Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)

Purpose: Building solidarity is perhaps the most crucial yet under-theorized process in organizing for social change. Solidarity has most often been treated as a latent quality, implicit in shared interests or cultural backgrounds, waiting to be uncovered by an organizer. The traditional model of organizing often seen in union and neighborhood-based organizing efforts associates solidarity with commonality, as opposed to difference (Calpotura & Fellner, 1996). However, this traditional organizing model is being forced to adapt to an increasingly multicultural context, presenting a need for rethinking past practices and creating new frameworks for multicultural organizing (Gutierrez et al, 1996). For example, an emerging body of critical multicultural theory encourages activists to build solidarity through surfacing and examining differences of race, sexuality, gender, class, etc. (Parekh, 2001). However, this growing body of theory has been relatively detached from action on the ground, with few efforts to empirically explore its conceptual framework or translate it into new models for community organizing practice.

Methods: This paper develops a practice model for community organizing through a comparative case study approach. Our case examples are drawn from a five-year qualitative, participatory evaluation of a national pilot project on youth participation in grassroots community organizations. Data was collected using in-depth semi-structured interviews, content analysis of organizational materials and reports, and participant observation at a series of cross-site meetings bringing the groups together, and then inductively coded and grouped into themes. The case examples offer insight into the efforts of young people to organize around neighborhood issues in largely low-income and racially diverse communities of color (Checkoway & Richards-Schuster, YR). While we do not claim that these groups are representative of every community organization, they are drawn from across the U.S. and have different histories and demographic bases, thus presenting the possibility of careful generalizability.

Results: Based on these case examples, we have developed a practice model for critical multicultural organizing that includes the following five elements: (1) Developing inclusive organizations that promote participation through consensus decision making and recognizing power differences (2) Building diverse collaborations and coalitions that aim to provide broad perspective and differing strategies on issues (3) Promoting intergroup dialogue and debate to develop inclusive language and uncover issues of privilege, racism, and oppression (4) Creating education and training programs to strengthen understanding about the roots of cultural differences by drawing on past organizing efforts and learning about historical and material conditions (5) Maintaining dynamic organizational structures (e.g., staffing, recruiting, and training) that are able to evolve with fluid understandings of cultures, difference and multiculturalism

Implications: This model helps to stretch current boundaries within organizing practice and has a variety of implications for social work practice, education and research. As we train future community social workers, we should be sure to focus on the ever-present diversity within any organizing effort and the practical ways they can use collaborative techniques and productively facilitate intergroup dialogues across differences.