查看原文
其他

“运动”引领社会变革,而非“组织” | 双语

SSIR 斯坦福社会创新评论 2021-09-05


创造一个健康、人道的世界不仅仅需要新的组织设计,还需要对组织本质进行整体性反思。如果具备社会意识的组织和商业企业表现得更像是一个运动而不是一个组织,会发生什么呢?

运动的成功是全球性的。如果一个运动成功了,每个人的处境都会改变。相反,组织的成功是内部的,它们常常通过为自己所完成的工作来定义成功。

运动始于价值观。在成功的运动中,决策和行动都与这些价值观保持一致。组织始于行动,并通过诸如“核心竞争力”和“快速失败检测机制”这类范式得到强化。


▲图片来源于摄图网


本文首发于SSIR英文网站作者:希尔迪·戈特利布(Hildy Gottliebjul)翻译:齐菁博校对:姚森、张亦蕾

保罗•霍肯(Paul Hawken)在2007年出版的《被祝福的动乱》一书中描述了一场日益壮大的全球运动,旨在创造一个健康、人道的世界。这场运动并不是在某单一旗帜的领导之下进行的,而是由世界各地数以百万计的无关联的个人和团体所共同创造。

自那以后,社会变革的舞台迅速扩大。我们见证了传统的非营利组织(或者我们更愿意称之为社区受益型组织)的激增。社会企业成为了主流,许多主要大学都已将其纳入研究领域。我们也看到了传统商界的剧变,从常见的“漂绿”行为(即公司或组织以某些行动宣示自己对环境保护的投入,但实际上却是反其道而行的虚假环保宣传),到真正具有社会意识的企业的崛起。

然而同时,我们也在继续见证着战争、贫穷、个人暴力行为、大规模的社会不公,以及创纪录的环境退化的发生。

但是,回顾过去的一个世纪,世界确实经历了彻底的社会变革。这些成功的尝试并不是在个别组织的牵头之下进行,而是由各种运动来引领发生的。

那么,如果具备社会意识的组织和商业企业表现得更像是一个运动而不是一个组织,会发生什么呢?在实践中又会是什么样子?要回答这些问题,需要考虑我们应如何重新定义以下三个因素:成功、领导力,和运转方式。


定义成功


 
在运动中,使命决定了团队意欲实现的最终目标。当一场运动取得成功——就是“任务完成!”之后,每个人都可以离开。然而,在组织中,使命决定的是“我们做什么”。在一个组织中,成功意味着每个人都会继续留下来!
 
运动的成功是全球性的。如果一个运动成功了,每个人的处境都会改变。相反,组织的成功是内部的,它们常常通过为自己所完成的工作来定义成功。

运动追求彻底的变革。组织则常满足于增量的改进,并清楚知道,一个实体无法实现大规模改变。
 
在运动中,需要超越任何个人利益的事业目标。在面临艰难决择时,这个事业目标是决策所参照的第一标准。在组织中,责任担当首先是指对组织负责。当领导者面临艰难决择时,最要紧的是确保组织的可持续性。
 
“运动”这个词的意思是“创造行动”,从一个地方到另一个地方。维持一个运动就是维持行动。根据韦氏词典,“组织”一词的意思是“将某物的不同部分按一定顺序排列,以便他们被易于找到或使用的行为或过程”。维持组织就是维持秩序。
 
定义领导力



运动始于价值观。在成功的运动中,决策和行动都与这些价值观保持一致。组织始于行动,并通过诸如“核心竞争力”和“快速失败检测机制”这类范式得到强化。价值观很少被组织作为选择应该采取哪些行动的准绳。

领导运动的是一个积极活跃的角色——它涉及领导实际的活动,大多数时候没有正式头衔。相比之下,领导组织的则是一个名义上的角色——首席执行官。事实上,在几乎所有规模大于小型初创企业的组织中,那些挂名的领导人并不是领导实际活动的人。

在运动中,领导力是从内部产生的。只要承诺为这一事业采取行动,任何人都可以加入。一旦进入“内部”,能否成为领导者由每个人所采取的行动和做出的贡献来决定。而组织则往往去“外面”寻找领导者。人们只能以正式角色(董事会成员,职员,志愿者,实习生)加入一个组织。个人本身并不能控制自己是否能够升迁,那些拥有正式决策权的人才可以作出这些决定。

