Community Service Has a Number of Important

Benefits
Engaging in community service provides students
with the opportunity to become active members of
their community and has a lasting, positive impact
on society at large. Community service or
volunteerism enables students to acquire life skills
and knowledge, as well as provide a service to those
who need it most. These are some of the common
benefits of participating in a community service
program:

1. Psychological benefits: Volunteering increases

overall life satisfaction and helps you feel good
about yourself because you are helping others. It
can also help to decreases stress and ease
depression.

2. Social benefits: Volunteering engages students

with the community, creates special bonds with the
population being served, and increases social
awareness and responsibility.

3. Cognitive benefits: Volunteering helps students

enhance their personal knowledge, grow from new
experiences, and develop better interpersonal
communication skills.

Participating in community service not only makes a

difference to the organization and people being
served, but also makes a difference to every
student’s career prospects. Participating in
community service activities helps to enhance
student resumes by allowing students to obtain
work-related skills prior to graduation, builds good
references for employers in regards to community
involvement, and provides a forum to network with
future potential employers. It also helps students
develop civic and social responsibility skills and
become more aware of what their community needs.
Aims and Objectives of Community Organization

Community organization is a process which dealing

with the welfare of individuals or groups to meet
their needs. It is an art of directing people talents
and potentialities to the discovery of basic needs
and resources. The idea of community organization
is that of mobilizing resources to meet needs,
coordinating the efforts of welfare agencies and
building welfare program.

Objectives of Community Organization

The main aim and objective of community

organization is to bring adjustment between the
resources available and felt needs of the people.
Special objectives of community organization are
following:
1.To get information about the resources and
needs
2.To arouse the people to work for the welfare
of the community
3.To create sounds ground for planning and
action
4.To create a sense of cooperation integration
and unity among the people
5.To motivate the people to take better
participation in the developing community
programs
6.To highlight the causes of various problems
affecting the community and hinder the way
of progress and development
7.To implement programs required for the
fulfillment of people basic needs
8.To develop better understanding among the
people about the issues and needs.
9.To mobilize the resources to create a suitable
ground for the basic needs completion and
eradication of problems.
10. To bring coordination between the
individuals, groups and organization to focus
 their point and challenge their objectives for
fulfillment
11. To launch necessary reforms in the
community for eradication of community
evils.
12. To develop democratic leadership among
people through their participation in
community programs
13. To develop the idea of ability and better
thinking to work for the betterment of
community.
14. The basic aim and objective of community
organization is to abolish the differences
among individuals, develop spirit of common
interest and sacrifice and also participate
collectively in community programs.
15. To organize the people for the promotion
and progress of community.

Most people involved in social media or community

management have experienced this many times.
You take on a new client, or start a job with a new
role, and management is very excited to see you.
The company really needs to do more with social
media, they declare with enthusism. And they are
confident you can make it happen!

But ask them what their goals are you'll often be met
with blank stares. Despite a deluge of information
about social media over the past few years, many
executives still don't have an idea of what they want
to accomplish with their brand's community
management efforts. And as any savvy social media
guy or gal knows, it's pretty hard to prove your
effectiveness without some agreement of what
you're trying to do.

This means that your first task will often be to

explain to them what the possible goals MIGHT be,
and then start from there to identify which ones are
important to them. Here are 7 goals of a successful
community management strategy:
1. Enhance Awareness

Enhancing awareness is often one of the top

priorities for community management. A company
wants its brand to be fresh in the mind of existing
customers, while spreading the word to potential
customers, as well as anyone else who might
influence existing and potential users.

2. Improve Public Perception

What customers and non-customers alike think and

feel about a brand matters greatly. Strong positive
PR helps build brand loyalty and goodwill with
customers. When people feel good vibes about a
brand, they are more likely to notice and highlight
the positive aspects. This translates into increased
mindshare and better word-of-mouth engagement.

3. Enhance Customer Service/Support

These days, customers with problems or questions
don't always follow traditional routes of airing
grievances or resolving issues. More and more, they
are engaging in online and social media
communities to spread the word and ask for help.
Good community management provides enhanced
customer service and support by answering users
questions and directing them down avenues to
resolve any problems or issues.

4. Create Advocates

Influencers are very important to the success of

brands. While strong brand advocates sometimes
pop up on their own, successful community
management involves discovering, identifying, and
nurturing brand advocates and key influencers.

