Example of Using the Problematic Moment Approach

BEC is a small organization whose mission is to advocate on a variety of social issues, which assail a very diverse community with a high population of immigrants in the heart of a major USA city. A multicultural board made of representatives of the key groups in the community and an executive director, a white bilingual male, manage the affairs of the organization with a skeleton staff of part-timers and community volunteers.

The consultants were called in to assist the board in becoming more sensitive and effective at managing the cultural, language, and class differences among its members. The meetings of the board, held every month, were conducted in English and simultaneously translated into three other languages - Portuguese, Spanish, and Khmer.

The group was having trouble working as an effective board, yet recognized the importance of learning from and finding better ways of working with their very rich and representative social differences.

We agreed on a collaborative approach. We would videotape a regular board meeting. After the meeting we would ask board members attending the meeting to identify at least one problematic moment they had observed in the meeting, and to briefly assess the effectiveness of the meeting using a short evaluation form.

A problematic moment is a moment when the group has the opportunity to creatively struggle with its differences and solve a particular problem. An edited version of the videotape was produced containing four problematic moments, which were identified in the course of the two-hour meeting.

The edited tape was fifteen minutes long and was shown to the board in a one-day retreat. Analysis of each moment helped the board to assess strengths and areas of improvement in the way the board managed itself and its differences. Based on this assessment and discussions, action plans were developed by the group for the future improvement of the board's work and multicultural relations.

An example of one of the problematic moments was when the executive director reported on the key activities of the last month. One of them had been providing assistance and orientation to immigrants in the community about a new law that had passed changing the immigration and residency requirements.

A brief discussion followed the report, which clarified the need and scope of the services offered. Various board members voiced their concern as to whether this activity fitted in with the mission of the organization and whether it would exhaust the scarce resources of the organization.

A Cambodian board member raised his hand and asked to speak. Through an interpreter, he told the story of his hardship and agony in coming to this country after being persecuted in Cambodia.

In a very moving description the board member said how important the former immigration laws had been in saving him and his family, how important the support received by him from BEC had been for his survival in the country, and how important it was for BEC to continue to offer that assistance and support to others in the community now.

A few seconds of silence followed his speaking. During this time, board members later reported, they got in touch with the mission of the organization and their own commitment to working on the board. They then felt more comfortable agreeing to support the immigration assistance program despite the considerable drain it would mean for the organization's resources.

In that moment, despite their many differences, the board was able to find common ground for action and for reaffirming the organization mission with its diversity components.

As a result of the analysis of the above problematic moment plus three others, the following sustainable improvements were brought to the operation of BEC.

1. Responsibilities and roles were clarified and an internal board structure was set up consisting of the following committees: (a) Community outreach committee, (b) Program/staff committee, (c) Financial/Fund raising committee.

2. A glossary of multicultural terms used frequently by the board was produced. Interpreters now sit behind, not next to, people receiving interpretation. A way for non-English speaking members to have more input into the agenda was formalized.

3. The board worked on improving their meeting skills and developed multicultural norms for their meetings. The board now meets every month to discuss 5 to 6 issues instead of meeting every two months with 10 to 12 issues.

4. Experienced board members began mentoring new board members on key issues affecting the community.

© 2000, Chaos Management, Ltd.