6.3: What Is Community Organizing?

In Community Organizing and Community Building for Health, Meredith Minkler and Nina Wallerstein offer a clear definition of community organizing:

"Community organization is defined as the process by which community groups are helped to identify common problems or goals, mobilize resources, and develop and implement strategies for reaching the goals they collectively have set."

Minkler and Wallerstein discuss community organizing in a health context, emphasizing empowerment, a process by which individuals or communities take control over their lives and environment. This greater control or power may take the form of greater community problem-solving ability and/or a change in their actual conditions and relations of power vis-à-vis others in their setting. It can involve developing skills for greater self-reliance, and it can involve taking on City Hall, industry, or whoever holds the power to affect the community.

Different definitions of community can coexist, as noted on the previous page. Community can be defined geographically (like a neighborhood), by membership in a particular demographic group (like an ethnic or religious group), or by a shared experience (for example, being a veteran).

Regardless of the community involved or the approach taken, community organizing seeks to empower communities.

Empowerment

Empowerment can be defined as a process by which individuals or communities take control over their lives and environment.

Approaches to Community Organizing

The processes or approaches used in community organizing also vary. One of the earliest descriptions of different processes (or approaches) was developed by Jack Rothman whose three categories of organizing include social advocacy, community capacity development, and planning & policy practice. (At least, that's how they are usually referred to these days -- his original language was slightly different.) Later researchers have used slightly different names for these 3 approaches, and have sometimes added to the list. Minkler and Wallerstein developed a typology to look at community organizing and community building on a continuum, arranged around a couple key questions.

1. Is the organizing focused on conflict / confrontation or on consensus building?
2. Does the analysis of the problem emphasize the needs that aren't being met, or the strengths that could be sharpened? (or both?)
3. Is the leadership primarily coming from community residents or from outsiders seeking to help the community?

Here's a short video explanation I made for you, outlining three main approaches to community organizing -- it may be helpful to review either before or after reading the explanation of approaches below. While I made this video in reference to the Seabert, McKenzie & Pinger textbook (listed below in the references), now the key information about community organizing approaches is all contained in this chapter.

Conflict approaches: Community organizing can take a confrontational approach. This assumes a conflict between those in the local society who control resources or decisions, on one hand, and the communities denied full access to those resources and decisions, on the other. A frequently cited quote from the remarkable abolitionist, intellectual and former slave Frederick Douglass reflects the tone of this tendency among community organizers: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." This approach is often called social justice advocacy, or social advocacy or Alinsky-style organizing (after Saul Alinsky, organizer and author of Rules for Radicals).

Social justice advocacy can be sparked by professional community organizers from outside the community (as advocated by Alinsky) or by local residents who are fed up with the status quo. Often it is a combination -- angry or distraught residents may seek the help of a professional community organizing group. Traditionally, social advocacy campaigns seek to force someone with power (like the local government, a local employer, or a utility company) to fix the problem that the community has identified.

While this focus on fixing a problem is considered a needs-based approach, it's important to note that a lot of internal community strengths are built during an organizing campiagn. When these internal strengths are a co-equal goal of the campaign -- not just changing the policy or the polluter, for example, but also changing the community's internal capacity -- then social advocacy can be considered a strengths-based approach. Minkler and Wallerstein call this "Empowerment-Oriented Social Action".

Frederick Douglass

Food for thought, in a quote from Frederick Douglass: "Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground."

Consensus Approaches: In contrast to the social advocacy approach, some community organizers focus more on consensus than conflict, and seek to build within communities the capacities to resolve challenges on their own. Advocates of a consensus approach often seek collaborations (rather than conflict) with other institutions. The strengths-based community capacity development or community building approach in the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation video below is an example of a campaign that focused more on consensus and capacity-building. Community building approaches generally focus less on problems (or needs) than they do the strengths of a community that can be marshalled for community improvement.

Using data from the community and working together with local government officials for new programs or policies is a third approach, which also focuses on consensus-building. It is often called community development or planning and policy practice. This approach often emphasizes building social capital both within the community (say, new connections and knowledge) and between the community and local government (or other sources of power). At one time I worked with a project that trained and mobilized Oakland youth to map the strengths and problems in their communities, then use that data to partner with the City of Oakland to use city funds to fix problems. That's a good example of a community development approach.

Here is a short video describing how the community of Houston, TX organized around two public health threats: second-hand tobacco smoke and lack of physical activity / childhood obesity. This video was made by one of their funders, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. There are roles for people working to support community organizing at all levels -- professionals working with foundations and nonprofits, elected government officials and their staff, and most importantly, community leaders and community members themselves.

Questions to consider in watching the video:

• How would you classify the types of organizing you see here? There may be more than one approach.
• Where do you see people seeking consensus or shared action, and where do you see them sharpening a conflict (or forcing a powerful entity to change their practices)?
• How fun do you think it would be to participate in a campaign like this? Are there parts of the campaign that especially appeal to you?

In organizing communities to grapple with health, promote prevention, uproot the causes of disease or suffering, or attain better (and fairer) treatment for the sick, there can be no one single "right way" to organize. In different settings and different moments, many different approaches have worked. What the approaches have in common is recognizing the value of prevention – creating the basic conditions for health for communities – and equity– increasing access to resources for all.

References

Seabert, McKenzie, Pinger...

Minkler, Meredith & Wallerstein, Nina. (2012). Improving health through community organization and community building: Perspectives from health education and social work. Community Organizing and Community Building for Health and Welfare. 37-58. Rutgers University Press.

RWJF video - does it need a citation?

Alinsky, S. (1971). Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich