Sameville | Presented by Seth Bate

The WSU Center for Community Support and Research has been facilitating a leadership development process for two dozen staff members of Starkey, Inc. A foundational concept for CCSR’s approach to leadership development (and one shared with our partners at the Kansas Leadership Center) is that groups have to be in a productive zone of work for significant change to occur. Getting into that productive zone can be uncomfortable and risky.

Because they care deeply about the work they do, and because the challenges they face are daunting and complex, the Starkey participants have been doing the difficult work of learning how to exercise leadership. Some of them wrote this story to illustrate what it can be like when people exercise leadership to get themselves and others into that productive zone.

Sameville

Photo courtesy of Paul Stringer

Once upon a time, in a land not so far away, there was a happy little town named Sameville, Kansas, where nothing ever changed. Flowers were always in bloom, the sun was always shining and the birds were always chirping. Rain only came at night, and everyone always pretended to be happy. Door to door salesmen trying to sell new ideas were always turned away.

But one day, a mean, nasty ogre crawled out from under a bridge. He captured the queen and her lady in waiting. (Oh, my!) The mean, nasty ogre overturned all of their long-held, sacred beliefs, and uncovered their unpleasant truths. The weather turned hot and dry. The flowers died. Chirping birds spontaneously combusted! Everyone in Sameville grew hot, and sweaty and smelly and cranky. They were uncomfortable and afraid.

So the uncomfortable people of Sameville brought in fans to cool things down, but the fans just blew away the covers they had thrown over their unpleasant truths. They formed a committee and plotted to kill the mean, nasty ogre, but they could not agree on a plan, because no one was in charge, there was no agenda, and no one had the power to decide. The queen and her lady in waiting were not around to chase all their problems away!

But then, one day the earth started to shake. The people of Sameville were frightened, and large cracks opened up in the ground where their sacred structures once stood - as if to swallow them. But nothing fell in! Sameville was safe because of the changes the mean, nasty ogre had made. And all of the people realized that the mean, nasty ogre was a hero. His actions had saved their little town!

And so the little town celebrated, and they changed their name to Changeville. No one was ever completely happy. The birds didn’t always chirp, and the sun didn’t always shine. But the little town of Changeville was safe forever and ever.

The end.

In the leadership development process, participants have experienced many moments an “ogre” has shaken things up in order to move the group into a productive zone of work. Sometimes the CCSR facilitators have been the ogres by doing something unexpected, using silence or asking provocative questions. Other times the Starkey participants have been pretty ogre-ish by challenging an assumption or offering a tough interpretation. Ogres might be scary, but sometimes they are exercising leadership.

For more about the productive zone of work (sometimes called the productive zone of disequilibrium) we recommend The Practice of Adaptive Leadership by Heifetz, Linsky & Grashow.

What do you think? | By Dee Hinton Turner

Mystic Mountain via Wikimedia Commons

Will Meecham recently wrote a post on Mental Health Day: Should it be Spiritual Health Day?

I found this read to be quite interesting.  It seems to bring to point what I personally feel about “Spirituality” being such a vital part of mental health recovery, substance abuse recovery and even recovery from/through life in general.  What do you think?

Free workshop will help organizations plan for executive transition

Thanks to a partnership with the United Methodist Health Ministry Fund, CCSR has been working closely with Tom Adams of TransitionGuides in the last two years to deeply understand organizational succession planning – and to make it useful and relevant for Kansas organizations. For most nonprofit organizations, this is specifically about planning for the day when the current executive director leaves.

On October 18^th, 1-5pm, CCSR will offer a free Compassion Kansas workshop in Wichita for nonprofit organizations on succession planning. This workshop will provide an introduction to Succession Basics: Emergency Backup Plan and Succession Policy. Call 316-978-3843 to register.

In his book TheNonprofit Leadership Transition and Development Guide, Adams says there are six areas to explore when an organization wants to define what a successful transition would look like. These areas also illuminate how close the organization is to being ready.

1. Strategy readiness
   How current is our strategic and business plan?
   What has changed or is changing in the environment that will influence our strategy or business plan in the next few years?
    
2. Financial readiness
   Do we understand our current financial health: income, expenses, assets and liabilities?
   What is the trend in our income and expenses and capacity to sustain a balanced operating budget?
    
3. Systems readiness
   Do we have in place up-to-date policies and procedures to guide and protect our organization? Where are we vulnerable?
   Does our technology infrastructure support the work required to achieve our mission?
    
4. Management team/staff readiness
   Are there key managers or staff who are doing more than one person’s job?
   Is there a culture and morale among managers or staff that results in retention, growth and ongoing advances for the organization in a capacity to achieve its mission?
    
5. Board readiness
   Does the board have effective leaders as chair and treasurer and leaders of key committees?
   Does the board have systems to support board regeneration and succession?
    
