%20Logo.png)
At the beginning of July, all of us at Literacy Works were excited to share our new values statements. We’re not just proud of the statements we came up with (which I think truly reflect how we do our work), but also the process that got us here.
For the final piece in our Trauma-Informed Communication series, we’re talking about Collaboration. Meaningful collaboration doesn’t happen accidentally, but through thoughtful planning and intentional processes. I’d like to share with you how we worked together as a team to develop our new values statements.
Why collaboration matters at work
Collaboration is “the meaningful sharing of power and decision-making.” While many workplaces claim to value collaboration, in practice important decisions are made in isolation by folks in leadership positions.
Nearly half of responses to a survey from the American Psychological Association said a lack of involvement in decision making contributed to stress in the workplace. Workplace stress leads to disinvestment, low performance, and high turnover - none of which are good for organizations.
At Literacy Works, we know that to do good work, staff members need to feel valued as individuals and have a voice in decisions that affect their jobs.
Cultivating a culture of collaboration
The process of revising our values started organically - many of us reflected on our own that what we had no longer fit our work. And that led to conversations with each other, saying “hey, what do you think about revisiting these?” It felt important enough to set aside staff time to dig into what we wanted to say.
When I reflect on our collaborative process, there are six lessons that stand out to me.
1. Leave your ego at the door
Our previous values were written by people who are still involved with Literacy Works. They could have easily resisted the change to something they’d created. Instead, they were open to the perspectives of others.
Similarly, this process was driven by program staff, rather than a top-down initiative. In order to meaningfully share power and decision-making, those with the most power need to be willing to step aside and listen.
2. Have a clear goal
Once we agreed that revising our values was something we wanted, we set aside time specifically for this conversation. We knew we wanted 4 to 6 statements written in plain language that capture how we approach our work. That helped us stay on track throughout the process.
Inspired by the ToP Facilitation Consensus Workshop, we used a Jamboard to brainstorm ideas and characteristics that reflect our values. Everyone could add as many words as they wanted, there were no wrong answers.
And that brings us to lesson three: Center the people with the least power.
3. Center the people with the least power
Every organization has both formal and de facto hierarchies. This is reflected in job titles, but also how people are treated based on their gender, race, disability, and other identity characteristics.
The risk of sharing an idea or critiquing your organization is not the same for everybody. Creating a culture where everyone feels safe to speak their mind takes intentionality and extends into everyday practices. Safety comes from showing, over time, that:
people won’t be punished for sharing critical ideas,
they can make mistakes and ask questions without ridicule, and
their suggestions and concerns will be taken seriously.
In the context of our brainstorming, using the Jamboard meant that everyone had the power to add their own ideas in their own words. It was anonymous, which can help alleviate pressure to censor yourself. And once on the board, everyone’s ideas carried the same weight.
A word of caution to those in leadership positions: in the process of centering marginalized and disenfranchised voices, be careful not to offload leadership responsibilities onto lower ranking and often lower paid staff. Think carefully about who’s coordinating meetings, taking notes, sharing updates, etc. Advocate for collaborative decision making, but don’t ask people to put effort in on something if you’re not genuinely willing to explore their ideas. Superficial collaboration is more harmful than not attempting collaboration at all. |
4. Invited discourse
After adding our ideas to the Jamboard, we worked together to sort them into categories. Then we chose a word or phrase that captures the ideas in each group. These labels would serve as the foundation for our values statements.
Unsurprisingly, we didn’t always agree on how things should be grouped or labeled.
Building off centering people with the least power, collaboration requires normalizing disagreement and discourse. In practice, this looks like:
Creating moments of quiet so even the shyer participants and slower thinkers have space to give their input
Calling in people who haven’t shared with questions like, “how do these ideas feel to you?”
Acknowledging tension and being willing to take a break if needed
Asking questions that can help identify a point of agreement
Once we had categories that felt good enough, we took a few weeks to percolate on what we had.
5. Hold space for what matters to others, even if it doesn’t feel important to you.
When we came back together, we used the categories we created to start drafting values statements.
This is the part that might feel tedious to a lot of people. We spent a lot of time honing in on the specific language we wanted to use. We were digging in the weeds. There were times where one person felt really strongly about nuance that didn’t matter to the rest of the group.
It’s easy in those moments to dismiss those concerns, to say, “it’s fine, no one will notice,” and move on. This is perhaps the truest test of collaboration: are you willing to explore what’s important to someone else that doesn’t feel important to you? Taking the time to hear out their ideas and work together on a solution shows that you respect and value their perspective.
6. Give it time
Urgency can quickly kill collaboration. When we rush, we’re less intentional, we default to the status quo, and we can bulldoze through the hard conversations. Creating space for meaningful collaboration requires time - often more time than you imagined.
It took us three all-staff meetings over four months to create something everyone was happy with. Before finalizing our statements, we presented them to our Community Voices Group, to make sure folks outside of Literacy Works understood them the way we meant them.
As I wrap up our Trauma-Informed Communications series, I’m reflecting on how creating opportunities for collaboration is both part of being trauma-informed and cannot happen without safety, transparent communication, and attention to power dynamics - all tenants of Trauma-Informed Practice.
Meaningful collaboration is an exciting and empowering experience. If you’re willing to put in the work, the results can be magical.
The Lab Report is Clear Language Lab’s blog and includes posts on various topics related to clear, effective communication. Questions or errors you want to report? Contact Tiara Whitlock, Program Manager, at tiara@litworks.org.
© 2024 Literacy Works