Our Programs of Study in ADF

Ar nDraoicht Fein, A Druid Fellowship, Inc. (ADF), provides four distinct avenues for pursuing study in the practice of Druidry. The Dedicant Program is the introductory study program, consisting of analysis of the eight major holidays, three book reviews, a look at grounding and centering practices, and a mental discipline/meditation practicum. Upon completion, the student may enter a variety of additional programs designed for enhanced specialization. The Guild programs focus on specific skillsets: bardic work, brewing, naturalist practices, liturgy, or study of Indo-European beliefs regarding magico-religious and divinatory practices, to name a few. The Generalist Program is a full course of study that encompasses aspects of all of these specializations. Finally, there are two courses of more intense study that includes a dedication to service in the organization: the Initiate Path and the Clergy Training Program. The Initiate work is designed for individuals who wish to be of service without ordination. The Clergy Training results in full ordination and provides the polity necessary to pursue a Masters of Divinity through an accredited university.

ADF is unique in that there are not many neopagan/polytheist training programs based on such sound scholarship and practical materials. The programs themselves were developed as needed by the Elders and Founders of the organization. The current staff of reviewers and mentors is in agreement that we have lost our edge and are in need of updating our resources. Our marketing is minimal to the point of word-of-mouth, as is common in the greater polytheist community. There is stigma, often negative, attached to our practices, and there are many participants who study under a pseudonym.

It is because we are unique that we need the program. Although it is a perceived need, it is one of great import to those who hold it. When the program was being developed, there was nothing like it. Most of the folks who practiced an earth-based religion were in hiding and met under the light of the moon to protect their identities. We have known folks who were fired and even lost their children due to misconceptions and prejudices against non-monotheistic religious identities. Still, our founder, Rev. Isaac Bonewits, decided he was done being in the shadows. When he founded ADF, his sole purpose was to provide safe space for earth-based folks who just wanted a place to pray. The study programs followed almost immediately as folks wished to learn all they could about the various practices of the folks of ancient Indo-Eurpoean tribes.

While the initial programs were developed, there was no real data collection. We are currently in our third version of the Clergy Training program as we have attempted to fill the gaps we discover haphazardly in our training. Mostly, when the folk we serve tell us they need us to do a thing, we figure out how to provide it. It is not the most effective way to build a program, but so far, it has served us. Until now, that is. We have finally reached a point where improvements are needed beyond our ability to simply perceive them. ADF has grown into a complex organization over these 30 years.

As we move forward, we are in desperate need of modifications, but these must be made with care. Full analysis of the program in the words of those we serve as they describe their experiences will not only shine a light on the areas for improvement, but also provide data about what we are doing well. Great care must be paid to ensuring we preserve those parts that are worth preserving and change those things that are no longer serving the folk or the organization.

Stakeholder Roles in Evaluation of the Study Programs

Stakeholders are those with "vested interest" in the focus of the evaluation; they are the individuals who are most likely to be affected by the outcome (Thayer & Fine, 2001, p. 104).  Depending upon the nature of their involvement with the program, various stakeholder groups may have different perspectives on what is important  in terms of areas to address and required feedback. For example, it may be important for the reviewers to know how many students are enrolled and how many have completed the programs, but the local leadership may be far more concerned that the students who complete the coursework are able to fulfill the roles for which the program has trained them.

1. The Students. These folks are currently enrolled and will provide data real-time regarding the struggles and benefits of the program as it exists. The previous students who are now unenrolled may have useful data, but the passage of time has likely clouded the memories of the experience. Further, the students who complete the programs have typically collected additional knowledge, which has the potential to simplify the previous program of study by comparison.

2. The Reviewers. These folks have the unique ability to capture common misconceptions as they appear in the course submissions. For example, if the majority of the students for whom they review are asked to revise the same question, there may be an issue with the wording or the source for this question. Combined with the data from the students, there is the potential for a broader-scope analysis.

3. Dedicated Congregants/Local Leadership. These folks are working with the students as they complete the training and begin doing the work. They will provide data regarding how well they are equipped upon completion and what additional training had to be provided. For example, a first circle liturgist who needs no help running a service would be seen as successful whereas a first circle liturgist who requires additional guidance would reveal areas for improvement.

In terms of the empowerment model, all three groups have the potential to ensure the success of the evaluation through their input for such things as creating questions, analyzing short-answer responses, and assisting with implementing any changes we agree to make.

Thayer, C.E. & Fine, A.H. (2001). Evaluation and outcome measurement in the nonprofit sector: Stakeholder participation. Evaluation and Program Planning. 24:103-108.

