CCCRTE

Memo

To: CCCRTE members, training participants

From: Clem McCartney

Re: Some personal thoughts on the role of the CCCRTE

It is important to avoid getting a sense that we are essential and it is even more important and difficult to make sure that other people do not get the sense that we are significant. We should not forget that people value relationships and support from as many people as they can and many of the people we meet are involved with many other people and networks as well as us. Most of us appreciate any help and support we can get, but in spite of all the support and expertise available, at the end of the day, we have to and want to sort out things to our own satisfaction. The sense that there are others who care may be enough to help us to continue to carry the weight of our concerns. The sense that we cannot manage without them is disempowering. The same considerations apply to people who are in very traumatic situations and we need to be careful that they are not getting the wrong impression from us.

It helps to distinguish the different ways in which we may be helpful and to recognise the other ways in which we are seen to be helpful by others, even if they often overlap in practice. For this discussion, an important distinction is between being a friend and providing skills, knowledge or expertise. Befriending is probably best reserved for those with whom we have a genuine feeling of closeness and we should not try to be all things to all people. We can make available our skills and knowledge to a much wider range of people with many of whom we will not have a strong sense of attachment. Sometimes the skills and knowledge may be specific and tangible and relevant to their activities, but in other situations we may be sharing an ability to help people think through their situations and reach conclusions.

There are also ways in which people respond to us which may not be as we intended. Sometimes they may be responding to us not because of who we are but because of what they perceive us to be. It may seem like a personal relationship but in fact it is valued by the other person because they have a relationship with someone in our position. We may feel comfortable with that when it gives the support of knowing that someone from outside cares, but we may be less at ease if it seems that the other person is valuing our support because we are important personalities, especially if we feel that we are not very important.

We also need to recognise that it is almost inevitable that the nature of a group experience such as a training course creates strong bonds which may not really reflect reality. We have to be pretty bad trainers not to reach that point at the end of a workshop. We should not get too pleased with our own achievement in reaching that point and it may not be very honest to encourage that feeling in the participants.

It is easy to say that we should be critical about our relationship with others and encourage them to be equally critical. And it is easy to say that we should respond more positively to those with whom we have an authentic relationship. But where does the line lie between a relationship which we feel comfortable with and one which seems inauthentic?

Because it is easier to define our contribution in sharing skills and expertise and because it can benefit a wider range of people, perhaps that should be the initial focus for activities in the region and elsewhere. It is much easier to exchange skills and knowledge through a purposeful, structured training programme. It is probably the kind of thing that funders are more willing to support. During that time we can also maintain friendships with some of the people we meet and can arrange a return visit to people with whom we have established that bond. I think that this is a more appropriate way for an organisation like CCCRTE to work, as it has a responsibility to offer help without giving preferential treatment to some. If we are going on a personal mission as an individual, that is different. In fact, if we have a specific purpose for contact, such as a training course, it takes the pressure off finding a purpose to justify other personal contact. But one implication of this approach is that any visit should include some time for personal contact.

These considerations may help us to decide what should be the priorities of the Committee. The exchange of skills information and expertise can be done across projects and groups and the participants can then pass it on in their own projects and regions. So when people ask us to do something for their individual group, it may be a more effective use of our contribution to involve a number of groups. That does not stop us visiting a specific group and having fellowship with them for a few days, but it may be harder to justify two weeks with one group, when we could be involving a range of groups for that time.

Equally, if it seems that a proposed activity will have a wider multiplier effect, it might suggest that it is worth making it a priority, even if the proposal is not very clear, provided that the core of the idea is there and it is not simply a vague sense that it would be nice to have a visit.

It seems to be the experience of people everywhere that they find it difficult to get round to things like networking and training simply because other commitments are more pressing and get given priority. It may also be that some groups have difficulty thinking about what are their needs and how they might meet those needs through training or other ways. In so far as this is the case, it might be worth running a seminar on identifying training needs and developing proposals. This would then feed into this process of selecting appropriate activities. Once a request seems to be appropriate, there is then the question of how it gets developed. It seems to be the right idea to pass each request on to an appropriate person in the network and they and their organisation would agree to do all the planning and preparation, including fundraising, etc., in the name of CCCRTE and their own organisation, if appropriate. This seems the right way because CCCRTE was set up as a network and co-ordinating mechanism and not as an executive organisation. If some requests are not met or take a very long time to be met, that may not be an indication that the fundamental idea is wrong. But there may be a need for some mechanisms for support and reporting. The group should be told who has taken on the responsibility. The person would agree to set up the programme and would come back if they could not do it. Two or three people would be identified as sounding boards and support for them. Progress or lack of it would be considered at each meeting.

On the question of apprenticeships, it is good to give others opportunities to be involved. But at the same time, there are people who could help who are not being used because they work from different perspectives or perhaps because they are not thought of. As well, the idea of equal participation of people in the region has not been realised. Again, if the responsibility of responding to requests is spread among a wider group of people, then the range of trainers used might well increase. It might be useful to monitor who are asked to help and who are being ignored.

newsletter | ccts