wiki content export 2026-04-22
This commit is contained in:
Wiki Bot
parent
16aef35682
commit
656c86e6a7
99 changed files with 2277 additions and 3 deletions
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Exercises and Prompts
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Exercises and Prompts
|
||||
parentDocument: Peer Support Playbook
|
||||
outlineId: 35d3ce43-87d7-4b2a-854e-9060640158e9
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: ICA Values Connections
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Exercises and Prompts/ICA Values
|
||||
Connections
|
||||
parentDocument: Exercises and Prompts
|
||||
outlineId: 91342338-8257-4550-be63-59f78d88dd75
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
These are prompts to get the studio thinking about how the ICA principles connect with their group:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Self-help:** What's the larger purpose your co-op serves beyond developing games? What critical gap does it fill?
|
||||
* **Self-responsibility:** How do members stay clear on roles? How do they hold each other accountable?
|
||||
* **Democracy:** Does democracy go beyond voting at AGMs? What are the actual decision-making practices? (Freedom Dreams uses consent-based decision-making vs. consensus — consent doesn't require all yes votes, just that no votes are okay with proceeding for now)
|
||||
* **Equality:** What policies protect rights? What's the membership/hiring strategy for representation?
|
||||
* **Equity:** What education is needed so leadership can *recognize* member needs without requiring disclosure? (Important: don't rely on marginalized members to self-identify their accommodation needs)
|
||||
* **Solidarity:** What's the co-op's response when called to stand shoulder-to-shoulder? How does it practice co-op principle 6 (cooperation among cooperatives)?
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Values Mapping
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Exercises and Prompts/Values
|
||||
Mapping
|
||||
parentDocument: Exercises and Prompts
|
||||
outlineId: fcba1d09-2356-4d69-9995-f512847ac552
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
When: Between Session 1 and Session 2
|
||||
|
||||
Duration: 45-60 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
Materials: Shared Miro board (template provided), 7 Principles reference
|
||||
|
||||
\nThis session helps the studio identify individual values and see where they align or diverge as a team. The goal is to notice rather than try to align everything.
|
||||
|
||||
If tension emerges, that's okay. Name it and move on.
|
||||
|
||||
## Before the session
|
||||
|
||||
* Confirm everyone completed their individual journaling (Session 1 homework)
|
||||
* Ensure their studio Miro board has the template
|
||||
* Have the 7 Principles visible (on the board or screen-shared)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Check-in
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Individual sharing (15-20 min)
|
||||
|
||||
Each person shares 3-5 values from their individual reflection.
|
||||
|
||||
prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What values came up when you did the journaling?"
|
||||
* "You don't need to explain or justify"
|
||||
|
||||
As they share:
|
||||
|
||||
* Each person adds their values to the Miro board (stickies in their colour/section)
|
||||
* No discussion yet - just capture
|
||||
|
||||
Watch for:
|
||||
|
||||
* Someone dominating or going first every time
|
||||
* Someone staying quiet - invite them in gently
|
||||
* Values that sound the same but might mean different things
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Noticing patterns (10-15 min)
|
||||
|
||||
Now look at the board together.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What do you notice?"
|
||||
* "Where do you see overlap?"
|
||||
* "Any surprises?"
|
||||
* "Are there values that seem similar but might mean different things to different people?"
|
||||
|
||||
Example to offer: "Transparency" - does it mean open documents? Open conversations? Both? Neither? What exactly is meant?
|
||||
|
||||
Let them discuss and keep it moving
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Connecting to the 7 Principles (10 min)
|
||||
|
||||
Look at the ICA 7 Principles together. Also see [ICA Values Connections](/doc/91342338-8257-4550-be63-59f78d88dd75)
|
||||
|
||||
prompt:
|
||||
|
||||
* "do you see connections between your values and these principles?"
|
||||
* "draw lines or group things if it helps."
|
||||
|
||||
This can be loosey goosey and don't let them fixate on making a beautiful diagram. the point is to see that their values connect to *a larger cooperative tradition*.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. To bring back to Session 2 (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
prom
|
||||
|
||||
* "what's one thing you learned about where your team aligns or diverges?"
|
||||
* "you'll share this in session 2 - doesn't need to be polished."
|
||||
|
||||
Have someone write it down or capture it on the board.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Community agreements contribution (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
"Based on this conversation, are there 1-2 values you'd propose adding to the cohort community agreements?"
|
||||
|
||||
Capture these to bring back to the full group.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Tips
|
||||
|
||||
If someone dominates: "Let's hear from someone who hasn't shared yet."
|
||||
|
||||
If no one talks: "Take a minute to look at the board silently. What stands out?"
|
||||
|
||||
If tension emerges: "I'm hearing some different perspectives here. That's useful but we don't need to resolve it today."
|
||||
|
||||
If they want to debate definitions: "It's okay to mean different things. The goal is simply to notice where you might need to clarify later."
|
||||
|
||||
If time runs short: Prioritize steps 2-3 (sharing and noticing). The principles connection and agreements contribution can be done async if needed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## After the session
|
||||
|
||||
* Note any tensions / surprises to mention in your Peer Support check-in
|
||||
* Remind the team to bring their learnings to Session 2
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Why-What-How
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Exercises and
|
||||
Prompts/Why-What-How
|
||||
parentDocument: Exercises and Prompts
|
||||
outlineId: ff5419e1-cfec-48fb-b988-67b8faaad067
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
### The Why/What/How framework
|
||||
|
||||
We're digging deep into values *so that we can make collective decisions*.
|
||||
|
||||
Corporations love to spend millions on consultants to come up with values frameworks they can plop on their website and investment slides then forget. And of course, traditional companies are explicitly beholden to their capitalist framework: typically a top-down structure, infinite growth/profit/shareholder value. And why should their employees buy into these values? And further, how do they even know if they are following them or not?
|
||||
|
||||
\nOne way to counter this is to integrate values into your everyday tools and processes - to build a common approach to introduce and practice ideas. This is important because if not everybody is on the same page, collective decision-making becomes very difficult. If you're not values-aligned everyone is interpreting the "right thing" differently. *Expect* this to happen - there will always be gradations of this! But you're always working towards a shared understanding.
|
||||
|
||||
WHY WHAT HOW is so helpful because it:
|
||||
|
||||
* Creates an understood and documented way to introduce and practice ideas
|
||||
* Can be quantified and measured over time
|
||||
* Makes course correction transparent to everyone
|
||||
* Provides good information for reexamining your values regularly
|
||||
|
||||
and we practice it ourselves for examining other ideas all the time!
|
||||
|
||||
#### Using the framework
|
||||
|
||||
The *order matters*: Why, then What, then How. And your values should guide all three levels.
|
||||
|
||||
**WHY** - Why does this value matter to us? What's at stake? Example: "We value transparency because secrecy entrenches power and excludes people from decisions that affect them."
|
||||
|
||||
**WHAT** - What does practicing this value look like? What are we committing to? Example: "All financial information is accessible to all members. Compensation is open."
|
||||
|
||||
**HOW** - How will we actually do this? What specific activities or outputs? Example: "Monthly financial summaries shared in Slack. Quarterly budget review meetings. New members oriented to finances in onboarding."
|
||||
|
||||
#### Walkthrough
|
||||
|
||||
*(Presenter demonstrates with their studio's value)*
|
||||
|
||||
Pick one value from your studio. Walk through:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. Name the value
|
||||
2. What happens if you don't practice it? what if you do?
|
||||
3. making concrete commitments or policies
|
||||
4. identifying specific activities/outputs (the actual things you do)
|
||||
|
||||
The Miro template on your studio board has space for this exercise, and you can spend some time with your Peer Support going over it at your next meeting.
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,375 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Manual
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Manual
|
||||
parentDocument: Peer Support Playbook
|
||||
outlineId: 2257548a-2419-407c-89e9-75f419314a1d
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
**Thank you for your interest in becoming a Baby Ghosts Peer Support!** Please take some time to read through this manual, as our peer support program - like our Cooperative Foundations program - is pretty unique.
|
||||
|
||||
## What does it mean to be a Peer Support?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
As *facilitators and supports* for program participants, we don't consider ourselves experts; rather, we consider ourselves peers! (It's right in the name.)
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
It's ok if you don't know all there is to know about running a coop or creating worker-centric operating models. We are all figuring this stuff out together, and this manual is a starting point.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
We strive to centre and prioritize people who are socially and structurally marginalized in the game industry, and that includes as Peer Supports. We hope the opportunity to support the development of new studios is enriching for you, too, and our program coordinators (eileen and jennie) are here to provide guidance and an ear when you need it.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Baby Ghosts' Values and Principles
|
||||
|
||||
In everything we do, we lead with our values. Baby Ghosts is a member organization with collective values we expect to be lived and shared with all members of our community.
|
||||
|
||||
* We challenge dominant power structures in the video game industry and interactive digital arts sector, centring those who have faced barriers and discrimination or have been made invisible.
|
||||
* We believe in the necessity of healthy, ethical, sustainable, and safe work environments.
|
||||
* We see games as tools for creative expression and social transformation.
|
||||
* We value weirdness, unconventional ideas, and doing things differently.
|
||||
* We welcome difficult conversations and manage conflicts through the lens of \[\[Loving Justice\]\].
|
||||
* We strive to make our work accessible to everyone, practicing care in all our relationships.
|
||||
* We acknowledge the intertwined relationship between capitalism and colonialism and work to disrupt these systems.
|
||||
* We value collaboration over competition.
|
||||
* We are transparent and value feedback.
|
||||
* We practice the values and principles of the cooperative movement as set out by the [International Cooperative Alliance](https://ica.coop/en/cooperatives/cooperative-identity).
|
||||
|
||||
### Cooperative Foundations Program Principles
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to our organizational values, we embrace the following principles when delivering our Cooperative Foundations program.
|
||||
|
||||
* We are **anticapitalist**, and reject standard industry practices that exploit workers and prioritize profit over wellbeing
|
||||
* Our focus is on researching, creating, and supporting **cooperative and worker-centric studio models** in our program and beyond
|
||||
* We prioritize **marginalized individuals**, especially IBPoC, in both Peer Support and studio selection
|
||||
* We are transparent about existing power imbalances in our organization and the wider industry. We are putting in place specific strategies to mitigate the negative effects of these dynamics, such as:
|
||||
* Creating opportunities for underrepresented folks to take on **decision-making positions** on our board, as Peer Supports and jurists
|
||||
* To the best of our ability, insulating and supporting our studios, board members, and Peer Supports from the online harassment that can take place in this industry
|
||||
* Adapting the program as we go to make it as supportive as possible
|
||||
* Focusing on sustainability over growth
|
||||
|
||||
### Acknowledging Our Context
|
||||
|
||||
We acknowledge our current status as a predominantly white space and are committed to changing this! You can help by:
|
||||
|
||||
* Addressing this reality and its implications
|
||||
* Being clear and upfront about this context with program participants
|
||||
* Explaining the limits of the program and what topics peer support is able to address
|
||||
* Naming issues as they arise so they can be further discussed and addressed
|
||||
* Working on strategies to mitigate harmful power dynamics with us during check-in meetings
|
||||
* Actively working to centre marginalized voices, especially IBPOC
|
||||
* Checking in to give space to others who may not have talked as much
|
||||
* Bolstering participants and encouraging them to take opportunities to present their work
|
||||
|
||||
## Cooperative Foundations Program
|
||||
|
||||
The Cooperative Foundations program *doesn't* teach game development. Studios that take part in our program are already capable of developing their games and are seeking *cooperative studio development* support. Here's what we focus on in our mentorship:
|
||||
|
||||
* Actionable values
|
||||
* Decision-making and prioritization
|
||||
* Collaboration and process development
|
||||
* Co-op studio structures and value flow
|
||||
* Governance and policy development
|
||||
* Collective decision-making
|
||||
* Team and project management
|
||||
* Studio story development
|
||||
* Solidarity strategies
|
||||
* Work/life balance
|
||||
|
||||
Additional benefits of the program include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A **safe and open place** to talk about what games mean to us
|
||||
* A **structured environment** for creative expression and collaboration
|
||||
* Opportunities for peer learning and support
|
||||
* Access to a **broader community** for game design and studio development support
|
||||
* **Resources and networking** with past participants, educators, academics, industry supports, and funders
|
||||
|
||||
Teams are all working on developing a cooperative, worker-centric studio. Studio sizes have ranged from 2 to 15 people, although we tend to lean towards smaller studios (2-7). They come from across Canada, and a majority of each team identifies as marginalized or underrepresented in the industry.
