# How do we Collaborate?

## Introduction
For a given project, it can be useful to discuss the ways in which we each participate in collaborative practices, what we can commit to, and agreements to guide these practices in an ongoing sustainable way.
> In this context, a ‘project’ is intended as a broad concept for any form of collaborative practice - including sharing space (e.g., during a retreat), participating in a recurring activity (e.g., a reading group), and contributing to long-term collective endeavour (e.g., a housing cooperative). *

There are multiple approaches to structuring discussions about collaborative practices. The aim here is to outline a selection of the many ways of conceptualising different areas where it can be useful to articulate a shared understanding of how we might collaborate. Some of these link to expanded session guidelines for those interested in discussing specific ways of collaborating in more detail.

One way of thinking through these concepts is to begin with by forming a shared understanding of *why* we are each participating in this project, our intentions for *what* the project is/does, and *how* we intend to relate along the way.

Exploring the *why* may include specifying the **context** of the project and articulating shared **values**. Co-creating the *what* may involve identifying a set of guiding **principles**, articulating the project's **purpose** and/or **vision**, and developing a set of practices or operation **protocols**. It is also important to discuss *how* we collaborate - including elements such as **participation expectations** and **power dynamics**, as well as broader **logistical** contraints the project may exist within.

These discussions can help to provide the foundation for [more intentional collaborations](/_VFSZEB1TN6_OvZ76Ax0Ew). Additionally, these discussion may help form the basis of [participatory governance documentation](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/SkG18auHF), such as *guidelines* for cultivating shared-cultural practices within the group; *agreements* that explicitly document and guide decisions processes within the group; and *statements* for communicate expectations for incoming group-members and/or a broader audience. See the further resources section for examples.

## Context setting
A discussion to clarify why we are undertaking this project and the scope of what we are collaborating on the shared project. Questions to prompt discussion include:

- What project are we collaborating on?
- What do we each hope to achieve by participating in this project?
- Why are we collaborating?
- Why are we motivated to participate in this project?
- Who is this project for?
- Who do we hope will benefit from this project?
- Who will be directly involved in this project?
- Who will be indirectly involved in this priject?
- When?
- When can the time-line of our participation in this project start/end/change?
- How?
- How does our participation in this project fit in with our existing commitments?

For more details, see the [Meaning Making in Context](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/context-for-collaborations) discussion prompts

## Values
In this context, our **values** refer to the set of attitudes, unique to each individual (or group), which govern our behaviour and guide the way we look at the world. Values are not about what you want to get or achieve; they are about how you want to behave or act on an ongoing basis.

Discussing the degree of alignment between our individual values can helps us to identify refine, and articulate (and periodically revisit) a shared-understanding of which values express how we want to act together during our collaboration. Identifying and monitoring shared values can also serve as guidelines for decision-making and conflict resolution, as well as for informing and constraining decisions that determine specific actions and/or the direction of the project.

For more details, see the [What are our shared Values?](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/values-calibration) discussion prompts.

If you already have a set of values articualated as a group, consider regularly monitoring how these are being enacted. One way to to this is to individually reflect on the following quesitons, and then come together to discuss the range of your responses:
- which seems most important
- which one do i think about or act on most
- which of these, if emphaised more, would make the biggest difference

## Principles
In this context, our principles refers to how we express our values across multiple contexts. Building on the shared-values discussion, this discussion focuses on exploring the principles that help us ensure that our actions are guided by our shared values across different aspects of the project.These contexts will vary for different project, some example questions to prompt discussion include:
- How does our approach to problem solving express our values?
- How does our approach to the ways we allocate resources express our values?
- How does our approach to our relationship building practices express our values?
- How does our approach to deciding when and how to collaborate with each other (and other groups) express our values?

## Purpose
Discussing the purpose of a project can help to articulate the project goals and intended outcomes how these align (or not) with respective value systems, and how they are enacted by our principles. Questions to prompt discussion include:
- What does the project do, and for whom?
- What specific outcomes do we hope to achieve with this project at different time points?
- How do each of our intended outcomes contribute to the project’s over-arching vision.

## Vision
Discussion the vision of a project can help identify the intended impacts - when we achieve all our goals - in terms of both who we will become and how the project could change the world. Questions to prompt discussion include:
- Who is most likely impacted by each of the project’s intended outcomes?
- Which of the positive impacts do we want to prioritise?(and how can we mitigate potentially negative impacts of this project?)
- What is the intended scale for each of these impacts?

## Protocols
Discussing protocols can help identify which behaviours help us embed our guiding principles into everyday operations in ways that contribute to our purpose and reach towards our vision. Questions to prompt discussion include:
- What are the types of behaviours that indicate that we are (or aren't) operating in accordance with our values
- What processes could help us monitor these behaviours and role that values play in the different aspects of our project?
- are there any processes would help us assign functional uses to our values (in addition to cultivating behaviours aligned with our values)?
- How do we monitor values-alignment (in decision making, conflict resolution, feedback loops, etc.,)
- Are there any broader sociotechnical constraints we need to consider (e.g., legal, financial)?

