The production of this report is itself a story of what is possible when people think and behave in new ways (e.g., letting go of control), to produce a better report and reach many more people. All of the authors of this publication work in different settings (nonprofit, business, academia), and with different institutions; yet we all participated in Leadership for a New Era, a collaborative research initiative designed to promote models of leadership that are more inclusive, networked, and collective. We chose to exercise leadership together. We learned how to co-create content using technologies, like public wikis, that enabled everyone to contribute or edit content without approval or vetting by others. Writing a paper together using a public wiki, as you might imagine, gets messy. Our success depended on developing norms about how to work together, establishing trust in our relationships, being accountable to one another, and talking through issues that came up along the way. We believe that by having multiple organizations co-brand this publication that the collective impact of diffusing these ideas will be much greater. While this may sound like coalition building where leaders strategically negotiate organizational interests for the purpose of a larger goal that advances everyone's issues; it is based instead on a philosophical appreciation of the actual interdependence of our work and acknowledgement that leadership is more about the process of what we produce together than what each one of us alone contributes. We did use social media to support our work, wikis and webinars, but in the end at the heart of this work is collective leadership, a fundamental shift in the way that we conceptualize and practice leadership. While anyone of us could have produced a report on this topic with some good ideas, none of us alone could bring the breadth of perspective and diversity of ideas that were to produce this end result. [I love this paragraph- but I'm not sure it's the best lead. It could be a sidebar, a preface, something on the back cover - if this will be print pub. For the lead - see my notes on overall structure in the comments DS] {I agree - this seems like a really good sidebar or backstory - kmh)

Introduction

We live in a world of skyrocketing complexity. Despite enormous effort byof bothmore thethan government1 andmillion nonprofitnon sectors,profit organizations we have not made significant progress on our most critical social problems -- the widening gap between haves and have nots, the failure of global food distribution systems, the rapid deterioration of the environment, and so forth. At the same time, we have seen extraordinary examples of previously unimaginable social change in recent years, such as the Arab Spring of 2011 that led to the deposition of corrupt regimes in Tunisia and Egypt.These shifts have one thing in common: networks. They are examples of what is possible when networks of activists and organizations -- in many cases tied together with new social technologies -- are activated and aligned around a common goal.This is not surprising when we consider the complexity and interconnectedness of our most important social challenges. No individual or organization can solve these problems independently. And yet,yet organizationsas thatJohn areKania tryingand toMark tackleKramer thesepoint challengesout remainin plaguedtheir byarticle, fragmentationCollective andImpact, duplication."nearly For1.4 example,million nonprofits accordingtry to WiserEarth,invent thereindependent aresolutions moreto thanmajor “onesocial millionproblems, organizationsoften andworking manyat millionsodds ofwith useach aroundother."

At the worldsame whotime, arewe activelyhave workingseen towardextraordinary ecologicalexamples sustainability,of economicpreviously unimaginable justice,social humanchange in rightsrecent protection,years, politicalsuch accountabilityas andthe peaceArab --Spring issuesof 2011 that areled to systematicallythe interconnecteddeposition andof intertwined.”corrupt However,regimes in theirTunisia article,and "CollectiveEgypt.These Impact,shifts "Johnhave Kaniaone andthing Markin Kramercommon: pointnetworks. outThey thatare "nearlyexamples 1.4of what millionis nonprofitspossible trywhen tonetworks inventof independentactivists solutionsand toorganizations major-- in many cases tied together with new social problems,technologies often-- workingare atactivated oddsand aligned witharound eacha other."common goal.

To catalyze transformative change, we need to understand how to leverage networks effectively. In order to fully embrace the potential of networks, we need to rethink the role of leadership in supporting change. What exactly does effective leadership look like in a world that emphasizes bottom-up over top-down and letting go over asserting control? And how do we develop and foster this new paradigm of leadership? We need to move beyond leadership models that focus on building the skills of individuals and challenge ourselves to understand how to cultivate leadership as a process by which multiple actors align their efforts to take action. We need a new mental model of leadership and new approaches to leadership development if we are to move the needle on any significant social problem by taking advantage of network strategies and more connected ways of working.

This report is a joint project of people and organizations working in both the leadership development field and the network field. We have come together to produce this report for several reasons:

1. We believe that preparing leadership with network tools and strategies can amplify the impact of social change work.
2. We believe that leveraging network strategies requires a fundamental shift in how we think about and develop leadership.
3. We believe that networks can teach us about the kind of leadership needed to tackle complex problems, which in turn can lead to new ways of developing leadership.
4. We believe that sharing ideas, resources, and recommendations will move others involved in leadership development work to do more to unleash the potential of networks to solve social problems.

In this report, we hope to help those in the business of developing leadership for social change -- from funders to leadership development providers to activists -- examine current assumptions about leadership, understand new models of network leadership, and propose ways to better prepare those in leadership to use network strategies and tools.

Why the Buzz About Network Strategies?

Networks aren't new, but they are receiving greater attention for several reasons:

1. Expanding use of social technologies. Working through networks has taken on a new urgency because the scale and reach of what networks can accomplish are expanding with the use of social technologies, from texting to Twitter. These tools are making it possible to connect people and organizations in unprecedented ways across innumerable boundaries. They make it possible to link to greater numbers of people (irrespective of geographic distance), to access a greater diversity of perspectives, to accelerate the sharing of information, and to reduce the costs of participation and coordination. These tools can help break down silos and the fragmentation that limit leadership capacity to address systemic problems. Social technologies can support leadership progress on complex social and environmental challenges that require people and organizations to coordinate their leadership efforts across traditional boundaries and sectors. (Working Wikily)

2 Better language and tools for visualizing network connections. Mathematicians and scientists have given us new language and tools for thinking about and analyzing our connections to each other. We have always lived and worked through our networks of relationships, but we now have the ability to see how the underlying structures -- the patterns of connection -- dictate access to expertise and resources in the network, reveal trust and commitment among partners in the network, and predict whether joint outcomes are organized for success. As we understand more about how networks behave, we can use the knowledge to strengthen and activate networks for social change purposes. We now have tools that enable us to create maps to better visualize the webs of relationships between people and organizations (or other entities). Network maps enable us to identify leverage points for helping a network weave connections for greater impact. As we understand the value of different types of relationships in a network we can facilitate connections that increase cohesion, produce innovation, and catalyze collective action. We can also see how information is likely to flow through a network and use this information to address bottlenecks and strengthen communication.

3. Increasingly complex and adaptive challenges and opportunities. The world's social challenges continue to grow in complexity, while most of our problem-solving approaches continue to be too linear. These problems span complex ecosystems beyond the scope of single organizations. As we begin to wrap our heads around what are often referred to as wicked problems, the nature of the problem evolves, rendering our previous strategies irrelevant and often an attempted solution creates another problem. Networks offer the possibility of adapting at the speed of the problem, leveraging many resources in parallel. This requires a new kind of leadership and level of connectivity needed to evolve and adapt with changing conditions.

4. Rise of free agents. We are seeing that networks are leaderful, not leaderless [ref. Lipnack and Stamps, Virtual Teams 1997]. Leadership emerges as people find opportunities to take action on issues important to them. Increasingly, individuals are not working through nonprofit organizations. A number of individuals, often called free agents, give their time and leadership energy to causes without working through nonprofit organizations. Many of these people who are young, and the next generation of leadership are connecting around the causes they care about through networks.

