Roy describes the Core Model

Roy describes the Core Model:

I observed evidence of this consensus building at the summer retreat when the group spent several hours coming up with the word of the year, “believe,” that they would use to guide their focus. In addition the founders presented aspects of their strategic planning concepts to the whole group for feedback, discussion and ultimately changes. Wheatley (1999) views an organization as a living system which organically self-organizes with the sharing of information. Restricting information also impacts the organization and its growth. SLP founders are very intentional about using the terminology to “be on the same page.” The national core goes to great lengths to share information with the chapters and the members. Each of the founders has certain campus chapters they work with and Roy is the liaison to all of the high school affiliates. The founders send frequent emails to the chapters. SLP constantly updates their website to provide information about new opportunities for leadership, upcoming events and exciting news. The founders also frequently text and call their chapters to seek input. All chapters are visited on a yearly basis and those that are closer in locale are visited much more frequently.

Because the Core Model has a flattened hierarchy of leadership these discussions are more likely to happen. Heifetz and Lipsky propose, “Hierarchical structures with clearly defined roles are giving way to more horizontal organizations with greater flexibility, room for initiative, and corresponding uncertainty” (p. 4).

The Core Model of SLP has eliminated the traditional titles and some of the hierarchy. Matusak (1997) states that: “Leadership is not necessarily a title or a powerful position; it is a process, it is relational, it is making something happen—it is leaving a mark” (p. 6). The SLP organization runs on functionality, not hierarchy. Pete talks about SLP and the Core Model:

It’s...this collective approach to making things happen and working together and…credit and positions and all that good stuff’s just tossed out the door. And it’s about what you can do…I guess that’s what’s changed and SLP has changed that in me and I think it changes that in a lot of people. I think people come out of it…with a new idea of what leadership can be and in a lot of ways I think people see it as a more effective way of leading. ‘Cause leadership is about creating opportunities for other people to find that leadership, it’s not about getting people to follow.

This core leadership model does not limit the group to traditional officer roles but allows as many students as possible to be involved. The development of the bus cores and the Celebration City Cores have all been attempts to deal with the exponential growth of the organization, at the same time allowing more leadership opportunities for other students. The group recently established an alumni core for those who want to stay involved in SLP after graduating from college. This distributed leadership is first modeled by the way the four founders share their own skills and talents. The Core Model is similar to the Social Change model (1996) which proposes that leadership is not limited to position but is rather a dynamic, fluid group process of influence that unfolds and shifts according to its members’ talents, energy and commitment (p. 129).

The Core Model works because of trust and equality. Cores exist for multiple functions—the National Core is in place to serve Chapter Cores, while Chapter Cores’ missions vary from campus to campus. Event Cores work to organize events, and Bus Cores’ purpose revolves around college Make a Difference Tour planning. There is complete equality within Cores, developed through relationships and roundtable discussion, ultimately building trust among the group. Often, core members shift towards a certain emphasis, allowing individuals to work from strengths and preferences. Cores accomplish all of the necessary tasks to run an effective organization, without title or hierarchy, minimizing the gap among people and levels. Cores succeed through support and respect. Very few accomplishments in life are done completely alone. SLP’s Core Model thrives due to the support of countless people, organizations, and ideas (SLP website, 2008).

SLP is represented by concentric circles that support each other. Owen (1997) states: “The circle is the fundamental geometry of open human communication. We do not have a square of friends, and on a cold winter’s night it is nice to be part of the family circle” (p. 5). SLP is true to this circle of influence and intentional integration into the culture. In speaking of how the Core Model is shared within SLP Pete says, “Due to the conferences and the retreats, it’s the only reason it has been able to happen, but that’s what happening. We built it into a culture I guess. Everybody knows about it.”

A volunteer with the SLP development committee describes his learning curve in being exposed to the Core Model:

My job was to come in there and tell them how to do it right and…I don’t know if it was Pete or Roy who said to me at one point, ‘This is about students leading students’… and he didn’t say it in a way that was offensive at all he just said…‘Don’t tell us how to do that, because this is more organic.’ It’s coming from the students and they are student-led and student-run trips, and it’s not about somebody in charge coming and taking a bunch of kids on a tour. So that’s a huge lesson for me and it’s an absolutely wonderful model I think.

As mentioned by this volunteer a paradigm shift that had to occur when older people were asked to be involved with SLP to be able to understand, accept and embrace the Core Model. Older people I interviewed had more of a hierarchical orientation and had to adjust to the student led program. Along with this adjustment from a generational point of view there are other struggles with the Core Model. When asked about the downsides of the Core Model Roy responds:

It takes a lot of time because to build relationships. One of the other downsides of it is, I think, we don’t attract every strong person to the organization because there are people that want to be at the top. And that is just where they want to be and they are not going to be, in our organization because they can’t get to the top. It’s frustrating; it’s a very frustrating process because somebody that may not be putting in as much time as you has just as much opinion. So that is kind of annoying that people will have an opinion on an issue that they may not even do any work on, but they just think it should be that way.

Pete echoed similar sentiments when asked the question about whether people get frustrated with the Core Model, “There are people that are not in SLP because of it, because they can’t rise to the top…because you’re not going to be the President, you know, you’re going to be one of four people.”

Ashley, a bus core leader, contrasted the Core Model with her sorority:

It’s not as hierarchical as our sorority is obviously…it’s a lot more of the intangible things you get out of leadership. It’s a lot more of the listening to each other, and actually putting the skills into practice so while in the hierarchy you might say, “Oh, I’m the president and I listen to everybody” in SLP you don’t really have that like president title and you do have to listen to everybody, because your opinion doesn’t necessarily matter more than anyone else’s, so it’s really coming at it from that equality level a lot more.

Even though there is not a hierarchy with traditional officers, the core group helps to guide decisions, and in this format also shares the responsibility. This shared leadership is reminiscent of styles used in the feminist movement and is not a new model but a re-emergent model. Nickers compared SLP with his current job in a corporation:

There definitely is hierarchy in SLP, obviously the Core Model, and you have the national core and…things like that…there are different roles in the organization and there would be titles or just what you are doing. Just everyone is on the same level and that is so true, but at the same time you know there’s three people in the room making the tough decisions for the group.

One of the advisors for the group mentioned a structural concern about the Core Model, “If we are having an event for student leaders it is easy to invite the President of the organization but the challenge is, if you have five student leaders, who do you invite...because we don’t have space for that many.” This is an example of a non-traditional model conflicting with the traditional way things have been done. Harold, their first advisor, talks about the Core Model in this way:

It is about participatory leadership…it is a gift they have and this is the other thing I have never seen a group do, is how to replicate themselves. They had a structure to do it which…could have delivered people but they delivered people with the same characteristics.

The founders feel that the organization is sustained by purpose and values and not by personality. Pete alludes to this when speaking about participants at the summer leadership meeting. “If we were to be gone tomorrow, SLP would keep on going ‘cause those types of students would step up and do something about it.”

All is not perfect in adopting this model and Roy mentions this after the transition of Nickers out of the national core:

I hate it because…it is always two against one now, you know, we never really had votes. So it was always four. So if you had a two-two split you could talk it through and get a consensus but now if you are on the minority of a decision you are like: ‘Am I going to fight this or am I just going to let it go because it is easier?’

The founders believe in a dialogue model to reach consensus and this has resulted in some meetings lasting for six or seven hours before reaching a decision.