The paradigm shift faced by the AC ecosystem requires strong rituals and habits to interiorize and live the self-managed model. Establishing and understanding a common rhythm is necessary to keep alive this process. Rhythm is understood as the habit of conversation, studying, and working together.
The temporary groups support this purpose by creating guidelines and following up each process when it is needed.
At the moment these working groups are:
Assembly Guideline
Banga
Lifeline
Legal Entity
Resource Map
AC Presentation Group
Tooling
Documentation
Internal communication
Network Health Group (Guardian of Intention)
AC Working Document Editorial Group
Each working group has created guidelines with information regarding the topic that they are responsible for, which can be found in the Appendix.
The members of these temporary working groups rotate annually (See E.3.1.a).
Unresolved Question.
How long is the commitment of each organization to the temporary groups? Or, what is the process for rotating these responsibilities?
What are the unfinished tasks of each working group? What processes can be implemented to help each other identify and finish these tasks?
Fund-raising is a critical aspect of the economic aspect of sustainability, which has been identified as the highest principle for the AC ecosystem. The concept of sustainability has been addressed in section B.2. This concept is considered in both affective and economic terms. Since economic challenges are constantly present in the day to day practices of the partner organizations, and sustainability is also directly related to the sustainability of the organisms of the AC Ecosystem itself, the question of how or if the organization can sustain itself as the existing members become un-funded is uncertain. Therefore, a clear position regarding the future is necessary to define. As a step in this direction, in order to address the issue of funding for the AC as an organization, in the assembly in Kyrgyzstan, it was decided that a fundraising group be established to look at how this task might be accomplished within the decentralized structure which is the AC ecosystem.
While the fundraising guidelines outline many if not all of the typical actions involved in fundraising. It is not clear which, if any, direct fundraising process will be implemented, for the AC as an organization. It is also not clear how groups of organizations might apply for specific project funding under the AC “umbrella.”
The guidelines correctly identify the critical relationships between this working group and other working groups that will be required in order to develop a coherent position based on the consensus of the AC members.
It is clear that part of the process for determining which potential funders to approach should involve the use of the Cascade of Coherence.
Unresolved Questions:
How does AC see itself after the 5 years of support for the current members?
What is AC’s philosophical stand in regards to the language it could use to communicate what it does with others and the relations it could form. This unresolved question is especially acute in relation to fundraising. It could be grossly formulated in these terms:
Does AC want to maintain a radical position in regards to the use of language and refuse to communicate using “traditional” referents such as impact and audience building or would AC accept to still play the “traditional” game while making its position clear and using a language that could be seen as “simplified” but could be used as an entry point for funders and/ or communication purposes.
In other words, how do we portray ourselves in a non-obscure way, in a way that is open to others, using a language that could be understood without betraying ourselves and our principles?
What is the AC position regarding the concept of the impact of the AC network on a local and global scale? Should this even be considered? If so, how should this be presented?
As a group we need to clarify our position about this and whether we want to try to quantify our individual and collective impacts in the traditional sense, and/or if we want to use qualitative impact measures, or both, or if we want to use any kind of impact measures at all etc.
Are some or all of the organizations interested in project funding as opposed to, or in addition to, structural or administrative funding?
How might we form groups of organizations that might request funding in order to realize a collective project? Is this related to the existing mechanisms that we have; Bangas, ETP’s, etc.?
If some organizations decide that they want to participate in such a collective project how can they take advantage of being part of the AC to secure funding? How can they or should they contribute to the AC common pot if the funding is awarded and the project is realized?
This is related to the question of the Legal Entity, which we still need to solve, but some basic questions related to fundraising also have to do with identifying our individual and collective strengths and impacts and agreeing on ways to communicate them to potential funders. This is also related to our ethical principles and brings up questions about developing new relationships or continuing existing relationships with organizations who work with and within the constraints of the capitalist system (including the art world and art market).
These working groups make possible the permanent flow of information that let us know the state of the resources into the network. There are three facilitator working groups to manage communications (TAM-TAM & website), Financial Administration (Attaya) and Fundraising (FUN-raising).
To subvert the paradigm of reporting to funders and in order to open the space for creation and sharing common resources, the assembly provides ways to manage the active circulation of information and outcomes produced by each organization and each study or working group. It also provides mechanisms for accountability that means that it recognizes and values not only quantitative or financial data but also the work that we do in permanent recognition of our contexts and our challenges, struggles, achievements and un-learnings.
Avoiding conflict and avoiding increase in the amount of work assumed by each organization implies the management of the AC communications mechanisms, which the network established as part of the self-management tools. They include the following:
Internal Communication (accountability)
Tam Tam/AC Drum (quarterly newsletter):
TAM-TAM is one of our internal communication tools/mechanisms for accountability. It is an internal digital newsletter that is used to update and share important, relevant and synthesized information with the rest of the AC network about ongoing of AC processes; triangles, permanent activities, working groups (permanent and temporary). It is lead by the permanent TAM TAM working group, but each organization and or working group has to develop their own content .
Mailing list arts-collaboratory@googlegroups.com
The mailing list is a mechanism to share relevant information, share resources and to make collective decisions.
The WhatsApp group, AC Family, is a permanent way to share and to keep the love flowing. It is a way of virtually living together and sharing and documenting on a daily basis the personal and affective relationships that are part of the dynamic of the ecosystem. It is an instantaneous way of keeping the conversation alive.
External Communication
Website
AC as well as the “face” to the outside world. It should communicates and represents the current self-organized structure of AC.
Brochure
The Brochure will be one of the tools used to communicate what the AC is and what it does. It has not been developed yet.
All the working groups have their own guidelines, describing how they function. (See Appendix I)
Attaya is the senegalese word for the popular African tea ceremony around which care is given, information shared, and disputes are resolved. In Arabic, Attaya stands for “givings or offerings” that are necessarily unconditional.
Created during the Kyrgyzstan Assembly, Attaya, is the working group, in charge of overseeing the budget and facilitating allocations. Each member in the working group is called Attiyya and communicate with a number of AC members, playing the role of direct link.
Attaya will more specifically facilitate the collective administration of the AC collective pot distributed by DOEN to each member and composed of the sum of the collective activities’ budgets.
Until a solid and legal model for governance is settled (see E.2), some of the ‘old’ structure of AC will remain in place in which the “funder”[13], DOEN, directly contracts and transfer the funds to each organisations individually. However, the budget for collective activities, the collective pot, which was handled by DOEN and Hivos until 2015, is now becoming decentralized and divided into smaller quantities. In other words, the AC collective pot is not in one place but it is being kept in 24 AC[14] collective pots.
This mechanism allows for collectively sharing the management of the budget and for a quicker access to resources, without numerous bank transfers or proposal writing.
Each organization can withdraw the funds needed from their part of collective pot in order to pay for the costs of Assemblies, Banga Meetings, ETP’s and Communication costs relating to the AC ecosystem (including the website). When it comes to Banga and ETPs, and for coordination purposes, the member should let their Attiya know. At the end of each year, each member is still required to submit an audited financial report, which will be reviewed by DOEN.
At present time, additional funds are still being provided by DOEN for the assembly, website, communication and fundraising costs (additional from the funds drew from the collective pot).
Bangas, ETPs, advanced payments and time strikes will be based on the AC members’ needs, urgency and the availability of funds in the collective pot. It is not about give and take; it is about caring and sharing as outlined in the AC ethical principles.
AC considers it part of a healthy practice to develop a yearly financial document that is audited by an external accountant and then attached into the Resource Map (D.2), both in terms of creating a sustainable internal financial practice and in terms of accountability towards the outside. The auditing will happen according to local auditing standards and most importantly in working with auditing companies that understand the nature of the creative and self-organisational practice of the network. In case companies with this understanding don’t exist locally, AC will help develop this understanding. Attayas will thus collect all of the individual audited reports, in addition to an audited report for the external expenses of AC and present one unified audited report for all of AC.