Network strategies are no more the answer to every change initiative than organizations are, yet organizational change strategies have been prioritized for decades as the best way to make change happen. The problem is that organizations create silos that swallow up individual leaders, whose authority and time to act on what matters most is often limited by organizational demands and protocol. Despite our best intentions, the problems of duplication and fragmentation persist and we settle for doing our part on our small piece of the puzzle ... and for the most part, it’s not adding up to a huge collective impact on any major problem. There are several things we would say about leadership and networks

1. Networks increase influence and reach by amplifying messages through social media, producing innovation by bridging organizations and sectors, coordinating the actions of more people with fewer resources, and aligning the work of individuals and organizations around a common purpose that achieves greater collective impact.
2. People and groups will exercise more effective leadership if they know how and when to use network strategies to build momentum for change, and use network resources for greater public benefit.
3. Using network strategies effectively requires different leadership values and behaviors.
4. Millennials who have grown up in a socially connected world are bringing a strong network centric approach to social cause organizing.

How Network Strategies Are Increasing Leadership Impact

When leadership integrates a network strategy we are seeing significant increases in the impact of their work on global social issues as demonstrated in the stories below. :

Suggestion: [ThisWe could use the case study that Natalia wrote up on Spark and use it to illustrate the points below or we could use the different examples below. DM
[All of the below are tech enabled examples. I'd suggest diversifying a bit. Some ideas area below - DS]

Influence: As illustrated with the example, The ‘Story of Stuff,’ an animated film targeting consumption, social media enabled the message of the film to go viral and 3 years later it is still getting 10,000 views a day, has had 12,000,000 online views that have prompted discussions and action around the world. By inviting a people to translate or adapt the film for their own uses the original film producers increased the global collective impact of the film's message, e.g. it has been translated into many languages, school curriculum has been developed for use with the film, it has been converted into theater.

Engagement: The 2008 Obama campaign mobilized 13,000,000 supporters and generated over $750,000 in small donations. The campaign demonstrated the power of using social tools and social networks to activate citizen leadership. Online tools made it possible for people new to leadership to raise money, find each other, organize house parties, and coordinate canvassing and phone banks. Unleashing leadership at a more massive scale requires more than technology. We need to move beyond thinking of leadership as the exceptional, almost heroic individual to see and support the leadership potential that exists within everyone who can be moved to take action on the things they care most about. A network approach to engagement does not require technology. In Lawrence, MA a network strategy was used to revitalize the community by building connection through community dinners and outreach.

Innovation: The designLeadership fieldLearning hasCommunity, longa recognizedlearning thatnetwork innovationof isthousands notof thepeople productdoing ofleadership thedevelopment lonework, geniusput (orout leader)a butcall athrough highlyits network synergisticinviting processanyone amongwho manywas individuals.interested Thein Minnesotaplanning Communitythe Foundationorganization's partnerednational withmeeting, AshokaCreating ChangemakersSpace, onto avolunteer. socialClose goodto contest30 thatpeople, promotedsome innovativeof ideaswhom forhad reducingbeen childhoodfollowing obesity.LLC's Thenewsletter networkoffered strategyto usedhelp plan the national meeting even though they had not been to solicit,any judgeof andLLC's shareregional ideasor increasednational civicmeetings. infrastructureThe byvolunteer engaginggroup organizationalof partnersover and20 theirdesign constituentsteam throughoutmembers who were dispersed across the contestcountry process.figured Innovationout washow producedto bycombine bringingface bothto aface, collaborativeconference calls and networkvirtual mindsetcollaboration tools. The influx of new and diverse thinking brought a good deal of innovation to the contest.design which integrated arts, create new formats and previously untapped facilitation skills.

Action: KaBOOM!, an organization that aspires to create a “great place to play within walking distance of every child” shifted to a network strategy to help people build 1600 “do it yourself” playgrounds in one year…more in one year than they had built in the last 14 years since their inception![i] Again this requires sharing leadership with people who are aligned with your goals and giving up control (not an idea consistent with leadership responsibility).

These are just a few examples of how people and organizations are increasing their capacity to innovate, extend their reach and tackle large-scale problems by broadening the ways they think about leadership, and by using network strategies and tools. As we will explain, these examples are possible because of leadership behaviors and skills that traditionally have not been valued as 'leader like'.


Sidebar: What do we mean by networks? (Do we need to include this or should we refer people to other resources for this level of detail???)

A network is a collection of people, organizations or other entities that are connected to each other by some kind of relationship. Networks have always existed because people are social and form relationships with each other. June Holley, in the Network Weaver's Handbook, elaborates: “networks are sets of relationships and the patterns they create.” She goes on to note that “these patterns influence the quality of communication and the likelihood of collaboration.” We are learning more and more about how networks support communication, collaboration, collective action, and innovation, and how to intervene in a network to strengthen it.

Networks have two basic elements, nodes (people and organizations) and the connections between them, ties. Hubs in networks have one or two people with most of the connections. Hubs are important because they have the capacity to weave the network by connecting people they know. The process of network weaving transforms the network from a hub and spoke pattern to a more web-like pattern with a core and a periphery.

The network core represents the strong bonds among a group of people who have a shared purpose or vision. They are the most engaged members of the network. A strong core means that people can come and go and the network remains strongly connected. A network with a vibrant periphery is more likely to form connections with people in other networks. The periphery of the network offers opportunities for growth and expansion (Fine and Kanter) Networks have strong ties at the core, and weaker ties at the periphery. Social media helps people stay connected, strengthen ties and brings new people and perspectives into the periphery.

The use of mapping tools to visualize networks enables us to assess the network’s overall health. Strong networks have clusters formed around affinity (shared goals, identity) that are linked to a diversity of other clusters. The grouping by affinity creates strong bonds and trust while the diversity supports new ideas, resources and innovation. Unlike traditional organizational structures where information flows down through multiple layers of management, a network is characterized by many indirect connections and shorter communication paths. While particular individuals or organizations may have some prominence in a robust network and help strengthen groups or catalyze relationships between groups, it is the connections that are powerful not the individuals who formed those connections.

We have always had, and will generally always need, two forms of networks in organizations: the formal and the informal. The formal organization is represented by the (usually) hierarchical organizational structure. The links, or ties, in these structures are reporting relationships. They represent commitments and obligations that go in both directions. Formal structures are essential for processes and tasks that require discipline, measurement, and decision-making. [Are these the right metrics? CR -- check with PA]. Formal organizations offer the illusion of control; however it is the informal organization, the organization between the lines and in the white spaces that supports the scaffolding of the hierarchy. Today’s organizational leaders need to be prepared to ask themselves, How do we become smarter about how to nurture and use informal connections? How can organizational leaders create more space for network forms of leadership? How can leadership programs support organizational leaders to develop network leadership competencies?

Why we need to think differently about leadership to unleash the power of networks

If networks offer so much potential, why aren't more people embracing them? Although many individuals and organizations are being encouraged to behave in more network centric ways, also referred to as the Monitor institute as “working wikily” with greater openness, transparency, decentralized decision-making and distributed action (Monitor Institute) better positioning them to adapt to dynamic and changing environments and respond to crises (Heifetz et. Al). This shift in organizational culture and practice cannot happen without a new lens and consciousness about the value of being transparent, decentralizing decision making and distributing leadership. These practices collide with what many believe to best practices in organizational management or what it means to lead. For example, without a new lens it could be difficult for an Executive Director to give up control of their product and even if they did think it was a good idea they would probably have to run the idea through a hierarchical structure for approval. There are two important assumptions that will prevent us from effectively taking advantage of network strategies and opportunities: first, that leadership is the activity of one individual influencing others; and second, that organizations are the most effective means for producing social and community benefit.