Stakeholders of the Study Programs

The three primary stakeholders of the ADF study programs are:

1. The Students: The folks who are actively enrolled and completing the coursework are the direct recipients of the program, and as such, they are the most important stakeholder group. Their role is critical in understanding what the program is and is not providing to them during their learning. For example, as a trainer ritualist, I can write courses regarding cosmology, comparative mythology, and bardic arts in religious ceremonies. For me, these are all useful topics. The students are the ones who will be able to tell me whether or not these courses are in line with their expectations, are written for the appropriate audience (meaning there is not assumed knowledge that they do not possess), and are relevant to the overall objectives of the program.

2. The Reviewers: The Reviewers are the second group of stakeholders and the people who grade the submissions. In order to become a reviewer, one must have completed the program themself. When we propose changes, we must ensure the reviewers are up-to-date with the knowledge they will need to grade the coursework, especially for the courses that are more subjective and do not currently have rubrics. They are also the people who work directly with the students and are therefore the logical choice for exit interviews with each completion to survey the students. I truly believe having survey questions is imperative, since so much of our study programs are done in an online format.

3. Dedicated Congregants/Local Leadership: ADF is a series of local churches known as groves that all fall under the umbrella of the parent organization. The dedicated congregants and local leadership team are the folks most affected by the success of these study programs. Since these programs also serve as our training programs, the quality of religious services is affected by the effectiveness of the coursework. If a course of study on leading temple services does not provide all the skills a person needs to perform this duty, the congregants will suffer the consequences. It would be prudent to ask these folks what it is they want to see in their religious leaders and adjust our programs accordingly. After all, the purpose of all of this is to serve these folks. They need a voice.

Group Dynamics: A Short-Overview

Traditional Models

Hierarchy. In a hierarchy, decision-making is often done from a top-down vantage. Those at the top, the point-person or person(s) in charge, have final say and may or may not take the perspectives of those beneath them into account. This type of decision-making is best suited for on-the-fly and immediate need decisions.

Democracy. A democratic group involves a voting process where the majority rules in terms of decision making. This type of decision-making process is useful when stakes are low and emotions are less likely to flare based on the outcome. High-stakes decisions are better suited for a process that has a built-in mechanism for ensuring buy-in from all parties involved (stakeholders).

Working Together: Building a Group Dynamic

Collaboration is the process through which two or more individuals or parties work together to produce something. Collaboration is teamwork under more cognitive circumstances (higher-level skills work), whereas teamwork is often highly mechanical (hands-on work). (Dictionary Collaboration)

Consensus is a type of decision-making process in which all parties must agree unanimously in order for a decision to be made (Dictionary Consensus).

How do these terms relate to one another? Collaboration is the process of creating something. Consensus is the end-result of a decision. Both are important parts of teamwork, especially when the setting is one in which the input and opinions of all parties are seen as having merit and deserving to be heard.

Different Methods for Group Decision-Making

Consensus Decision-Making and Interest Based Problem Solving. Consensus, when used to reach a decision, gives everyone the ability to say, “I have said all that I have to say and believe all can understand me. I have listened to what others have said and I believe I understand them. I will support the decision of the group though it may not have been my first choice” (Gallicano 378). Consensus Decision Making (CDM) is a strategy that many nonprofit organizations use to work through and manage conflict as well as for routine decisions of operation. Consensus is the opposite of the traditional top-down authoritarian and democratic models common to most organizations. When coupled with collaboration, consensus serves to prevent the undermining of the organizational unity. Even in a democracy, someone wins and someone loses, potentially creating animosity and generating conflict. (Gallicano 370)

Consensus Decision Making specifically coupled with Interest Based Problem Solving (IBPS) provides a template for collaboration. Traditionally, conversations focus on the positions of the individuals involved. IBPS refocuses the conversation on the interests of the group/organization. Instead of each person trying to convince the other that they are correct in their position, IBPS asks all parties to consider this: there may be an alternative to the positions that have been presented. IBPS asks each stakeholder to consider the best-possible outcome, and then the team collaborates to achieve the goal(s) agreed upon in the CDM process. (Gray 3)

Collaborative groups. Collaborative groups are groups of people coming together for a purpose without centralized structures of command and control (Starhawk, 2011, p.2).  Again, to work in collaboration is to work together on a cognitive goal. Teamwork, a term commonly associated with collaboration, refers to the more hands-on, mechanical tasks (“getting a job done”). Working collaboratively in a group is the process of working in unity for a common purpose without any one person above another such as in a hierarchy. Collaboration implies a balancing of power-dynamics, and although there is no defined hierarchy, there is a point-person, or facilitator, whose role is to guide conversation and action plans toward the agreed-upon goal. Long-term collaborative groups function best when the facilitator is rotated to avoid the most common pitfall of group dynamics: social dominance and unspoken power.

