The Review (Michigan Municipal League) May/June 2013
Governing is complex in the best of situations, and nearly impossible in the worst. We as community leaders have been challenged by a deteriorating traditional economy and a largely inarticulate demand to operate government “differently.” In many ways, these challenges present opportunities for making necessary changes. Such changes do not come naturally; sometimes there is a reluctance to change, even in unprecedented situations. As local government officials, we wrestle with the question of how to preserve our communities and their resources without the revenue to do so in the usual ways. The traditional paradigm and “old” solutions are well known: higher taxes, service cutbacks, and state takeover. Those solutions have failed. A paradigm shift is required because the challenges have changed over time.
Where We Are
We all have assumptions about community which are based on a personal world view. For instance, the concept of home rule is ingrained here in Michigan. Communities consider themselves exclusive and in competition with other jurisdictions, especially those adjacent to it. Citizens voted for politicians to represent (exclusively) them, with reason and prudence. As a result, communities’ current paradigm has an inward focus. However, the world in which we live has changed dramatically. We, as leaders, need to consider our assumptions and rework our definition of community in order to overcome the challenges facing us today. Our world view must change.
Paradigm Change – “Where We Need to Go”
Rather than taking the traditional view that every community is a sovereign “island unto itself,” we support thinking in terms of a “general systems approach.” This approach emphasizes interlinking of decision making by leaders with the “best interests of the community as a whole” as the driver. The wider approach is unexpected and consequently risky due to the politics within each community and the existing paradigm of “home rule” that the constituents maintain. At the same time, the systems approach makes sense with a bit of reflection. A municipality is not an end unto itself-it is part of the region and state, bypassing those imaginary lines of jurisdiction. Especially in Michigan, our smaller cities and villages do not have scale to do all things and effectively or efficiently provide many services that require regionaI solutions. Our modest locaI jurisdictions do not have the breadth to compete with the modern world when we are battling across locaI roads instead of focusing from a regional view.
Individual Change Comes First
In order to shift a paradigm one must explore the foundations of belief. These beliefs are built on assumptions based on an individual’s knowledge and experiences. When working within a team it is important that all the leaders and stakeholders share their beliefs with their group. Exploring individual “truths” is a great exercise to start a process of change. These truths, once explored, reflect a community’s belief. A follow-up exercise is to use a process called dialogue (which significantly differs from our common way of talking, i.e. debate) to share with each other the foundations of thought and beliefs and to come to some sort of group consensus as to what the thoughts and betief shoutd be for the community.
Once there is a mutuaI understanding of community, then we leaders can help others “catch on.” For most who foltow traditionaI thinking, this means changing from a parochial construct to one where we think of community as a cooperative.
This collaborative environment becomes the new standard. We need to share our concerns and successes, while at the same time meeting our locaI environment’s needs. This will lead to a different type of decision making and communities will understand the need to pay for what
they deeply hold to be necessary.
Paradigm comparison
Our greatest challenge will be the barriers created by past assumptions about community. People may not accept modifying those assumptions in response to the reality of the current situation. There will be an initial shock which you are probably experiencing already. lf we have accepted the new reality, we need to get our constituents to change their individual concepts and replace the past with a new world view, a new belief.
This can be done by re-building trust with constituents by being forthright with the assumptions of today, putting the reality “on the table,” and helping constituents realize and accept today’s challenges and realities. While doing this it is important to understand that human nature, for most, is to resist things being different – we resist change.
Overcoming Change Resistance
Experienced community leaders are open to this paradigm shift. They take the lead in the “thought change.” They need to help their constituents determine their underlying assumptions about their community and its integrity, and help them understand the differences between then and now. They then need to help them develop new assumptions by which to live with new measures of success. One way to gauge constituent feelings is to survey them on a list of common fears. The list needs to be neutral or positive in nature and can be measured using a Likert Scate (e.g., l = great fear … 5 = no fear).
Common List of Peoples’ Fears Related to Change
1. Fear of change itself
2. Fear of loss of homeostatic community
3. Fear of difference
4. Fear of loss of control
5. Economic fears
6. Fear of judgment and/or rejection
7. Fear of the loss of the past history/legacy
8. Fear of change for change sake
Using the resutts of this “fear poll” helps to address the changes required by the new paradigm and community understanding. As Albert Einstein said,“expecting different results by using the same methods of coping that worked in the past is a definition of insanity.” Another area to overcome is one of community culture. Many Michigan communities are based on cultural ethnicity (i.e., Polish, Dutch reformed, Native American) and/or creed (religion/religious affiliations, human rights,etc.).
They are often insistent on their traditional community and standards and wanting things to remain the same. There are often specific spokespersons representing the culturaI stakehotders who lobby for things to stay the same.
They are often insistent on their traditional community and standards and wanting things to remain the same. There are often specific spokespersons representing the cultural stakeholders who lobby for things to stay the same.
For those communities wanting to retain their traditional ways, leadership needs to help the community re-think itself while preserving the positives of the past. They need to determine what has been precious, good, and contributory. The answers to these questions will help shape the future of the local community and its collaborative relationships. The idea of the community helping to determine its quality and retaining what is most precious helps citizens feel involved and helps preserve what they want to keep.
Summary and Conclusion
We have focused on today’s current conflicts caused by economics. In order to move into the new normal, Leadership must determine its own concept of community, engage in dialogue with the constituents to understand their concepts and help them transition to the current reality, and help build and point out the ways in which the “old” valued parts of the community will survive. Leadership, in other words, must build trust within its constituency.This can be accomplished through transparent leadership, showing they value what their constituents value, helping the constituents engage with the change and be part of the transition, and acting in reliable and consistent ways, including decision making in the best interest of the whole community. Leadership needs to balance the needs of the electorate/community with the reality of economic change.This process can be done through re-education and taking a stewardship position over that of self-interest. In order to create sustainable change, the leader needs to use a strategy of change that is inclusive and participative.
Neil J. Simon is a consultant for Leadership Forward Group. You may contact him at njsimon0aol.com
Clay J. Pearson ls a city manager for the city of Novi. You may contact hlm via cpearson@busdevgroup.com
For further information and help from BDG, please complete the form below.