IWhat is different about leadership in networks? Network leadership practices clash with strongly held ideas about leadership that are prevalent in the nonprofit sector and society at large. Given the rootedness of our ideals about individual responsibility, we frequently develop narratives about leadership that attribute accomplishments to individual effort and merit overlooking the ways in which many people were contributing to a success. This narrative often leads us to fear being outperformed by others, and a desire to protect our competitive edge. This leadership mindset is not conducive to generosity or transparency. Our elevation of individual leaders relegates leadership to a select group making it difficult to see leadership in everyone who wants to get involved and take action. The Obama campaign would not have had its success if they saw volunteers as campaign workers who needed to be managed by a few central leaders.

The chart below illustrates some of these differences: (This is supposed to be a chart but the table did not copy into the wiki.)

Traditional Leader Model	Collective network leadership
● Leader exerts influence over followers ● Leadership in organizations is top down & hierarchical ● Achievements attributed to strength of individual leader and failures are attributed to his/her shortcomings as a leader ● Leaders can be developed but not everyone has leadership potential	● Individuals and groups connect & align efforts to support a common purpose. ● Leadership is a dynamic process with people assuming many roles ● Achievements are produced through collective leadership effort and failures & experimentation are embraced for advancing collective learning and adaptation. ● Everyone has the ability to exercise leadership

Without a strong commitment to developing a new leadership mindset and a network mindset, nonprofit leadership will default to old and familiar ways of leading and miss the opportunities to better align efforts with others to influence social change. As organizational leadership develops the capacity to use social technologies; and evolve and connect resources through networks, organizations will enhance not only the value of their own work, but also have a positive impact on the sector as a whole.

What new leadership behaviors can we learn from in networks? Understanding leadership in networks is giving us a new lens on what leadership as a dynamic and collective process looks like. Networks are often successful because they embody a set of values (sometimes referred to as a network mindset) that shape how people and organizations interact. Leadership is created through relationships and what we do together not who we are as individuals actors. A closer look at what is contributing to network success can teach us about the leadership process. These examples demonstrate values that are part of the leadership ethos of a network and demonstrate individual and group behaviors that increase leadership impact.

● Generosity: The founder of KaBOOM!, Darell Hammond, explains that they had a breakthrough on their mission of getting a playground within the reach of every child when they asked, "why don't we just give away the model? We can't do everything anyway. If we give it away people can replicate it on their own."
● Letting Go of Control: The last presidential election campaign, developed social technologies that enabled people to organize their friends and communities. This was possible because campaign organizers let go of control and concerns about whether people would do what they said they would do or stay on message.
● Trust and Reciprocity: Networks assume good will and build trust so that people from diverse perspectives and experiences can connect, interact together and find common ground. Lawrence Community Works uses a network centric organizing approach to engage 50,000 members who are driving community change in Lawrence, MA. Community members build trust and connections by hosting dinners to talk about their journey to the neighborhood and what their experience has been while living there. Action emerges from these conversations.
● Transparency: When people in organizations work in ways that are more transparent, accessible and understandable to people outside the organization, the walls between inside and outside become more porous. Transparency creates more opportunities for engagement. Ideas and resources flow more freely and creativity is sparked. The authors of this report agreed to collaboratively write and edit each other’s work on a public wiki in order to elicit more feedback and engage more people in promoting a more inclusive, networked and collective models of leadership. There are now over 200 people signed on to the wiki.
● Accountability: Authentic relationships create the conditions for mutual support and accountability. Accountability and responsibility are not enforced through rules, rather people become accountable to one another and the larger network because they care about each other. Nonprofit executive directors in Boston neighborhoods historically looked out for their own interests without thinking much about the well-being of the whole community until they formed strong, trusting relationships with each other through a fellowship program. Since then, they trust and care about each other deeply, leading them to act in ways that value the whole community, not just their short-term self-interest.


I noticed that Natalia has added a case study on Spark see below

Case Study: BostonSpark Green]This was andadded Healthyrecently. BuildingMaybe Networkit (Icould thinkbe maybeconnected thisto shouldthe getsection moveon needing toa thedifferent Leadershipkind developmentof section)leadership illustrating some of those points with this case study.

TheSpark is Bostona Greennetwork andof Healthyyoung Buildingpeople Network(millennials) illustrateswho are invested in promoting equality for women throughout the world. As a networked organization that operates primarily through the efforts of their volunteers (they only have one staff member), they use the power of networks socialto execute much of their programming. The network mappingwas founded in action.2004 Theby Boston-basedsix Barryoung Foundationwomen hadthat spentwanted severalto yearsget fundinginvolved twowith international setswomen’s ofrights. localSince organizationsthen thatit advocatedhas forgrown changesto engage over 5,000 people in buildingthe codesBay Area, contributing over $1,000,000 in grants and pro-bono standards:services publicto healthgrassroots women’s organizations thataround sawthe unhealthyglobe.

• Transparency buildingsand asOpen Leadership: Spark has a rootgrants causecommittee, comprised of manySpark illnesses,members, andthat decides environmentalwhich groupsprojects should be funded. Initially, the board made the funding decisions, but the team realized that weremany focusedmembers onwere interested in the energygrantmaking efficiencyprocess. As members, they are investors in the organization, and ecologicalthus impactit ofmade buildings.sense Into involve them 2005,at a seniordeeper programlevel. officerThis atcommittee Barrhas recognizedover that100 whilemembers who solicit, vet and process applications. They debate and vote on which project receive Spark grants.
• Engagement: “We believe in the “causes”power of networks. If you use a networked framework to engage people, you can maximize your investment. We wanted as many people as possible to participate in the twoprocess.” (Shannon setsFarley, executive director) Spark encourages all of organizationstheir members wereto different,participate in as many activities as possible, including joining the groupsgrant sharedmaking acommittee, commonsupporting advocacy goalefforts (signing ofpetitions settingand highercontacting performancecivic standardsleaders), forinteracting with other buildings,members through social media channels, and theyparticipating oftenin events approachedsuch as volunteer days. But the samenetwork governmentalso officialsleaves withthe boundaries open similarenough requests.so Somembers Barrcan brought“tap togetherin and tap out” from activities based on their availability and interest. That way, the network variousenjoys partiesthe full inenergy Aprilof 2005those that truly want to participate explorein whethera theygiven couldactivity, without alignmaking theirothers ef­forts,feel embarrassed shareor information,ashamed for not participating.

• Cross-sector Collaboration: One of the underlying values of Spark is that collaboration across sectors produces more innovative and developefficient solutions. For instance, a moreSpark member unifiedwith messageexperience in investment banking for municipal policymakers.projects Usingwas instrumental informationin collectedhelping atdevise thea gathering,more realistic thestrategy foundationto developedimprove a community real-timeradio socialproject networkin mapHaiti. “That’s the kind of theexpertise peoplethat traditional social sector organizations would disregard, in part due to biases against the private room.sector. TheAt mapSpark, clearlywe showedthink twodivisions principalbetween sectors clustersshould be ofblurred dots,for oneefficiency. representingAnd peoplewhen inyou healthblur organizationsthem, you create opportunities for leadership and engagement that weren’t available previously.” (Shannon Farley)

Spark provides members an opportunity to deepen their engagement with the othercause primarily– peopleinstead of simply attending an event or donating money, members can volunteer with grantee partners, mentor others, participate in environmentalgrantmaking, organizations;and iteven join alsoa showeddelegation of members that visit grantees around the groupsworld wereto notsee the wellimpact connected.firsthand. Seeing

Spark is a pioneer in the mapway ofin theirwhich fragmentedit operates using a network strategy. As a network, the groupsorganization agreedfaces some tochallenges. beginIn meetingparticular, togetherShannon andpoints eventuallyout formedthat the Bostontechnology infrastructure Greenhas andnot Healthykept Buildingup Network.with Thisthe networkgrowth hasof increasedthe connectionsnetwork.