|
||||
|
||||
Part of the Peer Support role includes helping us decide on our participating studios.
|
||||
|
||||
### Program Structure
|
||||
|
||||
* Duration: 2 months
|
||||
* Cohort size: 5 teams (selected through an application process)
|
||||
* Components:
|
||||
* Weekly curriculum presentations
|
||||
* Weekly peer support meetings
|
||||
* Social activities and networking events
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Program Goals
|
||||
|
||||
* Create **collaborative connections** between new folks and experienced developers/founders for mutual learning and support
|
||||
* Offer **funded time** to build solid studio foundations
|
||||
* Support participants in becoming **makers, mentors, collaborators, and friends**
|
||||
* Contribute to **systemic industry transformation** that prioritizes workers, inclusion, and autonomy
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Worker-Centric Approaches
|
||||
|
||||
We believe that **cooperative** and worker-centric development environments are fundamental to the ethical creation of games.
|
||||
|
||||
When we say worker-centric, we mean placing the wellbeing, rights, and needs of game workers at the centre of game development. This means:
|
||||
|
||||
* Living wages and profit-sharing that reflect the value of labour
|
||||
* Transparent salaries
|
||||
* Rejection of "crunch" practices and unpaid overtime
|
||||
* Encouragement of work-life balance
|
||||
* Authentic effort to hire and support marginalized people
|
||||
* Accessible workspaces (both physical and digital)
|
||||
* Regular anti-racism/anti-oppression and equity training
|
||||
* Zero-tolerance for harassment and abuse
|
||||
* Open and anonymous communication channels for reporting issues
|
||||
* Mental health support and resources
|
||||
* Flat or horizontal organizational structures
|
||||
* Collective decision-making processes on major project directions
|
||||
* Workers have a say in the types of projects that are taken on
|
||||
* Regular synchronous meetings with the full team for transparency and input
|
||||
* Exploration of cooperative ownership models
|
||||
* Credit and recognition for individual contributions
|
||||
* Protection of workers' intellectual property rights
|
||||
* Remote work options
|
||||
* Flexible hours
|
||||
* Support for workers with caregiving responsibilities
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Detailed Schedule
|
||||
|
||||
The program runs as an intensive two-month format, which keeps momentum and engagement high while giving studios a clear, focused foundation to build on. Here are the activities:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Weekly group sessions** (1 hour)
|
||||
* You will lead one of the workshops
|
||||
* **Weekly one-on-one check-ins with your assigned studio** (1 hour)
|
||||
* Support them in exploring their 'pain points' and identifying what areas they need to work on
|
||||
* Facilitate them in exploring the topics raised in the weekly group sessions
|
||||
* Guide them through articulating their values
|
||||
* **Networking/social events** (1 hour every two weeks)
|
||||
* **Weekly/bi-weekly peer support check-in with the peer support support person** (15-30 mins)
|
||||
* Discuss areas the one-on-one check-ins and where studios may need additional support
|
||||
* Debrief about the peer support process and any concerns
|
||||
|
||||
### Estimated Time Commitment
|
||||
|
||||
The following is an estimate of the time involved in each part of the role, so you know what to expect. Your contract is for a flat fee for the full program, not tied to exact hours logged. We ask that you track your time to help us refine these estimates and to help you notice early if the workload feels off. If you're consistently going over, let us know so we can adjust together.
|
||||
|
||||
| Activity | Hours | Description |
|
||||
|----------|-------|-------------|
|
||||
| Peer Support pre-planning/training meetings | 3 | For pre-planning meetings, we are asking each person to come to 1 interview training, 1 overall planning meeting, and 1 workshop planning meeting. |
|
||||
| Peer Support workshop prep | 2 | For preparing your workshop outside of the above meetings. |
|
||||
| Applicant interviews | 3 | We are only asking Peer Supports to come to the second stage interviews. We are budgeting for 2 interviews per Peer Support. |
|
||||
| Deciding on applicants (1.5 hr meeting) | 2 | 1.5hr meeting. Extra time for brief applicant review. |
|
||||
| Peer Support-team meetings | 8 | 1 hour meeting each week. |
|
||||
| Peer Support-led workshops (8 total) | 10 | Attending workshops/kickoff & wrap-up including your own. |
|
||||
| Peer Support debriefing as needed (1/week) | 4 | Peer support check-in meetings. 15-30 mins a week. |
|
||||
| Extra time for activities | 3 | |
|
||||
| Extra time on Slack working with peers | 5 | |
|
||||
| | | |
|
||||
| **Total hours per Peer Support** | 40 | |
|
||||
| **Rate** | $50.00 | |
|
||||
| **Total Compensation** | **$2,000.00** | |
|
||||
|
||||
# Peer Support Program
|
||||
|
||||
## Selection Process
|
||||
|
||||
Peer Supporters are selected through an application and interview process that is extended to members of our community, including past program participants. It is not an open call at this time.
|
||||
|
||||
## Onboarding
|
||||
|
||||
Peer Supporters are selected and onboarded about two months ahead of the Cooperative Foundations start date. During those two months, you will participate in regular planning meetings to update our curriculum, learn the material, brainstorm strategies, and get to know the rest of the group.
|
||||
|
||||
Please familiarize yourself with our [curriculum](https://learn.weirdghosts.ca/studio-development) and learning resources. Know that we will be adapting this curriculum before the program together.
|
||||
|
||||
## Self-Care and Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
🫂 Ensure you have your own supports in place outside of the program. Engage in regular self-reflection and do your best to take care of your own well-being!
|
||||
|
||||
🌱 You are a Peer Support, not a therapist. Sometimes conversations with studios can be a little intense or emotional. You can facilitate some of that space, but you are not expected to be a professional. It is acceptable and important to say "this is outside of what I am able to facilitate."
|
||||
|
||||
⏰ Be clear about your time commitments with the program coordinators and the participants. If your capacity changes or you're feeling overloaded, let us know - zero judgment. **Keep track of your hours and make sure you're not doing more than required.** Maybe you've made a great connection with a studio and have some extra time to support them in Slack. That's okay, but make sure you're checking in with yourself and your own commitments. You are not expected to be there for studios 24/7, and if something feels off with the workload, reach out to eileen and jennie so we can adjust together.
|
||||
|
||||
## Matching
|
||||
|
||||
During the application review process, we will also discuss studios that each Peer Support is most interested in working with. Peer Supports will list their top three choices and we will do our best to match each person with one of their top choices.
|
||||
|
||||
As a Peer Support, you will work primarily with one studio throughout the program, although this doesn't mean you can't call on other Peer Supports' expertise at times. For example, if another one of the Peer Supports is an expert in pitch deck review and you're an expert in project management, you can ask if they'd be willing to swap studios for a week.
|
||||
|
||||
### Mismatches
|
||||
|
||||
If you're having trouble working with your studio and it feels like there is a mismatch, contact the program coordinators. We will work with you to resolve the tension, or get you paired with another studio if necessary.
|
||||
|
||||
## Building Trust
|
||||
|
||||
Even with our framing of Peer Supports as peers to our studio members, it is important to acknowledge the implicit power dynamic between those seen in other contexts as mentors/teachers and learners. To build mutually respectful relationships with these studio members:
|
||||
|
||||
* Be aware of your own positionality and biases
|
||||
* Communicate clearly about your needs and capacity
|
||||
* Participate in networking events to connect with participants early in the program
|
||||
* Actively work to centre marginalized voices within the program
|
||||
* Encourage and facilitate participant-led discussions and initiatives
|
||||
* Be open and willing to share your own experiences - both positive and negative - when you see a genuine connection to what the studio is going through. If you only ever ask questions and offer guidance, you drift into teacher mode whether you mean to or not, and sharing something real about your own process is one of the most effective ways to flatten that dynamic. Use your judgment about boundaries and you don't need to compromise your comfort, but look for those moments where your experience can meet theirs.
|
||||
* Show that you value the unique perspectives and experiences of each participant
|
||||
* Acknowledge your own subjectivity and limitations
|
||||
* Create collective agreements rather than imposing rules - a judgment-free space comes from shared ownership, not top-down structure
|
||||
|
||||
> "You don't know more than the people you're working with. You just know different things." - Russ Christianson
|
||||
|
||||
## Creating Accessible and Inclusive Sessions
|
||||
|
||||
It's important that we work to make our sessions accessible to all participants. Here are some practices to incorporate:
|
||||
|
||||
### Scheduling and Calendar Management
|
||||
|
||||
Ensure every peer-support meeting is scheduled **at least two weeks in advance**, with invitations pushed both to the shared "Peer Support" Google Calendar and the cohort channel. Avoid last-minute calendar invites as this is exclusionary and inconvenient.
|
||||
|
||||
Note "no meeting" periods, such as the between-stages break and holidays. Ask for members to check in via Slack once a week or so when live sessions are paused.
|
||||
|
||||
If you are overwhelmed by calendar notifications, check in with the coordinators for support wrangling and filtering them to what is essential for you.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Attendance and Responsiveness
|
||||
|
||||
Everyone should have RSVPd to calendar events by at least 48 hours prior to a meeting. Poke anyone who has not responded by then. If not all studio members are available, ask if rescheduling is needed (the majority of members should be present for ALL Peer Support meetings).
|
||||
|
||||
Set an expectation that your studio should be checking the Slack channel at least twice weekly. If your studio goes silent for over a week, you may need to DM them or request support from the program coordinators.
|
||||
|
||||
### Before Sessions
|
||||
|
||||
* Send materials in advance when possible
|
||||
* Provide multiple ways to engage (verbal, written, anonymous)
|
||||
* Be clear about recording policies and obtain consent:
|
||||
* Notify the group if you will be recording the session
|
||||
* Explain how and where recordings will be shared
|
||||
* Offer to pause recording for sensitive contributions
|
||||
* Detail how transcripts will be handled (including privacy considerations)
|
||||
|
||||
### During Sessions
|
||||
|
||||
* Offer regular check-ins with participants' bodies and energy levels
|
||||
* Provide multiple ways to contribute thoughts - including verbal, chat, or asynchronous (especially for slower processors)
|
||||
* Acknowledge when topics might be activating or triggering, taking into account members' location within the industry
|
||||
* Schedule breaks and encourage participants to ask for breaks
|
||||
* Validate different communication styles
|
||||
* Explicitly welcome movement, stepping away, and self-care
|
||||
|
||||
### After Sessions
|
||||
|
||||
* Provide ways for asynchronous contribution
|
||||
* Follow up with resources
|
||||
* The session note-taker should post key action items and a link to the recording and Miro board in the studio channel promptly
|
||||
* Encourage a weekly "capacity" status update in Slack: a quick "👍 good" / "⚠️ limited" / "❌ unavailable" post - you can and should do this, too!
|
||||
|
||||
#### Peer Support Channel Reporting
|
||||
|
||||
After your sessions, take time to post a summary in the peer support channel - aim to do this within a day of the session while it's still fresh. This doesn't need to be a novel - high-level notes are fine - but do it consistently, because we're looking for patterns across studios. If a bunch of teams are struggling with the same thing, we can course correct together, and keeping concerns to yourself just makes it feel like your problem to solve alone.
