I always come away from opportunities for discussion with public innovators thinking more fully about issues. Invariably nuggets of inspiration pop up, often in ways that are unexpected. It’s what excites me about participating in such opportunities. The opportunities invariably bring clarity to questions on my mind. Here’s an example.
Why does public innovation seem to be uncommon? Turning outward, after all, simply makes so much common sense! Surely everyone realizes that thinking about the community first is more fundamental than thinking first the organizations. Surely people recognize that more can be accomplished by coming together than claiming turf? Why does this even need to be taught?
I've learned one thing in advocating for this work that serves me well. It’s reminding myself that few people think this way. Even fewer organizations do. I have to remind myself that more often than not thinking like this is, indeed, not natural. Yet, it's important to acknowledge that some do. They may not recognize the term ‘turning outward’ and they may not have the frameworks to aid them, but there are clearly institutions that do act this way. You can tell it in their actions, especially in the actions they take over time. Why is it that some institutions do while so many don’t?
I’ve been fortunate to have worked with dozens of institutions in several states for a number of years; localities in the northeast, northwest, deep south, mid-Atlantic, mid-west, and elsewhere. As I reflect back on them, I realize that few have had what seemed to be a natural outward orientation. Those that did seemed to have had something in common. They had a core belief about why they were there. You could tell it was something they actually thought about. But that wasn’t all. You could tell that they also really believed it. Many institutions, of course, have a statement of purpose. Yet I suspect that it’s few that believe in them passionately. These did. There was something more that distinguished them. These organizations were willing to change to stay true to their belief. And by that I mean they were willing to challenge themselves deeply. Other than their core belief, nothing was off the table - even their own internal sacred cows. Perhaps you could say they had the institutional equivalent of a personal covenant.
There is a part of me that would like to point to one conversation at Santa Fe as the moment when this became clear. But in truth, I can’t. It was the sum of conversations, formal and informal, coupled with continued dialogue with an ever-widening group of acquaintances that aspire to a life of public innovation. You never stop learning in this work. You simply keep looking for the nuggets of inspiration.