The Pitfall

Social Dominance Theory. We often say no one is in charge in our collaborative groups, but when no one is in charge, the person(s) with the most social dominance often ends up unofficially in charge by default when tensions rise. There is typically someone in a group to whom everyone else will defer as an unspoken rule. Dominance Hierarchy arises when members interact aggressively, such as when debating a course of action or defining participation in an event. This results from a collection of accumulated individual interactions and is something that has been a big issue for the pagan community at large.

References

Dictionary.com The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Collaboration. Web.

 - Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. Consensus. Web.

Gallicano, Tiffany Derville. “Internal Conflict Management and Decision Making: A Qualitative Study of a Multi-tiered Grassroots Advocacy Organization.” Journal of Public Relations Research, 25: 368-388. 2013. Print.

Gray, Kelsey, Ph. D. “Interest-Based Problem Solving Process and Techniques.” Washington State University Cooperative Extension. Seattle, WA. 1996. Print.

Starhawk. (2011). The empowerment manual: A guide for collaborative groups. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

A Personal Leadership Statement

Leadership can seem like a nebulous topic, something that you either have or do not have as an innate skill, and despite the myriad volumes of books available, many of them provide little by way of what to do when faced with a challenge. The following is a reflection on my own journey as a leader, what experiences have led to me where I am, and my potential for impact and growth.

I grew up in a small town in Reno, NV. My father was on disability, and my mother worked in a casino in a cash cage to make ends meet. Neither of them went to college, and neither of them held any titles in their employment history. Yet, when their friends needed guidance, they sought the advice of my parents. I remember them sitting down to pots of coffee with friends, laughing and then crying, sorting out the details and making a plan for moving forward. This is my earliest exposure to what it means to be a leader.

As I grew older, I found myself rising to meet the needs of others, just as I had modeled for me. I was also strong academically and excelling at music. When I graduated high school as salutatorian and prepared to move into my dorm room for college, my mother told me how proud she was. I was the first woman in my family to go to college, and no matter where I ended up, I was paving the way for those who came after me. My first tangible leadership lesson was this: lead by example.

During my first attempt at college, I did just that. I attended class, volunteered with the local school system as a tutor, and even got a job as a waitress. I held myself to high standards, and I found that those around me rose to them, as well. I wanted to be the kind of person who brought the best out in others. When I found myself pregnant in my third year of college and lost my scholarship, I was humiliated. I moved back home, but I chose not to tell anyone I was pregnant. I had been keeping things to myself that I worried would tarnish my name, and it wasn’t until I was almost eight months along that I informed my family. Once again, my mother was there with my second leadership lesson: lead with integrity and honesty.

After my first son was born, I put myself through school to finish my Associate’s Degree in Medical Laboratory Technology. Not quite the four-year degree I hoped to obtain, I was still the first woman to go to school and acquire a degree. My second and third child came eighteen months apart from one another, and my youngest son changed the course of my life forever. My Timmy was nonverbal until he was six, and the challenges of raising a son on the spectrum were just our way of life. I remember getting compliments on how strong I was and what a patient mom I was, but for me, there was no choice but to be the strong and patient so my son could have a safe environment in which to learn and grow. We developed our own methods of communicating, and as he learned how to interact with the world without my help, I went back to school to finish my Bachelor’s Degree in Medical Technology. My lesson from Timmy has always been that leading others often involves creating safe space for them to fail. As I embraced this, I even learned to create space for myself to fail, as well.

Now that I am completing a Master’s Degree, the first one in my family for anyone, I look back on those formative lessons and can clearly see how much these experiences changed who I am and how I operate in relationships with others. I would add perseverance and compassion to my list of leadership traits through my careers. Working in pediatrics and eventually being ordained as a minister taught me the value of meeting others with compassion, which means to suffer with, and sticking to the work until we reach our goals. These are the lessons that arise when I hear, “leader.”

