This is especially the case when those inhabiting these communities are faced with an imminent challenge: a forest fire, flood, opioid epidemic or mass shooting. As one of our colleagues in a small, isolated California community has noted when working on a team helping citizens evacuate from an impending collapse of a nearby dam: “there were no Republicans or Democrats coordinating these efforts and filling these sandbags, there were only concerned neighbors and citizens.” There was only a community of heart that transcended all political, ideological and socio-economic barriers.
While collective habits of the heart are probably most apparent under these stressful conditions, we believe that with careful and appreciative examination, the collaborative spirit also exists in the daily life of those citizens who reside in remote, rural communities. They have to rely on one another when addressing the challenge of revitalizing the local arts, finding the funds to repair and expand the local library, restoring a local river, or constructing a strategic plan for restoration of their local economy. Expertise is acknowledged and engaged because the residents of these communities know one another and have experienced the knowledgeable and skillful engagement of other residents of their community when addressing past challenges.
Expertise is established and action is taken based on this expertise. Collective habits of the heart are prevalent. Expertise is shared when people are proactive. They come together to eliminate the source of the stress. They find ways to reduce flooding or forest fires. They obtain funds to rebuild the dam. In these temporary settings, people also find ways to revitalize the arts, expand the library, restore the river, or stimulate their local economy. Temporary systems are established where new ideas can be explored, decisions can be made—and commitments can be established. It is to the nature and dynamics of these temporary systems that we turn our attention in this essay regarding collective expertise.
Expertise Concerning Structure, Process and Attitude
In seeking to identify the nature and dynamics of these temporary systems, we return to our identification of the natural, linkage and need-based sources of expertise to be found in these systems. It is well beyond the scope of this essay to identify all of the sources of natural expertise within contemporary communities. Abundant sources of technical expertise are to be found in mid-21st Century societies. Furthermore, we are not able to identify all (or even some) of the many linkages that can be accessed or needs that must be addressed in contemporary societies.
What can be addressed is the natural expertise needed to create and facilitate collaborative ventures in which collective expertise is being engaged. We specifically propose that these collaborative ventures and the accompanying acceptance and engagement of collective expertise requires the knowledge of a social architect (structural expertise), skill of a group facilitator (process-related expertise), and dedication of a social reformer (expertise related to attitudes). These three roles relate, in turn, to what Goodwin Watson (Watson and Johnson, 1972) proposed many years ago: effective functioning of a project, organization or society require attention to three dimensions: structure, process and attitude.
The first dimension (structure) contains the formal elements of a project, organization or society: the organization chart and reporting relationships, buildings, technologies, official strategic plans, etc. The structures are visible and can readily be articulated. They are the stable, enduring “snap shots” of the organization.
Download Article 1K Club