5. Collect Analysis and Feedback

Information on how an existing or potential customer
base feels about a product is extremely important.
The ability to identify opportunities to improve an
existing product, or to understand successful
enhancements for future products, can pay
dividends. Knowing what a community says they
want, extracting what they really want (which is not
always what they say they want), and understanding
what they dislike or don't want, can help increase
adoption, extend an existing product's life, or refine
design and feature sets to make new products more
successful.

6. Educate Existing and Potential Users

Educating existing and potential users can be

integral to improving brand awareness, PR, and
adoption. When users learn what a product does,
how to make the most out of a product, or even how
the product is created, they tend to be much more
engaged. You won't get far if people have no idea
what your product is for or how to effectively utilize it.

7. Drive Acquisition

Perhaps the biggest goal is to increase acquisition.

Depending on the business, this could be as simple
as selling more widgets, gaining more eyeballs, or
promoting institutional adoption. You want more
people to purchase or use the product, people using
the product to use it more often, and more
organizations to consider your product to be their
standard.

Once you identify what is important to your client,

you can start to craft a goal-oriented community
management strategy that allows you to measure
effectiveness and success.

WHAT IS COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION?

Community organization is the process of people
coming together to address issues that matter to
them. Community members developing plans for
how the city can be a place where all its children do
well. Neighbors joining in protests to stop drugs and
violence in their community. Members of faith
communities working together to build affordable
housing. These are all examples of community
organization efforts.

WHAT ARE THE TYPES OF COMMUNITIES THAT

ORGANIZE?
Community organization can happen in the variety of
contexts that define "community."
SHARED PLACE
People come together who share a common
geographic place such as a neighborhood, city, or
town. For example, local residents might come
together to address neighborhood concerns such as
safety, housing, or basic services. Problem solving
through community-based organizations (CBOs),
neighborhood associations, and tenants --
organizations are common forms of place-based
practice.
SHARED WORK SITUATION OR WORKPLACE
Community organizing also occurs among people
who share a work situation or workplace. For
example, union organizing among industrial or farm
laborers brings together those concerned about
working conditions, job security, wages, and
benefits.
SHARED EXPERIENCES OR CONCERNS
It's a good opportunity for community organization
when people share a common experience or
concern. For example, organizing might happen
among people who are poor about jobs, housing,
education, and other contributors to financial
security.
Organizing frequently occurs among those who have
concerns about the same issues such as substance
abuse, violence, or child welfare. Those who share a
common race or ethnicity may organize around
issues, such as discrimination, that are barriers to
achieving common goals. Finally, those who have
physical disabilities, such as mobility or visual
impairments, may come together to create
conditions that affect independent living.

WHAT ARE SOME MODELS OF PRACTICE IN

COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION?
Should community organization be about
collaboration among people sharing common
interests or confrontation with those in power? This
is a false dichotomy that ignores the context of the
work. Several models of practice emerged in various
contexts of community organization work (Rothman,
1995).
SOCIAL PLANNING
Social planning uses information and analysis to
address substantive community issues such as
education, child development, or environmental
health. For example, planning councils or task forces
engage (usually) professionals in setting goals and
objectives, coordinating efforts, and reviewing goal
attainment.
Social planning might occur in a context of either
consensus or conflict about goals and means. For
example, information about high rates of adolescent
pregnancy, and factors that contribute to it, may help
communities focus on the goal of preventing teen
pregnancy, and even decisions about using
controversial means such as sexuality education
and enhanced access to contraceptives. Use of
social planning helps build agreement on common
results.
SOCIAL ACTION
Social action involves efforts to increase the power
and resources of low-income or relatively powerless
or marginalized people. For example, advocacy
organizations, such as those for disability rights or
tobacco control, often use social action approaches.
They might arrange disruptive events -- including
lawsuits, sit-ins, or boycotts -- to draw attention and
focus to their concerns by those in power.
Organizers create events, such as a protest or strike,
that those in positions of power (such as employers)
can avoid or stop by coming to an agreement. For
example, people with disabilities might stop
picketing a business when it modifies policies that
discriminate against people with disabilities. Or, a
tobacco company might avoid a lawsuit by tobacco
control advocates by eliminating advertising
directed at minors. Social action tactics are used in
lots of situations involving conflicting interests and
imbalance in power; they usually take place when
conventional negotiations aren't working.
LOCALITY DEVELOPMENT
Locality development is another way to get people to
work together. It is the process of reaching group
consensus about common concerns and
collaborating in problem solving. For example, local
residents in urban neighborhoods or rural
communities may cooperate in defining local issues,
such as access to job opportunities or better
education, and in taking action to address the
concerns.
COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS OR COALITIONS
There are many hybrid models that combine
elements of the three approaches. For example,
community partnerships or coalitions combine
elements of social planning and locality
development when people who share common
concerns, such as child well -being or substance
abuse, come together to address them. The goal of
many coalitions is to change community conditions
-- specific programs, policies, and practices -- that
protect against or reduce risk for these concerns.
These models, and their variations, may be
implemented at local, state, regional, and even
broader levels.