As foundations and collaborationorganizations acrossin the differentnonprofit groupssector andare hasexploring networked improvedmodels, accessunderstanding to,the challenges and relationshipsopportunities with,of organizations manythat keyare policy-makersoperating inas thenetworks city.becomes (Workingincreasingly important. WikilyBut 2.0)many {Fromchallenges Bethand -questions hereemerge – What is athe linkbest way to support networks? What technology and resources are needed to facilitate the fullgrowth pdfof report.}networks? [weHow needcan we measure the referenceimpact here.and value, not only of the textresults, isbut fromalso Workingof Wikilythe -lasting whichconnections wasthat the basedmembers onbuild through the casenetwork? studyHow bycan Bethorganizations Tener,adapt their Alengagement Neirenbergstrategies andto Brucecreate Hoppe]greater shared ownership?.


What are network leadership competencies

The wheel of Network Leadership Competencies identifies five key competencies needed to effectively lead within a network or to bring network thinking and skills to increase the impact of leadership in nonprofit organizations. All of the competencies presume a network mindset and network literacy. Network literacy implies familiarity with the concepts of networks and their dynamics; the network mindset is the awareness and understanding that individuals and organizations are embedded in networks, and that social change impacts are more likely to occur as a result of applying network competencies.




Connecting: Relationships are the foundation of networks. Lawrence CommunityWorks (LCW) is a nonprofit community development corporation working to transform and revitalize the physical, economic, and social landscape of Lawrence, Massachusetts. LCW’s goal is to create a new “environment of connectivity” where residents can more easily connect to information, opportunity and each other. Their belief is that if thousands of residents are induced to “get back in the game” of working together and taking leadership roles in Lawrence, they can truly revitalize the City. [iv](LCW website) . Extending and cultivating trust is an essential leadership behavior that encourages self-authorizing action and open learning.

Bridging and weaving: Network weaving is the intentional process of strengthening and expanding ties in a network, e.g. introducing people, facilitating conversations, reaching out to new people and making people with different points of view feel included. This requires paying attention to culture, practices an structure that create disparities in access and power. Understanding gaps in the nonprofit ecosystem is a first step towards bridging across silos and other divides that interfere with joint action and alignment of effort. The success of the Boston Green and the Healthy Building Network depended on weaving together networks of people and organizations interested in building codes, the environment, and public health. Network weaving starts by understanding who needs to be connected and recognizing that both a strong core and a robust periphery are critical for creativity, innovation, reach and impact.

Organizing: In a traditional organizational model, leaders manage participation through action plans with prescribed roles; in networks, leadership is more distributed and often self-authorizing as people and groups take on different roles, and align their actions to move the system in a desired direction. Network members understand that small and large contributions aggregate to produce a larger collective impact. MomsRising describes the layer cake as a metaphor for providing multiple levels of participation and entry points. They create continuums of opportunity based on interest, time and skill. Making a phone call, selling t-shirts, showing up for an event and organizing campaigns are all valued. Bill Traynor of LCW descibes how critical it is to effective community organizing that networks create multiple entry points for people to find ways to do what they can and feel valued as contributors. Becoming adept at using social media can increase broader engagement and make it easier to support large-scale social change efforts.


Action Learning/Reflection: Learning in networks occurs through constant experimentation and failure. For instance, a group of students experimented with different ways to engage people in climate change before coming up with 350.org. Creating space for collective reflection and assessment enables networks to learn and leverage their successes. Learning helps network members identify how and where their mutual dependencies and cooperation can move their mutual objectives forward and what individual or organizational practices may need to change, transform or be let go. MomsRising celebrates mistakes with "joyful funerals" to enable people to move quickly to let go of things that did not work. Leadership that embraces risk taking, openness and commits to continuous learning and integration is more likely to produce social benefit and transform the status quo. Many funding models for organizations require short-term results for continuous support: this practice often undermines the bold experimentation which depends on learning from failure. Action learning is a hallmark of a vibrant network where plans emerge and action is adapted in response to experimentation with many ideas.

In addition to a dedication to action learning, leaders in networks need to be committed to learning about themselves. Bill Traynor of Lawrence Community Works shares his reflections about the personal learning and reflection one must do to be effective in a network. "The leader has to genuinely participate in the environment in order to deploy herself appropriately. The challenges of this way of being are profound, and those challenges start with a fundamental reflection about who you are as a person and how you move through the world: how you exhibit fear, react to change, deal with letting go of power and ego. How you listen and observe and the keenness of your instincts for both conceptualizing and synthesizing. How you hold onto or let go let go of strongly held convictions about what is right and what will work. All of these things are of course rooted in the essence of who we are as people.”[v]

Systems Thinking: Efforts to take on societal problems like climate change, poverty, or class and racial disparities, require a deep understanding of how systems work and perpetuate themselves. It is not possible to understand class, culture and power and how to work on behalf of social justice without paying attention to how opportunity structures that create and maintain racial and class inequities. Looking at interactions among multiple factors that influence system performance is critical for identifying leverage points for change. In the RE-AMP project the first course of action for the organizations and funders was to begin by understanding the system they wanted to change. They mapped the system to identify 4 key levers necessary to change the system: stop the building of coal plants, retire existing coal plants, replace coal generated electricity with renewable power and reduce electric consumption through efficiency. This multi-leverage point strategy requires an ability to see the big picture and understand how actions need to align to produce systems change.

SupportingWhat Leadershipdoes tothis Utilizemean Networkfor Strategiesleadership development?
Over the
pastMost severalcurrent decades,leadership adevelopment fieldapproaches ofare organizationalsteeped developmentin hastraditional maturedideas toabout supportleadership and strengthen nonprofit organizations through customized technical assistance toand addressare anot hostyet ofembracing goodthe managementdifferent practices;leadership nonthinking, profitvalues supportand organizationsbehaviors that offerare anecessary widefor varietyleadership of classes, training curriculum and materials; anetworks, robustmost resourceis ofso onlinedifferent and hard copy books, manuals,what andthe howtraditional toleadership guides;development leadershipdoes programsnot focusedtell onpeople cultivatingtrying strongto organization;lead andnetworks. capacityJust buildinga grantsbrief todescription supportof organizationsHOW indifferent thethis adoptionis. ofThat strongermight managementinclude practices.Comparativelyleading speakingacross themultiple fieldtypes of network developmentboundaries is- quiteincluding nascent.across Todistance prepareand individuals,organizational organizationshierarchies and groups to takecultures; advantageit ofalso networkmight strategiesinclude weleadership willresponsibility needwithout aauthority proliferationas ofpeople resourcestry to support a dramatic paradigm shiftcoordinate and adoption of new practices. Maine Network Partnersmotivate usersacross funderorganizations andwhere consultantparticipants collaborativesreport to incubateother programspeople and approacheshave thatother enablejob individualsresponsibilities. andThese organizationsmake tonetwork connectleadership anda networkvery theirdifferent resources,enterprise ideas,from andtraditional skillsorganizational toleadership.

