Conflict Transformation Questions by Balpreet Kaur

I know of at least one person on staff who is deeply uncomfortable with affinity groups.

2025-06-09 14:32:56 UTC

I like affinity groups, they are most useful in spaces where white supremacy culture and power structures exist or have existed. I would like it if we regularly revisited its usefulness cause it can also artificially silo our culture without proper and intentional work

2025-06-09 14:33:47 UTC

scot28 — 2025-06-09 14:33:48 UTC

I am excited for the process overall and hope that it works the magic that the chosen facilitators seem to be bringing to the systems change we are all hungering for.

A lot of clarity and transparency on how the groups were created.

2025-06-09 14:33:53 UTC

fostering psychological safety is important and I support the recommendations the consultants made

stephanie1410 — 2025-06-09 14:33:57 UTC

2025-06-09 14:34:23 UTC

I'm just wondering about roles within the org, too, and skills folks may need that require a different come-from. Like, what about those who are managers of other staff?

one concern is that we have multiple levels of leadership. how does that work when we look at lines of power

stephanie1410 — 2025-06-09 14:34:51 UTC

Honestly, I'm not totally sure yet. I think I need a little more time to digest it, which might mean it's not totally landing. I can see the benefit of creating safe spaces, and of separating by power, but it also could contribute to ongoing siloes. I am also not sure how the lived experiences piece fits in, if affinity groups are just separated by race and power.

2025-06-09 14:34:53 UTC

Will all the learning occur separately in affinity groups or only some of the units?

2025-06-09 14:35:01 UTC

scot28 — 2025-06-09 14:35:13 UTC

I am not excited by this structure. It may allow for some level of comfort, I get that, but it does not seem to allow for the actual work, it keeps us siloed. I hope we can think about this in a different way.

Race!

2025-06-09 14:35:26 UTC

I appreciate the affinity group clarity, and that there are spaces for Black and non-Black POC to dive into their experiences & dreams. I'm curious of where/how/if there will be crossover between the affinity groups, and believe there's some benefit to this in addition to the affinity groups.

Deepening already exisiting siloes, especially between SMT and the rest of the organization.

2025-06-09 14:35:35 UTC

Having specific, achievable outcomes with specific and achievable timelines.

2025-06-09 14:35:41 UTC

I think the non-Black + mixed race group gives me pause. Not sure if its the naming convention or the concern around how it would work in practice. I would say people of the global majority but I think it not including Black folx would also be inadequate

2025-06-09 14:35:42 UTC

2025-06-09 14:35:47 UTC

I'll second the question above

2025-06-09 14:37:24 UTC

I know we'll be doing values work; I think it's important to ensure that we're incorporating those values into agreements for all affinity groups, if we go in that direction.

Will it be self selected?

2025-06-09 14:37:28 UTC

How will the learnings and sharings within groups be collectively shared/understood

2025-06-09 14:37:54 UTC

How will this work be prioritized? The "suitcase" is very, very full and equity work always ends up at the bottom of the list. To be successful we HAVE to actually drop things.

2025-06-09 14:39:32 UTC

Recommendation on Addressing Silos

2025-06-09 14:43:39 UTC

Having racially focused groups at some point in these conversations is important. Ignoring race (and the racial dynamics of our team - for example, having an entirely white SMT and all Black on the ground organizers in a US-based EJ organization) is both dangerous and a missed opportunity.

I hear people being afraid of furthering silos however. Having transparency of the kinds of conversations we are having across affinity groups (not necessarily the the content of conversations, just the structure) could calm some fears. And we could have a transition timeline & North Star, slowly building spaces for the groups to come together.

staff having space and time in work plans to participate in the learning sessions as well as practice and integrate the learnings

stephanie1410 — 2025-06-09 14:43:45 UTC

I think some sort of milestones or curriculum in process where we can land together/collectively

2025-06-09 14:44:02 UTC

Same question as above

2025-06-09 14:44:20 UTC

scot28 — 2025-06-09 14:44:28 UTC

A shake up and leaving all of our assumptions at the door.

When will this work begin?

2025-06-09 14:45:27 UTC

building shared skills so we are all starting from a similar place of understanding and practice

stephanie1410 — 2025-06-09 14:45:28 UTC

scot28 — 2025-06-09 14:45:42 UTC

Does this lead to the important conversations we need to have with each other without methodologies and facilitators and roles but instead with our hearts?

2025-06-09 14:45:45 UTC

I think it would be wise to include a process for conflicts that actually come up. I know that this is not meant to be harm repair, but about how to work through conflict in general. However, I can imagine that the training itself could be triggering and dig up old stuff. Having a process for that if it happens could be a good thing.

How will we know this work is complete?

2025-06-09 14:45:53 UTC

scot28 — 2025-06-09 14:46:10 UTC

Our work together and deep healing.

that we as an organization are acknowledging conflict is ever-present and the importance of being in conflict in a relationship centered way can generate important and needed change

stephanie1410 — 2025-06-09 14:46:31 UTC

2025-06-09 14:46:54 UTC

Shared language and process for conflict transformation is exciting in and of itself! We have a lot of individual and collective wisdom to bring to the table.

2025-06-09 14:48:37 UTC

In what ways will RJC collaborate, be consulted, and/or be informed of the progress of this work?

2025-06-09 14:48:56 UTC

I'm already excited because I'm hopeful we will have new skills and tools to help us work through conflicts in a new way that isn't destructive to our relationships.

2025-06-09 14:49:02 UTC

Will we have guidance on the boundaries of when we try to work through conflicts together and when those need to move to HR?

Full-staff participation

2025-06-09 14:50:20 UTC

Will this be a trauma-informed process/practice?

2025-06-09 14:50:55 UTC

Including tenure at Dogwood into our affinity group selection

2025-06-09 15:00:20 UTC

We could uncover some differing approaches to conflict and/or shared values based off how long folks have been at the organization. Could be helpful information

2025-06-09 17:41:15 UTC

There is no room in the suitcase to the point that everytime this phrase is uttered I feel resentment. If this is truly a priority, then we will need to scale back on projects considerably and realign expectations.

Interactive sessions (sharing, there's some reflection, etc) will make me more enthusiastic in participation

balpreet2 — 2025-06-16 19:44:10 UTC