对运动的领导是分散和灵活的,因为个人需要深入参与到运动当中去,并将其他人也带入其中。对组织的领导是结构性的,通常按某个固定的组织结构图分层。外部人士最常见的参与方式是提供现金——要么是作为非营利组织的捐赠者,要么是作为商业企业的客户或投资者。

对运动的治理涉及价值观、战略和直接行动。对组织的治理涉及服从规定、监督和管理风险。战略通常是由组织中的其他人制定的,然后由那些“负责人”批准。价值观并不经常在具体治理的视野中。

归根结底,在运动中,运动本身就是领导力的实质所在,人们忠诚于该运动中的其他个人,并忠诚于超越这些个人的更伟大的目标事业。而在组织中,领导力培养的是对组织的忠诚。
 
定义运转方式



在运动中,形式服从于功能。运动关注的是可随功能需求变化的灵活有效的形式。在组织中,功能服从于形式的指导,这始于大多数组织的第一个正式行为——发布公司章程、章程细则和其他形式的声明,这些形式是组织实体履行其功能的基础。自第一个正式行为起,组织便看重稳定性和效率:“这就是我们做事的方式。”

对运动的支持是由内而外的——首先是由那些参与最多、受影响最直接的人发起,之后以此为圆心,同心圆式地向外播散开去。运动将“资源”定义为所需的实际资源(劳动力、材料),这些资源即使在看起来贫瘠的社区里也会很丰富。相反,组织所依赖的支持主要来自于外部——由客户、捐赠者、授予人、投资者或赞助人提供。组织将“资源”定义为现金,特别是对社区受益型组织来说,它们不会认为组织的成功主要取决于组织的服务对象。
 
运动倾向于采用的结构和系统,往往能够反映人们共享美好生活的社会发展方向。而组织倾向于采用的系统,则通常反映企业和国家如何维持对他人的统治权。

社会变革领域正在不断尝试新的组织形式,以推进保罗·霍肯描述的这场运动。组织越是有意识地架构其最终目标、领导力和运转方式,使之变得更像一场运动,这些努力就越有可能成功地创造一个更健康,更人道的世界。

注:本文作者希尔迪·戈特利布(Hildy Gottliebjul)是一位社会科学家,也是一位提出有力问题的人。作为一位作家、TEDx演讲者和连续的社会企业家,她联合创立了Creating the Future,是主要的边界推动者。Creating the Future是一个活实验室,通过在日常生活中的各种提问来展现人们最好的一面。



英文对照阅读

Building Movements, 

Not Organizations


In his 2007 book Blessed Unrest, Paul Hawken described a growing global movement to create a healthy, humane world—work that is happening not under a single banner, but by millions of unaffiliated individuals and groups around the world.


Since then, the social change arena has grown rapidly. We have witnessed the proliferation of traditional nonprofits (or as we prefer to call them, community-benefit organizations). Social enterprise has become so mainstream that it is a field of study at many major universities. We’ve also seen a marked shift in the traditional business world—from what was in many cases green-washing, to the genuine rise of socially minded businesses. 


And yet, we continue to witness war, poverty, individual acts of violence, massive social injustice, and a record pace of environmental degradation. 


Looking back over the past century, however, the world has indeed experienced sweeping social change. Those successful efforts were led not by individual organizations, but by movements.


What might be possible, therefore, if socially minded organizations and businesses acted more like movements than organizations? And what might that look like in practice?


To answer those questions, consider how we might re-define the following three factors: success, leadership, and means.


Defining Success

In a movement, the mission defines the ultimate goal the group intends to achieve. When a movement achieves success—“Mission accomplished!”—everyone goes home. In organizations, however, the mission defines “what we do.” Success in an organization means that everyone gets to stick around!


Movements define success globally. If a movement is successful, things change for everyone. Organizations, on the other hand, often define success internally, by what the organization accomplishes for itself.


Movements seek sweeping change. Organizations are often satisfied with incremental improvement, correctly understanding that one entity cannot achieve large-scale change.

