-

Centola, Damon. How Behavior Spreads: The Science of Complex Contagions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2018.
- Location 3270
-

Christakis, Nicholas A., and James H. Fowler. Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company, 2011.
- Location 3271
-

Coyle, Daniel. The Culture Code: The Secrets of Highly Successful Groups. New York, NY: Bantam Books, 2018.
- Location 3274
-

Cross, Rob, and Andrew Parker. The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004.
- Location 3275
-

Crutchfield, Leslie R. How Change Happens: Why Some Social Movements Succeed While Others Don’t. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2018.
- Location 3277
-

Engler, Mark, and Paul Engler. This Is an Uprising: How Nonviolent Revolt Is Shaping the Twenty-First Century. New York, NY: Nation Books, 2016.
- Location 3278
-

Ferguson, Niall. The Square and the Tower: Networks, Hierarchies, and the Struggle for Global Power. London: Penguin Books, 2018.
- Location 3280
-

Goldsmith, Stephen, and William D. Eggers. Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2004.
- Location 3285
-

Heifetz, Ronald A., Marty Linsky, and Alexander Grashow. The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2009.
- Location 3288
-

Holley, June. Network Weaver Handbook: A Guide to Transformational Networks. Athens, OH: Network…
- Location 3290
-

Holman, Peggy. Engaging Emergence: Turning Upheaval into Opportunity. San Francisco, CA:…
- Location 3291
-

Holman, Peggy, Tom Devane, and Steven Cady, eds. The Change Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today’s Best Methods for Engaging Whole Systems. 2nd ed. San…
- Location 3292
-

Huxham, Chris, and Siv Vangen. Managing to Collaborate: The Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage.…
- Location 3296
-

Järvensivu, Timo. Managing (in) Networks: Learning, Working and Leading Together. Helsinki,…
- Location 3297
-

Jay, Jason, and Gabriel Grant. Breaking Through Gridlock: The Power of Conversation in a Polarized World. Oakland, CA:…
- Location 3299
-

Johansen, Bob, and Karl Ronn. The Reciprocity Advantage: A New Way to Partner for Innovation and Growth. San Francisco, CA:…
- Location 3300
-

Kahane, Adam. Collaborating with the Enemy: How to Work with People You Don’t Agree with or Like or Trust. Oakland, CA:…
- Location 3304
-

Facilitating Breakthrough: How to Remove Obstacles, Bridge Differences, and Move Forward Together. Oakland, CA:…
- Location 3305
-

Solving Tough Problems: An Open Way of Talking, Listening, and Creating New Realities. San Francisco, CA:…
- Location 3307
-

Kaner, Sam. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. 3rd ed. San Francisco,…
- Location 3308
-

Laloux, Frederic. Reinventing Organizations: A Guide to Creating Organizations Inspired by the Next Stage of Human Consciousness.…
- Location 3312
-

Laloux, Frederic, and Etienne Appert. Reinventing Organizations: An Illustrated Invitation to Join the Conversation on Next-Stage Organizations.…
- Location 3314
-

Landreman, Lisa M., ed. The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators. Sterling,…
- Location 3316
-

Lima, Manuel. Visual Complexity: Mapping Patterns of Information. New York, NY: Princeton…
- Location 3317
-

Markova, Dawna, and Angie McArthur. Collaborative Intelligence: Thinking with People Who Think Differently. New…
- Location 3318
-

Martlew, Nick. Creative Coalitions: A Handbook for Change. Crisis Action, 2017. https://…
- Location 3320
-

McChrystal, Stanley, Tantum Collins, David Silverman, and Chris Fussell. Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement for a Complex World. New York…
- Location 3321
-

Meadows, Donella H. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Edited by Diana Wright. White River Junction, VT:…
- Location 3323
-

Neal, Craig, and Patricia Neal. The Art of Convening: Authentic Engagement in Meetings, Gatherings, and Conversations. San Francisco, CA…
- Location 3324
-

Newman, Mark. Networks. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford…
- Location 3326
-

Parker, Priya. The Art of Gathering: How We Meet and Why It Matters. New York, NY:…
- Location 3330
-

Pentland, Alex. Social Physics: How Good Ideas Spread—The Lessons from a New Science. New York,…
- Location 3332
-

Pflaeging, Niels. Organize for Complexity: How to Get Life Back into Work to Build the High-Performance Organization. 3rd ed. Wiesbaden,…
- Location 3334
-

Plastrik, Peter, Madeleine Taylor, and John Cleveland. Connecting to Change the World: Harnessing the Power of Networks for Social Impact.…
- Location 3335
-

Rainie, Lee, and Barry Wellman. Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge…
- Location 3337
-

Robertson, Brian J. Holacracy: The New Management System for a Rapidly Changing World. New York, NY:…
- Location 3338
-

Scharmer, C. Otto. Theory U: Leading from the Future as It Emerges. Oakland, CA:…
- Location 3341
-

Scharmer, Otto, and Katrin Kaufer. Leading from the Emerging Future: From Ego-System to Eco-System Economies. San Francisco, CA:…
- Location 3342
-

Slade, Samantha. Going Horizontal: Creating a Non-Hierarchical Organization, One Practice at a Time. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2018.
- Location 3345
-

Solomon, Robert C., and Fernando Flores. Building Trust: In Business, Politics, Relationships, and Life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001.
- Location 3346
-

Suarez, Cyndi. The Power Manual: How to Master Complex Power Dynamics.
- Location 3350
-

Gabriola Island, BC, Canada: New Society Publishers, 2018. Tapscott, Don, and Anthony D. Williams. Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. Expanded ed. New York, NY: Portfolio, 2010.
- Location 3351
-

Vitale, Christopher. Networkologies: A Philosophy of Networks for a Hyperconnected Age—A Manifesto. Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2014.
- Location 3354
-

Vogl, Charles. The Art of Community: Seven Principles for Belonging. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2016.
- Location 3355
-

Waddell, Steve. Change for the Audacious: A Doer’s Guide. Boston, MA: NetworkingAction Publishing, 2016.
- Location 3356
-

Global Action Networks: Creating Our Future Together. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
- Location 3358
-

Wahl, Daniel Christian. Designing Regenerative Cultures. Axminster, England: Triarchy Press, 2016.
- Location 3359
-

Watts, Duncan J. Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004.
- Location 3360
-

Weisbord, Marvin, and Sandra Janoff. Don’t Just Do Something, Stand There!: Ten Principles for Leading Meetings That Matter. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2007.
- Location 3361
-

West, Geoffrey. Scale: The Universal Laws of Life, Growth, and Death in Organisms, Cities, and Companies. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2017.
- Location 3363
-

David Ehrlichman is cofounder and coordinator of Converge (converge.net). With his colleagues, he has supported the development of dozens of impact networks taking action on issues as diverse as economic mobility, human rights, access to science, and health care reform. Prior to catalyzing Converge, David was a consultant with Monitor Institute, where he was first introduced to the power of networks.
- Location 3975
-

You can reach David at ehrlichman@converge.net.
- Location 3981
-