Our book is focused on the design, development and management of “generative social impact networks”.  It is pretty easy to know if a network is focused on social impact or not – their mission, values, and activities tell you whether the strategy is targeted on social good or some other kind of outcome.  But figuring out whether it has the genetics of a “generative” network is much more difficult.

We are engaged in a current project with a national foundation to do a network mapping exercise for them in a few targeted areas of urban sustainability.  Part of the question they are trying to answer is: where are the generative networks that can be supported to advance this field?  We started with a list of over 100 networks and have been narrowing down the list.  Since we have worked with some many “generative” networks, we assumed that it would be easy to tell which fell into that category – we had the “I’ll know it when I see it” attitude. But it has been much more difficult than we expected.

There are some types of networks that are pretty easy to screen out – your traditional trade association, professional association and issue campaigns as an example. As well as the “group activities masquerading as a network” – the NGO-driven distribution systems with relatively little member-to-member interaction.  But beyond this, it turns out you need to know a fair amount about the network to figure out which ones have generative genetics. So we created a list of criteria for the analysis. This is our working list at this point in time:

• Shared purpose. Members share a collective purpose that is focused on creating social good.
• Complex problem. The problem/opportunity being focused on is a complex one with no simple solutions and the network is committed to working on it from multiple angles.
• Member-driven. Members set the mission and goals, and “make the rules” and members do most of the work.
• Relationship-focused. Members develop deep and enduring relationships with each other; the focus of relationship building is member to member, not staff or other provides to members
• Flexible. The structure is flexible and adaptable and changes as needed.
• Internal markets for value. Value is determined by whether members engage in the activity or not – members “vote with their feet.”
• Decentralized. Decisions are highly decentralized.

Ultimately, it all boils down to understanding the member experience in the networks – what the culture of the network is. (OK, so the Collins and Porras “Built to Last” hypothesis applies here too!) And for that, eventually you have talk to some of the members.

Connecting to Change the World builds on an earlier resource that Pete and I developed called Net Gains. This latest collaboration with John Cleveland includes examples and lessons that have emerged from our work with social impact networks over the last decade or so. During that time, we’ve been introduced to many new networks and deepened our work with others. As a consequence, we have a better understanding of what makes some networks highly “generative.” By generative, we mean networks with a renewable collaborative capacity to generate numerous activities simultaneously. These are networks that activate members’ connections on an emergent basis as need and opportunities arise. Examples in the book include RE AMP – more than 165 nonprofit organizations and foundations in eight Midwestern states working together on climate change and energy policies, Reboot- a network of young Jewish American “cultural creatives” who are exploring and redefining Jewish identify and community in the U.S. and the United Kingdom, ten regional networks of state agencies and nonprofit providers that have organized to end homelessness in Massachusetts, and five regional and two national networks of rural-based organizations that are promoting public policies that benefit rural communities in the U.S. In all of these networks, members have been very deliberate about creating, strengthening and maintaining network ties in order to establish a base of connections from which many activities can arise at the same time or over time. This foundation is the starting point for the progression from connecting to aligning to production or joint action that we also discuss in the book.