|
||||
|
||||
Report both concerns *and* wins. If a studio is excelling or has something cool to contribute, mention that alongside any red flags, since there are opportunities post-program for presentations and workshops by participants and early heads-ups help us plan for those.
|
||||
|
||||
Work out a reporting rhythm with your peer support partner - whether that means you both write a quick summary, or one of you writes it up while the other adds to the thread. However you divide it, we want to hear from both of you.
|
||||
|
||||
## Inclusive Language and Behaviour
|
||||
|
||||
A safe, stress-free and inclusive environment must be maintained at all times. Here's how you can do your part:
|
||||
|
||||
### Respect Diverse Identities
|
||||
|
||||
* Do not make assumptions about identity, experiences, or pronouns. Always use a person's pronouns if they've been communicated, and ask for clarity if you're not sure.
|
||||
* Allow participants space and time to disclose as much or as little information about their identity and background as they wish.
|
||||
* Treat all participants with respect and assume they know more about what they are trying to create than you do.
|
||||
* Do not use ableist language
|
||||
* Let participants do their own work. If you're frustrated by a participant's learning speed, you're in the wrong place.
|
||||
|
||||
### Humour and Connection Styles
|
||||
|
||||
🎭 Humour can be a quick way to connect with people, but relying on it as your primary tool risks alienating folks who aren't neurotypical or who don't share your references. Pair humour with sincerity - being genuine and direct can be just as disarming and connective. If you're funny, great, use it, but make sure you're also building real rapport for the people who aren't getting the jokes.
|
||||
|
||||
### "Do"s and "Don't"s for Respectful Critique and Discussion
|
||||
|
||||
| Instead of... | Try... |
|
||||
|:--------------|:-------|
|
||||
| "This doesn't make sense." | **Help articulate problems** "Can you explain your thought process?" |
|
||||
| "No." | "Have you tried..." "Yes, and..." |
|
||||
| "That's not how you do it." | "Let's try to brainstorm how we can improve this together." |
|
||||
| "This is just like \[Idea X\]." | "Check out these projects - they're doing something similar. What can we learn from them?" |
|
||||
| "Do you have any questions?" | **Encourage questions, and respond to them positively** "What questions do you have?" "What an interesting question! I've wondered that myself." |
|
||||
|
||||
## Communication Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
* Practice **active listening**
|
||||
* Provide feedback with care
|
||||
* Honour where participants are and the decisions they've made so far
|
||||
* Offer support without trying to make decisions for the team
|
||||
* Use inclusive language and respect participants' identities and pronouns
|
||||
* For guidance on managing your capacity and availability, see [Self-Care and Boundaries](#self-care-and-boundaries) above
|
||||
|
||||
When engaging with participants on Gamma Space/Baby Ghosts Slack, please:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. Default to communicating through the shared channel for the event or program.
|
||||
2. Encourage participants to engage by responding to their posts.
|
||||
3. Do not initiate private messages to participants without the explicit consent of the participant.
|
||||
4. Follow our [Code of Conduct](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Code+of+Conduct) - it applies to both in-person and online interactions.
|
||||
|
||||
\
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
Understand that safety and boundaries mean different things to different people. *Always ask if you're unsure.*
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
## Facilitation
|
||||
|
||||
As a Peer Support, you are here to help support and encourage participants as they navigate their own studio development journey.
|
||||
|
||||
### Your role and responsibilities
|
||||
|
||||
Here's a quick-reference checklist for the role. Details on each item can be found in the relevant sections throughout this manual.
|
||||
|
||||
* Contribute to **curriculum development** prior to the start of the program
|
||||
* Participate in **selecting the cohort** from our applications
|
||||
* **Facilitate a workshop**
|
||||
* Participate in **regular planning and check-in meetings** during the program
|
||||
* Participate in ongoing **self-reflection** and open discussion about power, privilege, and equity
|
||||
|
||||
### How to run a session
|
||||
|
||||
#### Meeting Roles
|
||||
|
||||
Before each session, assign a facilitator (does not have to be a Peer Support!), a note-taker (to capture any decisions or action items), a tech lead (if recording - by consent of all present only!), and a timekeeper.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Session Content
|
||||
|
||||
Think of each session as a conversation. You are there as a *peer*.
|
||||
|
||||
During the program, your weekly sessions will be **centred around a weekly set topic for the whole cohort** based on the curriculum. We highly suggest using the [Why, What, How](https://miro.com/app/dashboard/?tpTemplate=uXjVNhP4wjQ%3D&isCustom=true&share_link_id=424922932467) exercise on Miro to organize the group's thoughts. For example, *Why* are actionable values important to us? *What* can we do to implement our values? *How* will we do this? Another useful tool is [Layers of Effect](https://learn.weirdghosts.ca/impact-tools/results-flow) for supporting decision-making.
|
||||
|
||||
We recommend that Peer Supports encourage studios to reflect on the weekly topic in advance of the meeting.
|
||||
|
||||
* Start by checking in with each other for 5-10 minutes in a fun or casual way
|
||||
* Ideally, you'll have your focus already, but take time to ask the studio what they are working on and where they need support
|
||||
* Prepare as much as you can in advance, but be ready to adapt your approach based on the group's needs
|
||||
* Encourage participation from everyone, helping quieter people speak up and moderating more dominant voices (program coordinators can also help with this)
|
||||
* Leave time to check out at the end of the meeting
|
||||
|
||||
🖐️ Get people doing things on the board. Have studios physically place sticky notes, move things around, and arrange their ideas on Miro themselves rather than defaulting to verbal discussion only. The act of doing stuff together is a powerful tool for reflection and memory. Not everyone can engage at the same speed, and it's fine to do some of it for people when needed, but aim to get hands on the board whenever you can.
|
||||
|
||||
⏰ Stay on schedule! Do your best to stick to a 1-hour meeting. Sometimes, the real "meat" of an issue doesn't come up until near the end and needs a bit of extra time. Occasionally going overtime on your 1 hour peer support session is only okay if both sides agree and are mindful/respectful of each other's time and labour. If the real conversation is just getting started as time runs out (and it will - this happens almost every time), carry the thread forward into Slack updates or the next session rather than rushing through it. Note where you left off so you can pick it up, and on rare occasions going a few extra minutes makes sense if the momentum is there and everyone's okay with it, but don't make overtime a habit.
|
||||
|
||||
😶🌫️ Leave uncomfortably…*awkwardly* long silences. This is one of the hardest facilitation skills, especially if you're a talker. When you ask a question and nobody responds, resist the urge to fill the gap and give it four more beats than feels natural. Breakthroughs happen in that discomfort - people finally get comfortable and open up right when you think the silence has gone on too long. We're flattened to screens and mics in this format, so people often need more time than you'd expect. If you need a coping strategy, try counting with your thumbs under the table or belly breathing through the pause.
|
||||
|
||||
😶 If you're stuck with a studio, a good place to return to is the [**Why, What, How**](https://miro.com/app/dashboard/?tpTemplate=uXjVNhP4wjQ%3D&isCustom=true&share_link_id=424922932467) exercise. You can also always stop a meeting a little early and reach out to program coordinators for advice on how to facilitate. We will provide you with resources and tools.
|
||||
|
||||
## Conflict Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
* Approach conflicts through the lens of [Loving Justice](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Loving+Justice)
|
||||
* Familiarize yourself with Baby Ghosts' [conflict resolution procedures](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy)
|
||||
* Recognize when to involve staff in addressing conflicts
|
||||
* Don't hesitate to ask the program coordinators for support
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Applicant Interviews
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Manual/Applicant Interviews
|
||||
parentDocument: Manual
|
||||
outlineId: 23eed4f9-23bf-4ddc-a584-a72a139e21d2
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
Part of your role as a Peer Support is helping us select the studios for each cohort. You'll be involved in second round interviews only - eileen and Jennie handle eligibility screening and first round interviews, including checking that all application materials are accessible and in order.
|
||||
|
||||
### How it works
|
||||
|
||||
You'll be asked to attend a maximum of 2 second round interviews over a two-to-three week period. Each interview can be up to 90 minutes, though some are shorter. Two peer supports attend each interview.
|
||||
|
||||
When an interview is scheduled, you'll get a notification in Slack (in the #bg-cohort-6-interviews channel).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::info
|
||||
To sign yourself up, emoji-react to the notification with ✋. You'll receive a calendar invite once you've signed up.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
If your schedule changes and you need to cancel, please let eileen and Jennie know ASAP.
|
||||
|
||||
### Before each interview
|
||||
|
||||
Before your interview, you'll have access to the applicant's full application, the application review, and first round reviews through [hub.babyghosts.org](https://hub.babyghosts.org/). You can see what's already been discussed, what questions have been answered, and how the studio scored in the first round.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::info
|
||||
A Question Bank is pinned in the Slack canvas for your peer support channel. It's a starting point - you don't have to stick to it, but the questions in there are designed to help with your scoring based on our rubric.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Take some time to review before each interview.
|
||||
|
||||
### During the interview
|
||||
|
||||
Think of the interview as a conversation, not an interrogation. You're trying to understand who this team is, how they work together, and whether they're ready for what this program asks of them.
|
||||
|
||||
Pay attention to how the team interacts with each other during the interview - not just what they say. Some of the most useful information comes from watching team dynamics in real time.
|
||||
|
||||
### Scoring
|
||||
|
||||
After each interview, you'll score the studio through your reviewer account on [hub.babyghosts.org](https://hub.babyghosts.org/). The scoring rubric is built into the interface, so you'll see the criteria and rating descriptions as you go.
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to the rubric scoring, you'll do a qualitative assessment before making your final recommendation, covering:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Pain point awareness** - Do they know where they're struggling? A team that can name their challenges with some nuance is in a very different place than one that says everything's fine.
|
||||
* **Openness to feedback** - Can they receive input without getting defensive or dismissive? The program involves being willing to learn and make changes.
|
||||
* **Team dynamics** - Is everyone participating? Are they communicating well with each other? Are there power imbalances that concern you?
|
||||
* **Cohort fit** - Do they get that this is about giving and contributing, not just taking? Do they seem like they'd mesh well with the community?
|
||||
|
||||
### Your comments matter!
|
||||
|
||||
The comments field is really important. We read qualitative comments closely when reviewing scores. If you write "this team absolutely has to be in" or flag a specific concern, that carries a lot of weight. Don't be shy - we trust your instincts!
|
||||
|
||||
### How final decisions are made
|
||||
|
||||
After all interviews are done, the full group of peer supports gathers to make final selections together (see [Applicant Selection Process](/doc/6150980a-76a9-4d2a-99d1-acab58e3847e)). We don't automatically accept the highest scoring studios. Rather, we talk about which teams we feel we can best support, how well teams fit with each other and whether studios seem likely to participate actively.
|
||||
|
||||
Community participation carries significant weight because without it, teams don't get to practice what they're learning and see it in action from other studios. Also, a team might be a great fit for one cohort and not another. We do consider the overall diversity of the cohorts and prioritize groups that have been underrepresented in our past cohorts.
|
||||
|
||||
This is also when you'll indicate which studios you're most interested in working with, which feeds into the matching process. We can't guarantee that you'll get your top pick, but we'll try our best!
