| |
|
Civility and regional economic development
Saturday, January 20, 2007 This post originally appeared in Brewed Fresh Daily in a commentary with John Ettorre here. The work of regional economic development takes place in a civic space, outside the four walls of any one organization. There are no rules in this civic space, unless we impose them on ourselves. No one can tell anyone else what to do. (Which is one reason why corporate, command and control mindsets don't do well. There is a lot of inherent ambiguity.) We need simple rules to guide our behavior: civility. Without civility, our civic space -- and our ability to tackle difficult issues and seize our opportunities -- withers. That's in part, what has happened in Cleveland, in my view. Where in this city do we have on-going discussions on the difficult issues facing us? The answer, I think, is in isolated venues, largely disconnected from one another. If we are to address these issues more than isolated events will be required. The City Club, CSU forums, Voices and Choices are all useful, but they are isolated events. They are not focused on the civic discipline of translating ideas into action, of holding each other accountable, of learning continuously about what works. They are not focused on "strategic doing". These conversations are also easy to disrupt. It doesn't take much for a loud mouth to disturb a library. People get angry at the disruption, and after a while they stop showing up. (This helps explain why strategies in this region are so difficult to implement, why after ten years we are still talking about convention centers.) So, many of us are engaged in the business of rebuilding our civic spaces. In this new economy -- and economy in which wealth is built on networks -- trust provides the fuel. Regions that embrace the civic behaviors that lead to stronger civic networks will be more competitive in the long run. They will spot opportunities faster. They will learn faster. They will move faster. We model new civic behavior by, in part, pointing out bad behavior and its consequences. We point out how old patterns of behavior lead nowhere. That's constructive criticism. Criticism with a purpose. (Much of my writing on Issue 3, casinos for Cleveland, was geared to pointing out the weak behavior of our business leadership in pursuing a narrowly self-interested policy that would damage our region.) Part of the reason we should focus some of our on bad behavior is simply to say, "That's not us." Or, more clearly, "Don't repeat THAT." It helps to understand good behavior by knowing what bad behavior looks like. (From George Washington: "In the Presence of Others Sing not to yourself with a humming Noise, nor Drum with your Fingers or Feet.") In our terms, rather than speak behind closed doors with our criticisms, publish them on Brewed Fresh Daily for all to see. Transparency matters in the civic space. People learn to trust each other when they are confident they can get access all the facts. (Which explains, in part, why the Internet changes everything.) In the past we relied on newspapers and professional journalists to balance this stuff out. While we have some very good young reporters, the Plain Dealer itself is a damaged brand with a diminished credibility. (Again, look at the swamp they got themselves into with Issue 3.) So people look now to bloggers for help. No one wants to listen all day to whining. At the same time, people want to know the facts on the ground. They want to learn from mistakes, and they want to move on. Constructive criticism is just that, constructive. The same simple rules that guide a productive private life, guide civility. Civility requires simple rules and discipline. (Check out George Washington's Rules on Civility. Or, read H.W. Brand's wonderful book on Benjamin Franklin, The First American. Brand describes how a young Franklin working to establish himself in Philadelphia, set out a discipline to convert specific virtues into habits.) So facing facts constructively -- with a mind for improvement -- is a good step, a necessary step. Ignoring facts leads us to misunderstanding where we stand. When we don't know where we stand, we get easily confused about the right direction. When we don't know our direction, we waste time. When we waste time, someone else eats our lunch. So, in the end, this issue of balance has no set answer. But each of us need to strike that balance, not 50/50, but more like 20/80: 20% of our time on pointing out mistakes to each other so that we can correct them, and 80% of our time focused on new habits and new possibilities. That's a rough rule of thumb, but good enough. The irony, of course, is that we sit in a region in which one of the most powerful innovations in civic engagement -- appreciative inquiry -- was invented. David Cooperrider at Case Western Reserve -- designed this discipline and it is now reshaping the civic spaces all over the world (but not here.) posted by Ed |
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
 |
|||||||
|
||||||||
