Diversity in Mahaleh (Community)

The level or better to say the "intensity" of diversity in communities or in local groups, is not the same as the diversity in bigger organizations, especially those organized from different communities. Does it mean that a local group shaped in a community has to be very week since they are only from the community and the members are not diverse. Is that true ?
When I look back at my experience in working with different communities and local groups in Iran, I can imagine how week the groups were. In some cases, some female villagers, with not enough knowledge, came together, while they were trying hard to create a change in their own community; they were not enough empowered since, at least, for one reason, they were not diverse. What has to be done ?
I think that we have to create diversity and contribute to it, as much as we can. If the group are only men, we have to encourage them to include women too, and the reverse is also true. Age diversity is another fact. Is there possible to invite various individuals from different age groups ? The third is to create diversity through involving various people from different perspectives.
In one village, I remember, I suggested students (university students) to join the group. The students were not in the village (they were students in other cities), but they came back the village when there was a holiday. That would be good, since these students could act as a bridge between the community and the resources available outside the community.
There are many other ways to guarantee the diversity within the local group, but, as facilitators, we have to ask the local people how they can add to their own diversity or to the diversity of their own group. Of course, the people attending the meetings have to be trained on diversity, so that they can understand the concept better. They have to understand diversity as "source of knowledge" which may be much helpful.

Encouragement of dialogue in communities: active listening

I have heard it many times that people in Iran have an oral culture and tradition; which means that messages are mostly transmitted in speech or songs, and will takes various forms of sayings, folktales, chants, etc. It also means that they talk but the do not write; however it seems people do not listen too.
In our workshops in various Tehran communities (mahalah), we had to encourage an dynamic dialogue on major problems among people living in a community. People, especially women and the members of local councils, loved such 2-3 hour meetings since they had a chance to talk about their own problems in presence of neighboring individuals; we found that people do not tend to listen. We, as facilitators, were there to encourage "dialogue". Dialogue means a process of talking and listening. Of course, when we are talking about listening, it is mostly active listening. As an active listener, he or she should be able to repeat back in his/her own words what he/she has been told (or what she/her has heard). This does not mean the listener agrees with what she/he has been told, but rather understands what others are mentioning. In fact, active listening - as a part of dialogue - improves mutual understanding in a community.

To be able to encourage "listening" in our project in Tehran communities, we used the five following techniques:

• Before the meeting starts, the facilitators remind the participants that they have two ears but one mouth. It is better to listen twice than they talk.
• The facilitator reminds people to listen carefully what others mention and not to refer to anything repeated during the brainstorming.
• Creating a pause either through paraphrasing or repeating, would help the participants to actively listen and think about the comments.
• The facilitators have to use the same language as people using, and to avoid expertise and literary words. People may listen better to a familiar language. 
• The facilitators will mention the fact that we are here not to judge but to understand what exactly people think about their own priorities in community.

Community acts in an environment

I remember, once in a local community, people were invited to attend a planning programme. I started to facilitate the meeting based on the process that had been designed. During the meeting, one of the local authorities thought that he should intervene, and when necessary, he started to continue the meeting without me. I let him continue, since I was really tired on that day (and of course I had no other choice); but then I found that he was just trying to end the meeting, since somehow, he might have thought that the people might demand something more than the capacity they had as local authorities of the municipality (as a governmental ). That was one of the worse memories of my facilitation activities.
Community empowerment will not happen without a general change within the system. The whole administrative system has to accept that such empowerment activities are a part of the general policy. In fact, the community acts within an environment and receives so many inputs from the environment. An enabling environment can help a community to move forward while a disabling environment impedes a community to progress.
However, a facilitator who is involved in community empowerment cannot wait until the system accepts the general idea of community empowerment. He or she has to start her work, even if there are problems. It means people have to experience participatory decision-making. That can start with very small projects in community. Such small activities will affect the environment.

Community Studies or Mahaleh Studies

Today, I was just moving around in UM library, and I found a book entitled: Community Studies. The book edited by Colin Bell and Howard Newby was first published in 1971. The book opens discussions on community that "was thought to be a good thing", however "its passing was to be deplored, feared and regretted." The author continues to find community position within the whole literature of eighteen to twentieth century. When reading that, I was thinking why we have not tried to look carefully at our notion of "mahaleh" in our own Iranian culture; a notion that now Tehran Municipality is trying to revive. About 130 years ago, Tehran had only five major mahaleh; now Tehran has been divided into 374 mahaleh.

In Mahaleh, the concept of neighborhood is so powerful. Mahaleh can be somehow a community, in which people are connected since they are living together. Ham-Mahaleh-ee, or the person who is living in the same mahaleh, is a powerful notion. Mahaleh could create a social identity, which may motivate people living in one mahaleh to help each other, to work for their own mahaleh. Mahaleh had a name; when somebody was asked where he/she had been born, you might hear he/she referred to the name of mahaleh. Now, reference to a mahaleh in responding to the place of birth has been forgot, since Tehran has really become a big city.

Facilitation and Trust

Social trust plays a major role in cohesion in a group. When group members trust each other, they are somehow let the group act in harmony. Every member of a group acts like an essential part of a group and every member trusts others, this let the group move more smoothly.

When individuals who are members of a group - and that are in relationships characterized by high levels of social trust, then they are more apt to openly exchange information, since they know that by such exchanging the information, they will not be hurt.

I do not know whether there has been any research focused on social trust or not, but I know well that there is a direct relationship between social trust and the power of a group.

The role of a facilitator is to strengthen the social trust among members of a group, through designing the best trust-building activities, and using effective techniques based on social trust in group activities.

I will try to find more cases of social trust within groups in the next post.

Facilitation and various levels of interventions

Three levels can be recognized in faciliation activity in community-based programs aimed at empowerment of people at local level: individual level (especially when there is a training activity or for example, when there is a referral activity); group level (empowerment activities aimed at CBOs or any other facilitation activity such as an evaluation); and community level (a change in values or culture of the group). But when you look at it from a distance, you can easily find three other levels (which will take you out of the community too, especially when you are trying to scale up): micro, meso and macro levels. Using this methodology, I would like to explain more how a faciliation activity affect the empowerment levels.

This is what I am going to work on it in this weblog, using my experience in facilitation in villages of Iran.