What Are Learning Points

Leadership in the Community

A SURF Summary Paper

Introduction

Leadership is important to communities of neighbourhood and of interest because it enables them to participate more effectively in their own regeneration efforts and in partnership initiatives including the Community Planning processes. Effective leadership will help ensure that communities are able to identify their needs and potential solutions and to work in collaborative and productive partnership with other partners such as public service delivery agencies.

This summary paper was developed by the Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum (SURF) following research into:

 Examining the knowledge and experience of what works in the area of Leadership in the Community.

 Developing forward-thinking ideas and proposals which would improve the capabilities of Leadership in the Community as an essential factor of successful regeneration policy and practice.

SURF used many methods of research and analysis during its study, such as:

o Enlisting an ‘Experts Panel’ o A postal and online survey o Group and individual discussions with community leaders and activists o Individual interviews with Regeneration professionals o Discussions and correspondence with stakeholder organisations o Extensive internet searches and scanning printed literature

1 SURF was also able to make use of its own membership networks and archives.

Information on the issues studied, the learning outcomes identified and proposals for the future follow.

What issues were examined?

 Evidence of what works best.

 Clarification and understanding of the concept of ‘leaders’ and ‘leadership’ in the communities.

 Acceptance and understanding of the concept of ‘leaders’ and ‘leadership’ in communities.

 The role of community leaders.

 What aspects are important in establishing productive relationships between community leaders or representatives and other Regeneration alliance partners.

 How leadership and leadership in communities could be strengthened, from the overview of community leaders and representatives.

What did people learn from all of this?

 Almost all community organiser interviewees identified the need for some sort of ‘leadership in the community’. However, there were certain complications and delicacies around the subject of leadership and a general unease of the use of the word ‘leader’ and leadership’. It is important than language and context are carefully considered.

 Despite the problems with the definitions of ‘leadership’ or ‘leaders’, community organisers and representatives identified with the suggestion that they contribute to leadership in their communities.

 For those involved in Community Regeneration, a description of a community leader could be an individual that:

o Belongs to the community through residence or service use or membership etc. o Works with others for the benefit of that community. o Is recognised within the community as a leader, either by election, nomination or reputation. o Works on behalf of the community in an unpaid status.

2  There is a distinct lack of coverage on the topic of ‘community leadership’ in any documents or discussions on Regeneration, and any information that is available is delivered in a ‘bookish’ format leaning more towards the private sector management style. With little evidence of any practical guidance, templates or examples of ‘what works’.

 Trust between community leaders and other regeneration partners is crucial and stands to improve relationships, allowing community leaders to become champions of a regeneration partnership, however, lack of trust only leads to scepticism and rejection of any partnerships.

 Related to the issue of ‘trust’ was the issue of ‘power’. The need for transparency and openness was highlighted by many interviewees as a topic which needed to be addressed from the start. Access to funds was seen as the key factor that created the ‘power’.

 Problems with non-statutory elections were highlighted, with many participants of the opinion that the main aim must be to hold democratic elections or collective nominations. They saw this as key to confirming the authority of community leaders or leadership.

 A clear understanding of what is meant by the ‘community’ that leaders represent is required, as many neighbourhood communities will have varied and sometimes competing interests. Even within thematic communities, there is diversity and divergence. Strong but appropriate leadership can reflect and accommodate this diversity.

 Community leaders and activists highlighted the importance of understanding the different views and expectations held by communities and their leaders and by partnership agencies. Community leaders are sometimes seen by agencies as for helping deliver programme and project aims, rather than to represent the ‘community interest’.

 Community leaders and activists had suspicions and views that professionals were happy to gather up any community representatives at the start of a regeneration programme or project. However, the professionals would tend to question the role of the representatives if they were to later raise objections or express views on behalf of the community that differed from the ‘official’ Regeneration agency view.

 Professionals can further support community leaders by showing an understanding and respect for the role variety, and often the role conflict, that community leaders have to manage. Community leaders can have difficulties over acting as a responsible Regeneration Partnership team member, whilst reporting back to the local community - and then again returning to the team with the views of the local community.

