I was pointing people towards the six sources of influence in some behaviour change training recently, and went back to some original sources to remind myself about the distinctions between the six sources. To recap, the six sources are arranged into a two-by-three table, with ‘motivation’ and ‘ability’ divided into personal, social and structural. In this explanation on the VitalSmarts blog the two ‘social’ sources of influence have been merged. This bothered me – is there really so little distinction between social motivation (peer pressure) and social ability?
It seems to me that the distinction is brought most sharply into focus when critical mass is needed to make a behaviour viable. Want to buy more locally-produced food? A farmers’ market or a local veggie box scheme needs a critical mass of producers and customers to be viable. Setting up a lift share scheme? You’re going to need more than two members. Freecycling? Hackney Freecycle has over 17,000 members (yes, really) generating about 1,500 messages about free stuff for giving and taking a month.
Now this kind of critical mass isn’t going to be important for all the behaviours you want to change, which is probably why the distinctions isn’t so clear in some of the descriptions. But where it is, then special attention needs to be given to recruiting the mass.
- How will you make it as widely-known as possible?
- How will you make it simple for people to let you know they’re up for it?
- How will you make it easy to store information about a pool of people and then ‘activate’ them you have enough mass to start things?
- And how will you use their good ideas and information to shape the system, so that it works for enough of them?
There’s a virtuous circle which can come into play here. This was brought home to me by a stakeholder engagement planning meeting which I ran last week with a community organisation which has been awarded substantial funding through the Low Carbon Communities Challenge. We did a quick brainstorm of all the non-carbon related ‘social capital’ in their village – the formal and informal organisations which bring people together and build a sense of community. The population is about 2,000 and the group came up with over thirty formal groups, clubs or regular events (one for every 67 people!) and a host of informal groupings. Active community organisations build community channels and hubs for conversation. Members will have more connection with each other, and more trust, than people who are merely residents of the same place. So a critical mass of ‘warm’ people is much easier to find.
I was bowled over by how many active societies there are, and we all felt very positive about the potential for drawing on this wonderful resource for the low-carbon activities the group has planned.
Actions we take which help build community – in our neighbourhoods or workplaces – all add to the web of interconnections which form fertile soil for future behaviour change.