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Applicant Selection Process
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Manual/Applicant Selection
|
||||
Process
|
||||
parentDocument: Manual
|
||||
outlineId: 6150980a-76a9-4d2a-99d1-acab58e3847e
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
* Background on our pipeline, scoring system, rubrics, etc.
|
||||
* Documentation of rubric used for each stage.
|
||||
|
||||
# The Decide Meeting
|
||||
|
||||
## What this is
|
||||
|
||||
This is the group meeting where we decide together which studios will join the cohort. *Every person in the meeting has a say in this decision.* We use consensus, meaning we don't move forward until everyone can fully support the new cohort.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Who's invited
|
||||
|
||||
Program coordinators, the peer support coordinator, and all peer supports. Some peer supports interviewed studios directly. They asked their own questions and submitted their own reviews. Others didn't interview but have full access to all application materials, scores, and notes through the [hub](https://hub.babyghosts.org). No one has more weight in this discussion than anyone else.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## How it works
|
||||
|
||||
We discuss each studio one at a time, adding our thoughts to a miro board the coordinators will make in advance of the meeting. We then work through any concerns or ties until we reach a selection everyone supports.
|
||||
|
||||
### Your prep
|
||||
|
||||
Review all studio materials in the hub: Applications, scores, reviewer notes, and self-assessments (especially for studios you didn't interview!). For each studio, come with a sense of: Do I think they're ready for this program? What excites me? What concerns me? Think about the cohort as a whole, not just individual studios. Which combination would make the strongest group?
|
||||
|
||||
You don't need to write anything down or share beforehand! And don't spend all day on this!
|
||||
|
||||
### Roles
|
||||
|
||||
We assign three roles before the meeting. Think about volunteering to facilitate! *We prefer that a peer support runs it, not a coordinator.*
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. The *facilitator* guides the conversation and ensures everyone speaks. They manage the process, *not content*.
|
||||
2. The *note-taker* captures important points, concerns raised (and by whom), and the final decision with reasoning/rationale.
|
||||
3. The *time-keeper* ensures the discussion moves towards the final decision and lets everyone know how much time is remaining in each section.
|
||||
|
||||
### Discussion
|
||||
|
||||
We go through each studio one at a time. For each one:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. The two peer supports who interviewed that studio share what they observed: What stood out, what concerned them, how the team interacted. *Coordinators hold back unless asked a direct question.*
|
||||
2. Anyone can ask factual/clarifying questions.
|
||||
3. *Everyone* shares a brief reaction onto the mirror board. One sentence is fine.
|
||||
|
||||
If you interviewed a studio, please share what you observed. What stood out? What gave you pause? How did the team interact with each other?
|
||||
|
||||
If you didn't interview a studio, just come ready to share your impressions based on the hub materials. Your outside perspective is extra valuable!!
|
||||
|
||||
Share your actual reaction. There's no need to be diplomatic (the teams won't see your comments) and it's okay to say you're not sure!
|
||||
|
||||
### Signal check
|
||||
|
||||
After discussing all studios, we use Slack reactions to see where the group stands. A coordinator posts one message per studio and the facilitator asks everyone to react.
|
||||
|
||||
Reactions:
|
||||
|
||||
* 💚 I support this studio being in the cohort
|
||||
* ✋ I have concerns I'd like to discuss before agreeing
|
||||
* 🛑 I can't support this - I believe it would *cause harm* to the studio or the cohort
|
||||
|
||||
### Working toward consensus
|
||||
|
||||
Studios where everyone reacted with green heart are in.
|
||||
|
||||
Studios where anyone raised a hand get discussed further. The concerned person explains, the group talks it through, and the concerned person decides whether the discussion has addressed their questions enough to change their reaction.
|
||||
|
||||
If more studios have support than there are spots, we work through the contested picks together until we land on a selection everyone can support, *even if it's nobody's first choice*.
|
||||
|
||||
### What consensus is *not*
|
||||
|
||||
Consensus does not mean everyone must be equally enthusiastic about every team. It means no one has a concern serious enough that they believe the decision would cause harm to the studio, the cohort, the program, or our community.
|
||||
|
||||
Consensus also does not mean the loudest concerns win. If one person has a strong objection but can't articulate why it rises to the level of "this would cause harm," the group can respectfully note the concern and still move forward.
|
||||
|
||||
Consensus doesn't mean this is your dream cohort. It means you can stand behind the selection and support these studios fully once the program starts.
|
||||
|
||||
### Closing
|
||||
|
||||
The facilitator posts the proposed cohort in Slack and asks everyone to react with a green heart if they can support it. If everyone reacts, the decision is made. If someone can't, we go back to their concern.
|
||||
|
||||
After the cohort is selected, peer supports indicate which studios they're most interested in working with (top 3). This doesn't need consensus - it's input for coordinators to use when making assignments.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::warning
|
||||
### Confidentiality
|
||||
|
||||
The notes from this meeting are confidential to the peer support team and coordinators. Studios should never learn the specific concerns raised about them during the decide session.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Session Guides
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides
|
||||
parentDocument: Peer Support Playbook
|
||||
outlineId: 62a75910-60e6-4018-9391-b4afbc50b419
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Pre-program: Onboarding and Prep'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Pre-program:
|
||||
Onboarding and Prep
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 90324dab-581b-4b87-a5ae-9ee5b70631b6
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
# **Your first Studio Support Meetings**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::info
|
||||
Use this list to get a baseline read on your studio. These are things to *notice and gently explore* over your first couple of conversations. No need to interrogate, and you don't need to go through all of them.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### **Relational foundation**
|
||||
|
||||
* How long have they known each other? Have they made anything together before?
|
||||
* How do they currently make decisions? (Note who answers this question.)
|
||||
* What happens when they disagree?
|
||||
* Has anyone left a previous collaboration? What happened?
|
||||
* Who's doing most of the talking right now? Who's quiet?
|
||||
* Is there evidence of trust (or trust-building potential) in the group?
|
||||
|
||||
### **Capacity and commitment**
|
||||
|
||||
* Is everyone working on this full-time, part-time, or around day jobs?
|
||||
* Are time contributions roughly equal? If not, how are they thinking about that?
|
||||
* What happens if someone needs to step back or leave?
|
||||
* Who has business/admin skills? Financial literacy? Project management?
|
||||
* Is there openness about strengths *and* limitations?
|
||||
|
||||
### **Game related**
|
||||
|
||||
* Where is the project at? (Concept, prototype, production, shipped?)
|
||||
* Who holds the creative vision? Is that shared or concentrated?
|
||||
* Have they discussed IP ownership yet?
|
||||
* What are the core disciplines in the group? (art, code, design, audio, writing, production?)
|
||||
* What's missing? Are they aware of the gaps?
|
||||
* Has anyone worked in games professionally before? In what capacity?
|
||||
|
||||
#### **What you're doing with this information:**
|
||||
|
||||
* Building your own picture of the studio's dynamics, strengths, and risk areas.
|
||||
* You don't need to resolve anything yet, just notice.
|
||||
* Bring observations to your PS check-in.
|
||||
|
||||
*Credit:* **Effective Practices in Starting Co-ops** *and Christine Clarke of* [*__Freedom Dreams__*](https://www.freedomdreamscoop.com/) *for inspiration/starting points.*
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 0: Kickoff + Onboarding'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 0:
|
||||
Kickoff + Onboarding
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: e4a6f7bf-569f-4e31-ba52-db1d709e628e
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 0: Kickoff + Onboarding](/doc/session-0-kickoff-onboarding-rmqeo95LVF) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-session
|
||||
|
||||
* Review Session 0 agenda and your intro talking points
|
||||
* Be ready to introduce yourself and your studio's journey
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
This is the full cohort's orientation to the program. Participants do introductions, learn about the program structure, build initial community agreements, and get the Power Flower homework.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::info
|
||||
A theme we want to emphasize (based on feedback from Cohort 5) is: **"friction is part of the work."** It's to be expected, and is not something to fear or avoid.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. You're introduced and matched with your studio
|
||||
2. Observe your studio during introductions – who talks, who doesn't, what pain points do they talk about?
|
||||
3. Participate in community agreements drafting – you are ***part of the community!***
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Connect and chat with your studio in their Slack channel(s)
|
||||
* Make sure they understand the Power Flower homework (especially that it is a private, individual reflection, and no one else will see it unless they want to share)
|
||||
* Note any first impressions to share at the PS check-in
|
||||
|
||||
### :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* One person from the studio dominates introductions or positions themselves as the main character
|
||||
* Team members who seem checked out already
|
||||
|
||||
### :hammer_and_wrench: **Tools introduced**
|
||||
|
||||
* Power Flower (homework, private)
|
||||
* Community agreements (Miro, collective)
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 1: Coop Principles and Power'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 1: Coop
|
||||
Principles and Power
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: c6a0ee07-8c24-41f3-9975-e54955e84b5c
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 1: Coop Principles and Power](/doc/session-1-coop-principles-and-power-bkC3D6n71S) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
In this session, we cover cooperative history and lineages, crediting Global South, Indigenous, Black, women's traditions, not just Rochdale. We also review the 7 ICA Principles. Some question prompts for getting your team to think about how the principles connect to work in their studio: [ICA Values Connections](/doc/91342338-8257-4550-be63-59f78d88dd75) www
|
||||
|
||||
The theme is *moving from principles to personal values*.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
**Homework assigned:** individual journaling, team values map (with PS), and individual prep for The Talk (Session 2).
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Observe small group activity (cooperative lineage sharing) – note whose stories are shared
|
||||
* *you will be auto-sorted into a random mixed group with another peer support and 3-5 participants*
|
||||
* Listen for how studios talk about values – vague or specific?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Values Mapping**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Studio Miro board with Values Mapping template
|
||||
* 7 Principles reference
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Confirm everyone completed their individual journaling (Session 1 homework)
|
||||
* Ensure the studio Miro board has the template
|
||||
* Have the 7 Principles visible (on the board or screen-shared)
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Individual sharing (15-20 min) – Each person shares 3-5 values from their individual reflection.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What values came up when you did the journaling?"
|
||||
* "You don't need to explain or justify."
|
||||
|
||||
As they share: each person adds values to the Miro board (stickies in their colour/section). No discussion – just capture.
|
||||
|
||||
Watch for: Someone dominating or going first every time; someone staying quiet – invite them in gently; values that sound the same but might mean different things to different people.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Noticing patterns (10-15 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Look at the board together.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What do you notice?"
|
||||
* "Where do you see overlap?"
|
||||
* "Any surprises?"
|
||||
* "Are there values that seem similar but might mean different things to different people?"
|
||||
|
||||
> Example to offer: "Transparency" – does it mean open documents? Open conversations? Both? Neither? What exactly is meant?
|
||||
|
||||
**Connecting to the 7 Principles (10 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Look at the ICA principles together.
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompts**:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Do you see connections between your values and these principles?"
|
||||
* "Draw lines or group things if it helps." – This can be loose – don't let them fixate on making a beautiful diagram. The point is seeing that their values connect to a larger cooperative tradition.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **To bring back to Session 2 (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompts**:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's one thing you learned about where your team aligns or diverges?"
|
||||
* You'll share this in Session 2 – doesn't need to be polished. Have someone write it down or capture it on the board.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Community agreements contribution (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"Based on this conversation, are there 1-2 values you'd propose adding to the cohort community agreements?" Capture these to bring back to the full group.
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If someone is dominating:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Let's hear from someone who hasn't shared yet."
|
||||
|
||||
If no one talks… awkward silence:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Take a minute to look at the board silently. What stands out?"
|
||||
|
||||
If tension emerges:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Sounds like there are some different perspectives here. That's useful but we don't need to resolve it today."
|
||||
|
||||
If they want to debate definitions:
|
||||
|
||||
* "It's okay to mean different things. The goal is simply to notice where you might need to clarify later."
|
||||
|
||||
If time runs short:
|
||||
|
||||
* Prioritize steps 2-3 (sharing and noticing). The principles connection and agreements contribution can be done async if needed.
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note any tensions/surprises for your PS check-in
|
||||
* Remind the team to bring their learnings to Session 2
|
||||
|
||||
### **👉 Also this week**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Make sure they're prepping for The Talk**
|
||||
|
||||
Session 2 homework includes individual prep on four topics: financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, decision-making styles.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::warning
|
||||
They need to *write their answers down* before Session 2. Check that they're doing this!
