Imagine that you ran into someone you know on the street and they asked you to tell them what sustainable development or sustainability was about.  You could answer it this way:

"Ecologically sustainable development can be thought of as changes in economic structure, organization and activity of an economic ecological system that are directed towards maximum welfare and which can be sustained by available resources." (From Braat, L.C., and Steetskamp, I. (1991). "Ecological-Economic Analysis for Regional Sustainable Development," in Ecological Economics, R. Costanza, ed. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 269-288.)

If you’re lucky, you’ll receive a blank stare.  If you’re talking to someone less patient, they’d probably be halfway down the block by the time you’ve finished.  If the objective is to make sustainability understandable and approachable, neither option is desirable.  A lot of folks that are passionate about sustainability – whether in their professional or personal life – tend to think of it only in the lengthy, academic terms exemplified in the definition above. 

In our work on the Cochrane Sustainability Plan, we developed three key phrases to capture how we were approaching this sustainability thing: 

• Think long term.
• Look at the whole.
• See the connections.

Now imagine again that you’ve been asked the same question on the street.  Which of the two options do you think would help people immediately understand sustainability and potentially get your conversation partner interested or even excited about it?

The issues that we face today require widespread understanding and collective action.  Sustainability provides an approach and mindset that can address these issues in a holistic manner.  We need as many hands on deck as possible.  If you’re a “sustainability nerd” (which I would consider myself), then think about how you make sustainability approachable.  It’s something we need to constantly think about and work on. 

In an earlier blog entry I talked about the importance of feedback.  The next time you’re explaining sustainability to someone, look for the feedback.  If you see someone’s backside walking down the street as you’re doing this explanation, you know you need to try again.

This is a bad sign if you're trying to explain sustainability to someone.

- John, April 6, 2009

Labels: communication, sustainability

¶ 6:30 PM 0 Comments

If you were talking to an English person and you asked them to put a bag of groceries in your boot, you’d watch them go to your car.  If you asked a North American the same thing, they would look down at your feet.  Then they would likely follow that up with a rather confused look.  They might even ask a simple question like, “What the hell are you talking about?”

Same word.  Same language.  Completely different meaning.

In our work at Intelligent Futures, we are continually trying to understand the language of the communities and organizations that we work.  Every community and organization is unique and has its own context – including history, pressures and language.  The key is taking the time to listen, rather than pushing your language and interpretation down someone else’s throat.

This approach to language is important because it shows respect for the existing experiences and knowledge of the people you are talking to and working with.  If you’re trying to work with people to make change in a community or organization, you need to know your stuff, but you also have to be able to listen and adapt.  Language is vital to this.

A good example of this is in our work with the Cochrane Sustainability Plan.  During a meeting with the Culture Citizen Action Group, we were trying to identify indicators that they could recommend for the Sustainability Plan.  Early in the process, the group struggled to understand what this meant and frustration was setting in.  Rather than going academic and verbose, we explained that we were simply looking for “measures” that will tell us how we’re doing.  That simple shift in language from “indicators” to “measures” made all the difference in the world and the ideas began to flow instantly. 

This is a very intelligent, energetic and committed group of citizens.  There was no shortage of brainpower in the room.  The usual language that these folks typically use just doesn’t include “indicator.”  That’s probably a good thing.  I’d rather chat with someone at a cocktail party who doesn’t use the word “indicator” on a daily basis anyway. 

If we were to impose our initial language on them, the work wouldn’t have progressed, the participants would have been frustrated and future buy-in and action could have been compromised.

Think about language and the context you’re in.  Otherwise, you might see the boot.  And I don’t mean the English version.

- John, March 26, 2009

Labels: communication, sustainability

¶ 11:28 AM 0 Comments