These three examples depict the same imagery as that of the family I described. Each group and organization have their own mission and purpose, and yet they realize that through collaboration they can leverage their own capacities in order to accomplish their shared outcome. This shared outcome in turn supports the unique and different missions and purposes of each group and organization.

Self-Interest Drives Collaboration

Before I started using the language of resilience, I was a self-proclaimed community organizer. A prime tenet of community organizing is to build on the self-interest of each person, group and/or organization to produce a common outcome. This self-interest is often defined by a mission, vision, purpose or goal that drives the person, group, or organization. Many times, community organizers identify new allies and partners by identifying how these partners’ self-interests are aligned with the other groups’ interests. And, by working together they can achieve an outcome that benefits all their individual interests. As such, when I was first introduced to this capacity leveraging model, it was immediately familiar to me as it depicted graphically what I did professionally as a community organizer. Today, with my work in community resilience, I continue to understand that self-interest is a crucial motivator for collaboration in order to build and strengthen social and community development.

You might notice a common thread among the examples of capacity leveraging I shared. The community members are all considered in some way to be “marginalized”. Community members of Greenwell Matongo, Windhoek, Namibia, do not have stable, formalized home structures and have extremely limited income. Residents of manufactured home parks are often seen as “trailer trash,” often have limited incomes and are easily exploited by the landowners since their homes cannot easily move. And, neighborhood youth of the Brian Coyle Center are young, Black/African, Muslim refugees whose first language is not English. There are a lot of cards stacked against each of these groups.

Let’s be honest, the mantra of American individualism espouses that anyone can make what they want to happen all by themselves. In other words, they believe in the erroneous adage that they can “pull themselves up by their bootstraps”. However, this is often not possible if the person or group is not lucky enough to have access to boundless money to buy whatever they want. And so, if you don’t have boundless money, in order to make changes you must find partners and allies who share a common vision. These “marginalized” populations were able to make the changes they desired by partnering with others. By themselves, due to the stigmas other people held of them or the lack of money and other resources, they are not able to create their desired outcomes. But through identifying partners with whom to collaborate, they can achieve their desired outcomes, including making their lives better.

Without the collaboration of others, the community members of Greenwell Matongo, Windhoek, Namibia would not have been able to create their community-owned bakery. Without the collaboration of others, residents of manufactured home parks would not have been able to create their own resident-owned community or Home-Owners’ Association (or Resident Association). Without the collaboration of others, the neighborhood youth that go to the Brian Coyle Center would not have been able to advocate for themselves why they need and deserve a safe and updated gymnasium.

I am not saying that aid must support “marginalized” groups in order to make positive change. I am saying other partners also would not be able to meet their own missions and desired outcomes without collaborating with these “marginalized” groups. Examples: Without the collaboration of community members, the Windhoek Community Development Center would not be meeting its goal of empowering its residents to develop sustainable neighborhoods. Without the collaboration and feedback of manufactured home park residents, APAC would not meet its goal of empowering and training residents across all of Minnesota. Without the collaboration and feedback of neighborhood youth, the Minneapolis Parks and Rec. Board would not meet its goal of offering fair and safe recreational services that supports the needs of all Minneapolis residents.

Organizations and groups that collaborate achieve more than they would be able to by themselves. And, at the same time – it is in the self-interest of each organization and group to collaborate with others, because they individually get more out of collaborating than they could by themselves.

Until next time,

Thomas

- - - -

Next month’s Community Connection will dive deeper into resiliency as a desired community goal. Snapshot: Communities are always changing, and many individuals, groups, and organizations that contribute to the health, stability and sustainability within a community suffer due to these changes. A community is resilient when these individuals, groups, and organizations are able to effectively respond and adapt to changing circumstances and strengthen the health, stability and sustainability of the whole community.

​