When I grow up, I aspire to be a big picture leader. Daniel Goleman (2014) defines big picture leaders as a “rare souls who operate on behalf of society itself rather than a specific political group or business” (p. 59). Though my journey started out about me as an individual, I can do a lot of good in the world for others. My experiences in medicine, in working with children with autism, and in my newest role as a Board Member for PFLAG Boulder County, opportunities abound for me to make a difference in far larger circles than the one drawn around my own little family. I identify as a great leader currently and do my part to address systems that are no longer serving our needs, whether in my department at work, in my role in the community, or in the community at large. Only together can we speak truth to power, and my lessons in leadership have prepared me to create space for others to lend their voices to the fray. We are stronger when everyone has a chance to be heard.

I have read many books on leadership theory, and I do not espouse to any one in particular. The first book that had a major effect on the way I interact with people was not a leadership book, but rather a psychology/self-help book entitled, The Five Love Languages. In his book, Gary Chapman (1995) discusses the different ways we give and receive love in one of five love languages: quality time, acts of service, gifts, words of affirmation, and physical touch (p. 10). Learning to name and express my own needs as well as to decipher the needs of others provided me with a unique foundation as a young adult to start building relationships with a genuine desire for all participants to love and feel loved in return. From this place of mutual respect and vulnerability, we find greater opportunities for growth and accomplishing goals.

Fast forward though years of ethics and pastoral study brings me to Tom Rath and Barry Conchie’s work. In their book, Strengths Based Leadership, I saw the importance of knowing not only how we feel, but also what skill sets we bring to the table as individuals to strengthen us as a team. Focusing on strengths rather than weaknesses builds self-confidence, which reaps a “cumulative advantage that continues to grow over a lifetime” (Rath & Conchie, 2008, p. 16). When we couple the focus on strengths with the best means of communicating this, we build teams that are more effective together than the individuals are alone.

I then came upon Simon Sinek’s golden circle: most folks know what we do and how we do it, but what truly inspires people is telling them WHY (Sinek, 2009, p. 37). Up until this point, I fell into the trap of thinking that being a good leader meant providing sound business policies and procedures and a clean, comfortable work environment. What was lacking was motivation. What was lacking was a way to inspire my team. When I first saw the TED Talk Mr. Sinek gave on the golden circle, I was inspired, and I wanted to bring that to my team. This work greatly improved my ability to communicate with my team and achieve results or implement change at a much faster rate. The simple act of explaining why improved relationships and provided opportunities for folks to thrive by stepping into the work with the knowledge of how they fit into the project before it even began. This was truly a gift to learn.

I also studied Paul Schmitz’s Everyone Leads: Building Leadership from the Community Up. His work is a combination of strengths based leadership and community problem solving that directly involves taking asset inventory from the community members and empowering them to find their own solutions (Schmitz, 2012, p. 138). When we replace “community” with “department,” this work becomes directly relevant to problem solving with the team. This method has made a profound impact on the way we work together as a team, and I would not have been able to implement this without the previous study, which gave me the “why” behind this leadership style.

All of these have paved the way for my preferred leadership style: Mindful Leadership. Mindful Leadership is another simple change in the way we interact with people. When asking busy leaders, movers, and shakers what they would say is the one thing missing from their leadership training, ability to execute goals, and work-life balance, they all answered with one simple concept: space (Marturano, 2014, p. 10). Blending mindfulness practices with leadership presence affords a leader the ability to cultivate focus, clarity, creativity, and compassion in the service of others (Marturano, 2014, p. 11). In studying this leadership style, I finally found the place where compassion fits into leading others.

Janice Marturano (2014) describes what she calls the “purposeful pause” (p. 55). This is recognizing a moment when our attention is not where it should be, stopping for a moment to provide space for this to pass, and bringing out attention back to the present. Staring into space, a quickening of our breath, breath holding, palms sweating, or dozing off, may mark these moments. When we pause to intentionally be present with our bodies and minds, we create the space for what lurks beneath these reactions to surface. Once they are in the forefront, we can address them and ensure we move forward with the best planning in our endeavors.

This mindfulness works in interpersonal dynamics, as well. For example, I have an employee who made several mistakes in a short period of time. When I brought it up to her in a coaching session, she apologized and was ready to go back to work. I noticed her nonverbal communication, she looked at the floor then around the room before answering, as though looking for something else, and I knew there was more. I took advantage of the opportunity to create space for her, and she revealed to me that a man at her gym had died while she was there, dropping over not far from her after what turned out to be an aneurysm. She was having a hard time focusing. Without taking this moment to acknowledge the difficulty of this situation, we would not have been able to address the underlying issue and would have ended up in a disciplinary action process.

Incorporating these styles into my own blended expression of leadership has been effective. I have received feedback from my staff as well as from my peers that I am someone who is approachable and a good listener. I have worked through the tendency of this style to allow others to the advantage of me, and this is my current focus for personal growth. I believe a leader must be one who gives others a reason to follow, and if I fall prey to someone’s ability to manipulate my compassionate nature, I will not inspire those who come after me.

The greatest strength of this combination of styles lies in the ability to work well in a diverse or global environment. Each of us comes to the table with our own strengths and areas for improvement, with our own knowledge and experiences. By creating an environment where those differences are seen as an asset rather than requiring assimilation invokes trust in the team. Here at Kaiser Permanente (KP), we strive to operate as One Laboratory in line with KP’s One KP initiative. We have 32 medical office laboratories (MOLs) that feed into one regional reference lab (RRL). The lab has a long-standing history of the typical us and them mentality, which is difficult to change. I started at KP as a MOL supervisor. After my first year, I was promoted to the manager of the Core Laboratory at RRL. It was not until I changed roles that I understood the vastness of the divide between the two worlds.

As an MOL supervisor, integrating into the culture at RRL was difficult at best. I was grateful for my skills at nonverbal communication I gained in having children on the autism spectrum. I knew the trust was low, so I led discussion with the why’s behind any changes we implemented. I took time to allow them to voice their concerns. I spent time complimenting their strengths as I noticed them and asking for assistance in projects based on their skills as well as areas where I saw opportunities for folks to learn something new. Over time, I have been so proud of our ability to come together as a team. We have a long way to go, but I am confident that we will travel together successfully. My peers and management team above me have noticed the change spreading to the way the RRL staff interacts with the MOL staff, as well.

Taking up the mantle of leadership is often not a conscious decision. Most of us find ourselves taking the lead in a situation without any real knowledge of how we ended up in a position of trust and authority. The study of leadership styles, as Simon Sinek prepared me to understand, is the understanding of the why. We all know what we do and how we do it. Discovering the why provides a wealth of understanding that spreads to those around us. As John C. Maxwell said, "Leadership is not about titles, positions, or flow charts. It is about one life influencing another." When we lead by example with integrity, honesty, perseverance, and compassion, when we take the time to allow others to shine and share their perspectives, we create a space where everyone has the ability to grow and succeed, building a foundation for a team who is only limited by their own imagination.


References

Chapman, G. (1995). The five love languages: The secret to love that lasts. Chicago, IL: Northfield Publishing.

Goleman, D. (2014). Leading for the long future. Leading Organizations: Perspecitves for a New Era. (3rd Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. p. 56-65.

Marturano, J. (2014). Finding the space to lead: A practical guide to mindful leadership. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.

Rath, T. & Conchie, B. (2008) Strengths based leadership: Great leaders, teams, and why people follow. New York, NY: Gallup Press.

Schmitz, P. (2012). Everyone leads: Building leadership from the community up. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sinek, S. (2009). Start with why: How great leaders inspire everyone to take action. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Twelfth Night Charm

On this, the final night of Yule, we celebrate with a Core Order of Ritual, Deity of the Occasion as fitting based on your chosen form of divination. The following charm may either be performed alone just prior to divination or as part of the working of the rite with the divination to be a forecast for the year to come for the collective of folks gathered.

Devotional/Prayer: A Charm of Twelfth Night Blessing and Divination for the Year to Come

For this, light one candle for each line of prayer and then make the offerings when instructed.

With this first flame, we honor our Mothers of Old.
With second flame, our hearth and home.
With flame of three, our land-kin, most fair and free.
With flame of four, men upon our family trees.
Five flames bright, our beloved housewights.
Six flames bright, our Ancestral Guides.
With the seventh flame, the Winter Goddess we hail.
With the eighth flame, the Evergreens prevail.
With flame of nine, our allies be praised.
With flame of ten, to the Gods be our glasses raised.
Eleven flames, bring in the boar.
Twelfth Night’s Flame, completes the lore.
Reflections on the year now past
Inform our paths as we now cast
Our lots to see what the future holds
May our fortunes be foretold!
​
Cast your divination set or take your annual omen per protocol. Once your reading has been made clear, offering a spirit, food, or incense in thanks.

At midnight, take the Yule log outside and throw it on the fire while bringing next year’s log into the home. If you are not using a Yule Log, you may want to carry out the “old year” with the tea lights on a cookie sheet and “bring in the new year” with a fresh set of tea lights.

Be an Activist and Advocate for Change

Below, you will find attached ten tips for leaders to work toward social change I got from the class I am taking at Regis. First, some words of my own.

