their being conscious of it. This lack of awareness Bourdieu (Bourdieu & Passeron, 2000) called It occurs because, in actions are interested. The logic of misrecognition. Bourdieu’s thinking, “all self-interest underlying all practices--particularly those in the cultural domain—is misrecognized as a logic of these practices and thereby contributes ‘disinterest’…This misperception legitimizes to the reproduction of the social order in which they are p. 90). embedded” (Swartz, 1997, The goal in this quadrant is the preservation of the status quo since grassroots leaders do not act because conflict is avoided at all costs. The decision to take no action is likely to be down thus making this quadrant the least democratic. This position stands in marked contrast to much of the writing about grassroots leadership where leaders use of attaining “methods consensus and for Community Action in Willie et al., 2008, p.13) in an reconciliation” (Centre attempt to bring about change, and where grassroots leaders a key role in mobilizing others “play in their pursuit of common interest for improvement and (Creyton & Ehrich, 2009, p.3). change” A consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of Cell C-Conflict Avoidance The main disadvantage of conflict avoidance is that there is minimal if any action and consequently very little if any change. Here the grassroots leader does not exercise any effort that would bring conflict. It is possible that inactivity could disempower followers if their desire is for more of a proactive approach. An advantage of taking no conflict may be that the grassroots leader considers the timing is not appropriate or the consequences of taking the action might be too risky and dangerous. In this way, inaction or withdrawal is preferable to action that may have detrimental consequences for the followers and/ or the cause. Cell D: Refinement / consensual = collaborative /democratic / distributive
their being conscious of it. This lack of awareness Bourdieu (Bourdieu & Passeron, 2000) called misrecognition. It occurs because, in Bourdieu’s thinking, “all actions are interested. The logic of self-interest underlying all practices--particularly those in the cultural domain—is misrecognized as a logic of ‘disinterest’…This misperception legitimizes these practices and thereby contributes to the reproduction of the social order in which they are embedded” (Swartz, 1997, p. 90). The goal in this quadrant is the preservation of the status quo since grassroots leaders do not act because conflict is avoided at all costs. The decision to take no action is likely to be thus making this quadrant the least democratic. This position stands in marked contrast to much of the writing about grassroots leadership where leaders use “methods of attaining consensus and reconciliation” (Centre for Community Action in Willie et al., 2008, p.13) in an attempt to bring about change, and where grassroots leaders “play a key role in mobilizing others in their pursuit of common interest for improvement and change” (Creyton & Ehrich, 2009, p.3). A consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of Cell C-Conflict Avoidance The main disadvantage of conflict avoidance is that there is minimal if any action and consequently very little if any change. Here the grassroots leader does not exercise any effort that would bring conflict. It is possible that inactivity could disempower followers if their desire is for more of a proactive approach. An advantage of taking no conflict may be that the grassroots leader considers the timing is not appropriate or the consequences of taking the action might be too risky and dangerous. In this way, inaction or withdrawal is preferable to action that may have detrimental consequences for the followers and/ or the cause. Cell D: Refinement / consensual = collaborative /democratic / distributive down
57308_EHRICH_What_can_grassroots_PRE_PUB.docx