3  There are significant challenges for Regeneration practitioners around the ‘Usual Suspects’ phenomena. This is a situation where the same few, perhaps unrepresentative, community ‘leaders’ attend many meetings and forums etc. This may not only be a case of professionals grooming or manipulating ‘trusted’ and familiar community leaders; it’s also a result the pressure to ‘get things done’ versus the need to invest time and other resources in wider outreach and in reaching the unengaged.

 A further consideration is that the, sometimes maligned, ‘Usual Suspects’ are a reservoir of local knowledge and, in the absence of other volunteers, may be the only ready source of continuity and stability for dealings with partnership agencies.

 Problems can arise when community activists are succeeded later in the Regeneration programme by new activists. Regeneration professionals need to be aware of the impact that this can have on the Regeneration programmes in the community and prepare in advance for them.

 The project surveys showed that over 90% of community leaders and organisers indicated that they felt their leadership skills could be improved.

 Quality and strength can be added to the communities through delivery of structured training and development of activities, offering experience and showing the outcome of Regeneration partnerships working. The content and delivery of any training and development support should be carefully designed and based on the agreement of the proposed participants.

 The project fieldwork and online survey showed the majority of community leaders and activists strongly favoured less formal styles of training that included much peer group interaction.

 When asked, 80% of community leaders and organisers believed that community leaders and organisations grew stronger when linked with Partnership organisations, Regeneration programmes etc., rather than developing independently in the community.

 In options offered in the online survey, over 70% of community leaders and activists remained inspired and determined to stay and get as much as possible from their own community.

 The online survey showed that the most important statements to over 90% of community leaders and organisers were to have ‘A stable supportive community organisation’ and ‘Independent funding for the community organisation’. Similar scores were given to ‘Being involved effectively on Partnership and other organisations’.

4  Some of the literary material suggested that women, youth and ethnic minorities in leadership or influencing roles was under-represented in area Regeneration. While participants of discussion groups agreed with this suggestion, the evidence base with regards to this issue in Community Regeneration is neither not large nor robust.

Forward-thinking ideas and proposals

Lessons learned from all of this include:

 For those involved in Community Regeneration, a clear definition of a ‘community leader’ should be developed.

 A database of relevant, appropriate and available material on the background of leadership in the Communities in Regeneration needs to be established.

 National government, in partnership with others, should continue to promote a greater understanding of the idea of leadership in communities and suitable values and actions to support it.

 SURF should work together with others to answer the obvious willingness shown at SURF Open Forums and seminars to take forward the conversation on developing trust and productive relationships as part of Regeneration partnerships working.

 Regeneration partnerships and partners along with community organisations and community representatives should agree to undertake a clear and inclusive audit of their leadership training and development needs, and find the most appropriate ways of meeting these.

 A shared online database of courses, material and support for training and personal development in leadership in communities should be compiled.

 Regeneration agencies and their staff need to be particularly sensitive about the impact of their description or designation of ‘communities’, and their decision making and programme management activities. These will impact on existing communities and community organisations.

 Regeneration agencies and their staff need to have a more far-sighted and suitable management of the possible long-term effects of Regeneration initiatives on community structures and processes.

 All parties to Community Regeneration in Scotland should promote the formal acceptance of the ‘National Standards for Community

5 Engagement’ by all agencies, organisations and companies seeking to participate with communities.

More Information

The Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum (SURF) is the independent regeneration and inclusion network for Scotland. Its main purpose is to inform improved regeneration policy and practice. It does so by:

 Providing a neutral space for all sectors and players involved in Scottish urban regeneration to share their knowledge and experience

 Stimulating challenging debate about community regeneration policy and practice

 Maintaining a high status for community regeneration on Scotland’s political agenda

 Providing relevant and constructive feedback to key policy makers

SURF operates from two basic principles:

 Successful and sustainable regeneration is only achievable when all aspects of physical, social, economic and cultural regeneration are addressed in a holistic approach.

 The people who are the intended beneficiaries of any regeneration effort must be meaningfully involved in the process if it is to be successful in planning, implementation and maintenance.

Further information on SURF is freely available on our website: www.scotregen.co.uk

This paper was produced by:

Edward Harkins Networking Initiatives Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum

Tel: 0141 585 6850

6 Fax: 0141 445 2024 Email: [email protected]