WHAT ARE SOME LESSONS LEARNED ABOUT

COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION AND CHANGE?
The following summaries come from lessons
learned from various experiences with community
organization practice. The lessons are organized by
broad topics related to the work of community
organization and change.
The lessons come through experience within:
● Understanding (and affecting) community
context
 ● Community planning
● Community action and mobilization
● Understanding (and addressing) opposition and
resistance
● Intervention and maintenance of efforts
● Promoting community change
● Influencing systems (or broader) change
● Achieving community-level improvements
UNDERSTANDING (AND AFFECTING) COMMUNITY
CONTEXT
High profile commissions and reports create
conditions for experimentation and optimism about
public problem solving.
For example, during the 1960s, the U.S. President's
Commission on Juvenile Delinquency helped spawn
innovative efforts such as those of Mobilization for
Youth in New York City. Similarly, in the early 1990s,
a national level task force on infant mortality helped
launch a multi-site demonstration program known as
Healthy Start. High-profile studies such as this help
set the public agenda by highlighting what should be
addressed and how. Prominent reports frame the
dominant explanations for societal problems. For
example, a report could focus attention on poverty
as a "root cause" of many societal problems or
infant mortality as a pressing issue. It might also
feature a promising alternative solution, such as
equal access to health care or legal assistance, as
an innovative way to address social problems.
You might need to use more than one model of
community organization practice to fit the variety of
contexts in which community work is done.
For example, social planning or locality development
strategies may fit a context of consensus about
common purpose such as working together to
reduce violence. By contrast, the strategy of social
action, with its disruptive activity and related conflict,
may be more appropriate in a context of conflicting
interests, such as organizing for decent wages or
safe conditions in the workplace.
Crosscutting issues are good contexts for community
organization practice.
Some community issues, for example, neighborhood
safety or substance abuse, affect the majority of
people who share a common place. They also offer
a solid basis around which a critical mass of local
people can work together. When community
organization efforts involve people from diverse
backgrounds of income and power -- such as
educational or public health improvements that
affect people across social class -- substantive
change is a lot more likely to happen.
Community organization can't always be separated
from politics or controversy.
Consider the case of people coming together in a
rural community to address issues of toxic waste
and environmental pollution. Public debate may
focus on both the economic interests of affected
businesses, and the health concerns of local
residents. It's typical that when two parties are on
opposite sides of an issue, neither will get everything
they want. Inevitably, a resolution is going to involve
politics: the art of reconciling or balancing
competing interests.
Poor people can make substantial gains (or losses)
during periods of tumultuous change, and related
realignment of political parties.
Would there have been a Civil Rights Act of 1964
without rioting and a realignment of the Democratic
Party? Political parties want to avoid mass protest or
any unorganized behavior if it's at all possible, by
changing (or appearing to change) policies,
programs, and practices related to voiced concerns.
Since mass protest is something those in power try
to avoid, it's an important means by which poor
people -- with otherwise limited resources -- can
achieve power and influence.
Strategies used in community organization should
match the times.
In times of turmoil, organizing protests and strikes
by the people affected by the issues can yield
maximum gains. By contrast, in the long times
between periods of disruptive actions, community
organization might use less conflict-oriented
approaches, such as locality development or
collaborative partnerships, to define and pursue
common purposes.
Mass protest and grassroots community organization
can work together.
When public protests and other forms of disruption
increase, so do the grassroots organizations that
address prevailing issues. For example, protests
regarding pro-life (anti-abortion) interests were
associated with increases in local organizations
supporting this and other related causes. When
public concern declines, so does organizing at the
grassroots. Although protest nourishes organization,
the reverse does not hold. Organization doesn't
produce protest -- it may even retard it (as when
agencies may avoid controversy to protect their
funding).
Community organizations form when people are
ready to be organized.
Although organizations may exist to promote
interest in an issue, such as child hunger, little will
happen until a significant number of people care
about the issue and feel that their actions can make
a difference. A big challenge is figuring out when
your issue matters to enough people who share a
common place or experience, so they can be
organized around the issue.
Institutions that want to avoid conflict and
controversy may be a difficult base for community
organization work.
Consider the case of a school-community initiative
to prevent adolescent pregnancy or HIV/AIDS.
Although schools are well positioned to deliver
information and health services to youth, school
officials often oppose providing sexuality education
or enhanced access to contraceptives for those who
choose to be sexually active. So, human service
agencies and educational institutions that rely on
public funding may be bad choices for lead agencies
in community organization efforts that are likely to
draw opposition.
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Societal and community problems are evidence that
institutions are not functioning for people.
Much of the framing of societal problems in the
1980s and 1990s focused on the personal attributes
of those immediately affected. For example, stated
