containers - the context of the spaces we hold

After thinking a little about the spaces that we hold when we call people together for dialogue and reflection on various subjects, and trigerred by a question that surfaced in response to my first blog post, I got thinking about the idea of containers... and came up with the following reflections

Container’ may need to be considered as something much more than the immediate space within which people are sitting and participating in any given group process. Rather, it can be looked at as a nested set of contexts from the micro progressively up through to the macro. For simplicity’s sake we can think of this as consisting of (i) a macro-container – the socio-cultural, economic, political context; (ii) a meso-container – the broader change process or ‘project’; (iii) the micro-container – the specific group dialogue setting in question.

All these layers of context are likely to shape the way that people engage in a particular issue and, therefore, the way that they are likely to position themselves, the extent to which they will open themselves up or be able to handle emotionally challenging situations, their readiness to test and challenge their own assumptions and limits. This kind of an insight carries important implications for me as I have been working in a multi-religious, multi-caste, gender-divided community with a combination of fairly clear hierarchies and lines of fragmentation dividing the people and shaping social interactions in ways that are not conducive to social transformation. Without acknowledging these dimensions of the social container within which the lower level containers can be created would not prove very helpful. Another level of the container is the larger change process (some might call this a ‘project’) that is being initiated and within which the wide variety of activities, workshops and group processes are embedded. This sets the context for change, communicates key values, and gives people a collective reference point of what is possible, how it is possible, etc. The next level will be the micro-container – what is typically considered when we talk about ‘containers’. How do we ‘set up’ certain kinds of interactions within the group of people that we are working with (i.e. how do we encourage the emergence of self-organised interactions; how do we get people to engage more deeply with an issue or question; how do we get people to build common understandings, a sense of togetherness, or responsibility towards a shared vision).

Each level of the container influences every other level of the container in non-linear ways. Essentially this tantamount to saying that transformation is possible. Understanding our own spheres of influence at multiple levels of the system allows us to open and host spaces – particularly at the micro and meso levels that are conducive to change and that can create living alternatives to what the macro level typically dictates. Though, in some ways, I feel that it is not really saying much, I feel that any discussion of containers that isn’t sensitive to these multiple levels of the ‘Container’ is likely to get stuck somewhere along the way.

The Micro-container. Probably the most talked about container round these parts. I am not sure what I can add about this container but it seems to me that the following are all important:

Linking the micro-container to the meso- and macro-containers

• What is this all about?
• What are we trying to achieve here?
• What have you seen and experienced so far in this context?

• Tell the people it is their decision and that they will own the outcome
• Keep away from outcomes and focus on values, principles and process
• Reference values in the opening stages and in the face of conflict – what are our operating principles
• Amplify marginal voices – and encourage inquiry into them (again with reference to values – e.g. is this a voice of compassion? What are the underlying assumptions implied by this position?)
• Focus on the positive (e.g. stories of change – particularly those that can create some level of cognitive dissonance)

The Meso-container. I don’t know how relevant this is to everyone else, but in the work I have been doing it has been quite critical because it has allowed us to create a particular context within which other group discussions can take place. For example, we have seen more marginalized groups becoming more vocal – particularly women – and relationships of solidarity have been formed amongst certain sections of the population. Many of these people had previously been involved in reflecting on what kinds of changes they want to see brought about and in talking about how they might go about this. The broader context of the change process in this particular context has been around the question of ‘how do we create a self-governing community in a multi-cultural context with high levels of inequality, a dysfunctional local government and rampant and divisive party-politics?’ All other interactions are, therefore, to a greater or lesser extent subsumed by this larger question. Whatever we have done so far in this process sends signals (which may be positive or negative – depending on what we have done) that will influence how the people we have been working with position themselves. Looking at what goes on in the micro-container can really help us learn a great deal about our meso-container and how we can better work with it.

The Macro-container. The macro-container appears to be the main source of discontent for people that we work with, consisting of what appear to be a large set of inadequacies and problems. Everyone who comes to participate has their own reading of this macro-container and their own set of interpretations as to why this macro-container is in the state that it is in. How ready is a Hindu to come to the defense of a Muslim in a group setting? What if it means going against a larger group of other Hindus? Or how ready (or, for that matter, capable) is an ‘educated professional’ to listen to an ‘illiterate tribal’? Or even more challenging – how ready is an ‘illiterate tribal’ to voice their own opinion when they have been taught to devalue their own knowledge and know their place at the bottom of the power hierarchy?

Having said all this, I don't really think things can be reduced so neatly into these categories of container. There is bound to be plenty of overlap with many containers intersecting and existing simultaneously. I think this requires some more thought and probing!