Subj:  CLIMB Correspondence
Date:  Mon, Feb 17, 1997 6:32 PM EDT
From:  CLIMB@MSU.EDU
X-From:	blaire@PILOT.MSU.EDU (Evelyn Blair)
Sender:	CLIMB@MSU.EDU (Commmunity Leadership Initiative--Michigan's Best)
Reply-to:	CLIMB@MSU.EDU (Commmunity Leadership Initiative--Michigan's Best)
To:	CLIMB@MSU.EDU (Multiple recipients of list CLIMB)

February l997

TO:     All CLIMB Partners
FR:     Evelyn Blair

Joel Welty wrote the following letter to Lela Vandenberg last December.
Lela responded, and asked Joel if he would share his thoughts with our
partnership.

Joel is pleased to share his letter with us and both he and Lela welcome your
comments.

Thank you.

Attachment
c:  MSU Extension Administrative Team
    CLIMB ListServ

* * *

December ll, l996


Dr. Lela Vandenberg, Grant Administrator
CLIMB - MSU/E
323 Natural Resources
East Lansing, MI  48824-l222

Dear Lela:

        I'm glad you made use of the timed agenda and the time enforcer at
the December 6 meeting.  People seemed to like it.  Concepts like that need
to be traded around among all of us, and I hope to pick up some new ones
from other CLIMB partners, concepts that I'm not yet aware of.

        The "team" concept needs more examination, I feel, since no one
seems to have a very clear idea of what it means.  I do like your thought
that it is a metaphor, because metaphors help us understand the nature of
the social organization we deal with.

        Some religious bodies refer to their oganizations as "flocks", a
vivid metaphor that makes it clear that authority in such religions belongs
to the shepherd -- priest, minister, rabbi, mullah -- and not to the sheep.
Doubtless the metaphor goes a long way to enforce docility and uniformity in
the sheepish members, and helps prevent them from indulging in any
independent thinking.  That's an important goal for many religious groups.

        Boy scouts refer to their groups as "troops", consistent with their
use of infantry uniforms, their exercises, their dominance by scout leaders
and so forth.  Scouting was designed to be a preparation for the military
life, and the troop metaphor goes a long way in meeting this design.  It is
one reason so many of us veterans find the boy scout program repugnant.  But
I have to admit, it is an effective metaphor.

        It seems to me that we could find a metaphor that is more
appropriate than "team" for what we hope will develop in CLIMB.  I presume
the metaphor is to a sports team.  We can reject out of hand the yoked oxen
and the harnessed horses.  The major characteristics of a sports team are,
first, the blind obedience of participants to the iron will of the coach
and, second, the mindless drive to achieve victory over similar teams in the
same sport.  Neither of these characteristics seem to me to be descriptive
of the relationships being created among CLIMB partners.  We are not blindly
obedient to anyone, nor do we enter into contests with other teams.  A
smashing victory has no meaning in CLIMB.

        "Team" is a favorite metaphor with industry, and I can see why:  a
corporation wants its staff never to question corporate decisions, but to
work enthusiastically on tasks specified -- and in the manner required -- by
the "coach".  The team knows that it exists only in order to win crushing
victories in the marketplace.  The metaphor works well for big corporations
seeking conformity combined with initiative, not so well for a professional
association like CLIMB.  I fear we have adopted the metaphor in CLIMB
inappropriately merely because it is widely used in industry.

        A more useful metaphor for CLIMB relationships would be an
"ensemble", particularly as seen in a jazz band when jamming and
extemporizing on a theme.  An ensemble has no dominant personality, but
encourages an intimate meshing of independent performances to make a
concerted effect greater than any solo performance could achieve.  An
ensemble will have a business manager to arrange when and where the ensemble
performs, but not to control the artistry.

        An ensemble encourages each partner to play off the contributions of
each other players, adding new interpretations combining themes, turning
another's idea inside out, adding harmoincs and applying new twists to old
thoughts.  The result is a dynamic mix of extraordinary richness, with ideas
popping out of the mix which no single partner could ever have thought of
alone. The contributions of each stimulate more contributions from each of
the others. As each catches fire from the others, the blaze can be brilliant.

        Ensemble is a noun and also an adjective, but there isn't a derived
adverb.  "Ensembly" doesn't work.  But there is an adverb with a chic cachet
that can be harnessed to the purpose:  holistically.  I hate to shift gears
like that.  Of course, the related adjective, holistic, would work, too.
But then there is no noun that would apply, since hologram doesn't seem to
be applicable to a group of people.  Our language is fun, but wretchedly
awkward sometimes.

        For the idea behind the ensemble metaphor to work, CLIMB would need
to set up "interactive ensemble sessions", in which partners would describe
the theories behind their project activities, and open them to challenges.
I'd love to have people analyze what I'm doing with the Local Co-op
Leadership Networks and challenge the thoughts behind them.

        And of course I'd love to challenge some of the leadership ideas
I've heard expressed by others.  Think of each of us tooting our horns in
harmony and dissonance, building on each other's melodies.

        The reason I consider all this important is that I am dismayed to
see so many CLIMB partners dropping by the wayside.  I think they expected
more substance, more "jamming" together.  Perhaps the sort of ensemble
interaction this metaphor suggests would attract them back.  I'd like to see
CLIMB become a permanent institution, with a life extending far beyond the
end of the Kellogg money.

        Best wishes, Lela.

Sincerely,

Joel D. Welty

Michigan Alliance of Cooperatives
477l Rolland Road
Blanchard, MI  493l0-9753

* * *


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From owner-climb@MSU.EDU  Mon Feb 17 17:32:49 1997
Return-Path: owner-climb@MSU.EDU
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [206.241.12.2]) by emin39.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA23559; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:32:38 -0500
Received: from vms.dc.lsoft.com by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.0829B401@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:32:37 -0500
Received: from MSU.EDU by MSU.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id
          4234 for CLIMB@MSU.EDU; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:05:44 -0500
Received: from MSU (NJE origin SMTP4@MSU) by MSU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with
          BSMTP id 4305; Mon, 17 Feb 1997 17:05:06 -0500
Received: from pilot08.cl.msu.edu by msu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with TCP; Mon,
          17 Feb 97 17:05:05 EST
Received: from blair.css.msu.edu (blair.css.msu.edu [35.8.120.102]) by
          pilot08.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/MSU-2.10) id RAA57893; Mon, 17 Feb 1997
          17:04:56 -0500
X-Sender: blaire@pilot.msu.edu (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <2.2.32.19970217225758.006aa588@pilot.msu.edu>
Date:         Mon, 17 Feb 1997 16:57:58 -0600
Reply-To: "Commmunity Leadership Initiative--Michigan's Best" <CLIMB@MSU.EDU>
Sender: "Commmunity Leadership Initiative--Michigan's Best" <CLIMB@MSU.EDU>
From: Evelyn Blair <blaire@PILOT.MSU.EDU>
Subject:      CLIMB Correspondence
To: Multiple recipients of list CLIMB <CLIMB@MSU.EDU>