In movements, accountability is to a cause greater than any one individual. When it comes to making tough decisions, the cause is the top priority. In organizations, accountability is first to the organization; when leaders face tough decisions, their top priority is organizational sustainability.


The word “movement” means “to create action,” to go from one place to another. Sustaining a movement is about sustaining action. Per Merriam-Webster, the word “organization” means “the act or process of putting the different parts of something in a certain order so that they can be found or used easily.” Sustaining an organization is about sustaining order.


Defining Leadership


Movements begin with values. In successful movements, decisions and actions align with those values. Organizations begin with actions, reinforced by axioms such as “core competencies” and “fail fast.” Values are rarely used as the consistent barometer for determining which actions to take.


Leading a movement is an active role—it involves leading actual activities, most often with no official title. By contrast, leading an organization is a titular role—chief executive officer. Those titular leaders, in virtually all organizations larger than a tiny start-up, are not the ones leading actual activities.


In a movement, leadership emerges from within. Anyone can join, simply by committing to take action on behalf of the cause. Once “inside,” becoming a leader is self-determined by each individual taking action and contributing. Organizations, on the other hand, often look “outside” for leaders. People can join an organization only in formal roles (board member, staff, volunteer, intern). And individuals themselves do not control whether they rise through the ranks; those with formal decision-making authority make that call. 


Leadership of a movement is distributed and agile, as individuals become more deeply engaged and bring others into the fold. Leadership in an organization is structured and most often hierarchical, per a fixed organizational chart. Outsiders most commonly engage by providing cash—as a donor to a nonprofit, or as a customer or investor in a business.


Governance of movements is about values, strategy, and direct action. Governance in organizations is about regulatory compliance, oversight, and risk management. Strategy is most often developed by others in the organization, and then approved by those “in charge.” Values do not routinely enter into governance conversations.


Ultimately, the movement is the leader—people working on behalf of a movement are loyal to other individuals within the movement and to a cause larger than those individuals. In organizations, leadership cultivates loyalty to the organization.


Defining Means


In a movement, form follows function. As functional needs change, movements value forms that are agile and effective. In organizations, function is guided by form, beginning with the very first official act of most organizations—filing articles of incorporation, bylaws, and other declarations of the forms around which the entity will fit its functions. From there, organizations value stability and efficiency: “This is how we do things.”


Movements are supported from the inside out—first by those most involved and most directly affected by the cause, and then in concentric circles rippling outward. Movements define “resources” as the actual resources needed (labor, materials), which are abundant even in communities that seem to have very little. Organizations, on the other hand, are primarily supported from the outside —by customers, donors, grantors, investors, or patrons. Defining “resources” as cash, community-benefit organizations in particular do not assume that the recipients of their services will be the primary contributors to the group’s success.


Movements tend to adopt structures and systems that mirror how societies progress toward people living well together. Organizations tend to adopt systems that mirror how businesses and nations maintain sovereignty over others.


The social change arena is continually experimenting with new organizational forms to further the movement Paul Hawken described. The more intentional organizations are in structuring their end goals, leadership, and means to become more movement-like, the more likely those efforts are to succeed in creating a healthier, more humane world.




END



# 你知道哪些成功的(社会)运动案例?
它们有什么特点?#

欢迎留言交流
也可扫描二维码
添加福娃微信
“勾搭我们”






打开淘宝扫描二维码
或复制如下口令到淘宝打开
¥Wec81LXtKae¥
进入【北京乐平公益基金会公益店铺】
即可购书



关联阅读



1. 新旧势力的碰撞:如何通过四个步骤打造成功的运动

2. 向死而生:新冠病毒倒逼社会创新


3. 应对公共危机,我们需要“系统领导者”

4. 破解公共倡导难题,应从“增强意识”转向“引导行动”

5. 洪晃:疫情将在多大程度上改变我们的生活认知?

6. 新公益的最新发展

7. 黄铮公开信:新世界正到来,新物种必出现



: . Video Mini Program Like ,轻点两下取消赞 Wow ,轻点两下取消在看

您可能也对以下帖子感兴趣

文章有问题?点此查看未经处理的缓存