To support solveleadership problems.as Thea resultscollective haveprocess beenwith tothe bettercompetencies needed to leveragework andeffectively targetin capacity-buildingnetworks resourcesand toin thosemore whoconnected needways them,will require that thewe strengtheningrethink ofleadership capacitydevelopment fordelivery collaborationstrategies. Most leadership andprogram peerfocus sharing,on andbuilding the formationskill sets of individuals, often networksto thatprepare canthem createto andlead in implementorganizations. innovativeAs approacheswe embrace toleadership as problem-solving.Mosta currentprocess leadershipenacted developmentby approachesmultiple arepeople steepedengaged in traditional change, ideaswhat aboutare leadershipthe costs andof organizationsselecting and aredeveloping notindividuals? yetAre we embracinginadvertently reinforcing theindividualism differentthat leadershiphas thinking,so valuesinfused andour leadership behaviorsthinking? If thatleadership areemerges necessarythrough forthe leadershipprocess of networks,coordinated mostaction, isthen sowhy differentdo andwe whatassume the needed traditionalskills leadershipfor developmentsuccess doesshould notreside tellin peopleone person trying(the toleader)? leadIf networks.skills Justand acapacity briefare descriptiondistributed ofwithin HOWgroups differenthow thisdo is.we Thatsupport mightgroups includewith leadingthe acrossskills multiplethey typesneed ofas boundariesa -group includingto acrossmove distanceforward. and

These organizationalare hierarchiesimportant questions andfor cultures;the leadership itdevelopment alsofield. mightWhile includeit leadershipmay responsibilitywell withoutbe possible authorityto ashelp individuals peoplelearn trycollective tobehaviors, coordinateand develop and practice collaborative motivateskills acrosswithin organizationsa wherecohort participantsenvironment; reportour traditional approaches tohave othernot peopleled andto havethe otherimpacts jobwe responsibilities.seek. TheseAre makethere better networkways to leadershiphelp agroups, verynetworks differentand enterprisecommunities fromexercise traditionalleadership for greater organizationalpublic leadership.]benefit? There are a number of interesting leadership programs that are bringing a network mindset to leadership development that we would like to share to offer some interesting examples of what it looks like to prepare leadership to effectively utilize network strategies and network tools.

The Barr Fellowship Network Case Study (I am wondering if this is the best case study since it has elements that are more traditional)

The Barr Fellows are an unprecedented network of people that in a lifetime most of us would never be able to pull together and become that close to. This network transcends fields, gender, race to a level that wouldn’t be doable on one’s own. This level of partnership and camaraderie breaks down fears and inhibitions; it’s going to save our sector. (A Barr Fellow) Claire this does not sound much different than a traditional leadership program that creates a network as a byproduct of its work...I am wondering if there was an intentional recruitment strategy about selecting local EDs and providing support that would cultivate an emerging network among them...if so was is specifically the learning journey or could it have been any trust building activities...I want to avoid making it sound like international travel is some how key to nurturing a network. Are there ways to address this in the case study? Maybe emphasize the program goal and outcomes more than the trip. Also can you say how this is different than traditional approaches since the one of the points of the paper is that traditional heroic models of leadership and individually focused programs won't get us where we need to be)

The Barr Foundation and the Interaction Institute for Social Change (IISC) partner together to nurture authentic relationships among cohorts of nonprofit executive directors in Boston to create the conditions for a thriving nonprofit sector among leaders from different neighborhoods and focused on different issues. Twelve executive directors, every two years, begin their Barr Fellowship by taking a two-week learning journey together somewhere in the global south. The learning journey is meant to be a significantly disruptive experience. On the journey they encounter different social spaces, different levels of hope and despair, and a different climate and ecological experience. The intense pace coupled with well facilitated moments of shared reflection create the conditions for deep connection and personal and collective transformation. Usually, relationships among leaders are mediated by organizational roles and identities, and are often limited to the transactional and the formal. The learning journey breaks through this layer of relationship into a more intimate space, a deeper and more human connection that creates more room for self-revelation and builds trust.

The trust developed among Barr Fellows has created a reservoir of social capital which produces enormous community value. Here’s one example: When the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI) led an effort to win a Promise Neighborhood grant for Boston, it had very little time to pull together the proposal. The social capital among Barr Fellows was a critical factor that contributed to DSNI’s proposal receiving the highest score among all PromiseNeighborhood planning grants that were awarded. DSNI’s ED, John Barros, called the former ED of the Children’s Museum, Lou Casagrande (both Barr Fellows in 2007) to ask for his help securing memoranda of understanding (MOUs) from 15 of the city’s museums. The museum directors had little or no knowledge of John or DSNI, but they did know Lou. As a respected colleague in the museum world, Lou could vouch for John to his colleagues. The success of Lou’s efforts to secure these MOUs in a matter of weeks, was only possible because of the trust and social capital the Fellowship created.

What does this mean for leadership development? To support leadership as a collective process with the competencies needed to work effectively in networks and in more connected ways will require that we rethink leadership development delivery strategies. Most leadership program focus on building the skill sets of individuals, often to prepare them to lead in organizations. As we embrace leadership as a process enacted by multiple people engaged in change, what are the costs of selecting and developing individuals? Are we inadvertently reinforcing individualism that has so infused our leadership thinking? If leadership emerges through the process of taking action, then the needed skills for success do not reside in one person (the leader), they reside in the capacity of small groups of people contributing their skills, coordinating actions, and collaborating for greater impact. If networks are essential for large-scale change, then why do we focus so much attention on individual skill-building. In a community change project wouldn’t it make more sense to connect people with different skills and life experiences to strengthen their social capital so that they can be lead more effectively together. These are important questions for the leadership development field. While it may well be possible to help individuals learn collective behaviors, and develop and practice collaborative skills within a cohort environment; our traditional approaches have not led to the impacts we seek. Are there better ways to help groups, networks and communities exercise leadership for greater public benefit? We believe that again we can stretch our thinking about leadership development by looking more closely at how leadership gets developed within networks.
Case Study: Boston Green and Healthy Building Network (I think maybe this should get move to the Leadership development section)