Social engagement, for me, has been very hard. I have often shied away from conflict, especially loud conflict, and I have experienced my share of gaslighting and tone-policing most women who speak out are subjected to at one time or another in their lives. I have had people stand up for me during those times as well, and I still remember and cherish each and every time someone spoke out to help me.

Those who see "boots on the ground" calls to action result in distress, guilt, and even shame in our "inability to help:" this is for you. I am writing this today, feeling inspired to share what has helped me to break my silence and cycles of fear.

There are actually three different classifications for those who are part of a social movement, Activists, Allies, and Advocates.

The Activists are easy. We see these folks on picket lines, holding signs and chanting, inspiring massive groups of people to speak in unity. This can be a very scary thought for the introverts and softer folks among us. If this is you, there is nothing wrong with you.

The Allies are those who learn about the plight of the group for which they want to speak on a deeper, more personal level. They learn about who they are, what they care about, how they got here, and what they need. The allies listen and act when there is a chance. These interactions are more likely to be one-offs and likely have fewer participants. They make a big impact on smaller situations and individuals. These are important. There have been some good resources floating around on what it means to be an ally. The title, "ally," is not one you can give yourself, though. You have to earn it through action.

Advocates are often the administrators. I have heard the term "administrative activist" thrown around to describe them. These are the folks who write letters, organize campaigns, run the crowdsourcing, provide a plan for clothing and feeding a long-term protest, and focus on being a voice for social change among leaders and politicians. These folks are vital and often unsung heros of these movements.

My point is we need all three of these, and no matter what our strengths or areas where we can improve might be, we can be a vital part of creating social change for the groups we serve. The ten tips in this short piece are likely to be useful no matter what your mission might be.

Thank you for reading. May you be inspired today. May your heart be moved.

Be an Activist and Advocate for Change

The nonprofit sector is the second largest part of the private economy in the United States, generating almost $1 trillion per year. This sector employs nearly 10% of the workforce and in many locations that number is even greater. With such a huge potential economic engine and political power base, why are nonprofit organizations almost never taken into consideration when key community and political decisions are made? Why aren’t nonprofits more engaged in advocacy and activism?

The answer: many nonprofit leaders are afraid of the political process and/or don’t think they need to get involved in lobbying and activism. Some of them are even afraid that if they lobby they will lose their funding. The fact remains that nonprofits can only gain strength and power (as organizations, alliances, and as a sector) if they become active in the activist process.

Here are some tips on getting involved as both an advocate and an activist.

1. Every nonprofit has the right and the responsibility to become engaged and involved in activism. The IRS permits a certain percentage of a nonprofit’s income to be used to support lobbying around issues (not candidates). If you want to file as an actual lobbying organization your board of directors can easily pass a stipulation to the 501 (c) (3) called an; H election.
2. Of the $1 trillion per year going into the nonprofit sector almost $750 billion comes from the government and public sector. This is a huge amount of money and the decisions on the use of the money are determined by the elected officials and the bureaucratic structures.
3. Activism is all about leadership development. It takes an effective leader to testify in front of a house or senate committee, and to mobilize people to write letters and e-mails. Advocacy is a great training ground for the development of strong leaders.
4. Be clear when it comes to voicing what you want. Make sure you are very clear and specific when you request something from a decision-maker.
5. Research to make sure you know what you are talking about. Before you begin to write letters or testify make sure you do your homework and know the facts. It is not okay to just have a lot of passion and compassion. You need to be competent as well.
6. The media can become your best friend. A famous community organizer once told me that the “media is the great equalizer.” The media can help spread the word and help mobilize other people. But treat the media with respect and be prepared and careful when talking with a reporter.
7. Don’t be intimidated by power. This is a big issue with many nonprofit leaders who feel intimidated by elected representatives and people of authority. Remember, these representatives work for you and it is important that they listen carefully to the people who are close to the issues and solutions.
8. Don’t be afraid of power. One definition of power is “the ability to act.” Without this ability we feel helpless. In the middle of the word empowerment is power – we should all be working on helping people gain more strength, confidence, and power.
9. Mobilize your constituency. The political establishment responds to people who are committed enough to express their opinions and become involved in the democratic process. We need to demonstrate democracy by having people become active in the issues they care about through letter writing, emails, testifying, phone calls, and personal visits.
10. Have a “deep throat” working for you. When working on an issue, try to have a friend “inside the system” provide you with information that will help you map out a strategy, or time the writing of a letter, or advise you as to when it will be a good time to testify.