The Powerful Strangers Summary
Westley et al. 4 The Powerful Strangers
Power can often seem like a barrier to change happening. Identifying those powers can be difficult as it is not always comfortable. “Confrontation with the powerful stranger [gives] way to bridge building” (Westley et al, 2007, p.97), the challenge is using conflict, as an opportunity to collaborate. The social innovators goal of engaging the ‘powerful stranger” is to develop resources, to further their cause. “Anyone who wishes to transform a system has to unlock resources claimed by the status quo.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.96), this is generally why confrontation is inevitable. The power can be held by a ‘stranger’ or be an ‘‘inner stranger’ that fights against us when we try to make change happen.
The idea of unlocking resources from the status quo, helps us develop a sustainability perspective, by demonstrating the importance of systems thinks, to avoid unintentionally becoming the problem. As the social innovator gains momentum we have to be cautious because “We have met the enemy and he is us” becomes “we have met the enemy and has become us.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.99). As, redistribution of money and resources, which generally equals power, is realized we need to use this new power and influence to reorganize and …show more content…
not stall the adaptive growth emerging. “As Holling’s four-phase model taught us, the stage after maturity and conservation is a new round of release and reorganization.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.99), this panarchy cycle is key to moving transformation forward. Consequently, avoiding negative influence is a necessary risk, while engaging the ‘Powerful Stranger’.
For example, P3 projects are a common government approach to secure service and infrastructure for public use. In theory, this approach looks like an emerging sustainable practice, adopting a whole life-cycle approach. Using P3s as a tool, is a viable solution because they allow the private sector to propose innovative solutions and reduce the financial risk on government and ultimately the public.
My concern is when you have two very “Powerful Strangers”, Government and Corporations, tasked with serving the public, are all three parties interests truly aligned?
Or is there too much inequally, due the nature and administrative barriers of government? For P3 projects to become effective do we need to start advocating to government to amend the Financial Administration Act and Core Policy, to allow really transformation. I would guess this kind of change is the slowest part of the panarchy, because there is no glamour to changing this system. I think re-designing this system using guiding principles of sustainable eco-systems, would provide great benefits to society, economy and
environment.
Are root metaphor at play in government Acts, Regulations and Policies? If so, how do we achieve this level of transformation, when faced a ‘Powerful Stranger’?
Reference
Westley, F., Patton, M. Q., & Zimmerman, B. (2007). Getting to maybe : How the world is changed.Toronto: Random House Canada.
Power can often seem like a barrier to change happening. Identifying those powers can be difficult as it is not always comfortable. “Confrontation with the powerful stranger [gives] way to bridge building” (Westley et al, 2007, p.97), the challenge is using conflict, as an opportunity to collaborate. The social innovators goal of engaging the ‘powerful stranger” is to develop resources, to further their cause. “Anyone who wishes to transform a system has to unlock resources claimed by the status quo.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.96), this is generally why confrontation is inevitable. The power can be held by a ‘stranger’ or be an ‘‘inner stranger’ that fights against us when we try to make change happen.
The idea of unlocking resources from the status quo, helps us develop a sustainability perspective, by demonstrating the importance of systems thinks, to avoid unintentionally becoming the problem. As the social innovator gains momentum we have to be cautious because “We have met the enemy and he is us” becomes “we have met the enemy and has become us.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.99). As, redistribution of money and resources, which generally equals power, is realized we need to use this new power and influence to reorganize and …show more content…
not stall the adaptive growth emerging. “As Holling’s four-phase model taught us, the stage after maturity and conservation is a new round of release and reorganization.” (Westley et al, 2007, p.99), this panarchy cycle is key to moving transformation forward. Consequently, avoiding negative influence is a necessary risk, while engaging the ‘Powerful Stranger’.
For example, P3 projects are a common government approach to secure service and infrastructure for public use. In theory, this approach looks like an emerging sustainable practice, adopting a whole life-cycle approach. Using P3s as a tool, is a viable solution because they allow the private sector to propose innovative solutions and reduce the financial risk on government and ultimately the public.
My concern is when you have two very “Powerful Strangers”, Government and Corporations, tasked with serving the public, are all three parties interests truly aligned?
Or is there too much inequally, due the nature and administrative barriers of government? For P3 projects to become effective do we need to start advocating to government to amend the Financial Administration Act and Core Policy, to allow really transformation. I would guess this kind of change is the slowest part of the panarchy, because there is no glamour to changing this system. I think re-designing this system using guiding principles of sustainable eco-systems, would provide great benefits to society, economy and
environment.
Are root metaphor at play in government Acts, Regulations and Policies? If so, how do we achieve this level of transformation, when faced a ‘Powerful Stranger’?
Reference
Westley, F., Patton, M. Q., & Zimmerman, B. (2007). Getting to maybe : How the world is changed.Toronto: Random House Canada.