The Boston Green and Healthy Building Network illustrates the power of social network mapping in action. The Boston-based Barr Foundation had spent several years funding two sets of local organizations that advocated for changes in building codes and standards: public health organizations that saw unhealthy buildings as a root cause of many illnesses, and environmental groups that were focused on the energy efficiency and ecological impact of buildings. In 2005, a senior program officer at Barr recognized that while the “causes” of the two sets of organizations were different, the groups shared a common goal of setting higher performance standards for buildings, and they often approached the same government officials with similar requests. So Barr brought together the various parties in April 2005 to explore whether they could align their ef­forts, share information, and develop a more unified message for policymakers. Using information collected at the gathering, the foundation developed a real-time social network map of the people in the room. The map clearly showed two principal clusters of dots, one representing people in health organizations and the other primarily people in environmental organizations; it also showed that the groups were not well connected. Seeing the map of their fragmented network, the groups agreed to begin meeting together and eventually formed the Boston Green and Healthy Building Network. This network has increased connections and collaboration across the different groups and has improved access to, and relationships with, many key policy-makers in the city. (Working Wikily 2.0) {From Beth - here is a link to the full pdf report.} [we need the reference here. the text is from Working Wikily - which was based on the case study by Beth Tener, Al Neirenberg and Bruce Hoppe]Case Study: Spark [I added this here because it focuses on the network perspective, but not sure if it's too long, etc. (Natalia)]This was added recently. Maybe it could be connected to the section on needing a different kind of leadership illustrating some of those points with this case study. Spark is a network of young people (millennials) who are invested in promoting equality for women throughout the world. As a networked organization that operates primarily through the efforts of their volunteers (they only have one staff member), they use the power of networks to execute much of their programming. The network was founded in 2004 by six young women that wanted to get involved with international women’s rights. Since then it has grown to engage over 5,000 people in the Bay Area, contributing over $1,000,000 in grants and pro-bono services to grassroots women’s organizations around the globe. Transparency and Open Leadership: Spark has a grants committee, comprised of Spark members, that decides which projects should be funded. Initially, the board made the funding decisions, but the team realized that many members were interested in the grantmaking process. As members, they are investors in the organization, and thus it made sense to involve them at a deeper level. This committee has over 100 members who solicit, vet and process applications. They debate and vote on which project receive Spark grants. Engagement: “We believe in the power of networks. If you use a networked framework to engage people, you can maximize your investment. We wanted as many people as possible to participate in the process.” (Shannon Farley, executive director) Spark encourages all of their members to participate in as many activities as possible, including joining the grant making committee, supporting advocacy efforts (signing petitions and contacting civic leaders), interacting with other members through social media channels, and participating in events such as volunteer days. But the network also leaves the boundaries open enough so members can “tap in and tap out” from activities based on their availability and interest. That way, the network enjoys the full energy of those that truly want to participate in a given activity, without making others feel embarrassed or ashamed for not participating. Cross-sector Collaboration: One of the underlying values of Spark is that collaboration across sectors produces more innovative and efficient solutions. For instance, a Spark member with experience in investment banking for municipal projects was instrumental in helping devise a more realistic strategy to improve a community radio project in Haiti. “That’s the kind of expertise that traditional social sector organizations would disregard, in part due to biases against the private sector. At Spark, we think divisions between sectors should be blurred for efficiency. And when you blur them, you create opportunities for leadership and engagement that weren’t available previously.” (Shannon Farley) Spark provides members an opportunity to deepen their engagement with the cause – instead of simply attending an event or donating money, members can volunteer with grantee partners, mentor others, participate in grantmaking, and even join a delegation of members that visit grantees around the world to see the impact firsthand. Spark is a pioneer in the way in which it operates using a network strategy. As a network, the organization faces some challenges. In particular, Shannon points out that the technology infrastructure has not kept up with the growth of the network.

As foundations and organizations in the nonprofit sector are exploring networked models, understanding the challenges and opportunities of organizations that are operating as networks becomes increasingly important. But many challenges and questions emerge – What is the best way to support networks? What technology and resources are needed to facilitate the growth of networks? How can we measure the impact and value, not only of the results, but also of the lasting connections that the members build through the network? How can organizations adapt their engagement strategies to create greater shared ownership?


Lessons from how leadership is being developed in networks:

Cultivating a network mindset: Leadership programs that cultivate a network mindset focus less on skill-building and more on relationship-building and helping each other to see and experience the power of interconnectedness. Bridging barriers and boundaries, and becoming aware of your position and role relative to others shifts perceptions about where power and influence lie from the individual to the network.

Multiple entry points: A number of organizations that use network strategies create multiple entry points for people to connect to small groups of people around issues they care about. Multiple entry points give people a chance to meet other people, build relationships and find opportunities to contribute their gifts. In this process, networks form, and people grow and develop their leadership as they do work together.

Convening and Process: In the example of the ReAMP project leadership emerged when people set time set aside to get to know each other and find the connections in their work. Network mapping was a powerful tool for visualizing their connections. Participants who all had numerous responsibilities in their own organizations and the container that gave them time and space and the process that supported know each other in deeper ways supported collective leadership.

Learning by doing: In a collective culture where small groups of people are actively supported to take risks and reflect and learn together a couple of things are happening. Bonds of trust and reciprocity are created as each person contributes their ideas, talents and resources; no one person is the “knowing leader.” As the group interacts, issues and conflicts undoubtedly arise. A group’s capacity to manage those issues depends on the quality of relationships they have together, and their collective willingness to find solutions that work for the group as a whole, and move their collective work forward.

Relationship building and weaving: As people in LCW got to know neighbors they had not met, share their stories and talk about their community, collective grievances and aspirations emerged connecting people in their desire and willingness to take action.

Implications for Leadership Development

These lessons are being echoed from other experiments in leadership development that have achieved surprising results in short time by convening multiple stakeholders in a specific region who are focused on an urgent problem, or by convening people in small communities to have guided discussions about their experiences of poverty and what to do about it. There are some striking similarities that point to new approaches to developing leadership capacity:

• Support people, groups and organizations who want to work on a common concern: Many of the leadership strategies that can point to dramatic changes in the lives of people in a community are supporting people in the process of taking action together on a specific problem or issue.
• Provide convening and process support that build relationships: A number of successful approaches focus on supporting connection and understanding each other better (and in the process ones self). For example, the systems mapping process was helpful to the ReAMP participants and study circles the framed questions for participants in the Horizon’s program helping them to draw on their experiences and wisdom to shape plans, and the neighborhood circle process in LCW used storytelling to build relationships among estranged neighbors.
• Facilitate Action Learning: Learning from co conspirators in joint action or colleagues in a field develops everyone involved. Fostering action learning, provide time and structure to reflection, and facilitating communities of learning and practice all develop leadership.
• Brokering resources: Maybe an important role for people and organizations who want to strengthen social change leadership is one of identifying and securing resources. Most of the approaches we are drawing from have an asset based philosophy and assume that groups and communities have among their members many of the skills that they need, so they don’t come with a fixed curriculum that some feel presumes a deficit of skills. This is not to say that in the course of work and trail and error that groups involved in change will not recognize that there may be resources, knowledge or skills that would be helpful. The difference is that people engaged in leadership are identifying what they need. Leadership programs or coaches can be providers of what is needed.

Recommendations for developing leadership with the capacity to utilize network strategies and tools:


If you are a running leadership development program:

Existing leadership programs reach tens of thousands of people yet few explicitly recognize the leadership opportunities, challenges and skills necessary to utilize network approaches. Yet, these leadership programs and strategies offer an important venue for people and groups interested in preparing leadership to better understand networks. Becoming adept at using network strategies and tools requires a commitment of time to learning and practice and leadership programs can provide this opportunity. Through leadership cohorts, individuals and groups can learn and practice these skills with others.

Following are recommendations about leadership program goals, design, and curriculum components that can help programs better equip leadership with the mindset and skills to choose organizational and/or network approaches:

Question your leadership assumptions: Our thinking has been heavily influenced by the dominant culture of individualism in this country and permeates the ways in which we think about and develop leadership. Ideas about individual leaders and what it takes to be a leader, e.g. specific attributes, skills, or training could limit opportunities to support millions of people and groups who want to take action together on issues and problems they care about. [integrate this one with 'network mindet' rec or expand? - ds]

Target your leadership development work to large scale change: We will not achieve societal level changes even if we have the most talented leaders working alone or within a single organization. Aiming high for enduring systemic change requires recognition of the leadership initiative that exists in everyone and a commitment to strategies and tools that can coordinate the efforts of vastly more people. For example, the RE-AMP project set a "big hairy audacious goal of an 80% reduction in electrical pollution". This could not possibly be achieved by one organization. This goal became the rallying point and driving purpose for leadership alignment of over 120 organizations. Many leadership programs are designed to strengthen individual skills with the expectation that this will improve organizational performance and result in specific or general community changes that are often not identified or monitored. We need a revolution in our beliefs and behaviors. If we believe we can and must do more (e.g., make sure that every person in this country has access to good health care, quality education and a safe place to live), then we need leadership strategies to help us better leverage vastly more people. [Understanding that network leadership not only can involve but depends on leadership initiative from many more people in many new ways means investing in leadership development training and challenges for many more people in our organizations.ng…reworded to incorporate your ideas…check it out-dm]

Be Strategic in Your Recruitment: If you begin to see your leadership strategy as an opportunity to cultivate or nurture a potential network it is important to think about what alignment of groups will advance the result you hope to produce through your leadership work. The Boston Green and Healthy Building Network described in the case study on page ...... is a great example of strategic recruitment with the intention of building relationships among activists and organizations work in building codes and standards and people in public health.