6. Executive readiness
   Is the executive clear about her plans for departure or engaged in a personal process to become clear?
   Does the executive support this planning?

This workshop will provide language and tools to begin to answer these questions and prepare organizations for fulfilling their missions beyond the tenure of the current executive.

Collective Impact Follow Up | By Amy Delamaide and Seth Bate

About a million years ago—or maybe just a few months—I wrote a post about an article we at CCSR are reading, “Collective Impact” by John Kania and Mark Kramer. I promised a follow-up post once we had discussed it at staff meeting.

Your wait is over. Here is that promised follow-up post.

We talked about the article at our August 10th staff meeting. In no particular order and without attribution to the staff members who contributed, here are some things we discussed:

• Communication is important to keeping collective impact efforts going. When different organizations are working on the same issue, sharing what each organization is doing and the impact it is seeing would energize the other organizations and support mutually reinforcing activities.
• The idea of collective impact seems rather utopian. In real-life, it was suggested, change takes much longer than the article indicated. The work is never done and practitioners are constantly revising their approach.
• It is worth exploring what barriers exist that prevent us from moving towards collective impact. How do you reinvigorate organizations at a grassroots level when they are in crisis or under stress, such as many are in these economic times?
• When doing research, especially participatory or action research, it is worth engaging the people doing the work as co-researchers and co-evaluators. This could result in having several “layers” of researchers—the participants in an intervention, the direct service staff delivering an intervention, and those academics observing at a distance could all contribute as researchers.
• It is useful to us as an organization to continue sharing articles and periodically discussing them as a large group. This makes sense for us as a university-based center where continued learning is valued. This might be something that makes sense for your organization, too.

We’ve continued hearing “backbone support organization” and “collective impact” in meetings with partners, so the ideas from the Kania and Kramer article are definitely worth grappling with if you haven’t yet. There is also a blog where the authors and other contributors are continuing to develop their ideas: Collective Impact Blog. Check it out.

Youth as Leaders of Today--Not Just Tomorrow | By Dr. Tara Gregory

“Youth are the leaders of tomorrow!”  How many times have we heard--or possibly said--this as adults who are interested in promoting civic engagement and public responsibility in those who are younger?

Photo courtesy of KCYV

I understand that it’s typically meant as encouragement and is said with great hopefulness. But I always bristle when I hear this because my many years of experience working with young people (high school students, primarily) assures me that seeing youth only as leaders of the future sells them egregiously short. They’re doing incredible things today and every day that reflect exceptional passion, skill and commitment. From groups such as the Kansas Consortium for Youth Voice in Lawrence to the Mayor’s Youth Council in Wichita, there are a huge number of youth-led groups who understand that leadership isn’t a position but something that anyone can do at anytime. And there are many individual youth who stand up and do what they think is right to make life better for others. They organize charitable activities for those in need, write books about their own challenging experiences, and do many other acts of leadership and selflessness. 

I want to make a clear distinction between youth involvement as volunteers and youth-led civic engagement. There are a lot of opportunities and encouragement for youth to get involved in projects that are designed to better the community. But these opportunities are frequently created and supervised by adults with little youth input or involvement in defining the issue or determining the response. There’s nothing wrong with opportunities for youth to be involved as volunteers just as it’s an important option for adults to give back to their communities. But true growth and engagement comes from the autonomy to define and determine the focus and direction of civic engagement. Truly youth-led projects, in which adults take a back seat and typically provide support but very little supervision or authority, are relatively rare – primarily because we adults have trouble getting out of the way and trusting youth to do good things. But I’ve seen time and time again, even when I’ve had my own secret doubts, that youth will come through and do stunningly selfless and effective acts of leadership when given the space. I’ve never been disappointed when I’ve let go of my hard-earned “right” as an adult to talk constantly, have all the answers, do the “important” tasks, and generally be in charge. 

One specific experience I had was when I provided support to a group of high school students who decided to put on a day-long workshop for middle school students. The high school youth determined the focus (training the middle schoolers on how to take action to prevent substance abuse within their own schools), designed and presented all of the sessions, and worked individually with teams from each middle school to help them develop an action plan to enhance their school. On the day of the workshop, I overslept. I was panicked at what was probably happening because I wasn’t there to provide assistance where necessary. When I got to the workshop location about 30 minutes before the start of the event, everything was ready to go and, in addition to teasing me mercilessly about being late, the high school youth jabbed me a bit about not trusting them to have things under control. It was a lesson to me about the “adultist” attitudes I still held, even though I loved and trusted this group of youth tremendously. It was also a reminder about how much more meaningful the accomplishment was to the youth when they did it all themselves. I’ve never forgotten this day because it was a great example of what I still needed to learn and also because of how incredibly proud I was to have the honor to be associated with these exceptional young people. These youth are now adults with kids of their own. I hope they remember this day and the pride they felt as vividly as I do.