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* A studio that can't name any values beyond "we want to make good games" – don't we all! Too vague.
|
||||
* One person speaking for the group about "our" values
|
||||
* Values that are all abstract with no grounding in practice
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 2: Shared Purpose and Alignment'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 2: Shared
|
||||
Purpose and Alignment
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 6edd974c-3ef1-4eaa-a7cd-1620716e859a
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 2: Shared Purpose and Alignment](/doc/session-2-shared-purpose-and-alignment-RfzSikcGy1) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
This session, we talk about the challenges of *aligning on the studio's purpose*.
|
||||
|
||||
We go over common pitfalls – vague goals like "we all just want to make good games" and assuming shared politics means shared work values. We do four rounds of The Talk, asking detailed individual questions about financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. Studios practice this in their channels with the Peer Support present.
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
***This is a big one.*** You're facilitating The Talk in your studio's breakout room (aka their project or studio channel). Here are some things to watch for:
|
||||
|
||||
Financial reality:
|
||||
|
||||
* People minimizing their own needs
|
||||
* Wide gaps in financial situations not being acknowledged
|
||||
* Someone going quiet
|
||||
|
||||
Time/availability:
|
||||
|
||||
* Vague answers
|
||||
* Someone over committing to match others
|
||||
|
||||
Skills/contributions:
|
||||
|
||||
* People only naming strengths and not gaps
|
||||
* Assumptions about roles based on past
|
||||
* Someone taking on the hard or tedious stuff by default
|
||||
|
||||
Decision-making:
|
||||
|
||||
* Very different styles that could clash (fast decider vs. slow processor)
|
||||
* Someone who goes along to avoid conflict
|
||||
* Past conflicts referenced passively
|
||||
|
||||
### :triangular_ruler: **Format**
|
||||
|
||||
Each person answers in turn (2 min each), use the Miro timer, brief open discussion after everyone answers, then move to next round.
|
||||
|
||||
The goal isn't to solve everything today, just to get the conversation started!
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Continuing The Talk**
|
||||
|
||||
**Materials:** Notes from Session 2 activity, participants' original prep from Session 1
|
||||
|
||||
### :world_map: **Context**
|
||||
|
||||
In Session 2, studios practiced The Talk – four rounds covering financial reality, time/availability, skills/contributions, and decision-making styles. They started these conversations but didn't finish them (this is the intention). During this Studio Support Meeting, help them go deeper: Create space to continue conversations that got cut short or stayed shallow, draw out what went unsaid, help the team notice patterns.
|
||||
|
||||
This is an ongoing practice!
|
||||
|
||||
### :ocean: **Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"How did The Talk feel for you? Anything still sitting with you from Session 2?" Let each person respond briefly. Listen for tensions, moments of relief, unfinished ideas.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Go deeper on one round (20-25 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"Which round felt most unfinished or brought up the most tension?" Revisit the questions in the round they choose, but this time, push past the first answer.
|
||||
|
||||
***For financial reality:***
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. What would change for you if the studio couldn't pay you anything for six months?
|
||||
2. Are you trying not to seem demanding, and not sharing your true needs?
|
||||
3. Are there differences in monetary needs that create (a sense of) unbalanced power dynamics?
|
||||
|
||||
***For time and availability:***
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
4. How many hours per week can you reliably, actually commit – a hard number.
|
||||
5. What's something that would cause you to miss a deadline? How would you want to handle that as a team?
|
||||
6. Are you building around one person's availability? Intentionally?
|
||||
|
||||
***For skills and contributions:***
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
7. What happens if no one does the "dreaded task"?
|
||||
8. When you're overwhelmed, do you want people to check in or give you space? Does the team know that about you?
|
||||
9. Is anyone doing work that isn't visible or acknowledged?
|
||||
|
||||
***For decision-making:***
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
10. What happens if you disagree about something, but don't say anything?
|
||||
11. Has there been a decision in this group where you felt unheard?
|
||||
12. When you're under pressure, do you speed up or slow down? Do these styles clash between members?
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Draw out the unsaid (15 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::warning
|
||||
***This could be hard.*** "Was there anything you wanted to say in Session 2 but didn't?"
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
Give silence and let it be awkward. *You really need to relish the awkwardness.* Let folks build up courage to speak up. If nothing comes up, at least you've created an opening for later.
|
||||
|
||||
* Is there a question you wish someone had asked you?
|
||||
* Is there something you noticed about a teammate's answer that you're still thinking about?
|
||||
* Is there an elephant in the room?
|
||||
|
||||
If something big comes up: help them decide – "Is this something you want to keep talking about now, or table for later?"
|
||||
|
||||
### Close and next steps (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
"What's one thing you want to carry forward from this conversation?"
|
||||
|
||||
Remind them: these conversations don't end here; tension is interesting information, not failure; they can bring things back to future PS sessions.
|
||||
|
||||
**Nudge them on their Session 2 homework:** writing down tension points and unsaid questions. Check that they're doing this – we need this to build on later.
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post:**Red flags**
|
||||
|
||||
* One person's needs consistently minimized (by themselves or others)
|
||||
* Financial gaps with no acknowledgment of how they affect power
|
||||
* A founder or initiator whose preferences are treated as default
|
||||
* Someone checked out or going along without engaging
|
||||
* A topic the group keeps avoiding
|
||||
* Stuck or clearly in conflict
|
||||
|
||||
Note these for your PS check-in or message in the channel.
|
||||
|
||||
## :point_right: **Also this week: Scale and Pace**
|
||||
|
||||
**Duration:** 15-20 minutes (can be folded into the same meeting as Continuing The Talk, or done as a separate short check-in)
|
||||
|
||||
**Context:** Session 2 homework asks each person to individually reflect on where they see the studio in 1/3/5 years and what their revenue model might look like. This is just a conversation starter. You're helping them notice where their assumptions about the studio's future align or diverge.
|
||||
|
||||
**Before the conversation:**
|
||||
|
||||
* Confirm everyone has done some thinking on this (even loosely). If they haven't, give them 5 minutes of quiet writing time before you start.
|
||||
|
||||
**How to facilitate:**
|
||||
|
||||
Start with a round: Each person shares one thing about where they see the studio. Keep it brief – you're listening for gaps, not building a business plan.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts to draw out differences:
|
||||
|
||||
* "When you picture the studio in three years, how many people are on the team?"
|
||||
* "Are you imagining one game, or multiple projects?"
|
||||
* "What does 'success' look like for you personally – not the studio, *you*?"
|
||||
* "Is this your full-time thing, or alongside other work?"
|
||||
|
||||
Then ground it:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Who are your players? Do you know?"
|
||||
* "What's your revenue model – game sales, services, grants, a mix?"
|
||||
* "Can that sustain you? For how long?"
|
||||
* "What happens if the game takes twice as long as you think?"
|
||||
* "What happens when your current grant ends? Do you know what your studio actually costs to run without grant funding?"
|
||||
|
||||
**What you're listening for:**
|
||||
|
||||
* Major mismatches in ambition (one person wants a 20-person studio, another wants a 3-person collective)
|
||||
* Revenue model assumptions that haven't been tested or discussed ("we'll just get a publisher")
|
||||
* Someone who hasn't thought about this at all
|
||||
* Scale assumptions that don't match the team's actual capacity
|
||||
* Different definitions of sustainability (covering rent vs. building wealth vs. just making a game)
|
||||
|
||||
**What you're not doing:** Judging their plans or telling them what's realistic. You're helping them see whether they're actually talking about the same studio.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
**Tip:** **If you notice a big gap** – say, one person assumes this is a side project and another has quit their job for it – name it gently. "I'm noticing you might be picturing different scales here. Is that something you've talked about?" This is the kind of divergence that festers if it stays unspoken.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
**After the conversation:**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note any major alignment gaps for your PS check-in
|
||||
* They'll keep returning to scale and pace throughout the program – this is just the first pass
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 3: Actionable Values and Impact'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 3:
|
||||
Actionable Values and Impact
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 6b557fed-1ae0-41cd-a97d-8ceea11b523b
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 3: Actionable Values and Impact](/doc/session-3-actionable-values-and-impact-U1NcQXtrbg) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-session
|
||||
|
||||
If you are the presenting PS for this session, prepare a **10-minute** case study from your studio covering:
|
||||
|
||||
* How you arrived at your current values (what process did you use? what changed through iteration?)
|
||||
* One example of values guiding a real decision – especially a hard one
|
||||
* Where you've seen a gap between stated values and actual practice, and what you did about it
|
||||
|
||||
Show the messy stuff. Participants need to see that this work is ongoing, not a one-time exercise.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
Studios move from identifying values to making them operational. The session introduces two tools: the Why/What/How framework (turning values into concrete practices) and Layers of Effect (mapping ripple effects of decisions). A Peer Support presenter shares a case study from their own studio. Studios work through scenarios using values-first thinking and identify a decision to run through the tools with their PS this week.
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* If presenting: Deliver your case study. Be honest about what didn't work and what you're still figuring out.
|
||||
* Observe your studio during the scenario exercise – who applies values first vs. jumping to solutions?
|
||||
* Note whether studios can connect their Session 1 values to the tools, or if values are still too vague to be actionable.
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Confirm everyone understood the Why/What/How framework and the Layers of Effect template
|
||||
* Make sure the Miro templates (Why/What/How and Layers of Effect) are on your studio's board
|
||||
* Note which decision they chose for the homework activity
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Why/What/How + Layers of Effect**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Studio Miro board with Why/What/How template
|
||||
* Studio Miro board with [Layers of Effect template](https://miro.com/templates/layers-effect-template/)
|
||||
* The studio's values map from Session 1
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Confirm the Miro templates are set up and accessible
|
||||
* Review the studio's values map – pick 1-2 values that seem ripe for the Why/What/How exercise (have a suggestion ready in case the team gets stuck)
|
||||
* Know which decision they identified at the end of Session 3 for the Layers of Effect exercise
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"How did the scenario exercise land for you? Was it easy or hard to start with values before jumping to solutions?"
|
||||
|
||||
Let each person respond briefly. Listen for whether they found the tools useful or abstract.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Why/What/How deep dive (20-25 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Pick one value from the studio's values map together and work through the full framework.
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 1: WHY (5-7 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"Why does this value matter to your studio? What's at stake if you don't practice it?"
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts if they get stuck:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What would go wrong if you dropped this value tomorrow?"
|
||||
* "Who is affected if this value isn't practiced?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 2: WHAT (5-7 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"What does practicing this value actually look like? What are you committing to?"
|
||||
|
||||
Push for specificity:
|
||||
|
||||
* "If a new member joined next month, how would they know you practice this value?"
|
||||
* "'We value transparency' – what does that mean concretely? Open finances? Open conversations? Open documents?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Step 3: HOW (5-7 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"How will you actually do this? What specific activities, rituals, or outputs?"
|
||||
|
||||
This is where it gets real:
|
||||
|
||||
* "How often? Who's responsible? Where does it live?"
|
||||
* "What's the minimum viable version you could start this week?"
|
||||
|
||||
Capture everything on the Miro board.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Layers of Effect practice (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Use the decision they identified in Session 3. Walk through the three rings together.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
**Parallel framework for context:** Neil Postman's "Seven Questions for any new technology" maps closely to Layers of Effect. If a studio is struggling with the concentric rings framing, try Postman's questions as an alternate way in: (1) What problem does this solve? (2) Whose problem is it? (3) What new problems does solving it create? (4) Who is most impacted? (5) What changes in language? (6) What shifts in power? (7) What unintended uses might emerge?
