The Story Behind the CongRegation Themes
CongRegation has morphed and grown since the first incarnation experiment in 2013 although the fundamental structure of what makes it special has remained the same.
One of the key things that changes annually has been the theme and interestingly the original theme of ‘Social Media’ still features strongly in some people’s perception of the event. Let me take you through the evolution to this years theme.
The first year focused on social media which as a sector was still evolving and needed lots of discussion and guidance. We gave options to people about submissions ranging from Case Study, Tips, How to Guide through to a what was called a ‘Rant’ (positive or negative perspective on the topic). Most submissions took the form of a leadership type piece essentially a smart positive rant, where opinions were given space to be elaborated, dissected, reassembled and made ready for discussion. It was clear that this was the type of contribution and form that people were naturally more attracted to but is the most difficult of all the options. It takes time to narrow down the vast choices, percolate the ideas, build a reasonable case, research, compose, edit, test, rethink and finally submit.
This single choice of submission was carried into year 2 but the theme broaden out a bit to include digital media, partially as a reaction to the broader nature of year one submissions. Rather than just document work done, attendees wished to dig deeper and ponder the topic at a more challenging level, rather than just deliver a blog post that could have featured on a regular social media blog. This was the what I saw as the emergence of what I called the ‘Mental Itch’. We are surrounded by all the theme areas but we rarely really question them or construct our thoughts into a robust argument or stance. In a world of twitter, microcontent and limited attention span long form content forces us to consider things with a bit more depth, sometimes to quite personal self reflective areas. We are also all incredibly busy and possibly don’t reward ourselves with higher debate and thinking when stuck in the now.
Year 3 became a bit more challenge focused with the theme exploring the impact of technology on work and personal lives. This evolved from conversations at year two as personal impacts were questioned. As the diversity of attendees expanded and as the curious nature of attendees grew there was a collective desire to look at something bigger and tap into the collective mindsets. If my observation from year two was around the general willingness to tested (submission and conversations on the day) year 3 taught me that the more meaningful content frequently involved peeling back layers of the onion to really see what, who was ticking. This happens naturally during the day in Cong but year 3 contributions contained not just smart insights but also deeper personal perspective.
Year 4 ‘The Future’ emerged as a natural extension of the Year 3 theme of the impact of technology on our lives. Technology has a role but it’s not the only player in town and year three surfaced a lot of fears and reservations that people had about the future direction we were heading. An attempt to capture on the day insights in the form of an open challenge to create a better future was also attempted but these themes are so big, multi faceted and broad that consensus is almost impossible to achieve. In fact, we could not even reach consensus on who should get the award for best contribution (the crystal ball is still sitting in my office). Addressing the final challenge on the day of producing ideas on what would make a better future proved difficult as the more views on the future that emerged the more questions that accompanied it.
The ‘Innovation’ theme of year 5 reflected the emergence of ‘meta themes’ and could be viewed as an additional component of the convergence between technology and future. This allowed the flexibility to explore experiences, expertise and scratching of the mental ‘itch’ – something that was always nagging you at the back of your mind that you wished to explore more deeply. The compliance aspect of the submission (ie cannot get a ticket without it) was replaced by sometime cathartic release of energy and focus on a blank canvas topic. CongRegation creates a peer based, trusted environment to explore areas and it was heartening to hear challenges to conventional wisdom and counter intuitive approaches. As the attendee profile also broadened so did the entry point and background perspectives. The range of angles, perspectives, commentary, guidance and strong opinions reinforced my own internal view that everyone has a piece of the jigsaw puzzle and no one has all the pieces.
Last years theme of ‘Ideas’ proved difficult for people as not alone do we rarely think about ideas in an external inquiring stance but we generally live in the moment of having an idea and the problems it poses. Ideas is related to the Innovation theme but interestingly many felt that Innovation had become abused as a concept due to over use – words matter. Similar to innovation, executing on an idea was a key exploration thread. In normal life this theme gets superficial treatment and is often interwoven into bigger fabrics. David Gluckman’s presentation in Ashford Castle and his comments about Ideas alerted me to this rich vein – if we just viewed it differently and pondered it more deeply. Rather than a collection of idea pitches the submissions contained a mix of well thought out reflections and probings.
Informally the theme has come out of conversations after each CongRegation and this year was no different involving late night (strike while the iron is hot) chats in Danaghers after the huddles and ukulele session finished. Four key suggestions emerged:
Fear: this popped up in a lot of huddles, would connect in a very deep way but also risked becoming very personality focused.
Imperfection: This was viewed both as perfection and imperfection and could produce fascinating divergent views
Transition: This originated from a conversation where it was felt a lot of people at CongRegation has experienced change or were undergoing deep self reflection (career, life).
Community: In its seventh year is CongRegation becoming a community that takes place in a rural community.
The date and theme were put out as a Twitter poll (not the most scientific way but I wanted to make it a bit more objective) and Community was the clear winner.
Over the last year I have had many conversations with Tracy Keogh about community from a business perspective from how do you define it, to the different perspectives to the joys and problems of working with communities. I have lived in rural and city communities, in communities in different culture China, Spain, Canada. I worked with different work communities and communities of practice. I have watched online communities grow from the early email lists and the fascinating worlds that evolved and have become the tail wagging the dog. I live in a rural community but see multiple levels, complications, fantastic endeavors, open mindedness, closed mindness to completely unconnected groups. Everywhere I look I see tribes, formal/informal groups of people and witness the same people behaving in completely different way. Community surrounds us, united us, it drives and moulds us and we rarely question it deeply. My curiosity is only now starting and I like all the contributors have permission to think, reflect, express and share our insights.
Only starting also is the awareness of how much I have to learn about this arena. Since agreeing the theme I have had fascinating conversations with sociologists about community and place, the evolution of communities through migration and the view/power of filtered, collated research to explain what I see daily but do not necessarily understand. As per Joan Mulvihills comments I have become hyper alert to community related topics to the point of having email conversations with a poet who featured on RTE Sunday Miscellany, straight after the show as he had a unique perspective on a community where I lived. Coffee time discussions have uncovered doctorates who have tried to implement industrial standard on to a rural community to try improve the community. Psychologist friends fascinate me on the way the thread multiple theories and thinking into explain how and why we operate in groups and communities.
Personally I am really excited about this theme, I am looking forward to being challenged, reflecting, researching , wondering, writing, scrapping, sharing, testing and I hope, like all the contributors, that this process along will enrich me a little bit more.