Photo courtesy of KCYV

I’ve also recently had the opportunity to use the Kansas Leadership Center concepts and principles with the Kansas Consortium for Youth Voice, a youth-led group whose mission is to empower youth voice to generate action and positive change in their communities. While I know from my own experience that these concepts are frequently challenging for adults to integrate, it seemed that the youth immediately got it. They worked through faction mapping, identifying values, and a number of other exercises that challenged them to diagnose the situation (i.e., adult resistance to youth voice), manage themselves, energize others, and intervene skillfully. There was no question of them being too young or inexperienced to understand or utilize these tools. And I know they’ve taken this information and immense skill forward in their work. Again, I hope they recognize the value and uniqueness of what they’re contributing to their community.

Youth are people who have a stake in our communities and who have valuable knowledge and skills to contribute right now. We sell youth short when we think of them as biding time until they’re old enough to be community leaders – and consequently we cheat our communities out of valuable expertise, passion and energy. Just as all adults have various experience and areas of expertise, so do youth. Just because their experiences and areas of expertise are different from ours, doesn’t mean they aren’t as valuable and interested in creating better communities if we’re willing to treat them as partners. I encourage all adults to avoid the “leaders of the future” comment. If we as adults make space for youth to contribute to civic leadership, we are all equals in creating a better Kansas.

Photos courtesy of Kansas Consortium for Youth Voice, from the leadership/service learning workshop they held for Iraqi and Central European youth through the International Visitors Council of Greater Kansas City.

Searching for a Rose Garden in Berlin | By Dr. Tara Gregory

View of the valley below Neuschwanstein by Dr. Tara Gregory

I just returned from a trip to Germany and Austria where in addition to the usual sightseeing, I was privileged to attend a conference called “Searching for a Rose Garden: Fostering Real Alternatives to Psychiatry” in Berlin, sponsored by Verein zum Schutz vor Psychiatrischer Gewalt – the Association for Protection Against Psychiatric Violence. This conference was organized and primarily attended by persons who referred to themselves as survivors of psychiatry from all around Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. As far as I know there were only a few of us from the U.S. and maybe even fewer whose experience is more as a provider than a recipient or survivor of psychiatric services. Although I’m still processing everything I learned and experienced at this conference, one thing I do know is that the wisdom that was shared by persons with lived experience and from other countries changed my perspective on what psychologists or other service providers like myself think we know about mental illness. I’m just going to share a few questions, thoughts, and ideas that I’m still considering and maybe I’ll write more in the future when I’ve figured out what this all means to me. 

Before I share my questions/thoughts/ponderings, I want to be up front about the fact that I don’t have much personal, lived experience with mental health services beyond working in the substance abuse prevention field for many years and now as a researcher who sometimes focuses in this area. So I wouldn’t consider myself to be much of a consumer, survivor, peer or any other designation for someone with significant lived experience. I’m also a community psychologist – not clinical – and as such, I’ve never provided direct therapeutic services to persons with mental health issues. My role has primarily been to help foster community conditions that support the health and well-being of the people within these contexts and to do research along these lines. I’m not saying these things to distance myself from the people or the issue, but to be clear that I’m a bit of an outsider and may be late to the party where some of my thoughts are concerned. So I’m proceeding cautiously knowing that what I write here is tinged with a bit of distance from – but complete respect for – lived experience in this area.

Briefly, here’s what I heard, considered, thought, or questioned based on my experience at this really illuminating and inspiring conference:

1. The perspective presented by many at the conference was that of psychiatric survivors, i.e. people who reject the medical model of distress and who feel that they have been seriously mistreated and harmed by typical psychiatric treatments (such as institutionalization, restraint, electroconvulsive therapy, medication) and are thus “survivors” of psychiatry. This perspective of being a survivor of services seems appreciably different than that of a “consumer,” the term that is more typically used here in the U.S. or at least in Kansas. What are the implications of being a survivor versus a consumer? 
2. Consistent with the rejection of the medical model, several presenters indicated that the term “injury” rather than “illness” is more reflective of the foundation of mental health issues. One presenter, David Webb, suggested the word “psychache” (soul ache) as being the best descriptor of the condition that fuels such responses as suicide attempts. Additionally, in her presentation on self-harm, Clare Shaw spoke of self-injurious behaviors as an expression of the will to survive and hope while in distress rather than the typical view of them as indicators of hopelessness. She further noted that the greatest “penalty” and motivator for lethal actions was being restrained from self-injury, which takes away the person’s only option for comfort in the midst of turmoil. These ideas seem to fit well with the trauma-informed care perspective that suggests that what appears to be maladaptive behavior is actually a reasonable response in the context of traumatic situations/histories. So if there’s no true mental illness but rather mental injury or “psychache” what does that mean for how we typically view and treat mental health issues?
3. In Berlin, there’s an organization, which helped support this conference, called the Weglaufhaus. Literally translated, this means “runaway house.” At the Weglaufhaus, peers provide support to those in crisis so as to lessen the possibility of traumatization through interaction with typical treatments or the system itself and to encourage solidarity and self-sufficiency. While there are a few similar organizations in the U.S. (see peer-run crisis alternatives for more information), what would it take to create more options for peer run alternatives to hospitalization? Maybe more importantly, what would it take to make this “alternative” more mainstream?
4. Another field of inquiry that’s emerging in Germany is peer-supported medication cessation. Basically this would offer an option for those who make the decision to stop taking medication when it seems to not be helping or to be harmful (as defined by the person) to get assistance from others who understand the process and ramifications in all areas of the person’s life (e.g., physically, emotionally, spiritually, socially, etc.). The desire to create such a peer-driven service is becoming more pronounced as knowledge increases about the negative impact of psychiatric medications on health and life expectancy. While this may take a while to figure out how to implement effectively and consistently, will reliance on medication ever become the exception rather than the norm? Should it be the exception?  I’m guessing that most participants at this conference would probably say yes.

Probably the most central point that was underscored time and again during the conference was the power of solidarity and support among survivors. Although not completely parallel to living with a mental health issue, I’ve been a type 1 diabetic since I was six years old. Although my diabetes is under good control, I often get “assistance” from others in managing it – sometimes invited, sometimes not. I’ll usually gladly accept it from someone who has similar experiences or who has at least shown themselves to be knowledgeable and empathetic to the range of experiences I have. However, nothing irritates me more than when someone who hasn’t lived with this or who doesn’t have the same type of diabetes tells me what I should or shouldn’t eat, when I should check my blood sugar, how much to exercise or not (as some oddly recommend), and what my limitations are or might be. For those with mental health issues, who often face more traumatic intrusion than I probably ever will, peer support is quite understandably preferable and, as research is showing, can be highly effective. And, as Clare Shaw noted, understanding a person isn’t just the first step in helping, it IS the help.

So I came back with a lot of questions after this trip -- one is why my German sounds so good in my head but doesn’t appear to be well understood by most native speakers -- and a lot to ponder -- including how many times I could eat a meal of bratwursts and pretzels before someone tells me a diabetic “shouldn’t be eating that.”  More than anything, as I’m always reminded when I go to Germany, which is where I was born, there are often very different but equally valid perspectives and ways of living in cultures other than our own, whether it’s the German culture or that of survivors of psychiatry.  I’m very grateful to the conference organizers and participants for sharing their perspectives and experiences in an effort to increase understanding and the growth of a more enlightened approach to mental health.

CCSR Welcomes New Volunteers | By Angela Gaughan

We are excited to have seven students volunteering at CCSR on a variety of projects this semester.

Four students are from the Emory Lindquist Honors Program, two are in the Master of Social Work Program and one has earned a bachelor’s degree in Psychology. Each volunteer is working on a specific project – one that she expressed interest in. Our hope is that the volunteers will learn more about how we build capacity for individuals, organizations and communities. We are also looking forward to seeing what they contribute as well as hearing the questions they have about our work.

The students from the Honors program are Victoria Eck, a junior majoring in Pre-law and Political Science/History; Emily Lancaster, a sophomore majoring in pre-medicine; Janet Nghiem Phy, a freshman with an undeclared major; and Shahla Pourkaram, a junior majoring in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering and Pre-medicine.

Kaitlin Boger is a second year master’s student and Jennifer Comes is in her first year of studying in the Master of Social Work Program. Bailey Blair has earned a bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a Teacher’s License in English Literature and Psychology. She plans to pursue a PhD in Clinical Psychology.

When I asked a couple of students what they were working on today, one said that she is gathering information for an upcoming presentation at a health fair. She is also creating a logo and handouts to help people with mental illness keep track of their medical information so they can advocate for their own medical treatment. Another student said that she is researching sources of resilience to help in building a model of trauma healing for CCSR’s work on Trauma-Informed Care.

Graduate student Kaitlin added, “Right now, I'm currently working on a Trauma-Informed Care blog post, helping design and facilitate leadership development sessions, and designing and supporting a trauma-informed organizational process for a community partner in Topeka. I have been conducting website searches to gather information on Trauma-Informed Care models and Trauma-Informed treatment. I have also been working on various teams to help design presentations in trauma-informed care.”

It has been great to get to know these students, the next generation of leaders in the work place. Please help us welcome these new volunteers!