Andreas form Darmstadt; my hometown in Germany had arrived, especially to document the training and the life of people on Rusinga. Marian from the US arrived the week before, she had been here last August with Jan van Koert from the Netherlands and been in ungoing contact with the group on Rusinga. She had especially cared for and supported orphans in a pre-school.
We had planned a good-by-party for Friday with both groups, the beginners and the advanced learners. Participants of the beginners group had bought and prepared food, bought b
everages, decorated the room. I appreciate very much how they handled it, they had elected sociocraticly the people in charge of each task, and these had looked for supporters. Using sociocratic election had brought much appreciation for many of them.I remember especially 3 experiences of this week:
1. The sociocratic election of a representative who would accompany Heike and me to join the NVC training in Nairobi and make contact with the NVC-enthusiasts to start (hopefully ongoing) networking in Kenya. We started Thursday afternoon after the training. In the first round many voted for James, who is also a member of the Badilisha-board (he organisation that had invited us). He also voted for himself. Then I asked according to the sociocratic process of election if someone wanted to change their vote after they had heard the arguments before going into the consent round. All but three voted for James (not yet election), one of them Ruth, who said she didn’t know it was possible to propose herself. So she proposed herself.
I proposed James because he had also proposed himself and I guessed from the votes before that participants would consent to his election. There were three paramount objections.
Then I proposed Ruth, also because she being female and in the beginners group a man had been elected – and I was sure and also told them that I guessed that the skills needed for this task would be equally met by each of the tree remaining candidates. This time there were two paramount objections. James mentioned that Ruth would already be going to Kisumu, a town in a distance of 3 hours travel, with some women to explore how they could generate an income. So she would cover several departments on the organisation (women empowerment and NVC) and this would be more than he appreciates. Solomon found this true for Ruth and James as well, who is a member of the board. So I gave it another try and proposed Maurice, repeating that I was convinced that each of the three would be able to fulfil the task. This time there were paramount objections again, mostly from the women in the group who wanted Ruth to go.
I felt helpless and expressed it; it was getting late and dark. (There are no street lamps; they had no torches to get home. So we agreed on continuing the process during our meeting on Friday. I asked them to be aware of all three being equally skilled candidates and to consider a different vote for the next day. On Friday we abbreviated the training somewhat because we had planned our good-by-party. Before we started I again explained what is meant by paramount objection. I wanted to start the election process a young teacher asked how it came that I decided about which objection would be a paramount objection, I wouldn’t be a member of the group. I invited him to facilitate the election process; he and the group consented.
He asked for votes, we listened to the arguments, and Meshak proposed Ruth. The election ended again with three paramount objections.
Then James withdrew from proposing himself; the other one who also had proposed James changed his vote to Ruth. In the next consent round there was still one paramount objection from Solomon fearing Ruth would be overwhelmed by working in the two departments – he would like the work being shared. She already would be going to Kisumu.
The facilitator of the election, felt helpless – and I too. Some mentioned that the board members wanted to use power over in the group, why we had suggested an election anyway, it was about autonomy for the group. I feared that the whole group would start to fight with each other and I would leave enemies instead of contributing to peace.
Then I remembered NEEDS. I asked Ruth and Solomon for their needs, which were met by staying with their votes. Ruth expressed her need for contribution, she was working with people from the organisation from the very beginning and eagerly waiting for a chance to contribute to the growing of the group – and now that was an opportunity.
Solomon expressed that it is very important for him that no one does more than they are capable of. I asked Ruth if she could agree on going to Kisumu (she had cared for the accommodation there and knew the women they wanted to visit to find out how women on Rusinga could create an income of their own, but someone else would come back with the report. She agreed on this. Solomon also agreed on this solution.
I felt deeply happy and relieved to have found a solution to this challenge – based on needs!
