Try   HackMD

Collective Governance and Distributed Leadership Practices

The formal or informal systems that structure how we are able to hold each other to account for how we act in relation to others within given spaces/projects are sometimes described as collective governance practices. How we act out these structures matters. These structures impact how leadership practices emerge within groups - with some structures enforcing centralised dominance practices while others support efforts to distribute power and responsibilies.

Within colonial contexts, capitalism pressures us to unintentionally default to relating to each other within oppressive structures. One way to resist these pressures is by being more intentional about the governance structures we choose for ourselves. While our choices for collectively governing ourselves are constrained by these broader contexts, making our governance choices explicit can help to open up space within which to co-create more just futures together.

In my explorations of different approaches to collective governance practices, I've found that guidelines and agreements are being used to detail specific expectations around participation within collectively governed spaces and projects. In some cases, formalised statements are also shared publicly to communicate existing guidelines and agreements with new participants (and broader audiences).

When and how the effort of identifying, calibrating, and articulating shared expectations around a given aspect of participation depends on the a range of factors including the how many people are involved, how stable the collection of participants are, how long the given collective space/project is expected to last, and so on. For example groups practising commoning may need additionally considerations that allow for regularly revising agreements to allow for shared expectations to change as new considerations emerge within a dynamic collection of participants).

There are numerous ways to group different aspects of participation together through these processes. The following broad categories are my attempt to sort examples of guidelines and agreements that have been shared as public statements.

  • Identifying values & articulating principles, examples of efforts to identify and articulate how the groups values align (and, where relevant, how these inform their guiding principles, vision, etc.,)
  • Decision-making practices, examples of efforts to identify and articulate agreed decisions-making practices within a group
  • Conduct statements & participation agreements, examples of declarations about what a given group considers acceptable behaviour for contributors/participants within a given space/project.
  • Accountability processes, examples of agreements about how to navigate conflict as a group and/or how to hold people accountable for harm or abuse occurs within the group
  • Communication processes and documentation practices, examples of explicit agreements on how to communicate 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.

Identifying Values & Articulating Principles

The process of identifying a shared-understanding of the values that set the standards of behaviour within a given context/group/space can be a useful foundation for participatory governance practices. For example, periodically engaging in an explicit process of calibrating values motivating a project can help highlight when/how different assumptions are contributing to misunderstandings. Once identified, a given set of values can be used to help articulate a set of values and/or principles for guiding decision-making and conflict resolution practices, informing the direction of a group, and determining the ways in which individual actions align with collective agreements.

The following offer some examples of clearly articulated values as they relate to an organisations guiding principles, mission, purpose, and vision:

Conduct Statements and Participation Agreements

While used in different ways, codes of conduct and participation agreeements broadly function as statements of 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. Accepting this agreement is often positioned as a condition of participation in a given space/community (where acceptance means agreeing to take responsibility for meeting these expectations, accept the stated consequence if/when relevant, and follow the conflict resolution processes as needed). Note that there are also examples of interpersonal agreements that combined conduct and participation expectations with explict accountability processes, as detailed in the following section.

Some examples:

Accountability Processes

Statements that articulate accountability processes function to make explicit shared agreements about the responsibilities each participant will take for specific aspects of their conduct within a given group, and the processes for holding each other to account for not meeting those responsibilities.

Regardless of other forms of expected participation, having explict accountability processes can be helpful to clarify expecations about how to navigate conflict within the group, as well as how to hold people accountable for harm or abuse occurs within the group.

These accountability processes often rely on the group having articulated shared-expectations about how individuals conduct themselves in relation to others (sometimes within the same statement, sometimes as a seperate agreement - see overlaps in the conduct statements participation agreeements).

For example:

Decision-Making Practices

Articulating explicit decision-making guidelines and agreements can help to clarify participatory governance practices. Without this clarification, assumptions can emerge about who needs to participate in decisions that impact the whole group based on implicit governance structures.

The less centralised and autocratic the 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.

The following examples of explicit governance agreements highlight a wide range of options - for example, some groups use consensus decision-making, others use some form of distributed leadership, others have chosen decentralised technically-mediated hybrid decision-making processes, etc.,

Communication Processes & Documentation Practices

Communication & Working-goup Guidelines

Further Resources:

tags: resource-sets collaborative-practices participatory-governance

Date created: 2021
Version: 3.0 (2024)
Attribution: created by E. T. Smith on unceded lands of the Wurundjeri people.

Image Not Showing Possible Reasons
  • The image file may be corrupted
  • The server hosting the image is unavailable
  • The image path is incorrect
  • The image format is not supported
Learn More →
CC BY-NC-SA

Last changed by 
 
E. T. Smith
I am a researcher and resource curator using this space to draft and share early-versions of projects. For context, see: https://hackmd.io/@Teq/Bio
0
1
808

Read more

Recommendations Snapshot

A sample of things I’ve recently recommended - sorted into the following broad interest areas (each updated & trimmed sporadically):

Mar 21, 2025
Teq

This bio is intended as a context-specific introduction to contextualise the resource-sets and writings I share publically.

Jan 21, 2025
Housing as a Collective Responsibility

The following resource set is intended to support discussions on the concept of housing as a collective responsibility. For more detailed resources, please enquire about the ongoing research project into existing collaborative models/approaches I’m conduting to support a potential working group for developing housing justice focused approaches to collaborative.

Jan 1, 2025
Transformative Approaches to Conflict Resolution

image of a flower growing out of a concrete block and destroying the concrete to free it's root, from: https://ncph.org/history-at-work/how-should-we-respond/

Nov 11, 2024
Read more from E. T. Smith
Published on HackMD