Cultivate and practice a network mindset: A leadership program or trainings can incorporate network literacy and the introduction of a network mindset into their curriculum. When individuals and groups have an opportunity to reflect on their current ways of behaving, and practice network ways of working, they will be better positioned to apply network tools and strategies in complex situations, and understand when it is more appropriate to use organizational tools and strategies to manage technical challenges. For leaders who have learned to work through organizations there is a learning curve to understand different types of networks. The David and Lucile Packard Foundation funded a Network Weavers Community of Practice so that people who are weaving networks within and across traditional organizational structures could be in a peer learning relationship to support each others' efforts experimenting with new behaviors and tools. They hired three people with expertise in network weaving and communities of practice to support the work of this community of practice over a six month period.

Develop systems analysis skills: Incorporate systems understandings of culture and power. Those who are providing leadership in networks or bringing network strategies to their work in organizations will not contribute effectively to addressing the structures and systems that perpetuate the unequal distribution of opportunity that lies at the heart of the social ills. [the inequality / social justice frame comes up a lot. If we're using this frame we should be explicit about it up front. To me it signals a specific audience this is more narrow & politically progressive than the broader social change capacity building community- ds]To effectively lead requires knowing how to intervene in a system to change the outcomes it produces. Systems thinking and analysis does not come easily to people who are invested in one issue or one problem, but it can be learned. The Sustainability Institute and LEAD International in the environmental field have led the way in developing tools, games and curriculum to learn to lead with a systems understanding of how things work and how to disrupt or intervene in systems to change them. Systems thinking curriculum can be incorporated into current leadership programs or offered as training components as part of organizational and network capacity building efforts.

Integrate Action Learning: Taking risks and valuing learning from experiences of success and failure is often not a valued leadership behavior but it can be supported through leadership programs that help participants value learning and action learning methodologies.In a supportive community, a group can experiment and learn more quickly together and strengthen their networks by using action learning methodologies. Leadership programs that use action learning deepen participation, and connect participants in a community of practice that builds relationships among people where they often did not exist before. Network strategies have the capacity to accelerate learning through experimentation by supporting multiple actions around common purpose at a new level of scale.

Learning when and how to use social media tools: Effective leadership will need to both understand when their work would be better served by a network strategy and know how to utilize social media tools to their advantage. The range of social media tools and how to use them can be daunting to people and groups when they venture into this new terrain. Social media use in the nonprofit sector is very uneven, often based on generational differences. It is important to introduce basic tools: social networking sites, wikis, Twitter, blogging, Flickr, etc. and provide technical support and a safe space to practice and discuss the ways in which new technologies can help achieve shared purpose. There is usually a learning curve but the payoff can be big. Using the right social media tools in the right way can mean accomplishing more in less time and often with fewer resources. The leadership at KaBOOM! had to commit themselves to learning and becoming comfortable with social media tools to advance their work. Levi Strauss has initiated a Pioneers for Justice leadership program that is helping emerging leaders understand networks and network tools, including social media. Participants in the program will have a session with Beth Kantor who has written about bringing a network mindset to non-profits. They are also working close with Zero Divide to conduct social media audits and training in social media tools for the participants and their organizations. [I'd suggest dropping the last two sentences - DS]
[ng: The above might be titled and reframed: Strategically select relevant social media tools that can make the connecting and coordinating easier and can vastly expand an initiative's reach and engagement. The paragraph might emphasize the issues of how to think strategically about the technologies, then how to gain the competencies amongst network participants to make them work effectively rather than the emphasis on the technologies themselves…Hi NG, tried to incorporate..see what you think..we do address the strategic part in the section on network mindset-dm.]

Visualize network relationships: In addition to understanding why networks are important, leadership and training programs can help participants to understand what a network is, what makes a network healthy, and how leadership can support network growth, purpose and impact with network skills like weaving and bridging. Those in leadership can now learn about and see network or systems using social network analysis. This is important since we are accustomed to seeing organizational charts while networks are invisible. These tools have helped people learn to work in networks more effectively as they see and understand the importance of formal and informal structures, weak and strong ties and the importance of affinity and diversity as demonstrated in the story of the Boston Green and Healthy Building Network. [need to make the link back to leadership development. Are there some nuggets from Claire and Bruce's paper to weave in here?]

Strengthen alumni connections and connect their networks: Many leadership programs are now realizing that their alumni are untapped networks. Without a network mindset and strategy for unleashing the power of these networks, alumni network effects may be limited to small clusters of graduates organized around their class identity, geography or issue interests. With a network mindset, alumni have the opportunity to reach out beyond their cohort to weave connections between and among their networks. The tools that can map and make networks more visible can be used by leadership programs to understand their cohort network and how it can be strengthened and grown so that leadership program alumni networks can be catalyzed to support continuous peer learning, and action on collaborative initiatives or policy change. We can do more to connect the busy graduates of leadership programs to increase the impact of their efforts, not by working more but by working smarter through networks.

We will see a shift in the vibrancy and action being produced by networks of leadership program graduates, when leadership programs incorporate curriculum and tools that do more to help their participants to understand: 1) what a network is and why network strategies can help to amplify their impact; and 2) how to effectively utilize and strengthen networks with weaving and bridging skills. In the meantime, a number of leadership programs that are picking up on the power of network strategies are bringing this thinking to their work with former graduates.

Kellogg Fellows Leadership Alliance: Case Study of Using SNA to Catalyze an Alumni Network

The Leadership Learning Community and the Kellogg Fellows Leadership Alliance have entered into a partnership to use a social network analysis (SNA) to help catalyze their network of 1000 leadership graduates from 10 different leadership programs funded by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation of the past 30 years. This project is being funded by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. LLC and KFLA will use social network analysis to grow the KFLA network’s ability to share information, coordinate activities, accelerate learning and take action. Kellogg fellows will benefit from knowing more about other fellows who work in their field, share their interest in an issue like immigration, could be the perfect consultant for a project, or live 5 miles from them. KFLA is one of the better staffed alumni programs and has been able to transmit some of this information but there is a limit to how much they can monitor and communicate information about 1000 people. In short, we want to help the KFLA network participants communicate more amongst themselves, self organize and coordinate joint work with a lighter touch from the KFLA team to exponentially expand the scope of what they can accomplish together.

To do this the LLC Team will survey KFLA alumni and map their connections by asking them questions about who they communicate with, who they seek advice from, who they have worked with, or what issues they are interested in working on. The maps we produce will make the network and the way it works more visible to staff and fellows who want to take an active role in strengthening the network. Maps reveal connections across cohort groups, regions, issues and shared interest, information that can be used to identify and facilitate collaborative opportunities across silos. Staff and fellows will be involved in making meaning of the maps as part of the analysis. This project will use social network analysis to build this capacity within the KFLA staff and among participants. A good part of this joint venture will involve training KFLA staff in how to use SNA tools and coaching KFLA staff and interested participants in network weaving so that the perspectives, tools and skills will be incorporated into the fabric of KFLA’s approach to building and activating its network.

After a year of working with KFLA we will do a second network map to track changes that have occurred within the network as a result of this support. There will be a case study produced at that time too tell this story in the hopes that there will be many lessons and possible applications for leadership programs experimenting with how to connect and leverage the impact of the good work of their graduates. After all, hundreds of thousands of individuals, teams and communities have participated in leadership development activities over the past 20 years. Imagine the collective impact if we could connect these efforts!


[Diana - i think this list will be most powerful if it's targeted. I'd recommend dropping general recs for how funders can support networks. we're writing a whole publication on that subject and can make the link between these two resources…Hi Diana, the primary audiences for this publication are people who run, fund , study or provide services to leadership development efforts. We have not really written this for a general population of individuals leading/working through networks or networks interested in strengthening their own leadership. While the report would hopefully have some nuggets for a broad audience I am not sure how this section is targeted or focused if not for funders. If you think it is duplicative of what Monitor will be producing maybe we eliminate the section below??? dm Hey Deborah - I think its good as is - not duplicative of the funders guide as its evolving. A draft is here:http://networksguide.wikispaces.com/6-7+Draft+Funders+Guide. I've made a few consolidation recommendation below. Happy to work on rewriting these recs if the suggestions work for you - DS]

Recommendations if you invest in leadership development:
Supporting Leadership to Utilize Network Strategies


Over the past several decades, a field of organizational development has matured to support and strengthen nonprofit organizations through customized technical assistance to address a host of good management practices; non profit support organizations that offer a wide variety of classes, training curriculum and materials; a robust resource of online and hard copy books, manuals, and how to guides; leadership programs focused on cultivating strong organization; and capacity building grants to support organizations in the adoption of stronger management practices.

Comparatively speaking the field of network development is quite nascent. To prepare individuals, organizations and groups to take advantage of network strategies we will need a proliferation of resources to support a dramatic paradigm shift and adoption of new practices. Maine Network Partners users funder and consultant collaboratives to incubate programs and approaches that enable individuals and organizations to connect and network their resources, ideas, and skills to solve problems. The results have been to better leverage and target capacity-building resources to those who need them, the strengthening of capacity for collaboration and peer sharing, and the formation of networks that can create and implement innovative approaches to problem-solving.Most current leadership development approaches are steeped in traditional ideas about leadership and organizations and are not yet embracing the different leadership thinking, values and behaviors that are necessary for leadership of networks, most is so different and what the traditional leadership development does not tell people trying to lead networks. Just a brief description of HOW different this is. That might include leading across multiple types of boundaries - including across distance and organizational hierarchies and cultures; it also might include leadership responsibility without authority as people try to coordinate and motivate across organizations where participants report to other people and have other job responsibilities. These make network leadership a very different enterprise from traditional organizational leadership.]There are a number of interesting leadership programs that are bringing a network mindset to leadership development that we would like to share to offer some interesting examples of what it looks like to prepare leadership to effectively utilize network strategies and network tools. Support leadership in network weaving: There are costs involved in network weaving that often cannot be absorbed by any one organization in the network. Foundations can play a role in bringing important resources to this work and even in creating a container for this work to occur. The Barr Foundation through their fellowship program was able to create the conditions for local leaders to build relationships. The Hunt Alternative Fund invested in network weaving through its fellowship programs. Both programs have demonstrated a high return on network investments. Some promising strategies for supporting network weaving include:

• Identifying one or multiple people who are dedicated to making and strengthening connections throughout the network.
• Supporting social network analysis to help networks make their relationships more visible so that they can strengthen their network.
  
• Hosting in-person gatherings that strengthen connections through attention to quality facilitation, food, and the gathering space.
• Creating an online infrastructure, and supporting network technology stewards (people who facilitate use of technology to share information, coordinate or learn together.

Support leadership development programs that incorporate a new leadership mindset and build network capacity: Until leadership development is elevated as an important human capital investment in the non-profit sector leadership programs will not be sustainable on a fee for service business model that has had success in the for profit sector. This means that leadership programs will need continued support from donors to fund leadership development work. These programs can offer an important vehicle for helping existing leaders learn new skills and strategies. Leadership programs can also serve as a vehicle for fostering new networks or strengthening existing networks. The Barr Foundation’s Fellowship is a good example of using a leadership strategy to foster a network among non profit leadership in Boston.

Invest in strengthening network leadership capacity. There have been few targeted efforts to focus on existing networks and nvest in the development of network leaders or weavers to date, but some exciting prospects are unfolding. The Packard Foundation’s investment in the Network Weaving Community of Practice for network weavers facilitated by June Holley, John Smith, and Nancy White (well-recognized network weavers and network technology stewards).

Promote learning about how to strengthen network leadership: As leadership programs, capacity builders and technical assistance providers focus more attention on how to develop leadership competencies within networks and a network mindset among organizational leadership, we need to ask and answer questions across a variety of experiences that will accelerate learning about the impact of networks and how to strengthen them:

• What are effective strategies for cultivating leadership with a network mindset and the ability to use network strategies and tools to increase their impact?
• What impact are strong bridging and weaving leaders having on network results?
• What are the gains from successful network ventures? E.g. What impacts do networks have on social and environmental justice issues, like changing health status in a low-income community, improving air quality, ensuring economic and family success?
• What will I and we have to give up to build networks across organizations?

This type of learning can be supported by investing in cross program evaluations, communities of practice, and collaborative learning opportunities. Through opportunities like these practices with evidence of success that point to where the field needs to move to maximize the impact of leadership investments and strategies can be surfaced.

Invest in the development and diffusion of network leadership training materials, curriculum and tools: To incorporate the changes being recommended leadership development programs need resources. For instance, June Holley, a leading practitioner of network weaving, has developed a Network Weaving Handbook with hundreds of exercises to strengthen the capacity of network weavers. The extraordinary number of existing delivery organizations, such as leadership programs and management support organizations, could easily reach and thousands of nonprofit leaders with a network mindset if investments were being made in training curriculum and tools that could be utilized by leadership development service providers. [combine this rec with above one rec about promoting learning? ds]

Embed network literacy in professional development programs: [something from Grady here?] The subject of networks is no longer an amorphous catch-all: there is science about how social and organizational networks are structured, the best way to structure them for different purposes, and a way to talk about distinct network structures, the roles that individual play in networks, and the ways that networks can be leveraged. For leaders in the social change initiative, there is no other way to success except through networks, and being able to talk the talk is the first step in learning to walk. [combine this rec with #1 - support leadership development programs? - ds]

Conclusion:

The health of the planet for future generations is at risk and the increasing wealth gap has created a country in which many people cannot find jobs, attend good schools, live in safe neighborhoods, own homes or afford health care. We have entered into a new social environment where everyone who cares about these issues has an opportunity to work in new ways and can engage and activate many more supporters for their cause. As Clay Shirky points out, “There are thousands of experiments in new social forms going on every day, as people who want to gather together, try capabilities that have only recently become ubiquitous…Our social tools are dramatically improving our ability to share, cooperate and act together. As everyone from working biologist to angry air passengers adopts those tools, it is leading to epochal change.” Leadership of social change efforts can sit on the sidelines wondering if networks are a fad or embrace this opportunity and develop a new network mindset. As this publication points out, this is not easy. It will require us to question what we think we know about leadership and organizing. It will require us to break from the time demands and momentum of existing work in organizations to step into unfamiliar territory and experiment with new ways of thinking and new tools. We offer ideas, resources, and tools for preparing leadership to scale their social change by taking advantage of network thinking and strategies. This work is still emerging and we invite you to help by sharing resources, experiences and your own learning.
[?Add in above: While we have our missions and organizations allow no time for these activities and reflection, we also cannot afford to ignore the new challenges and to better prepare ourselves for them...or something like this. Ng…Hi NG, I tried to incorporate into the last couple sentence…feel free to change DM]