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
**Primary effects (5 min):** "What are the direct, immediate impacts of this decision?"
|
||||
|
||||
* Who gains? Who pays? Who's invisible but affected?
|
||||
|
||||
**Secondary effects (5 min):** "What are the known but less obvious impacts?"
|
||||
|
||||
* What dependencies or new risks are you introducing?
|
||||
|
||||
**Tertiary effects (5 min):** "What unforeseen consequences might emerge over time?"
|
||||
|
||||
* What standards could this establish? What shifts over years?
|
||||
|
||||
Use yellow stickies for opportunities/benefits and red for risks/costs. These might be connected – a benefit in one layer can create a risk in another.
|
||||
|
||||
**Debrief (5 min):**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Did mapping this change how you think about the decision?"
|
||||
* "Did your values hold up, or did you notice a gap between intention and effect?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close and next steps (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
* "How often should you revisit your values and check whether your effects match your intentions?"
|
||||
* Encourage them to make this a recurring practice, not a one-time exercise
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If the Why/What/How stays vague:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Can you make that even more specific? What would someone actually *see* you doing?"
|
||||
|
||||
If they rush through Layers of Effect:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Slow down at tertiary. The unforeseen stuff is where the most important learning happens."
|
||||
|
||||
If they only see positive effects:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Every decision has costs. Who bears them? Who's invisible here?"
|
||||
|
||||
If one person dominates the values conversation:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Let's hear from everyone – whose experience of this value is different?"
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note whether the studio can translate values into practices or if they're still stuck at the abstract level
|
||||
* Note any gaps between stated values and emerging practices – these will come up again
|
||||
* Remind them to discuss as a studio: how often should you revisit values and check your effects?
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* Values that are all "why" with no "what" or "how" – inspiration without practice
|
||||
* A studio that can't see any negative effects of their decisions – lack of critical thinking or avoidance
|
||||
* One person defining "our" values without challenge from the group
|
||||
* Tools treated as a box-checking exercise rather than genuine reflection
|
||||
* "We already know our values" without being able to articulate practices
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 4: Decision-Making in Practice'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 4:
|
||||
Decision-Making in Practice
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 7152ed91-fcea-47b5-9b0a-a2d9c11ce212
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 4: Decision-Making in Practice](/doc/session-4-decision-making-in-practice-aHPbIrtYgR) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
Studios explore cooperative decision-making frameworks (consensus, consent, majority, delegation, random chance). They practice identifying who gets to raise issues, work through decision-making steps, and discuss handling dissent. The session also covers meetings (roles, facilitation, rotating responsibilities) and the "genius trap." Studios do a facilitation rotation practice in groups of three. The Informal Hierarchy Check-In is introduced as an ongoing tool.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
**Homework assigned:** practice one decision-making framework on a real decision, map current role distribution, complete the Informal Hierarchy Check-In as a studio, and notice where decisions happen this week.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Observe the facilitation rotation activity – note how your studio members handle facilitating, participating, and observing
|
||||
* Listen for how they talk about where decisions currently happen (meetings? DMs? default to one person?)
|
||||
* Note whether anyone identifies informal hierarchy patterns during the journaling activity
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Make sure your studio understands the Informal Hierarchy Check-In questions and plans to work through them together
|
||||
* Confirm they've chosen which decision-making framework to practice this week
|
||||
* Check that they understand the difference between consensus and consent – this trips people up
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Decision-Making Practice + Informal Hierarchy Check-In**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Informal Hierarchy Check-In questions (from session)
|
||||
* Decision-making frameworks reference (consensus, consent, majority, delegation)
|
||||
* The studio's notes from the facilitation rotation activity
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Know which decision-making framework the studio chose to practice
|
||||
* Have a small, real decision ready in case the studio can't think of one (e.g., "What should your next team social activity be?" or "How should you structure your next sprint?")
|
||||
* Review the 5 Informal Hierarchy Check-In questions so you can facilitate them smoothly
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"What did you notice in the facilitation rotation? What was harder than expected – facilitating, participating, or observing?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Practice a decision-making framework (20-25 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Help the studio work through a real decision using their chosen framework.
|
||||
|
||||
**Set up (3 min):**
|
||||
|
||||
* Name the decision clearly. Write it down where everyone can see it.
|
||||
* Name the framework you're using – "We're going to try consent on this."
|
||||
* Clarify: who is affected by this decision? Does everyone here need to be part of it?
|
||||
|
||||
**Work through the decision-making steps (15-20 min):**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. Understand the context – what's happening? What do people feel about it?
|
||||
2. Identify the underlying need – what are we actually trying to address?
|
||||
3. Generate options – encourage weird ideas. Notice who contributes.
|
||||
4. Check alignment with values – how do these options fit with who you want to be?
|
||||
5. Evaluate consequences – who benefits, who's affected, trade-offs?
|
||||
6. Decide using the framework – name the method before you begin.
|
||||
7. Before finalizing: "Does anyone have concerns they haven't voiced? Is anyone agreeing just to move on?"
|
||||
8. Clarify implementation – who does what? When do you check back?
|
||||
|
||||
**Debrief (5 min):**
|
||||
|
||||
* "How did that feel compared to how you usually make decisions?"
|
||||
* "What was different about naming the framework first?"
|
||||
* "Did anyone notice moments where old patterns kicked in?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Informal Hierarchy Check-In (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Work through the five questions together. Go one at a time.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts to keep it exploratory, not accusatory:
|
||||
|
||||
* "No guilt here – we're just noticing."
|
||||
* "These patterns aren't problems yet. But under pressure, they become cracks."
|
||||
* "What would you want to change? What's actually fine?"
|
||||
|
||||
Capture observations – they'll bring these to Session 5.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's one pattern you noticed that you want to keep an eye on?"
|
||||
* Remind them to notice where decisions happen this week (in meetings? DMs? Slack? who's present?)
|
||||
|
||||
### 👉 **Also this week**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Map your current role distribution**
|
||||
|
||||
This can be done async or as part of the PS meeting if there's time. The question is simple: for each role/responsibility in the studio, where did it come from – explicit decision or implicit default?
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Who handles finances? Was that decided or did it just happen?"
|
||||
* "Who schedules meetings? Who takes notes? Who answers external emails?"
|
||||
* "Are there roles no one officially has but someone 'just does'?"
|
||||
|
||||
This feeds directly into Session 5's governance work.
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If the decision-making practice feels artificial:
|
||||
|
||||
* "The point is to *notice* the process. How you decide matters as much as what you decide."
|
||||
|
||||
If one person dominates the decision:
|
||||
|
||||
* "I noticed \[name\] spoke first and longest. Can we try a round where everyone shares before discussion?"
|
||||
|
||||
If no one disagrees:
|
||||
|
||||
* "That was quick! Is everyone actually aligned, or is someone going along to keep things moving?" (This is a direct reference to the dissent section from the session.)
|
||||
|
||||
If someone gets defensive:
|
||||
|
||||
* "It's okay – noticing patterns is the hardest part. You don't need to fix anything today."
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note which patterns came up in the Informal Hierarchy Check-In – especially anything the studio seemed to avoid discussing
|
||||
* Note how the decision-making practice went – did they actually use the framework or fall back into old patterns?
|
||||
* Bring observations to your PS check-in
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* A studio that "decides" everything by default to one person and calls it delegation
|
||||
* Someone consistently going along without engaging – "I'm fine with whatever"
|
||||
* Resistance to the hierarchy check-in – "we don't have hierarchy, we're all equal" (it's insidious)
|
||||
* Decisions happening outside the room (in DMs between two people) and being presented as done
|
||||
* The same person always facilitating, taking notes, or scheduling
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,145 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 5: Coop Structures and Governance'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 5: Coop
|
||||
Structures and Governance
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: f317905f-1ee1-4412-89c6-6b12e007b7d4
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 5: Coop Structures and Governance](/doc/session-5-coop-structures-and-governance-DxoDQCtL66) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-session
|
||||
|
||||
If you are the presenting PS for this session, prep a **15-20 minute** case study from your studio covering:
|
||||
|
||||
* How your studio makes decisions now
|
||||
* What you tried that didn't work
|
||||
* One example of governance helping resolve a real issue
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
Studios learn about:
|
||||
|
||||
* legal structures (sole prop, partnership, corporation, worker coop)
|
||||
* governance models (collective governance, advice process, sociocratic circles, board + membership, DisCOs)
|
||||
* member management (adding, departing, removing members)
|
||||
|
||||
A PS presenter shares a 15-20 minute case study on their studio's governance journey. We also introduce Community Rule as a tool for documenting governance in plain language. We focus on *making governance visible*, designing structures from the patterns noticed in Session 4, and distinguishing between governance practice and legal incorporation.
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* If presenting: deliver your case study
|
||||
* Observe how your studio responds to the governance models – what resonates? What causes confusion or resistance?
|
||||
* Listen for whether they connect their Session 4 Informal Hierarchy Check-In observations to governance design choices
|
||||
* Note how they react to the member removal discussion. It's an uncomfortable topic.
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Make sure your studio has access to [Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/)
|
||||
* Confirm they understand the homework: start a Community Rule draft with you, discuss financial sustainability, and do a personal reflection on financial access
|
||||
* Note which governance model(s) they're gravitating toward
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Community Rule Drafting**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* [Community Rule](https://communityrule.info/) tool
|
||||
* Studio's Informal Hierarchy Check-In observations from Session 4
|
||||
* Notes on which governance model(s) interested them
|
||||
|
||||
### :world_map: **Context**
|
||||
|
||||
This is a working session. You're helping the studio start documenting their governance in plain language using Community Rule. They don't need to finish – the goal is to surface where they already have answers vs. where they need more conversation. This will be a living document.
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Familiarize yourself with the Community Rule interface and fields
|
||||
* Review the studio's Informal Hierarchy Check-In observations
|
||||
* Have the governance models overview handy (collective governance, advice process, circles, board + membership) in case they need a refresher
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"What governance model stuck with you from the session? Did anything click, or feel wrong?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Community Rule walkthrough (10 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Open the tool together. Community Rule works as a modular builder – you assemble your governance from pre-made or custom building blocks.
|
||||
|
||||
Start with the basics: Name your studio and write a short summary of its structure.
|
||||
|
||||
Then explore the module library together. There are four categories:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Culture** – values, norms, purpose, solidarity, diversity
|
||||
* **Decision** – how decisions get made (lazy consensus, do-ocracy, vote, ranked choice, etc.)
|
||||
* **Process** – how policies are implemented and evolve (accountability process, delegation, transparency, dissolution, exclusion, etc.)
|
||||
* **Structure** – roles and internal entities (board, council, membership, ownership, roles, committee, etc.)
|
||||
|
||||
Drag in the modules that feel relevant. Each one can be configured with key-value pairs – for example, a "Membership" module might have configuration like "Eligibility: active worker-owners who have completed a 3-month trial period." You can also create custom modules for anything the library doesn't cover.
|
||||
|
||||
Don't try to build everything at once. Start by browsing the categories and noticing which modules the studio can configure easily vs. which ones lead to blank stares.
|
||||
|
||||
Prompts:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Which of these are you already doing without naming it?"
|
||||
* "Where is there genuine disagreement or uncertainty?"
|
||||
* "What's missing from the library that's specific to how you work?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Draft together (20-25 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Start filling in what you can. Focus on the modules where there's energy or alignment. When you hit a field where there's disagreement, note it and move on. Don't try to resolve everything today.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close and gaps list (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
* Make a list of areas that still need discussion
|
||||
* "What's the most important unresolved question?"
|
||||
* "Who's going to take a first pass at writing up what we decided today?"
|
||||
|
||||
### 👉 **Also this week**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Financial sustainability conversation**
|
||||
|
||||
Session 5 homework asks each person to reflect: *What does financial sustainability look like for you personally? What would you need from this project?*
|
||||
|
||||
This is prep for Session 6 (Equitable Economics). Check in during the week:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Has everyone spent some time thinking about the financial sustainability question?"
|
||||
* "And the personal reflection: what financial information have you never been allowed to see at work?"
|
||||
|
||||
These don't need to be discussed as a studio yet – just make sure individuals are reflecting.
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If they want to pick a governance model immediately:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You don't have to commit today. Start with collective governance or advice process – you can add complexity as you learn what you actually need."
|
||||
|
||||
If Community Rule feels bureaucratic:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You're already doing governance – this just helps you name it."
|
||||
|
||||
If they skip over membership/removal:
|
||||
|
||||
* "This is the part that matters most when things get hard. Even a rough sketch now saves a lot of pain later."
|
||||
|
||||
If one person is doing all the talking about governance:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Governance designed by one person is just management with extra steps. Everyone needs to shape this."
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note where the studio has clear alignment vs. where they got stuck
|
||||
* Note any tension around membership/removal – these conversations will deepen
|
||||
* Remind them about the financial sustainability reflection for Session 6 prep
|
||||
* Bring the draft status to your PS check-in
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* A studio that resists documenting anything – "we just know how we work" (exactly the problem)
|
||||
* Governance designed around one person's strengths or preferences
|
||||
* Avoiding the membership/removal conversation entirely
|
||||
* Confusing governance with incorporation – "we're not a real coop yet so we don't need this"
|
||||
* A draft that looks perfect on paper but doesn't match how the studio actually operates
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,160 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 6: Equitable Economics'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 6:
|
||||
Equitable Economics
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: e90f4170-5f49-4705-ac9f-c42214aaf73b
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 6: Equitable Economics](/doc/session-6-equitable-economics-VhhiZSc9Ej) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
This is a dense session covering revenue sources, financial transparency, compensation models (equal pay, needs-based, role-based, hybrid), profit-sharing basics, and IP ownership. Studios discuss what financial sustainability means personally, explore open-book practices, and start thinking about what "fair" compensation looks like. The session connects financial decisions to the governance structures from Session 5.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
**Homework assigned:** discuss financial transparency (what feels vulnerable to share?) and compensation models (what feels fair?). These conversations are prep for the PS meeting this week.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Observe how your studio reacts to the compensation models discussion – where do they light up? Where do they tense up?
|
||||
* Listen for financial information gaps – who has financial literacy? Who doesn't?
|
||||
* Note whether anyone avoids the personal financial sustainability question
|
||||
* Watch the IP ownership discussion – this can surface unexpected disagreements, especially if someone brought existing work into the project
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Check that everyone understands the homework and is willing to have the financial conversations
|
||||
* Note any immediate tensions about money that surfaced during the session
|
||||
* Make sure they know the tools mentioned: [CoBudget](https://cobudget.com/), [OpenCollective](https://opencollective.com/), [coop.love](https://coop.love)
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Financial Transparency and Compensation**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Compensation models reference (equal pay, needs-based, role-based, hybrid)
|
||||
* Studio's Community Rule draft from Session 5 (financial decision-making sections)
|
||||
* Revenue sources overview from the session
|
||||
|
||||
### :world_map: **Context**
|
||||
|
||||
Money is where values meet reality. This studio support meeting helps the studio have the financial conversations that most groups avoid. Your role is to create enough safety for vulnerability while pushing past surface-level comfort. These conversations don't need to reach decisions today – they need to *happen*.
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Check in about whether they've started reflecting on the homework questions
|
||||
* Review the studio's governance draft – what did they decide about financial decision-making?
|
||||
* Be prepared for this session to be emotionally charged
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"The session covered a lot of ground about money. What's sitting with you? Anything surprising – or anything you're dreading talking about?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Financial transparency (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Start with the personal reflection prompt from Session 5 homework:
|
||||
|
||||
"What financial information have you never been allowed to see at work. What might have been different if you had?"
|
||||
|
||||
Let each person share. This grounds the conversation in lived experience before it becomes abstract.
|
||||
|
||||
Then move to the studio:
|
||||
|
||||
**Prompts:**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What financial information would feel vulnerable to share with your studio?"
|
||||
* "What would you need in order to feel safe sharing it?"
|
||||
* "What's the minimum level of financial transparency you'd want in your coop?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Practical questions:**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Who currently knows the most about the studio's finances? Is that a choice or a default?"
|
||||
* "If you were to do open books – what would that actually look like? A shared spreadsheet? Monthly summaries? Full access to accounts?"
|
||||
* "What's one step you could take this week toward more transparency?"
|
||||
|
||||
Don't push anyone to share financial details they're not ready to. The goal is *naming the discomfort*.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Compensation models (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Review the four models briefly:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Equal pay:** same rate regardless of role
|
||||
* **Needs-based:** adjusted for members' actual financial situations
|
||||
* **Role-based:** different rates for different roles
|
||||
* **Hybrid:** base rate plus adjustments
|
||||
|
||||
**Discussion prompts:**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What feels fair to you? Where do you notice tension between 'fair' and 'comfortable'?"
|
||||
* "What would you need to know about each other's situations to decide together?"
|
||||
* "Which model aligns best with your values?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Dig deeper:**
|
||||
|
||||
* "If you chose equal pay, what happens when one person is working 40 hours and another is working 15?"
|
||||
* "If you chose needs-based, who decides what counts as a 'need'?"
|
||||
* "If you chose role-based, who decides which roles are worth more – and doesn't that recreate hierarchy?"
|
||||
|
||||
You don't need to reach a decision.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **IP ownership – first pass (5-10 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
If there's time, and only if the studio is ready:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Who owns the game you're making together?"
|
||||
* "Has anyone brought existing work into the project? What happens to that?"
|
||||
* "What happens to IP if someone leaves?"
|
||||
|
||||
If these questions create tension, name it: "This is the kind of conversation that gets harder the longer you wait. Notice where you're not aligned."
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's one financial conversation your team has been avoiding?"
|
||||
* "What's one concrete step you can take before next session?"
|
||||
* Remind them: Session 7 is about conflict – and money is often where conflict shows up first
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If someone shuts down:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Money stuff can be really personal. You don't have to share anything you're not ready to. But notice what you're protecting and why."
|
||||
|
||||
If the group avoids specifics:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Saying 'we'll figure it out later' is a to avoid financial conversations. Try to think of a specific decision to discuss today."
|
||||
|
||||
If one person has significantly more financial literacy:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Part of transparency is making sure everyone can participate in financial decisions. Can you explain that in plain terms?"
|
||||
|
||||
If there's a clear financial power imbalance:
|
||||
|
||||
* Don't force anyone to disclose. But you can note: "Financial differences affect power whether you name them or not. The question is whether you address it openly."
|
||||
|
||||
If they want to decide compensation now:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You can start with a provisional model. Try it for a period, then revisit. Consent-based: is this good enough for now, safe enough to try?"
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note how the financial conversations went – where was there openness vs. avoidance?
|
||||
* Note any power dynamics around financial literacy or financial resources
|
||||
* Note any IP ownership disagreements – these need to be resolved before incorporation
|
||||
* Bring observations to your PS check-in
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* One person controlling all financial information or decisions
|
||||
* Someone minimizing their own financial needs to match the group
|
||||
* "We don't need to talk about money yet" – avoidance that will become a crisis later
|
||||
* Financial plans that assume best-case scenarios with no contingency
|
||||
* Major gaps in financial literacy that no one is addressing
|
||||
* IP ownership assumptions that haven't been discussed – especially if someone brought pre-existing work
|
||||
* Compensation discussions where one person's opinion is treated as the default
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,168 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 7: Conflict Resolution and Collective Care'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 7:
|
||||
Conflict Resolution and Collective Care
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 146f541d-6ccb-42be-95f7-53ed23d5ed90
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 7: Conflict Resolution and Collective Care](/doc/session-7-conflict-resolution-and-collective-care-fplNXDnOWp) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## Pre-session
|
||||
|
||||
* Review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy) before session – this is the template participants will adapt for homework
|
||||
* Check in with your studio about how their compensation discussions went; any friction that came up is useful for this session
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
The heaviest session. Studios learn to reframe conflict as data (not failure), distinguish structural from interpersonal conflict, and practice behaviourally-specific feedback. Key tools: the Loving Justice framework (Brave? Kind? Honest? Humble?), the intent/behaviour/impact model ("stay on your side of the net"), and the Window of Transformation (zones of activation). The session covers multi-directional accountability, escalation as care, and the idea that trust comes from repair, not avoidance.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::warning
|
||||
**Before this session:** review Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy). Check in with your studio about how their compensation discussions went – any friction that came up is useful material for this session.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Observe how your studio responds to the conflict reframing – relief, resistance, or discomfort can all be informative
|
||||
* Watch the activity closely – are they able to use behaviourally-specific feedback or do they slide into judgments?
|
||||
* Note whether anyone identifies conflicts they've been avoiding
|
||||
* Pay attention to body language during the accountability discussion – who checks out? Who leans in?
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Check in with each studio member (even briefly, via Slack) about how the session landed
|
||||
* Make sure they have the link to Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy)
|
||||
* If any studio member seems activated or upset, reach out directly. This session can surface real pain.
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Conflict Policy and Practice**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Baby Ghosts' [Conflict Resolution Policy](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Policies/Conflict+Resolution+Policy) and [Procedures](https://publish.obsidian.md/baby-ghosts-corp-docs/Public/Procedures/Conflict+Resolution+Procedures)
|
||||
* Loving Justice framework reference
|
||||
* Window of Transformation zones reference
|
||||
|
||||
### :world_map: **Context**
|
||||
|
||||
This PS meeting has two parts: (1) helping the studio name an avoided tension, and (2) reviewing the conflict resolution template together. The order matters – naming a real tension first gives the template review practical grounding. But read the room. If the tension-naming conversation goes deep, let it run and abbreviate the template review. The real work is the conversation, not the document.
|
||||
|
||||
This may be the most emotionally demanding PS meeting. Be prepared to hold space without trying to fix everything.
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Review the Baby Ghosts conflict resolution policy and procedures yourself – know the structure well enough to guide a discussion
|
||||
* Reflect on what you observed during the session and the compensation discussion last week – is there an unresolved tension you've noticed?
|
||||
* Check your own readiness. If you're carrying a lot from your own studio or personal life, be honest with yourself about your capacity to hold space today.
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"How are you feeling after that session? Anything stirred up?"
|
||||
|
||||
This isn't a throwaway question. Give it real space. If someone needs to talk, let them.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Name one avoided tension (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::warning
|
||||
***This could be hard.*** Go gently but don't avoid it.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
"What conflict or tension has your studio been avoiding? It doesn't have to be big – small avoidances are actually great to examine."
|
||||
|
||||
**If no one speaks up immediately**, let the silence sit. Count to 15 in your head before you intervene. Then try:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Is there something you've been wanting to bring up but haven't found the right moment?"
|
||||
* "Think back to the last few weeks. Was there a moment where something felt off but no one said anything?"
|
||||
* "Are there any patterns from the Informal Hierarchy Check-In (Session 4) that you haven't addressed?"
|
||||
|
||||
**If something does come up:**
|
||||
|
||||
Help them practice the tools from the session:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Behaviourally-specific feedback:** "What did you actually observe? What's the behaviour you can point to?"
|
||||
2. **Stay on your side of the net:** "What was the impact on you? Separate that from what you think they intended."
|
||||
3. **Loving Justice check:** "Is what you want to say brave? Kind? Honest? Humble?"
|
||||
4. **Window of Transformation:** "Where are you right now? Where do you think the other person is? Is this a good time for this conversation?"
|
||||
|
||||
**If something big surfaces:**
|
||||
|
||||
Don't try to resolve it in this meeting. Help them decide:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Is this something you want to keep working through now, or does it need a dedicated conversation?"
|
||||
* "Would it help to have a third party present when you continue this?"
|
||||
* "What would make it safe enough to keep talking?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Review the conflict resolution template (15-20 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Go through Baby Ghosts' policy together. For each section, ask:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Does this make sense for your studio?"
|
||||
* "What would you change?"
|
||||
* "What's missing?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Key areas to discuss:**
|
||||
|
||||
**Who initiates:** "In your studio, who would actually be the one to say 'we need to use the process'? Is it comfortable for everyone to do that, or would some people never initiate?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation:** "How much documentation feels right? Too little and things get lost. Too much and it becomes punitive."
|
||||
|
||||
**Timelines:** "How quickly should you respond to a raised concern? What's realistic?"
|
||||
|
||||
**When resolution isn't reached:** "What happens if you go through the whole process and still can't agree? What's the last resort?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Escalation:** "Who's your third party? Another studio member? Your PS? Someone outside the program?"
|
||||
|
||||
They don't need to finalize a policy today. The goal is to identify what resonates, what needs adapting, and what gaps exist.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's one thing you want to commit to about how you handle conflict going forward?"
|
||||
* "Is there anything from today's conversation that needs follow-up before next session?"
|
||||
* Remind them: Session 8 is the last session. Encourage them to use this week to address anything unresolved.
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If no one wants to name a tension:
|
||||
|
||||
* Don't force it. "That's okay. The invitation stays open. Sometimes naming something takes longer. You can always come back to this."
|
||||
|
||||
If it gets heated:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Let's pause. Where is everyone right now?" (Use the Window of Transformation language.) "Is this a conversation we can have right now, or do we need to step back?"
|
||||
|
||||
If someone minimizes:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You said 'it's not a big deal' – but you brought it up. Can you say more about why it's on your mind?"
|
||||
|
||||
If someone deflects to structural issues to avoid interpersonal ones (or vice versa):
|
||||
|
||||
* "It can be both. What's the structural part, and what's the interpersonal part? Which one are you more comfortable talking about – and which one are you avoiding?"
|
||||
|
||||
If the template review feels abstract:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Think about the tension we just discussed. Would this process have helped? Where would it break down?"
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Note how the tension-naming went – did something real surface, or did the studio stay safe?
|
||||
* Note how they responded to the conflict resolution template – did they engage or treat it as a formality?
|
||||
* If any individual seems affected, follow up with them directly
|
||||
* Bring observations to your PS check-in – especially anything that concerns you about studio dynamics
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* A studio that insists they have no conflicts – avoidance is not peace
|
||||
* Someone who identifies a conflict but then immediately retracts: "never mind, it's fine"
|
||||
* Conflict always attributed to one person – scapegoating
|
||||
* Political framing used to avoid naming emotional experience (the emotional-political conflation trap from the session)
|
||||
* A studio that wants the policy "just in case" but clearly has an active, unnamed conflict
|
||||
* Someone who seems shut down or dissociated – check in with them privately after
|
||||
* Performative agreement: "I'm fine with whatever the group decides" when they clearly aren't
|
||||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,207 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: 'Session 8: Self-Evaluation and Pathways'
|
||||
collection: Cooperative Foundations
|
||||
path: >-
|
||||
Cooperative Foundations/Peer Support Playbook/Session Guides/Session 8:
|
||||
Self-Evaluation and Pathways
|
||||
parentDocument: Session Guides
|
||||
outlineId: 5233cb08-c16e-4c02-b726-5b0ce313961d
|
||||
createdBy: Jennie R.F.
|
||||
---
|
||||
> **Session content:** See [Session 8: Self-Evaluation and Pathways](/doc/session-8-self-evaluation-and-pathways-BKKaLmqOxN) for the full curriculum.
|
||||
|
||||
## **What happens in session**
|
||||
|
||||
The final session. Studios do a personal self-assessment (private) and a studio self-assessment (collective, shared with Baby Ghosts). The studio assessment rates seven areas on a 1-5 scale (from "Considering/Reflecting" to "First Draft of Documentation"): values/purpose/alignment, governance, decision-making/meetings, equitable economics, conflict/repair, program reflection, and what's next. The session covers post-program supports (Ghost Guild, workshops, PS recruitment, incorporation resources) and closes with a collaborative zine activity and group celebration.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::info
|
||||
This is a closing session. Your role is less about facilitating new content and more about helping your studio reflect honestly and plan for what comes next. The assessments are the core deliverable.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
### :eyes: **Your role during session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Observe how your studio approaches the assessments – honest and reflective, or rushing through?
|
||||
* During the studio assessment, note whether they're aligned on their ratings or if there's disagreement about where they actually are
|
||||
* Watch for emotional responses during the closing – this program has been intense, and endings can surface unexpected feelings
|
||||
* Participate in the zine activity and closing – you're part of this community
|
||||
|
||||
### 👆 **Your role after session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Make sure both assessments get completed (personal assessment individually, studio assessment together)
|
||||
* Schedule a final PS meeting for this week to help them complete assessments and talk about next steps
|
||||
* Make sure they understand Ghost Guild and post-program supports
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
:::tip
|
||||
Your weekly PS sessions end after this week, but you're still part of the community. Many studios appreciate knowing you're available for occasional check-ins as they hit milestones or challenges.
|
||||
|
||||
:::
|
||||
|
||||
## **This week's Studio Support Meeting: Assessments and What's Next**
|
||||
|
||||
### **📚 Materials**
|
||||
|
||||
* Personal self-assessment form (each member should have their own copy)
|
||||
* Studio self-assessment template (on studio Miro board)
|
||||
* Community Rule draft from Session 5
|
||||
* Any notes or documents the studio has created during the program
|
||||
|
||||
### :world_map: **Context**
|
||||
|
||||
This is your last formal PS meeting with this studio. The goal is to help them complete their assessments with honesty and specificity, and to set them up for continuing this work without you. Resist the urge to sugarcoat or wrap things up neatly. The most useful thing you can do is help them see clearly where they are – strengths and gaps alike.
|
||||
|
||||
### **👆 Before the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Review your notes from the full program – what patterns have you noticed? What's shifted? What's stayed stuck?
|
||||
* Review the studio's Community Rule draft, values map, and any other documents they've produced
|
||||
* Prepare your own honest assessment of where the studio is – you'll use this to calibrate if their self-assessment seems off
|
||||
* Think about what you want to say to this studio at the close. This matters.
|
||||
|
||||
### **🌊 Session flow**
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Check-in (5 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
"How are you feeling about the program ending? What's sitting with you?"
|
||||
|
||||
Let this be genuine. Some people will be relieved, some sad, some anxious about what comes next. All of those are valid.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Personal self-assessment (10-15 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
If they haven't completed the personal assessment yet, give them quiet time to work on it now.
|
||||
|
||||
This is private – you don't need to see it or discuss it. But you can offer:
|
||||
|
||||
* "Take your time with this. Be honest with yourself."
|
||||
* "Where have you grown? Where do you still feel uncertain?"
|
||||
* "What do you need from your collaborators that you haven't asked for yet?"
|
||||
|
||||
If they've already completed it, ask: "Was anything surprising when you reflected? Anything you want to share?"
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Studio self-assessment (20-25 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Work through the seven areas together. For each, the studio rates themselves 1-5:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Considering/Reflecting** – Thought about individually, not discussed as a team
|
||||
2. **Discussing Collectively** – Talking together but no decisions
|
||||
3. **Brainstorming** – Actively generating ideas and exploring options
|
||||
4. **Sifting/Sorting** – Narrowing down, making choices, working toward alignment
|
||||
5. **First Draft of Documentation** – Something written down – a policy, process, or shared agreement
|
||||
|
||||
**Go through each area:**
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Values, purpose & alignment**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Can each person name your studio's core values? Do those match?"
|
||||
* "Do you have a documented values statement or Why/What/How?"
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Governance**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Where is your Community Rule draft? What's documented vs. still informal?"
|
||||
* "Do you have a membership/removal process, even a rough one?"
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Decision-making & meetings**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Are you using a named framework? Rotating meeting roles?"
|
||||
* "What decisions still happen by default?"
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Equitable economics**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Have you had the money conversations? Compensation, transparency, IP?"
|
||||
* "What's decided vs. what's still avoided?"
|
||||
|
||||
**5. Conflict & repair**
|
||||
|
||||
* "Do you have a conflict process – even informal? Have you used it?"
|
||||
* "What tension have you named? What's still unnamed?"
|
||||
|
||||
**6. Program reflection**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What worked about this program for you? What didn't?"
|
||||
* "What do you wish had been different?"
|
||||
|
||||
**7. What's next**
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's your plan for revisiting governance and values after the program ends?"
|
||||
* "Who's responsible for scheduling that?"
|
||||
|
||||
**Your role during this:**
|
||||
|
||||
If a rating seems inflated – gently push:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You rated governance a 4, but last week you hadn't discussed membership or removal. What's your thinking?"
|
||||
|
||||
If a rating seems deflated – acknowledge progress:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You rated conflict a 2, but you named and addressed a real tension two weeks ago. That's meaningful progress."
|
||||
|
||||
If there's disagreement on a rating – that's data:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You see yourselves differently on this one. That's worth exploring. What does each of you see?"
|
||||
|
||||
Capture the assessment on the Miro board.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **What's next (10-15 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
Help them make concrete plans:
|
||||
|
||||
* "When is your next governance review? Put it on the calendar right now."
|
||||
* "Who's going to be your accountability partner for keeping up these practices?"
|
||||
* "What's the first thing that will slip? How will you catch it?"
|
||||
|
||||
Talk about Ghost Guild and post-program supports. Make sure they know what's available.
|
||||
|
||||
If anyone is interested in becoming a PS for a future cohort, encourage them to talk to the program team.
|
||||
|
||||
#### **Close (5-10 min)**
|
||||
|
||||
This is your moment. Share what you've observed over the program – what you're proud of, what you're hopeful about, where you think they'll need to stay vigilant.
|
||||
|
||||
Be specific. "You've grown" is less useful than "In Session 2, no one would say what they actually needed financially. By Session 6, you had that conversation and it was hard but you did it."
|
||||
|
||||
Then let each studio member share something too:
|
||||
|
||||
* "What's something you're proud of from the program?"
|
||||
* "What conversation did you have that you wouldn't have had otherwise?"
|
||||
|
||||
End with care. This matters.
|
||||
|
||||
### :star: **Tips**
|
||||
|
||||
If they rush through the assessment:
|
||||
|
||||
* "This is the last structured reflection you'll do with support. Take the time – it's worth it."
|
||||
|
||||
If they rate everything high:
|
||||
|
||||
* "I'm glad you feel good about your progress. Can I push on a couple of these? I want to make sure the assessment is useful to you going forward."
|
||||
|
||||
If they rate everything low:
|
||||
|
||||
* "You've done more than you think. Let me reflect back what I've seen over these weeks."
|
||||
|
||||
If they're anxious about the program ending:
|
||||
|
||||
* "The structures you've built are real. The tools don't disappear. And the Ghost Guild community is there for you."
|
||||
|
||||
If emotions come up:
|
||||
|
||||
* Let them. This is appropriate. Don't rush past it.
|
||||
|
||||
### **🏁 After the session**
|
||||
|
||||
* Ensure the studio assessment is submitted (goes to Baby Ghosts)
|
||||
* Ensure each person has completed or will complete their personal assessment
|
||||
* Share your own PS observations with the program team – what this studio needs going forward, what to watch for, where they're strong
|
||||
* Thank the studio. Mean it.
|
||||
|
||||
## :triangular_flag_on_post: **Red flags to watch for**
|
||||
|
||||
* A studio that can't complete the assessment because they disagree on where they are – this reveals deeper alignment issues
|
||||
* Rushing through to "get it done" – avoidance of reflection
|
||||
* Ratings that don't match what you've observed – denial or lack of self-awareness
|
||||
* No plan for continuing governance practices after the program – high risk of drift
|
||||
* One person taking responsibility for everything post-program – that's not a coop
|
||||
* Signs that the program surfaced issues the studio hasn't resolved – make sure the program team knows
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue