ORGANISATION & CULTURE by Stefan Freedman
Summary of a WSA Initiative and an ongoing discussion
At the last world
congress, Innsbruck 2005, there was a delegates Forum called ‘Our duty to be
present in the world’. In following this up, WSA first focussed outward on
Subud’s visibility and image with the initiative on our presence in the world. (1)
To complement this, WSA
then began the second initiative of looking at our own organisational strengths
and any self-limiting tendencies.
The second initiative involved
me in co-ordinator role and Frederic Richard as my ongoing
sounding board and rudder, providing clarity and structure. The team that has participated in this second initiative along
with the World Subud Council includes Amalia Rasheed, Garrett Thompson, and
(later) Marcus Mackay, with support from WSC
secretary, Julia Hurd, in consultation with Osanna Vaughan and Maya Bernades. Questions
about our ‘norms’ and culture have largely been my own input. I appreciate the team giving me leeway to explore the potential of
these ideas to understand better how our organisation might currently be
perceived by society. I raise a few controversies and take sole responsibility
for any unintended bias in the way I present this theme, and in my concluding
observations. This paper does not claim to be “expert advice" or a proposal, and does not represent a
unified view held by members of the WSC or ISC. The current team values this initiative as part of an ongoing conversation to
expand our perspectives and options.
I can’t, unfortunately, get to this world congress, but there’s a super
team of skilled facilitators supporting the ISC team. I’m confident that you (delegates
and members) and they will put this discussion paper to good use. Any comments
pre-congress are warmly welcomed. Stefan Freedman email stefan@subud.org
p
2 Background
p 3 What happened next...
p
4 Tools (A.I. & Open Space)
p 6 Consulting the Grassroots
p 8 Themes & Hot Issues
p 9 Insights / analysis
p
9 Solutions & Options
p 11
Appendices
p 21
Conclusion
lots of info and ideas to juggle with
I use English spelling
such as organise rather than organize (except when quoting)
(1) Subud’s Visibility: ‘Being Present’ – the first
initiative was co-ordinated by Taufik Waage. Amalia Rasheed helped give
substance to the initiative by serving on the External Relations Committee which
opened doors for Subud to participate more fully in the UN and the World
Parliament of Religions. See Amalia’s report for details.
BACKGROUND
The roots of recent ISC work go back
to questions and practical suggestions from the worldwide membership which were
raised and discussed at past world congresses. Appendix
1. At the Delegates Forum (Innsbruck, 2005) titled ‘Our duty to be
present in the world’, the participants decided to split into three groups to
address different aspects of interest:
To follow this through, the WSA team (2) initiated a process of reflection
on the potential for cooperation with other organisations that have aims in
common with Subud. We also invited Subud groups and members to look at how we
might improve visibility, accessibility and the image we present of our
organisation. (More Appendix 2)
Subsequently it seemed natural to
complement this with a more ‘inward looking’ reflection, to explore more deeply
in what ways we might improve our communication with one another and with the
public: to more accurately reflect who we say we are… hence the initiative
which was called ‘looking at our organisation and culture’. (Appendix 12 for full details of the WSA
2007 brief)
The aim of the process was to reflect on our Subud
culture - a broad concept - and consider ways in which, as a learning
organisation, we might increase our capacity to make use of feedback, to explore
new possibilities and to innovate.
The process of dialogue and reflection on Subud
Culture started in earnest with a workshop in Lewes (2007), facilitated by Enthum. It identified an open ended and flexible
process to recommend to members and groups around the world to use, along the
lines of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) which is described on p4.
The WSA team was also interested by
the spontaneous growth in independent communications among Subud members.
Notably, the website ‘Subud Vision’, where a diversity of members views, controversies
and suggested solutions are aired in-depth. During this 4-year term, Subud independent
facebook groups have been springing up. The largest of these, named ‘SUBUD’ -
with 1,240 participants - includes a lively discussion forum (3).
WSA notes that the majority of
communications, feedback, reports etc are in English. We appreciate that this
makes it more difficult for those who do not speak fluent English to
participate equally. This is regrettable and we realise that translation for
all WSA communications is limited to volunteers who come forward to do this
work.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Till now
the initials WSA (World Subud Association), WSC (World Subud Council) and ISC
(International Subud Committee) have all been used. ISC is proposing to this congress
that their name becomes ‘WSA exec.’ since they are the team appointed to act on
decisions which are made by all of us (the WSA) at world congress.
(3) www.subudvision.org
(launched, Jan 2007) provides an open forum, feature length articles exploring
individual views (the editors encourage diversity of opinion) and a Solutions Project.
The Subud facebook groups (6 so far)
attract a high percentage of younger contributors. See
www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2225721356&topic=8338&error=1#/search/?init=quick&q=SUBUD
WHAT HAPPENED NEXT
Garrett Thompson (ISC) invited me to
join their team after we talked together at the 2007 “THANK YOU” international
event in Ascot, UK.
But why was I – sometimes an
outspoken writer for Subud Vision - to be involved? It was hoped that I could encourage members and groups to
communicate more freely with the WSA exec and also that I would help the team
to distil and integrate some of the issues and suggestions members are raising
on independent sites, chat-rooms etc. For my full background and its relevance,
Appendix 3 (p15).
Part of my brief was to consult with
the wider membership to see to what extent views aired on independent websites reflected
those of the membership in general. Perhaps we were hearing from a minority of
atypical individuals while most members were contented?
In asking members to reflect on our
association, we included our ‘communal culture’.
Inevitably every kind of human group evolves a characteristic atmosphere - a way-of-being
– and generally some in-house words, phrases and attitudes. We set out to learn
how people experience our Subud community’s culture and how well this matches with
the way we want the worldwide Subud association to be perceived.
Results are summarised later in
Issues & Themes. And the ongoing discussion
and feedback from around the world is openly available on the official Subud
website www.subud.net/columns.shtml
But first, a look at some specific
tools WSA have found useful:-
Helena Milan at the Subud arts extravaganza (4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) This and all other photos here were taken
by Rosana Mount at Loudwater Farm, UK
TOOLS
We are privy to a lot of encouraging
news. We also hear of diverse challenges around the Subud world. To help with
the challenges we considered tools which enable professional organisations to:
·
improve
communications and team-work
·
raise (or
restore) morale
·
move through
conflict situations
·
respond
positively to change
Could these be useful in a Subud
context? We decided to find out.
ISC/WSA executive arranged for
Enthum – a U.K. Subud firm working with organisations – to facilitate a weekend
for the whole team together. We met up at the Subud centre in Lewes, UK
(January 2008), supported also by Sharifin Gardiner (Susila Dharma) and
Hermione Elliott (SIHA). Enthum asked us to let them demonstrate an organisational
tool called Appreciative Inquiry
(A.I.).This is based on one-to-one interviews and then a pooling of themes and
ideas, resulting in a shared practical vision. (Appendix
4). We seemed to achieve a lot in a short time, and almost all felt energised
and uplifted in the process. Having given AI a thorough road-test the team was
able to recommend it for Subud congresses and meetings, as a format for team-building
and practical results. I was an exception; feeling somewhat uneasy because I
was struggling with the instruction to ‘stay positive’ (more on that later in
Insights/Analysis 4, p10). This was noted, and incorporated into the WSA suggestions
for exploring AI when in a Subud setting.
An
introductory “pack” to Appreciative Inquiry for Subud meetings is freely
available online at www.subud.net/columns.shtml?AA_SL_Session=1769cbf66a4ac567730da90fb648dfd7&x=17793
Since the Lewes “launch” a number of
Subud national congresses and member focus groups have explored AI in some
depth.
Lora Bilger (who was at that time an
international helper for area 2) reports:
APPRECIATIVE
INQUIRY AT THE GERMAN NATIONAL CONGRESS - May 2008
Imke
Lohmann, Kejiwaan Councillor, and Bärbel Grimm, Committee Councillor, had,
according to the input of
ISC for this year prepared a whole
day-long workshop on the Appreciative Inquiry (AI) process. After they had
introduced the members to their offer it became clear that so many attendees
were interested in this work that those who offered other workshops drew back
and announced a delay of their offers...
The AI process was well prepared and at the end nearly everybody involved had expressed that this way to work on themes
was very new for Subud, very interesting and rewarding.
Monday morning was used more for Latihan and testing. Most of the testing was
tied into the results of the AI process from Friday to connect those activities
and results with inner receiving. This congress was perceived by many as a very
good, interesting one with a great and light atmosphere.
Subud USA also shaped a national
congress around it (July 2008) while other AI Subud sessions including
Indonesia, France and the UK reported worthwhile results. (For more Subud
reports about using AI: www.subud.net/columns.shtml)
The feedback suggests a palpable
benefit for Subud communities who have tried this format for
communication. Wisely, I imagine, it
has not become something we use all the time (it could
become routinised). However the
results are so encouraging that we hope it will be tried out more widely, and employed
often again.
Other groups have explored the ‘Open Space Technology’ approach to
meetings. This allows participants to hold a cluster of simultaneous
small-group discussions, and to move freely from one to another. Those
participating reported that – unlike at a large meeting where most people were
just listening - they felt enlivened and fully engaged, and described the small
flexible groups as energising and productive (Appendix
5). If you’re attending a WSA workshop this world congress then you will
be trying this out yourself and we are interested to hear afterwards how useful
you find it. (Ideally there would be a longer time to explore each topic fully).
In January 2008, as part of Subud
Australia’s national congress, Sophia Blake offered an Open
Space framework for members to
discuss ‘How does Subud’s communal
culture help and hinder us, and what can we do about it?’ (WSA has adopted
this as one of our key questions for congress delegates to consider.) Sophia and
I co-led an Open Space session at the THANK YOU international event at Ascot,
UK, the previous summer (Aug 2007). Both occasions quickly yielded lively discussions and concrete proposals.
(More about the Australian sessions Appendix 9)
Some members have become interested
in tools that help build understanding in conflict situations. In particular nonviolent communication (NVC ) is
being explored by members in France, Canada, UK and perhaps elsewhere. Many of
the ‘sagas’ that International Helpers and the WSA exec. hears about describe ongoing
and entrenched conflicts. Subud groups are not immune from human dynamics. Where conflicts persist over time, even
after extensive testing, helpers and members may opt to approach them with
additional resources and skills. So WSA is interested to hear from members who
are qualified, experienced or are training in a conflict transformation method.
(To read more about NVC including a short personal account see Appendix 6)
The Portland group in Oregon, USA, has
been meeting regularly to speak openly and listen non-judgementally. They have
called these sessions visioning and
have found a growth in understanding, community feeling and commitment among
group members. Other groups are now trying this out – adapting the idea to
their own situations.
chatting and singing together at
Loudwater farm, UK
GRASSROOTS
Before looking at themes and issues,
one question...
Isn’t consulting members a huge
waste of time?
Don’t we already have a system for dealing with grassroots
needs and proposals? A member brings an idea to their group. It gets discussed
and – if it resonates with other members - is passed along to the region, the
national council, and finally (via national delegates) to world congress, where
it gets discussed further and may result in a congress resolution which is then
passed back to the various countries to be disseminated among the groups and
members.
The advantage of this existing
system is that it weeds out unpopular proposals. There simply is not time at a
world congress to give attention to each and every bright idea that individuals
might wish to table. The existing
approach provides a filter and creates a manageable feedback system.
However, there are three drawbacks:
Some Subud members thrive on
meetings but others hate them. Some can speak clearly in front of a group, while
others can’t – and perhaps express themselves better in writing. Some committed
members are so fully engaged with their work, family or voluntary projects that
they can rarely attend a group meeting. Access
to “the system” has not been experienced as equal.
Using the existing framework, how can a member (even as a delegate)
present a nuanced proposal in detail, giving a full background and supporting evidence?
Anything innovative or radical requires an entire context and a plan. To
condense a proposal into a short statement that might be transmitted in a
sentence, tested about or voted on may miss the real “meat” of an issue. Like discussing
a pie when you can’t taste the filling and have only nibbled at the crust. This
is one reason why ISC takes an interest in the Subud Vision format, initiated independently
by members, which hosts detailed analysis and carefully thought through
proposals. This is not about whether or not one agrees with any particular
article, but the value of looking critically
at a range of in-depth suggestions.
It seems that there are members who
perceive a chasm between the regular membership and the “centre” where
decisions are taken (world congress) or implemented (WSA exec). Some feel that
their local group is not a place where they can express themselves or feel
supported. Members (including many younger ones) report that their initiatives
are not wanted or taken seriously (5). WSA received several letters about this
and you can find a very charming and original one from France in Appendix 7. In the first open-talk meeting I
co-led at
Ascot (Aug '07)
we asked participants a question I borrowed from
a book about revitalising
organisations. “If the Subud organisation
were an animal what would it be?”
One response was, “A giraffe.
Because
the head (office holders) seems remote from the feet
(grassroots
members).”
So this ISC/WSC initiative invited feedback not only from national
chairpersons, but also from groups and from individual members, to be sure that
there is no block in the chain of communication; to be simple and direct. We have
heard back from a number of members about their specific experiences and issues
and realised that some of these reports can not be generalised. It is the personal story which gives
meaning and poignancy to each communication. All this has been enriching,
and a privilege to receive. In addition to summaries of discussions, some
individual letters which touched the team and from which we learned a lot can
be read on the official Subud website. www.subud.net/columns.shtml
Input
from International Helpers:
We are grateful for the feedback and
suggestions from some members of the IH team, given in Appendix 8.
(5) Happily, this “oldies
know best” tendency seems to be changing in several countries, such as,
Colombia, UK and USA where
many organisational roles are being taken on by younger members.
THEMES & HOT ISSUES
First let’s glance at six themes
that came up generally and repeatedly. These themes are condensed from feedback
from national chairpersons and international helpers, congress meetings, AI and
Open Space sessions, articles in official Subud publications and also from
Subud Vision and independent websites, plus individual members who wrote to
WSA. In the following chapter we look at any insights / analysis that may open
up the themes. Finally we pass on suggestions which we hope may contribute
towards congress discussions to find solutions and proposals.
Some groups report depletion not
just of numbers but of enthusiasm and vitality. On the other hand, from around
the world, we are hearing of successful ways in which members are supporting
one another and nourishing group life. What can we learn?
We asked 60 Subud members what was
the most important change they’d like to see in Subud. The most popular answer
was “more open communication”.
How can we become a better learning
organisation?
(Why learn? Why change? See Appendix 11)
Do you think there is a
special "Subud way" of doing everything? This is not our official
claim or philosophy, but it may be an idea cherished by many members. If
so, it is a Subud 'norm'.
And...if any of our habitual ways are
hindering us, what can we do about it?
Shoshanah Margolin (co-ordinator for
International Helpers) writes: “Helpers and committee
really need to learn to work together, for this is also what brings life to
groups, regions, countries, and in the world.” (More:
Appendix 8)
Time for concentration
INSIGHTS / ANALYSIS
We have had feedback
from congresses, groups and members in Australia, Austria, Canada, France,
Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Netherlands, Singapore, UK and USA. We are aware
that this gives us an indicative picture (so far) rather than a complete one. We
are depending on delegates and members at the congress to help ‘fill in the gaps’.
First, a look at demographics. There
are countries and areas where membership is increasing, such as Chile, India,
Nigeria and (I believe) the USA. On the other
hand, certain long established groups are concerned about the ageing of their
membership, which is not being replaced. And in a few years there may not be
any members in Bangladesh, Cyprus and Peru. This term we’ve added Bosnia, Serbia,
Tanzania and Trinidad to the list of countries with members and removed other
countries that I suspect had few members to begin with and now have none that
we know of – Albania, Georgia, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Zambia. A mixed report.
One consideration is this: picture a
large, active Subud group. It is likely that various members of the group are
involved with helper and committee work at national, zonal or international level,
while others are performing helper and committee duties at the local group. A
number of other members may be elderly. Who then is left with spare time and
energy to enliven the group socially, to start up a local project or to develop
links between the group and the community? In maintaining an elaborate support
structure for Subud, are we – unintentionally – draining vitality away from
local initiatives, and if so, how could we reverse this?
The basics of real active listening, being able to
effectively separate out judgement of others when giving feedback and doing so
with a modicum of respect and love, may be missing in our group interactions.
So we tend to withdraw, store resentments and turn off or simply limit our
level of engagement. (Marcus Mackay)
At the first of the meetings I
co-hosted for Subud Vision (Ascot, UK 2007) to find out members’ views, we
asked all present (approx 60) what was the most important change they’d like to
see in Subud. The most popular choice was “more open communication”. People
specified: Honest dialogue; Openness and transparency; Openness to each others’
lives outside Subud, Natural friendly communication with everyone;
Gaining confidence to share candidly with non-Subud members; More publicity;
Open discussion of how the latihan is for us, More sense of community and
sociability in groups
This suggests that the quality of
dialogue and group discussion is a key element for many members.
Morgan Scott Peck (USA 1936 – 2005) wrote that in every religious or
spiritual group there are those who see themselves as “orthodox/traditional”,
others who are “reformist/liberal” and a smaller
number who are “universalist” (seeing their own preferred path as having
equal value to all others).
Traditional members, in general, tend to be older, and concerned with
keeping the integrity of their faith. Reformists tend to be younger, interested
in their spiritual community becoming relevant, in responding to change and
attracting other younger members. However reformists and traditionalists do
generally agree on one thing - that “their watches are the only ones that tell
the right time”.
Meanwhile ‘universalists’ find such a claim embarrassing, and would say,
“Everyone’s watch tells the right time in a different part of the world”. Scott
Peck’s model is widely used to stimulate discussion in interfaith circles (7)
and apparently can be adapted to fit any spiritual organisation. Even though
Subud is relatively young I wonder if it might to some extent apply. Do you
find this a useful model for understanding diverse viewpoints in our Subud
circles? (See Appendix 10 for one member’s response.)
Traditional or reformer. Perhaps the most vital thing for us to learn is this: how
to understand and to feel closer to those who express very different opinions
from our own. In congress sessions we hope to hear and value diverse views so
we can acclimatise ourselves to becoming a broader and more inclusive
organisation.
(6) ‘Subud as University’ is borrowed from the title of an article by
David Week on www.subudvision.org
(7) I learned this model at an interfaith facilitator’s training (Oct 09
at Ammerdown Centre, Bath, UK.)
Warning: the following musings are controversial!
- And, of
course, you are completely at liberty to disagree
I want to introduce this topic
by quoting an article by Lilliana Gibbs, a longstanding helper who grew up in a
Subud family (8)
All
groups, from our families to our workplaces, have two sets of rules: the overt
ones, which are openly expressed, and the covert rules, called ‘norms’. Norms
are the powerful, often unspoken conventions by which a group operates. These
naturally emerge from a group’s history, patterns of behaviour and the dynamic
way it develops. Norms are adhered to, consciously or unconsciously, in order
to belong.
In Subud
it can be unclear what is a ‘rule’ and what is a ‘norm’, since one of our norms
is to say there are no rules!
I suggest
some of our norms are:
· the latihan is superior to other
spiritual practices
· thinking is inferior to feeling
· accept all that Bapak said, and
· don’t question too much
I want
to add a 'norm' I have struggled with inside myself. For many years my own
pacifist beliefs and inclinations matched with a Subud trend to always avoid conflict. But experience has shown me that where there are
differences of opinion or need, a conflict is sometimes actually needed.
Smoothing it over prevents conflict resolution, and harmony can be won only by thoroughly
engaging with and working through (not bypassing) the conflict.
Being optimistic
and positive can be affirming. Or it can seem insensitive if it leaves someone
else feeling negative! The same might apply to testing when there is a conflict
of opinions. A way to check is: does it
leave someone feeling unhappy? Do all parties feel that they have been
respected, listened to and fully understood? Perhaps this 'avoid conflict' norm
or tendency in Subud is changing... what's your experience?
The purpose of this topic is
to ask whether members experience Subud as having norms
- and, if so, which ones are
prevalent. (The following section will ask what we might do about it...)
(8) Lilliana’s article can be
accessed at www.subudvision.org
Our collective culture is more than our
unspoken conventions or ‘norms’. It is the whole atmosphere we co-create as an
association. Whether or not we are welcoming, sensitive to
differing needs, tranquil or lively
(or both). Whether people speak in forthright or hushed voices,
the language we tend to use, how we
deal with dissent, disputes and so on. Which aspects of
our communal culture are you happy
with? Which, if any, would you change?
The Open Space meeting at Subud Australia’s
congress explored this theme so you may like to see Appendix 9 for some highlights of what they
came up with. (Or read their impressively detailed report, “Peeling The Onion”,
on www.subud.net/columns.shtml
).
“Helpers and committee
really need to learn to work together, for this is also what brings life to
groups, regions, countries, and the world.” This upbeat request from our hardworking
International Helpers does – I’m sorry - raise some issues. “Oh no!” I imagine
you saying, “Can’t we all simply be kind, supportive and just get along?” I
truly hope we can, but I also see a need for clarity:
A question that seems to
be causing confusion for many of us: what is the nature of the support that the
committee and helpers can give each other? I remember when I was first involved
in committee work (Norwich and Central London groups, U.K. in the1970s). Our
regional meetings were attended by regional helpers who would “keep the quiet”,
sitting in a state of latihan (we assumed) while we would each give our
interminable group reports and discuss properties and finances. I’m not
surprised that over several decades U.K. helpers found ways to participate more
actively and that the role of testing
at committee meetings increased.
In another country, a
national chairperson we interviewed this year reported that their national
council meetings and work had been paralysed by genuinely well meaning ‘interference’
by national helpers. Eventually she had to ask them politely not to attend. Being
an ex-national helper and friends with most of them, seemed to make clarity of roles even harder. The
previous national chair had experienced the same frustration and so for some
time they had been unable to recruit a new national chairman. One element of
successful co-operation is to trust other team members to perform their role,
allowing some leeway for individual initiative. Apparently this respect and trust was not manifest.
‘Working together’ apparently became counterproductive in this instance.
Perhaps relevant to
this, another member wrote in to suggest:
Our
approach to group decision making is dominated by testing, which some
experience as an imposition and which is open to misuse. We are not a democracy
but a ‘testocracy’.
Bapak advised us to divide
helper and committee functions according to whether the issue is a spiritual or
a practical one. But the most debated and perennial issues are, inconveniently,
both spiritual and practical. For
example, the applicant procedure affects us all in a very tangible and
down-to-earth way, since some groups are shrinking and our sustainability
depends on newcomers. Yet this is also a kejiwa’an matter. Perhaps such
universal issues and decisions should be decided by the whole of our Subud
community. For helpers, committee and (let’s please add) members to learn to
work co-operatively but without blocking one another, what will help? What do
we need?
Phew! That’s
the “heavy” part –
OK. we can now look at good practice, solutions,
useful tools, relevant members projects etc.
SOLUTIONS & OPTIONS
This includes reports on
what Subud people are already doing which others may want to try...
A key to the vitality of an organisation (and this applies to every organisation,
not only to Subud)
is an inflow of new members. Léonard Lassalle emailed WSA about his
region in France where the latihan is reaching new people:
For Subud to
grow we do not need to inform, or give all the information we know about it but
just love, care and listen, the latihan within us does the rest. Our group
is growing here because there are no obligations, no "helpers" no
"Opening" (how can we say who is closed?) but starting simply with
the first latihan...etc. Our latihan friends enquire in their own time. When
they feel the latihan strong inside and want to know how it is out there, they
ask questions, some have joined Subud France others have not.
Léonard gives a more detailed account in an article called “Latihan for
All Humanity” (www.subudvision.org)
My reason for sharing my experience is to encourage
the younger generations to be freer, to follow more their receiving and not to
be so bound by the many regulations that we have tied ourselves to, regarding
the approach to newcomers.
A younger member from
the U.K. writes:
When an organisation tries to present a grand and
materially successful image I think people can be put off. That’s why I think
that the ordinary lives of our members should be at the forefront of Subud’s
image. Our diversity, tolerance and compassion should be demonstrated and
celebrated. Small everyday events that ordinary people can relate to should be
made more of, as it shows that we value the little things as much as the grander
things.
These suggestions are given here, not as a ‘line’ WSA is promoting but to show some approaches members are
trying, and to give food for reflection. Perhaps every country and group will
find its own approach to vitalising Subud.
We described on pages 4
and 5 how congresses and groups are exploring and finding value in various
communication formats. Appreciative
Enquiry is designed to boost morale and build on organisational strengths. Open Space Meetings provide an
enlivening and flexible format for discussions which may particularly appeal to
people who usually avoid meetings. Nonviolent
Communication - useful in conflict situations - helps us to notice hidden
barbs or judgements in habitual exchanges (including our own) and to find more
successful ways of speaking truthfully.
One of the keynotes in
the coming congress is Capacity
Building. What if we sponsor a few members to get training, with the
understanding that they would share and use their skills to help
us enrich our
communications?