## Participation expectations
Discussing our participation expectations can help us monitor how our protocols ensure values-alignment across different contexts of the project. There are many different types of participation expectations, as two examples, consider:
- **Decision-making (governance) expectations**
Articulating explicit decision-making agreements can also help to clarify the governance practices that structure expectations around participation. The less centralised and autocratic a group's approach to leadership, the more important it is to identify a shared-understanding of the group's intended governance structure, and intentionally choose appropriate decision-making and communication practices. Without this clarification, assumptions can emerge about who needs to participate in decisions that impact the whole group based on implicit governance structures (e.g., [adchocracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhocracy), [doocracies](https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy), [sociocracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociocracy) [holocrocies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy), [democracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy), [bureaucracies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy), etc.,). See the 'Further Resources' section for examples.
- **Interpersonal conduct expectations**
Regardless of the degree of participation expected in governance processes, it can be helpful to clarify how to resolve conflicts within the group by articulating shared-expectations about how individuals conduct themselves in relation to others and what to do when things go awry. One of the tools in this space are **Interpersonal Conduct Agreements:** These are statements that outlines a set of shared **agreements** about the responsibilities each participant will take for their conduct within a given community, and the processes for holding each other to account for not meeting those responsibilities. These agreements are co-created (and periodically reviewed) by those participating in the community.
- **Expectations for collectively navigating conflict**
Part of collaborating is navigating the tensions and conflicts that arise along the way. One of the best practices for navigating conflict together *well* is to practice it. Additionally, there are various tools that can help articulate shared sets of expectations about how to reduce the potential for conflict and/or respond to conflicts when they emerge. For example, **Code of Conduct Statements & Conflict-Resolution Guidelines** are statements details the **explicit expectations** for acceptable/unacceptable conduct within a given space/community, and often detail the consequences for those who fail to meet these expectations. See the 'Further Resources' section for examples.

For more details, see the [pre-emptive relationship gardening practices](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/IntentionalCollaborations1) discussion prompts

## Power dynamics
Even with shared protocols,explicit participation expectations, and a commitment to equity and inclusion, there are always differences in who has more or less influence within different contexts.

In discussing these dynamics, we hope to increase our shared understanding of those differences and, where relevant, identity changes in how we work together that might improve the distribution of power in the context of our collaboration. Example discussion prompts include:
- Are there any processes for communicating when power-dynamics emerge that make one or more of us uncomfortable?
- Reflect on the group within which you felt most welcomed, supported, and able to work at your best and describe some of the characteristics of this group?
- If safe for you to do so, reflect on a group within which you felt the unwelcome, unsupported, and unable to work at your best, and describe some of the characteristics of this group?
- How is decision-making power currently distributed among the group (and are these power-dynamics explicit or implied)?
- Are there any hesitations you have about collaborating together?
- Are there any ways of working that would help you to feel better able to participate in this group?
- Are there any processes that could help us better navigate the power-dynamics within this group?

## Logistics
With any project there are logistical considerations and it can be beneficial to form some agreements about what these are and, where relevant, who has responsibility for what, and under what conditions that responsibility is shared with others. For example, it can be helpful to form agreements on how to communicate about what to whom on which platform (to ensure clarity, transparency, etc.,), as well as what kind of documentation is needed for decisions/processes, how often these are reviewed, and who is responsible for keeping them up to date in the interim.

Questions to prompt discussion include:
- Are there any the legal, financial, and any other sociotechnical practices we need to engage with as part of this project?
- What communication tools are we going to use for this project?
- What rhythms of participation are we expecting of each other during this project?
- What aspects of the ways in which we contribute to our project should be documented?

## Future Co-Creation
See [Co-creating Shared Futures](/orzWQoy_TsGQRSCHkCNOBw)
## Further resources
### Example Value Statements
Examples of values articulated in the context of the guiding principles, mission, purpose, and vision of various projects:

- The Enspiral handbook's [statement of values](https://handbook.enspiral.com/guides/values) that all members are expected to share.
- The *guiding principles* emerging within the collection of open-source projects building on the Scuttlebutt protocol, as agreed in [2018](https://scuttlebutt.nz/docs/principles/) and [2020](https://scuttlebutt.netlify.app/docs/principles/)
- Black Coop's [guiding principles](https://docs.indexcoop.com/our-guiding-principles)
- Ouishare's [manifesto](https://www.ouishare.net/manifesto), includes a statement of the five values guiding their actions and decisions.
- Embasssy Network's Sigal House's [values statement](https://embassynetwork.com/locations/sigil/values/) and La Choza Del Mondo House's [vision statements](https://embassynetwork.com/locations/choza/vision/)
- Loomio's [purpose and vision](https://www.loomio.coop/our_cooperative/purpose_and_vision) agreement, and [value statement](https://www.loomio.com/about)
- Mondragon Cooperative's [mission, vision, & values statement](https://www.mondragon-corporation.com/somos#global)
- rOpenSci [mission statement](https://ropensci.org/about/)
- Design Justice Network's [principles](https://designjustice.org/read-the-principles)
- A list of [mission statements from some of the world’s leading digital campaigning groups](https://commonslibrary.org/mission-statements-of-some-of-the-worlds-leading-digital-campaigning-groups/)
- [Kiev Burn's Principles Statement](https://kiezburn.org/11-principles/)

### Examples of Governance Agreements
Examples of explicit governance practices within organisations that use either [distributed leadership](https://youtu.be/o0Hu5ntP61U) and/or decentralised technically-mediated decision-making processes:

- Enspiral's [Agreements for Decision Making](https://handbook.enspiral.com/agreements/decisions)
- Greater Than's [Decision-making Agreement](https://handbook.greaterthan.works/agreements/decision-making-agreement), [People Agreement](https://handbook.greaterthan.works/agreements/people-agreement), and [Financial Agreement](https://handbook.greaterthan.works/agreements/financial-agreement)
- Loomio's [governance](https://www.loomio.coop/our_cooperative/governance) and [cooperative principles](https://www.loomio.coop/our_cooperative/cooperative_principles) agreements, and [working together](https://www.loomio.coop/working_together) guidelines.
- Embassy SF's [evolving doocracy agreements](https://medium.com/embassy-network/an-evolving-doocracy-3a6123f9b170)
- Ouishare's ['Our DNA' statement](https://www.ouishare.net/our-dna) that includes a description of their doocratic approach to decision-making processes.
- [Scuttlebutt.eu](http://scuttlebutt.eu/)'s [Collective Documents](https://scuttlebutt.eu/documents/)
- [Keiv Burn's Consensual Do-Ocracy Statement](https://talk.kiezburn.org/d/M91bKpBo/consensual-do-ocracy-short-definition)
- Design Justice Network's governance [structure](https://designjustice.org/structure)

### Examples of Interpersonal Conduct Agreements
- Embasssy Network Sigal House's [shared agreements statement](https://embassynetwork.com/locations/sigil/shared%20agreements/)
- Enspiral's [personal conduct agreements](https://handbook.enspiral.com/agreements/personal_conduct)
- [Intro to transformative conflict resolution](https://www.notion.so/ca34DoY5R5S6dy1kZfsCUQ)
### Examples of Code-of-Conduct Statements & Conflict-Resolution Guidelines
- The [Contributor Covenant Template Code of Conduct](https://www.contributor-covenant.org/) for Open Source Communities
- Scuttlebutt's [Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct](https://scuttlebutt.nz/docs/code-of-conduct/) for the collection of open-source projects building on the SSB protocol, and the related [SSBC_JS Code of Conduct](https://github.com/ssb-js/ssb-js/blob/main/code_of_conduct.md) and [Scuttlebutt.eu Code of Conduct](https://scuttlebutt.eu/documents/)
- Association for Interdisciplinary Meta-Research and Open Science's [Code of Conduct](https://aimos.community/code-of-conduct), including process for reporting unacceptable behaviours and resolving conflict
- rOpenSci OzUnconference [code of conduct](https://ozunconf19.ropensci.org/coc.html)
- Enspiral's [Conflict Resolutions Guidelines](https://handbook.enspiral.com/guides/conflict-resolution), and guidelines for responding to [Harassment and Abuse](https://handbook.enspiral.com/agreements/harassment_and_abuse)
- Ebassy SF House's [accountable space guidelines](https://embassynetwork.com/locations/embassysf/accountablespace/)
- TacticalTech's [accountability statement](https://tacticaltech.org/accountability/) - not a decentralised org, but a useful example still.
### Examples of Communication and Documentation Agreements
- Enspiral's [Communication Guidelines](https://handbook.enspiral.com/guides/comms_guidelines)
- Example [Working Group Guidelines](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/working-groups)
- [Scuttlebutt.eu](http://scuttlebutt.eu/)'s [Growing a Peach](https://scuttlebutt.eu/DIY-Peach!/) working-group guidelines

---
###### tags: `discussion-prompt` `collaborative-practices` `intentional-relationships` `meta-communication`

Date created: 2023
Version: 2.0
Created for: Panga
Attribution: created by [E. T. Smith](https://hackmd.io/@Teq/Bio) on unceded lands of the [Wurundjeri people](https://www.wurundjeri.com.au/).
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/4.0/88x31.png" /></a> [CC BY-NC-SA](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)

---