In the first of a series of interviews with South-West Coastal LPIP partners, Matt Bell from the Plymouth Octopus Project talks tactics for helping coastal communities thrive.
Can you tell us a bit about yourself and the Plymouth Octopus Project?
I’ve been involved with charities for the past 15 to 20 years. In January 2019, I made the move to Plymouth to join Plymouth Octopus Project. The core mission of POP revolves around supporting small grassroots groups within the community. We aim to empower them to do what they do best by facilitating connections between different groups, fostering mutual support, and capacity-building. This includes offering advice, workshops, training, and other forms of support.
Prior to joining POP I worked for a charity in Exeter. We were a multipurpose organisation with a strong focus on local projects related to poverty. During my time there, I became increasingly interested in the concept of community and the importance of addressing homelessness and promoting community development. I noticed a lack of listening and connection within the system which affected community members.
The second aspect that caught my interest was how to align the organisational structure with the values we were trying to promote in the community. The fixed hierarchical top-down control approach contradicted the essence of our community-focused work. It felt like these two aspects were not harmonising well.
In the past, the need for centralised information flow justified hierarchical systems. However, in today’s world of rapid and decentralised information exchange, such structures appear increasingly outdated.
Can you say a little more about this hierarchical approach?
I found myself in a peculiar situation in my leadership position, mediating conflicts between team members, and feeling conflicted about my role. I questioned the need for the kind of ‘parental’ structure I found within the organisation and began to question the limitations it imposed on individuals’ autonomy to resolve their own issues.
As I delved deeper into the topic, I discovered alternative organisational models that share striking similarities with the values embraced in community and network settings. Applying these values revealed the shortcomings of hierarchical structures, which were initially developed with mechanistic and militaristic influences. In the past, the need for centralised information flow justified hierarchical systems. However, in today’s world of rapid and decentralised information exchange, such structures appear increasingly outdated.
Day by day, we witness how fixed hierarchies hinder progress. Fixed power dynamics and control impede adaptability to different situations, often leaving authority in the hands of those ill-suited for leadership. It becomes apparent that hierarchies are impractical and counterproductive, reinforcing my belief that they are ultimately unhelpful.
Can you tell us about a specific project that has harnessed this approach and these values?
Recently, we have been involved in a high-profile program called Belong in Plymouth. This initiative focuses on fostering better relationships between statutory organisations and grassroots groups. It aims to bridge the gap and encourage collaboration between these different entities.
Our journey began with the City Council and Local Care Partnership to develop our bid. From the outset, we recognised the importance of listening to people. Rather than planning a structure and then seeking input, we decided to prioritise listening as our starting point.
We contemplated bringing in evaluators or researchers, but that approach didn’t align with our goal of fostering long-lasting relationships. Instead, we opted to ask a diverse group of individuals to engage in open-ended conversations about the specific question we wanted to explore. Our focus was on coaching them to have meaningful conversations. We tackled each challenge as it arose, adapting our approach accordingly.
In the span of two years, we made progress in the cycle of transitioning from conversation to insight and action. This was made possible through building capacity and the natural progression of the conversation. We understood that people needed to grasp the purpose and value before embracing the structure. It is an ongoing cyclical process of deepening understanding and broadening engagement.
What are the challenges for organisations such as POP?
The challenge lies in finding the right balance between being specific enough to secure funding and not getting too bogged down in details. We hope to strike that balance, obtain the necessary funding, and then open the conversations again with a degree of flexibility.
The key obstacle to change is the lack of engagement and time for people to participate in decision-making and collaboration. Therefore, we need to find ways to free people up and give them permission to engage. We also need to address the major barriers to change, such as how money is utilised under existing power structures. Often, those in senior positions have reached their positions by not listening, so asking them to listen can be quite challenging, as they have become skilled at appearing attentive while not truly listening. And even if the best intent is there, the wider system can significantly hamper their ability to listen.
To truly listen, we need to check in with people, and provide structured time and space for their voices to be heard.
What makes for ‘effective listening’?
When it comes to effective listening, my experience with the Local Care Partnership highlights the importance of creating time and space for people to express themselves. In delivery board meetings, for instance, there are often between 10 to 20 attendees, but only one or two individuals get the opportunity to speak on a given agenda item. This type of meeting structure lacks the capacity and time for reflection, making it feel like a waste of time. Similarly, in other system-wide meetings, where 30 people are present, only a few individuals share updates, raising questions about the effectiveness of such gatherings. To truly listen, we need to check in with people, and provide structured time and space for their voices to be heard. By cultivating this practice within our organisations and the broader system, we can better respond to the needs and concerns of individuals and communities.
Effective listening also involves piecing together a bigger picture. I recall a Safer Communities meeting where issues of racism were raised, but they weren’t reflected in the statistics so the issue was downplayed. However, it’s crucial to understand the underlying reasons for those conversations to take place. It signals those members of the affected community feel threatened or unsafe in some way.
On the other hand, they may express their inability to lead such conversations due to limited staff time, capacity, or resources. Effective listening requires us to engage in a two-way process, where we don’t rush to find immediate solutions, especially if it’s not within our formal roles or responsibilities. Instead, we can approach it at a human level and engage genuinely with the issues at hand.
How can we move forward?
We often focus too much on problems that are defined by others, particularly within the context of services and their agendas. This narrow focus can limit our understanding of the broader issues at hand. Additionally, there is a tendency to rush into finding solutions without allowing sufficient space for input and conversation from those directly affected. This haste to quickly “solutionise” further reinforces a service-oriented approach.
To address this, I believe we should shift our approach and discover solutions through meaningful discussions about real lives in Plymouth. Instead of taking these conversations away to be analysed and solved by a group of experts, we should create an inclusive environment where multi-stakeholder groups can engage in dialogue. By bringing together diverse perspectives on the same experiences and issues, we can foster a more holistic understanding that goes beyond predefined solutions and considers the voices and insights of the community itself.