In addition we want to pass
on a proposal in case you missed it in a recent Susila Dharma news:
Daniela
Urutia and Machrus Garces are proposing a model for helping one another in our
Subud groups and they are starting with their group, Subud Cali in Colombia.
They came to their model through simple observation: “We are often unaware of
the difficult situations faced by Subud members in their daily lives. Sometimes
Subud members abandon the group and we don’t know why. If we approach them,
we’ll find that these people are silently experiencing difficult situations and
that there isn’t support from the group.”
According
to Daniela and Machrus, until now, the development of Subud has been a highly
individual process, based in each person’s latihan. We don't often consider the
importance and benefits of participating in the group’s social and collective
life, reaching out to and helping one another in a systematic way.
For this reason, they are proposing an
initiative to strengthen the group's capacity to help find meaningful solutions
to the real life problems faced by its members. The initiative includes the
following elements:
1. Identify and understand the situation of
Subud members in the groups, through learning each other's stories, problems
and challenges.
2. Collectively build solutions or
alternative solutions to the particular situations identified, using the social
capital that exists in Subud — this includes all group members, helpers,
entrepreneurs, etc.
3.
Create a local support fund for the development of solutions: this could be for
training, entrepreneurship or other start-up activities.
4.
Monitor and evaluate the development of agreed solutions. Have we solved the
problem? How is the member doing? If you would like to know more about putting
SD to work in our groups, please contact
Machrus, agarcesll@hotmail.com,
or Daniela, danielau9@hotmail.com.
WSA appreciates the
inclusion of monitoring and evaluation.
This is something we need to improve in general. For example, as an
organisation we don’t always ask people why they leave. Even if we do know we
don’t record or pass on the information.
We can learn a lot if we develop a routine way to
find out why members leave and report back. This is relevant also to the next
question –
How can we become a better learning
organisation?
The following is from an article in
Subud Journal (U.K. bi-monthly).
Lucy Houbart (Loudwater group, UK) writes:
I think having more training could help the
committees. I work in a school and people are always being given training on
how to work more effectively. I don’t think we should be afraid to learn how to
do things better by people not in Subud. We need to learn how to chair meetings
effectively, assess the needs and skills of members and find better ways of
getting things done.
WSA with other Subud members is developing Subud’s role
in the UN and presenting
Subud at the World Parliament of Religions. By becoming more outward looking we
will also be receiving feedback
which may enable us to move out of our obscurity and isolation as an
association and participate more in public fora. More about this in Amalia
Rasheed’s report.
“Instead of thinking we’re going to
change the world, we...move on to being part of the world: being a productive
and beneficial actor in the world, without seeking to control it.”
(David Weeks – ‘Subud as University’ – article on www.subudvision.org)
For simplicity, let’s look at these
two themes together:
I suggest that we do have a very
distinct culture and set of norms. Much of our culture stems
from the guidelines Bapak gave in his talks to support the process of the
latihan, and from the
love and honour that many members
feel towards our founder. This may result in his photograph being displayed,
his talks promoted and his daughter Ibu
Rahayu being seen as our spiritual leader.
This culture suits some of our
membership very well, but frustrates or distances others. So that:
a> it’s hard for us all to get
along
b> it’s confusing for enquirers
(teachings? rules? guru? or none of these?)
I think there’s an answer. See if
this works for you...
There would be no problem – I
believe – in honouring Bapak if it were understood and made very clear to
enquirers that this is a personal choice.
We can be upfront that there are longstanding, dedicated Subud members who find
value in hearing Bapak’s talks and others who don’t.
For this to work:
To those who like to promote Bapak:
I suggest claims like “It’s important to hear Bapak’s talks” or “you’ll never
make spiritual progress if you don’t do prihatin” can sound dogmatic or
‘bossy’. But the same point can be made using a personal statement in which we show respect for individual differences,
such as “I’m not speaking for everyone now, but I find great enrichment in
reading and rereading Bapak’s talks”.
And those who find our current culture
an impediment; can you accept that we’re a diverse organisation which includes
many who feel a very positive and personal connection with Bapak and his family?
No need to feel embarrassed or burdened
so long as your right (and the right of enquirers) to choose a simpler approach
to Subud is entirely respected. Bear in mind that Subud
culture, like everything else these
days, is participating in a current of
rapid change.
Sulfiati Harris, one of the
founders of the ‘Seven Circles’ retreat center, writes:
“...the latihan makes us so sensitive and open to each
other that there is a huge potential for deep, devastating hurt. In most
centers there is a reservoir of hurt from past attempts to work together.
So it seems we need to hit the ‘refresh’ button on the
way we work with committees...”
The Seven Circles gatherings in California,
USA, and – inspired by these – Open Circle gatherings
in the UK, , create a format for Subud people and their friends to
spend time together. They talk in a circle in which any roles which may divide us are put aside (such as
helper/committee/member) and support is given for people to speak spontaneously
from the heart and to listen receptively to others. I participated in a UK
weekend this year and was surprised. I found community and kinship
with Subud peers in a deeply moving
way that I had been missing for years. I noticed that one person who I had
previously kept at a polite distance was able to show a side that made me suddenly
like him.
Perhaps there is something in this
approach that will help helpers, committee and members to
interact as equals and peers. Then
when we perform our functions we may find it more natural both to trust, and –
when required - to support one another.
Stewarding a multifaith,
international organisation largely run on good will and voluntary work is a
considerable achievement we can all feel proud of. We hope this long paper will
be thought- provoking and productive, and want to hear your feedback and ideas.
If you can’t get to congress, write
to stefan@subud.org
APPENDIX 1 - PAST CONGRESSES
During past world congresses, tough questions and
innovative suggestions from the worldwide membership have been discussed. For
example at Spokane there were well attended workshops entitled “Is Subud A
Cult” and “Gay And Lesbian Issues In Subud”. At the 2001 Bali World Congress
the discussion on what may make Subud seem like a cult continued. Here is a
short extract: (full official report available at
www.subudvision.org/or/Is%20Subud%20a%20Cult.htm)
Working Party: Is Subud a Cult? World Congress
Minutes 2001 Appendix 11
People who need a stronger reference system to lead
their life or to influence others cannot find it in Subud. So they turn Bapak's
advice into rules. They say 'Subud should be like this'. They impose these
rules on others.
At Innsbruck World Congress (Austria
2005) some of the toughest questions were raised by helpers at
an extensive and well-attended
helpers’ working party. The helpers divided into groups to discuss sensitive
topics including the language we currently use when describing the latihan, and
reports that in some groups there was a domineering helper. It was suggested
that helpers test together periodically to check if it is appropriate for each
of them to remain active – and asked that this be arranged with a supportive and
loving attitude. The helpers’ working party recommended to congress that
helpers serve a fixed term (as committee members do) to prevent us becoming
over-identified with a particular role.
APPENDIX 2 – “PRESENCE”
The first part of the reflection
process WSA invited members to participate in was called the ‘being present’ initiative.
It was soon recognised, that as an
organisation we have been largely ‘inward looking’ dealing with our own
development processes. As such we have had little experience and in some cases
little confidence in being engaged in more ‘outward looking’ activities. Also
it appeared that from the ‘outside’ our organisation was not so visible or
transparent and language used in our conversations with enquirers, publications
and websites was not as universal and encompassing as we claimed Subud to be. (Amalia
Rasheed)
An example of putting this aim of
“being present” into practice is the Edinburgh group, Scotland, who - with
support from other groups in their region – provided and hosted a big meal, on
several consecutive years, as part of an annual public “spirituality and peace”
festival. One result was that the name
“Subud” appeared on the festival’s widely circulated programme. Subud members
from around the world visited to take part in the conference and to offer
workshops. (More details at www.subudvision.org/doc/Stefan%20in%20Edinburgh.htm)
APPENDIX 3 – STEFAN
FREEDMAN’S BACKGROUND
My relevant background includes
organisational research at the London Tavistock Institute, a Social Science
degree and a long career of group facilitation worldwide - as well as 38 years
as a committed Subud member (28 as an active helper).
I had co-hosted two open discussions
for Subud members at Ascot (at the request of Subud Vision’s team of editors). And
I had represented Subud Vision during two UK national council meetings to
discuss the merits / demerits of having an independent website discussing
controversy wide open to the public (more below). On the basis of this
involvement and also my background, Garrett hoped I would bring to the WSA
exec. team some fresh perspectives.
Arguments against having Subud
controversy in the public domain:
We’re airing our dirty linen in
public, giving people the impression we’re a fragmented and discontented community,
putting off potential members.
Arguments in favour:
Dissenting voices are a healthy
indicator of diversity and freedom, whereas secrecy and censorship
suggest repression and arouse suspicion.
APPENDIX 4 – APPRECIATIVE
INQUIRY (A.I.)
WIKIPEDIA offers a good summary:
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is an organizational development process or
philosophy that engages individuals within an organizational system
in its renewal, change and focused performance. AI is based on the assumption
that organizations change in the way
they inquire and the claim that an organization which inquires into
problems or difficult situations will keep finding more of the same but an
organization which tries to appreciate what is best in itself will
find/discover more and more of what is good.
Appreciative Inquiry was adopted from
work done by earlier action research theorists and practitioners and further
developed by David Cooperrider of Case Western Reserve University
and Suresh Srivatsva in the
1980s. Cooperrider
and Srivatsva say that an organization is a miracle to be embraced
rather than a problem to be solved.
According to them, inquiry into organizational life should have the following
characteristics:
It is now a commonly accepted practice in the evaluation
of organizational development strategy and implementation of organizational
effectiveness tactics.
Appreciative Inquiry is a particular way of asking
questions and envisioning the future that fosters positive relationships and
builds on the basic goodness in a person, a situation, or an organization. In
so doing, it enhances a system's capacity for collaboration and change.
Appreciative Inquiry utilizes a cycle of 4 processes focusing on:
The basic idea is to build organizations around what
works, rather than trying to fix what doesn't. It is the opposite of problem
solving. Instead of focusing on gaps and inadequacies to find blame and
remediate skills or practices, AI focuses on how to create more of the
occasional exceptional performance that is occurring because a core of
strengths is aligned. The approach acknowledges the contribution of
individuals, in order to increase trust and organizational alignment.
APPENDIX 5 – OPEN SPACE
TECHNOLOGY
Open
Space Technology (OST) was
created in the mid-1980s by organizational consultant Harrison Owen when he
discovered that people attending his conferences loved the coffee breaks better
than the formal presentations and plenary sessions. Combining that insight with
his experience of life in an African village, Owen created a totally new form
of conferencing.
Open Space conferences have no keynote speakers, no pre-announced schedules of
workshops, no panel discussions, no organizational booths. Instead, sitting in
a large circle, participants learn in the first hour how they are going to
create their own conference. Almost before they realize it, they become each
other's teachers and leaders.
Anyone who wants to initiate a discussion or activity, writes it down on a
large sheet of paper in big letters and then stands up and announces it to the
group. After selecting one of the many pre-established times and places, they
post their proposed workshop on a wall. When everyone who wants to has
announced and posted their initial offerings, it is time for what Owen calls
"the village marketplace": Participants mill around the wall, putting
together their personal schedules for the remainder of the conference.
Nonviolent Communication (NVC) is a process developed by Marshall Rosenberg and others which people use
to communicate
with greater compassion and clarity. It focuses on two things: honest self-expression — exposing
what matters to oneself in a way that's likely to inspire compassion in others,
and empathy
— listening with deep compassion.
One of the central tenets of nonviolent communication
(also called "compassionate communication") is that everything a
human being does - whether benign or hurtful - is an attempt to meet their human needs. NVC
postulates that conflict between individuals or groups is a result of
miscommunication about these needs, most often because of coercive
language (e.g., inducing fear, guilt, shame, praise, blame, duty,
obligation,
punishment,
or reward).
The goal of NVC is to create a situation in which
everyone's needs are understood. The assumption is that, from this state of mutual
understanding, new strategies will flow that meet some needs of everyone.
Stefan’s personal experience of NVC
I attended a one-day intro to NVC.
It seemed promising so I went on to do several weekends of training.
The original motivation was to use it
in my work with multifaith groups. The surprise for me is how useful
it is to me personally in day-to-day
communications and in my own family life. I am learning to hear anger and
criticism without feeling distanced, and to recognise the unmet needs hidden
behind a harsh sounding comment.
APPENDIX
7-
Message to World Congress from a New Girl on the Block
Last year I attended my first
regional meeting, In groups they counted numbers of active members. Most of
them reported a drop in numbers.
I often sit and listen to Subud
members, some of whom bear office, some not, expressing feelings of isolation
(‘Nobody visited me when I was ill...’) powerlessness
(‘My latihan is perhaps too strong. I feel like my feet are
not on the ground, my life is such a mess’) disenchantment or apathy (‘Things will never change. We can never go
back to the early days’). Then I wonder, what sort of organisation have I
joined?
Recently I sat with two senior post
holders in the World Subud Association (of which existence I only heard of last
year – four years into my opening). I heard them speak about their work. I
listened with amazement and admiration. Then I wonder, why is it that I have never known about the Subud structure? About the differences
between WSA, committees and stuff? – And I feel dumb, ignorant, after 4
years…
I pick this up with my husband, who
has been in Subud for 40 years this year. He explains the structure to
me : local, regional, national, zonal, world. He tells me of the different
strata : Susila Dharma, Subud International Health Association, Subud
International Cultural Association (without acronyms!). He explains Bapak’s
vision to me about letting our latihan be seen to be working through our good
works, our talents, our jobs. And I think, good stuff.
I know that I have joined a
fantastic organisation which rests on a rock of spirituality that cannot
crumble : the Latihan. I would like to trumpet this from the highest hill
within Subud, so that the apathetic, the sceptics, the disenchanted can hear:
Whilst the latihan is at the base, the organisation cannot fade away. It will
evolve as all things spiritual do. We are in the process of that evolution. Our
job, each one individually, is to ask to receive how our individual evolution
and purification is meant to support the structure of the organisation AT THIS
TIME.
I see a pyramid. Pyramids are
hierarchies. They are neither good nor bad. And anyway, this is how Subud has
been set up. That’s ok. But let us not forget that the bricks and mortar of our
pyramid are the people. People breathe, think, have ideas, have opinions, have
visions. People also suffer hardship and need spaces and places to unload, to
share.
A pyramid is a good pyramid when it
contains conduits within its structure which enable an upward flow of
information. The conduits are already there:
local-regional-national-zonal-worldwide. But they seem to have blockages.
Something is missing. Extra processes are needed to unblock them.
Perhaps, at this time, the organisation
needs to take a fresh look at those conduits so as to enable them to turn the
pyramid upside down, processes which will facilitate feedback from below in a
more efficient way. I think the organisation needs to find evolutionary ways to
keep the ear of the WSA on the ground.
I think we need to find ‘vacuum
cleaners’ which will weekly sweep the floor and gather up people’s words -
especially from the many visionaries who at the moment come, do latihan, then
go home each week, taking their words,
ideas and their visions with them. We need to find ways to bring their words
and ideas into the heart of our World Subud Association.
Whilst sweeping up we are bound also
to suck up complaints and moans and groans, as well as hear of the sufferings
and hardships within the ordinary lives of members. All vital information.
With such information we can then
plan the road ahead. By asking and listening we will constantly find different
ways to do the decorating and maintenance which will keep the organisation
fresh, and keep negative forces at bay.
Old methods of gathering information
need to be revisited and scrapped if they do not work any longer. For example,
why rely on surveys if time and time again people do not fill them in? New
ideas are needed. For example, Subud members are mostly older in age as well as
in practice, a group for whom the internet is not part of daily life. Although
the internet is good, word of mouth is still there (such as buddy systems)
telephones and mobile phones a part of our lives.
Another idea might be, perhaps, to
set in place a system of mentoring for postholders by non-postholders…..Let’s
sweep the floor for more ideas.
With respect and gratitude from
Monica Bennett (France)
APPENDIX 8 – RESPONSE
FROM INTERNATIONAL HELPERS
(November 09)
Hello Shoshanah,
Are there any observations or impressions that you or other IHs would like to
contribute to the congress report
for WSA?
In a nutshell, what's going well with our org, what are the perceived
challenges, and any proposed improvements?
With warm regards,
Stefan
Hi
Stefan,
Many of the IHs are traveling at this time, and so I only have responses from some
in my area. These are
fairly
broad, but here goes:
1.
There is a real need for Subud members
to do enterprises together.
There
is not much life in groups at this time. People who work together
and do things together bring life. Without enterprise, how will Subud develop?
2. Men and women need to communicate
more.
3. Helpers and committee really need to learn to work together,
for this is also what
brings life to groups, regions, countries, and the world. Together, if they get
their
direction from God through testing, they then can carry out the guidance they
receive.
I am cc'ing all the IHs. Perhaps others will contribute more upon their return.
Love, Shoshanah
APPENDIX
9 – AUSTRALIA’S OPEN SPACE MEETINGS
“Peeling
The Onion” (part of National Congress 2008)
(These are
selected comments. For a full account see www.subud.net/columns.shtml)
Sophia
Blake, Facilitator, 14-Feb-2008 Peeling the Onion
How does Subud’s communal culture help and hinder us, and what can we do
about it?
...and the
resulting discussions from the workgroups.
A) WHAT CHANGES help make Subud more
attractive to new seekers?
Superiority
-several members mentioned that the notion of Subud being ‘special’ and Subud
members having exclusive access to the ‘grace of God’ is unattractive to
outsiders
Language
·
language needs to be fresh, alive, communicate using
the seeker’s own choice of words and beliefs so it appeals and is understood
·
we must not be stuck back in what was relevant in
1957; cultures move on and we have a right to change words such as kejiwaan,
latihan etc
·
why not have alternative words, that accurately
describe the practice, but that are more inviting and easily understood. These
words could be additional to what is already in use – so people have choice
depending on appropriateness of situation
(if you’d
like some specific suggestions see Beyond
Words & Images at www.subudvision.org)
Retention of new members
-need more awareness around this, better “buddy” system if helpers not fully
engaged
What is a healthy Subud community?
-identifying deep-seated differences and putting them on the table
B) WHAT IS SUBUD'S BIG HAIRY AND AUDACIOUS (and worthwhile) GOAL?
• Having a big hairy audacious goal keeps a forward motion in action, in
individuals, in the group and in the world. e.g. In Christchurch, they firstly
got a house, then halls, 1 hectare of land and have completed a second hall.
• Subud Australia is largely white, middle class, Anglo-Saxon with not many
other cultures included. In proportion to population numbers we should have 6
aboriginal people, yet have only 1.
