Why it could work for your group.

Why it works: 

  • It will ease the burden of “leading” 
  • It ensures all voices are equal
  • People are on a volunteer committee for a reason: they care about what the outcomes are and believe it’s important to the broader organization – any of these people could fill one of the agreed-upon roles
  • There is a greater sense of ownership in the circle and in the church as a whole when you have and equal opportunity to have a say in what we do
  • There are more checks and balances than having a single leader

It speaks to our UU values, in particular equity, pluralism, and justice.

How to get started in your group:

Suggestion is to follow what Stewardship did and just jump in. Take a stab at it – you can request some help from a facilitator at first. Even try doing it for a portion of your meeting on one decision you want to make – just try the rounds.

How it works in the Stewardship Circle.

To get started: 

  • We spent a couple of meetings deciding our goals and covenant
  • We identified the roles we thought were necessary for our circle each time we met: meeting facilitator, note-taker, and liaison to the Board of Trustees. Sometimes we have a timekeeper.
  • For these, we operated in rounds and each person spoke until we were satisfied with what we captured
  • We have a shared Google Drive folder where we can collaborate on documents

In our meetings: 

  1. We pre-agree on who will be the facilitator for the next meeting and we all contribute agenda items. This is usually done at the end of the last meeting.
  2. If there are any action items that people agreed to take on, we address the status of those at the beginning of the meeting. A reminder (sent by that meeting’s facilitator) of those items a few days ahead of the meeting is helpful. 
  3. The note-taker takes notes live and usually the other circle members have the notes up on their own screen to be able to add something if the note-taker missed it (not necessary, but helpful)
  4. Some portion of the meeting is catching up on what was done since last month, and then if there is decision making to be done, anyone can propose something and then we follow the rounds.

An example: 

  1. Jeff: “I propose we lead four adult forum sessions over the next 12 months. Does anyone have any clarifying questions/want to know more?”
  2. Sarah P, Brenda, Sara, and Sarah H each take turns asking questions that would help them get to consenting that this is a good proposal, e.g. 
    • “What are we trying to get out of this?” 
    • “Would anyone come to that/would it be a good use of our time?” 
  3. Jeff responds with his answers to the clarifying questions the best he can.
  4. In the quick reactions round, people might say:
    • “It would be a lot of work”
    • “How do we make it so that we aren’t saying the same thing 4 times”
    • “I love this idea, I want stewardship to be a year-round concept”
    • “Pass”

Remember that you are working toward consent, so consider what you need answered so you do not have an objection. 

  1. The group feedback in the reaction round helps refine the original proposal, and it is restated with improvements. Jeff might say:
    • “I heard what Sarah H and Sara D were concerned about. My new proposal is that we lead 2 adult forums in the next 6 months with themes that align with our circle’s goals, and then we revisit the idea at the 6 month mark. Do you consent?”

Then each person in the circle clearly says whether they consent or object. This is very fast. If you do not have consent, go back to the drawing board. This rarely happens, though, because people have had the chance to be heard.

  • As we close the meeting, we decide on roles for the next meeting, pick a date, and develop an agenda. We also check in with how we feel the meeting went. We stick to an ending time to be respectful of everyone’s time.
  • We have different facilitators and note-takers each time, but we have typically kept the same leader/delegate as two people were already at the BOT meetings.
  • As we identify more circle overlaps, we will be more intentional about the leader and delegate roles.
Back to Sociocracy