"causes" of high rates of youth crime may highlight
the values and behavior of youth and their families
such as "poor anger control" or "bad parenting." Such
analyses rarely emphasize the contribution of
broader environmental conditions, such as
availability of jobs or chronic stresses associated
with low income, and the institutions responsible for
them. In addition to individual responsibility, public
institutions -- such as schools, business, religious
organizations, and government -- should be held
accountable for widespread problems in living.
It's essential to set realistic goals for community
organization efforts.
Community-based initiatives often overpromise,
particularly with grantmakers. Setting unrealistic
objectives -- for example, to reduce academic
(school) failure by 50 percent in the next two years --
sets the group up for perceived failure.
Organizations should carefully assess the feasibility
of their proposed aims.
If we set only modest goals, we will probably achieve
less.
Although goals ought to be achievable, they should
also be challenging. Objectives can be overly
modest. For example, an overly modest goal might
be to reduce rates of school failure (now at 80
percent) by 10 percent within three years.
Insufficiently challenging objectives may not bring
forth the necessary effort, resources, and degree of
change needed to address the community's concern.
Social planning can engage experts (and local
people) in helping address societal problems,
particularly when there is consensus on the issue.
We can advance locally valued purposes by
engaging technical experts and local people in
defining problems and solutions. Outside experts,
such as university-based researchers or public
officials, can assist local people in obtaining and
interpreting data, facilitating the process of setting
priorities, and identifying promising alternatives. But
planning can go beyond the traditional roles of
facilitating coordination and communication among
agencies to identifying environmental conditions to
be changed.
Locality development or self-help efforts can also
assist in addressing community issues.
Local people have the experiential knowledge to
come together to define local issues, such as
neighborhood safety or jobs, and take action in
addressing them. Such self -help efforts have their
roots in the settlement house movement in urban
neighborhoods. They are guided by respect for the
autonomy of local people to decide (and act on )
what matters to them.
Local control can hinder collaboration at broader
levels of planning.
Planning at higher levels than the neighborhood, city,
or town may be necessary to address the broader
conditions that affect community organization
efforts. For example, the growing concentration of
poverty in the urban core, a result of regional
planning decisions and other broader policies, is a
structural issue that affects community
development efforts within inner-city neighborhoods.
Although it's desirable for community building,
strong local control may hinder the broader planning
and coordination necessary to address local issues.
COMMUNITY ACTION AND MOBILIZATION
Each individual has the capacity for
self-determination, self-help, and improvement.
A basic assumption of community organization is
that people most affected by local concerns,
including those labeled as "clients" of agency
services, can do something about them. This
"strengths" perspective highlights people's assets
and abilities, not their deficits and limitations. While
it acknowledges personal and community
competence, it also recognizes the importance of
environmental supports and barriers that affect
engagement in community life. For
self-determination efforts to be successful, we must
create opportunities for working together, and
increase the positive consequences of community
action.
You can't do it by yourself.
Addressing what matters to local people -- good
health, education, and jobs, for example -- is beyond
any one of us. The idea of "ecology" -- interactions
among organisms and the environment -- helps us
see community action as occurring within a web of
relationships. Community life is enhanced when
individual strengths are joined in common purpose --
an expression of the principle of interdependence.
We are interconnected: each of us has a
responsibility to make this a world good for all of us.
Strong leaders are present in even the most
economically deprived communities.
Authentic leaders -- those who enable constituents
to see higher possibilities, and pursue them together
-- are among us. Yet, they may not always be
acknowledged by those in authority. When doing
community organizing in low-income public housing,
I found that a simple question helped in
"discovering" local leaders: "Who do children go to
when they are hurt and an adult isn't home?" Such
questions help us discover the "servant leaders"
among us: those who "lead" by addressing the
interests of their "followers."
Community practitioners should never get used to the
terrible conditions they see in their community work.
Those doing community work, particularly in
low-income communities, are exposed to horrible
things: children in uncaring and unhealthy
environments; adults without adequate food,
clothing, and shelter; and other conditions essential
for a decent life. Practitioners should avoid
becoming desensitized about how they feel about
what they see and hear. Disclosing experiences and
feelings to colleagues is one way to help support
each other. Community activists must also decide
how to use those feelings -- such as anger about
conditions in which some people live -- to energize
and sustain their work.
People's beliefs and values enable them to stay
committed.
To make a difference, those doing community work
must be in it for the long haul. People's values, such
as fairness or respect for the dignity of others, help
sustain their efforts. For instance, a personal or
family history of discrimination -- a common
experience for many racial and ethnic minorities --
may incline us to embrace the value of social justice
and to work for equality of opportunity.
The work of community organization is like that of a
"secular church."
Faith communities and religious institutions help
shape our beliefs about what is right and good, such
as our responsibility to care for others.
Community-based organizations, such as a
homeless coalition or tenants-rights organization,
call us to serve the common good -- things beyond
ourselves. As such, they enable us to devote our
lives to higher purposes, while working in this world.
Community practitioners have few opportunities to
reflect on the work.
Those doing the work of community building are
often consumed by its demands. For example,
leaders and staff of community-based organizations
rarely take time to consider the lessons learned
about community action, barriers and resources, or
other features of their work. Personal reflection
journals and periodic group retreats help leaders and
groups to reflect on and review the initial purposes
and recent directions of their organizations. As such,
they promote "praxis" -- the joining of understanding
(theory) and action (practice).
Responding to events and opportunities to build
community often takes us beyond what we know.
Community practice is largely an art form. Effective
intervention is shaped more by trial and error than by
tested general statements about the conditions
under which specified interventions (the
independent variable) effect desired behavior and
outcome (the dependent variables). Yet, attention to
the conditions that matter to local people -- crime,
drug use, and poverty, for example -- cannot wait for
the findings of research trials. We must be decisive
in the face of uncertainty, even when the scientific
evidence for a chosen course of action is
inadequate.
UNDERSTANDING (AND ADDRESSING) OPPOSITION
AND RESISTANCE
Societal problems sometime serve the interests of
those in power.
For example, a regulatory policy that permits
environmental polluters to go unpunished serves the
economic interests of businesses that pollute, and
those elected and appointed officials who may
benefit from campaign contributions or bribes.
Similarly, the existence of drugs and violence may
indirectly benefit elected officials since they often
gain public support when they rant against
perpetrators of drugs and violence. When those in
authority oppose community action efforts (or
ignore appeals for substantive intervention), there
may be a disconnect between the public interest
(common good) and the private interests of those
with disproportionate influence.
Racial and ethnic tension and controversies have
disrupted and destroyed many community
organization efforts.
Race and ethnic differences matter in this work. For
instance, most African Americans share a common
history of discrimination based on race, such as
being followed more closely in a store or being
ignored by cabs in a city. When you are part of an
ethnic minority, people may assume they can think
and speak for you, even if they have given no
evidence that they care about you. Accordingly,
understandable distrust of the "other" (the majority
culture) may breed conflict that disrupts reciprocity
and collaboration among people of different races
and cultures.
Social action tactics, such as disruptive protest, have
many detractors.
Participating in (or supporting) protest can be
dangerous, especially for those who remain in the
community. For example, following a school boycott
launched by residents of a low-income public
housing project, it was my friend Myrtle Carter, a
welfare mother and visible leader, who was
subjected to police harassment. She was arrested
and jailed for a minor parking violation while we
outside organizers who were also part of the effort
experienced only small inconveniences. Activists
using protest tactics should expect those in power
to retaliate, even by establishing criminal penalties
for particularly effective disruptive actions such as
strikes.
Less in-your-face social action approaches can
produce a strong political base from which to make
change.
For example, the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF)
appeared to be relatively effective in attracting
support (and avoiding opposition) for their causes.
Consistent with the "I Ching" and other statements
of Eastern philosophies, less direct or forceful
actions may be less likely to beget opposition and
adverse reaction.
Opposition and resistance may come in many forms.
An analysis of the advocacy literature suggests
different ways in which change efforts might be
blunted. These include deflecting attention from the
issue, delaying a response, denying the problem or
request, discounting the problem or the group,
deceiving the public, dividing and conquering the
organization, appeasing leadership with short-term
gains, discrediting group members, or destroying the
group with slur campaigns through the media.
Skilled practitioners can help group members
recognize (and avoid or counteract) sources and
modes of opposition.
Community organizations may respond to opposition
with appropriate counteractions.
Consider the case of local welfare officials (the
opposition) who discount claims of a disability rights
group that people with disabilities are being denied
assistance unfairly. To counteract this opposition,
disability advocates might document the number
and kinds of cases denied, and use media advocacy
about the consequences of denying eligibility to
arouse public concern. Depending on the nature and
form of opposition, appropriate counteractions may
include reframing the issues, turning negatives into
positives, going public with opponents' tactics,
concentrating the organization's strength against the
opponents' weakness, and knowing when to
negotiate.
Opposition to change may be like an onion.
Advocates should expect multiple layers of
opposition and resistance to community and system
change. For example, community organizations
working for better schools may face resistance
initially from school board officials; later, from local
principals; and still later, from teachers. Peel off one
layer, and another form of resistance or opposition
may be there to protect vested interests.
INTERVENTION AND MAINTENANCE OF EFFORTS
The strategy of community organization should fit the
situation.
The broad and specific means of intervention should
match the ends, and the context. For example, social
planning -- using technical information often with the
guidance of outside experts -- may assist in defining
goals when people share common interests.
Similarly, locality development -- featuring self-help
efforts of local people -- may be appropriate for
reducing a particular problem, such as substance
abuse or neighborhood safety, around which there is
widespread agreement. In contrast, social action --
with its disruptive tactics and related conflict -- may
be needed in contexts of opposing interests such as
in reducing discrimination or disparities in income or
power.
Using multiple strategies usually has an advantage
over any single strategy.
Some initiatives -- for instance, a campaign for
school reform -- get stuck using one preferred
means of action, such as collaborative planning or
disruptive tactics, even when the goals or conditions
shift. By invoking only one strategy, the
organization's actions may be easier to ignore and
the benefits of complementary approaches may go
untapped. For example, the threat of disruptive
tactics (social action) may make support for
self-help efforts (locality development) more likely.
Flexibility in strategy, and use of multiple means,
may enhance community efforts and outcomes.
Being in two cultures promotes creativity.
Some community practitioners operate in more than
one system of influence. For example, those who
combine research and practice must respect the
influences of both academic disciplines and
members of community-based organizations. Being
open to different audiences helps integrate disparate
ideas, discover novel solutions, and transform
practice.
The work of community organization takes time, and
follow-through.
Mobilizing people for action requires substantial
time and effort. Making the calls and personal
contacts to bring about a change in school policy, for
example, cannot be done solely by volunteers. The
stimulation and coordination of community work,
like any other valued work, should be paid for.
Without salaries for community mobilizers or
organizers, follow-through on planned actions is
rare.
External support may be both a necessity and a trap
for community organizations.
Community organization efforts seldom are
maintained without external resources.Yet, financial
support usually has strings attached. For example,
accepting money from foundations or the
government may restrict advocacy efforts. Although
often a necessity, outside resources may come at
the price of compromising the group's goals or
available means of action.
Community organizations often fade away.
When the issue that a community organization was
formed around begins to fade, so may the
organization. For example, a taxpayer rights
organization may dissolve when its goal of blocking
a particular public expenditure, such as a school
bond issue, is resolved. Organizations that endure
after the issue subsides may lose members unless
they reinvent themselves to address other emerging
issues.
Organizations need small wins.
"Small wins" are shorter-term, controllable
opportunities that can make a tangible difference.
For example, a good neighborhood organizer might
work for improved trash pickup or more streetlights
to provide (literally) visible benefits of group action.
Without the small victories, community
organizations won't retain current members -- or
attract new ones.
PROMOTING COMMUNITY CHANGE
The central ideal of community organization practice
is service.
Practitioners' interests should always be lower on
the list than the interests of those of the people
served. Yet, when disciplines, such as social welfare
or public health, market training for "professionals"
in the work of community organization, they risk
creating professions in which the practitioners
benefit more than the clients. Professions that
certify people -- and not promising practices or
demonstrably effective methods -- may emphasize
the interests of professionals (or guild interests),
and not those experiencing the problems.
Community organization must go beyond the process
of bringing people together.
For some practitioners, dialogue among
representatives of different groups is a sufficient
"outcome" of community development efforts. Yet,
local people who come together to address what
matters to them are usually interested in going
beyond talk, and on to action and achieving results.
Community organization efforts should bring about
tangible benefits such as community change,
problem solving, and furthering social justice.
The primary need is not for individuals to adjust to
their world, but for environments to change so people
can attain their goals.
Much framing of societal problems focuses on the
deficits of those most affected. For example,
prominent labels for causes of academic failure
might include "poor motivation" (of youth) or "poor
monitoring" (by parents). Alternatively, analyses of
academic failure might address such environmental
conditions as "few opportunities to do academic
work" (in schools) and "limited opportunities for
employment" (following school). Community health
and well being are private and public matters, calling
for both individual and social responsibility.
Community-based organizations can function as
catalysts for change.
Effective community organizations transform the
environment: they alter programs, policies, and
practices related to the group's mission. For
example, a disability rights organization might
modify policies regarding employment
discrimination against people with disabilities or
establish new job training programs that
accommodate people with different impairments. In
their role as catalysts for change, community
organizations convene others, broker relationships,
and leverage resources for shared purposes.
INFLUENCING SYSTEMS (OR BROADER) CHANGE
The level(s) of intervention should reflect the multiple
levels that contribute to the problem.
Consider the typical interventions for most societal
problems. For example, job training to address
unemployment or drug awareness programs to
counter substance abuse, is typical of initiatives
trying to change the behavior of those with limited
power who are closest to the "problem," for instance,
low-income adults (unemployment) or youth
(substance abuse).
When used alone, service programs and targeted
interventions, such as for so-called "at risk" adults or
youth, may deflect attention away from more root
causes, such as poverty and the conditions of
opportunity that affect behavior at a variety of levels.
Resolution of many societal issues, such as crime or
unemployment, requires changes in decisions made
by corporate and political decisionmakers at levels
higher than the local community.
Systems change does not occur simply by reporting
felt needs to appointed or elected officials.
For those with higher economic or political status,
simply expressing a concern may have influence on
decisions that affect them. A variety of traditional
means is available to such groups as a way of
exerting influence; they include petitioning, lobbying,
influencing the media, supporting political
candidates, and voting in large numbers. These
means are largely unavailable to those most
affected by many societal problems, however, such
as children and the poor. Marginalized groups lack
the resources to exert influence in conventional
ways.
The great power of social movements is in
communicating a different vision of the world.
Marginalized groups use the drama of protest -- and
the conflict it provokes -- to display realities not
widely regarded as important. For example, the
media may cover a strike and related protests by
farm workers or coal miners, and the violence it
often evokes from owners, the police, or others in
power. Media coverage helps convey the story of the
conditions faced by the protesters, and the
unfairness of the action (or inaction) of businesses
or institutions that are targeted. The dramatic nature
of protest and related conflict can help politicize
voters who, through enhanced public support of the
positions of marginalized groups, can exert influence
on those in power.
Community organizations should seek changes
within their power to manage.
Since ignoring is likely and retaliation is possible,
small organizations with limited power should avoid
seeking fundamental changes in the system. For
example, a single grassroots organization in a
low-income neighborhood may not be positioned to
effect systems changes such as altering the
priorities of grantmakers who support work in the
community. But, small and scrappy organizations
may succeed in bringing about community change
when their bulkier counterparts do not.
Community and broader systems change can be
brought about through collaboration.
Collaboration involves alliances among groups that
share risks, resources, and responsibilities to
achieve their common interests. For example, local
community-based organizations interested in the
well being of children can link with each other to
create local programs (e.g., mentoring), policies
(e.g., flextime to be with children after school) and
practices (e.g., adults caring for children not their
own).
Additionally, broader partnerships with grantmakers,
government agencies, and business councils can
affect the conditions in which change occurs at the
community level. An example is altering
grantmaking programs to support collaborative work
or promoting child-friendly business policies through
industrial revenue bonds or new corporate policies.
Collaborative partnerships help bring about
community and system change when they link local
people to resources and institutions at the multiple
levels in which change should occur to address
common interests.
ACHIEVING COMMUNITY-LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS
Societal problems often reoccur.
Consider the problem of gang violence that occurred
after World War II and reoccurred in the 1990s.
Broad social conditions -- wide disparity of income,
weak social ties, and related mistrust of others --
appear to affect the likelihood of societal problems
such as increased death rates, infant mortality, and
perhaps youth violence. Improvements achieved in
one era may need to be reestablished by future
generations that must again transform the
environmental conditions that support the
reoccurrence of societal problems.
Most community efforts "chip" away at the problem.
The majority of community interventions do not
match the scale of the problem. For example, a
community effort may prepare 10 unemployed
people to compete for only one available job, or may
create 100 jobs in a community with thousands of
unemployed. We often make small changes in a
context that remains unchanged.
Real change is rare.
Significant improvements in community-level
outcomes are highly unusual -- such as cases of
reducing rates of adolescent pregnancy or academic
failure by 50 percent or more. Yet, in requests for
grants, community-based organizations often
promise (and grantmakers expect) statements of
objectives that indicate significant improvements as
a result of only modest investments over a short
time. We should not perpetuate myths about what
most interventions can actually accomplish.
Development of community leadership may be a
positive byproduct of even a "failed" community
effort.
Although an initiative may not produce statistically
significant changes in community benchmarks or
indicators, it may develop new leaders or build
capacity to address new issues in the future. For
instance, a public health initiative that produces only
modest reductions in rates of adolescent pregnancy
may develop the capacity to produce changes that
matter, such as four years later when the group
switches its efforts from adolescent pregnancy to
child well-being.
Community documentation and evaluation must
help us see what is actually achieved by community
initiatives, including evidence of intermediate
outcomes (e.g., community and system change) and
other indicators of success or "failure" (i.e.,
community capacity over time and across issues).
Optimal health and development for all people may
be beyond the capacity of what communities can
achieve, but not beyond what they should seek.
Most community-based efforts, such as those to
create healthy environments for all our children, will
fall short of their objectives. Yet, justice requires that
we create conditions in which all people can make
the most of their inherently unequal endowments.
Support for community initiatives should be guided
by what we must do for current and future
generations, not by what limited gains we have made
in the past.

IN SUMMARY
The fundamental purpose of community
organization -- to help discover and enable people's
shared goals -- is informed by values, knowledge,
and experience. This section outlined lessons
learned from the experiences of an earlier
generation of community organization practitioners
(each with an average of over 40 years of
experience). The insights were organized under
broad themes of community organization practice.
Community organization often has a bottom-up or
grassroots quality: people with relatively little power
coming together at the local level to address issues
that matter to them. For example, grassroots efforts
may involve planning by members of a neighborhood
association, protests by a tenants' organization, or
self-help efforts of low-income families to build local
housing.
Yet, community organization may also function as a
top-down strategy, such as when elected or
appointed officials -- or others in power -- join allies
in advancing policies or resource allocations that
serve their interests. Bottom-up and top-down
approaches to community organization may work in
conflict, such as when appointed officials conspire
to make voter registration of emerging minority
groups more difficult. Top-down and bottom-up
efforts may also work in concert, as when
grassroots mobilization, such as letter writing or
public demonstrations, help support policy changes
advanced by cooperative elected or appointed
officials working at broader levels.
Community organization strategies may be used to
serve -- or hinder -- the values and aims of particular
interest groups. Consider the issue of abortion:
those organizing under the pro-choice banner may
use protest tactics to advance policies and practices
that further individual freedom (a woman's "right" to
choose whether to have an abortion). Alternatively,
those working on the pro-life side may organize to
seek changes consistent with the value of security
and survival (an unborn child's "right" to life).
Depending on our values and interests, we may
support or denounce the use of similar disruptive
tactics by proponents or opponents of the issue.
What is the relationship between personal values
and qualities -- and the experiences and
environments that shaped them -- and the work of
community organization and change? Personal
background, such as a basic spirituality or a history
of discrimination associated with ethnic minority
status, can predispose a practitioner to support
particular values, such as social justice or equality,
consistent with the work of community organization.
What qualities and behaviors of community
organizers, such as respect for others and
willingness to listen, help bring people together?
Many of these attributes and behaviors -- including
clarity of vision, capacity to support and encourage,
and tolerance of ambiguity -- are similar to those of
other leaders.
How do we cultivate such natural leaders, and
nurture and support their work in bringing people
together? Further research may help clarify the
relationship between personal qualities and
behaviors, such as those of the "servant" or "servant
leader ," the broader environment that nurtures or
hinders them, and the outcomes of community
organization efforts.
Finally, leadership in community work may begin
with a few good questions:
● What is desired now, in this place, by these
people?
● What is success?
● Under what conditions is improvement possible?
● How can we establish and sustain conditions for
effective community problem solving? over time,
and across concerns?
● How would we know it?
Imagine a "living democracy" -- large numbers of
people, in many different communities, engaged in
dialogue about shared concerns and collective
action toward improvement. Perhaps these lessons
-- inspired by reflections of an earlier generation of
community organization practitioners -- can help us
better understand and improve the essential work of
democracy: people coming together to address
issues that matter to them.