• The way we do things is very Western. To reach out to other cultures, we will
need to go out and invite them in, possibly through Ethnic TV and radio and we
need to make sure all of our policies have an inter-faith flavour.
APPENDIX
10 – A member’s response to the model:
traditional
/ reformer / universalist:
This model doesn't illustrate views held by
Subud members. This is because the “reforms” that some members are requesting
are, paradoxically, "traditional". They go back to a simpler way of
explaining and hosting Subud, as in earlier days. No guru, no teachings, no
faith required, no long introduction/probation. Early on we used to make it
crystal clear that the latihan is an individual process which changes over
time, and that all statements about it are personal accounts. What members
are missing is the original, simple, accessible Subud.
APPENDIX 11 – Why should we learn? Why change?
This
is from a recent exchange on the Subud Vision discussion site:
W:
I am not understanding why anyone wants
a "fresh Subud". I go to Subud. I do Latihan. I schmooze a bit on
occasion, and if there is a meeting or dinner after Latihan I may stay. I
donate a bit of money to carry my share of expenses. I am satisfied. I don't
worship Bapak, and I don't follow many of the advices he gave us, and I still
feel pretty good about Subud and about my life.
S:
I can't speak for all latihan practitioners, obviously, but I believe that for
many of them your question would be answered quite simply. They may, like you,
be perfectly satisfied with Subud and the latihan as far as their own
experience of it goes, but what they will not be satisfied with is a situation
where the latihan is very much a minority practice, indeed a diminishing
practice that may die out altogether. They may also not be satisfied that such
a high proportion of those that join Subud leave and never come back. Some may
think it's all up to God and eventually the situation will turn around. An
increasing number may now think the evidence is tending to show that it is not
up to God but up to ourselves, and since we are the only people who know about
the latihan, then the responsibility is with ourselves to recognise the
problems and organise a recovery from them.
APPENDIX 12 – minutes of
the WSA meeting at Ascot in Aug 2007
The following text shows the
foundation for the initiative on our culture (page 16).
WSA
INITIATIVE FOR THE COMING YEAR
16:1 It was decided that last year’s
Being Present Initiative is an ongoing process, as various
countries are only now taking it on
board and want to continue.
16:2 During the discussions, and considering the outcome of Being
Present initiative, the council agreed that an organic way to proceed would be
to start a second initiative that would focus on taking a deeper look at our
association, questioning our Subud culture, what serves us, what doesn’t, what
needs to be changed etc. In other words after fifty years, the WSA needs to
engage in an honest, fearless and open
appraisal of how we function – from groups to the international and all the
layers in between. The latihan and Subud is about inner development and
personal evolution that should necessarily be reflected in our daily lives, as
well as the work of the association. Let’s take a courageous look to search for alternatives where things aren’t
working as we should like them to.
Such an initiative would also support the International Helpers’ goals to look at and address
various issues within the helper structure, such as relationships to young
people in particular. Looking at ourselves objectively and making
recommendations can be seen as a first step towards strengthening our
organization, which was another working party at Innsbruck. It would be related
to the External Relations Committee’s proposal to survey and review the Subud organization and culture.
A work group will be established for that purpose, including the WSA chair and
deputy and ISC.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUDING
REMARKS
(I
offer these ideas as part of an ongoing discussion)
As stewards of the latihan we Subud members encompass
a spectrum of approaches. The ISC team are getting heartfelt messages from
members around the world, hoping that we will help our polarities to pull
together rather than pulling apart. To describe the extremes of each approach I
will need to generalise:
I will call one end of the spectrum ‘mountains’. A mountain stands tall and strong. It must weather the changing
seasons and the battering of storms to resist erosion.
I am using the image of a mountain to describe those who see Subud as a beacon
of spirituality which they hope others may one day be drawn to. Their primary aim is to carry forward Bapak’s
mission, ensuring the translation and dissemination of Bapak and Ibu
Rahayu’s talks, explanations and the spirit of their advice. Our mountains are
generally content to describe the latihan in familiar terms such as submission
or ‘Worship of the One Almighty God’. They strive to retain the current
structure, such as a recommended (maximum) three month application period. They
work for Subud to maintain and raise our standards, and to remain cohesive.
Many regret the growth of Subud discussions at congresses and online, which –
they fear – may dignify people’s egos and distract us from simply surrendering,
and from the wealth of guidelines that have already been given by Bapak. The
overall concern is that if change is encouraged it may not improve things, and
there’s no telling where it may end.
The other end of the spectrum I call ‘rivers’. A river flows from a spring bringing precious water out into the world.
In order to grow, a river will inevitably acquire silt, flotsam and jetsam. The
river’s course and shape adapts over time to accommodate a changing environment,
while still carrying water from the original source.
Subud river types yearn for a flexible
and responsive organisation to let the latihan flow abundantly toward
society. They want to demonstrate the founder’s assurance that the latihan is
simple and needs no guru or teachings. They advocate a wide range of words and descriptions
to reflect the personal nature of the latihan experience which accommodates
itself to people of all philosophies. Some rivers feel that we are damming our
organisation with rigid words and procedures instead of sharing the latihan
without preconditions. For this reason many are requesting a shorter applicant
period. They see the growth in frank discussions as a healthy sign of progress.
Their aim is to develop local flexibility so we will not suffocate and fade
away.
One unfortunate consequence of having these polarities is that people
discovering Subud are getting a mixed
message. Our ‘rivers’ will claim we have no guru, priests, rules or
teachings, while our ‘mountains’ will emphasise the importance of the person
and words of our founder. Is this lack of congruence perhaps putting people
off?
A healthy organisation needs people to play different roles. Picture our association
as a vehicle which needs both an
accelerator and a brake. At present the accelerator and brake are often
applied simultaneously, which creates frustration. This is certainly a factor
in some members’ discouragement or withdrawal from committee roles. And yet the
two roles could be more complementary.
Both ‘rivers’ and ‘mountains’ show admirable dedication and sincerity as
custodians of the latihan. Many have worked valiantly for decades in various
Subud committee and helper roles. And in broad terms we are all cherishing the same dream: the continuation and success
of Subud. Our quest now is to find a healthy synergy between these differing
approaches.
If you’ve read the whole of this report, I thank you. You’ve surely
earned a rest!
(Dilia and ducks at Loudwater farm –
photo by Rosana Mount)