Skip to main content

XR UK Constitution (toolkit prototype)

The Self-Organising System

Guiding & Empowering The Rebellion

As updated 17 March 2023

We pursue great demands, but we sometimes make mistakes. We are all crew together, but we often disagree. We want to spread power, but it’s hard to do this and stay coherent as a movement.

This Constitution provides a set of agreements to guide us in making decisions
when we don’t know how.
It is a modest tool in pursuit of immodest goals.

Self-organising keeps us agile — able to draw on collective wisdom,
but free from unnecessary interference.
It cannot guarantee success, but it reduces the chances of us falling out.

This Constitution will not lead us to heaven;
but we hope it may continue to save the movement from hell!

Rebels gather among mulit-coloured XR flags

Contents

  1. XR UK Organism
  2. Roles Within A Circle
  3. Sub-circles
  4. Policies & Domains
  5. Choosing Role-Holders
  6. Joining A Circle & Asking People To Leave
  7. How To Make Decisions
  8. Meetings
  9. Record-Keeping

Rebels listen, some smiling and clapping, to a speaker or performer out of picture

A. Introduction — What this is, who it’s for, and how it changes

  1. This document defines the Self-Organising System for XR UK.
  2. To achieve our demands and see real progress in tackling the climate and ecological emergencies, we need our movement to work rapidly and effectively. The Self-Organising System replaces traditional ways of organising. It empowers rebel teams to make decisions independently within agreed parameters. Through this system the movement entrusts groups with the responsibility to make the best decisions they can so that we can all be successful.
  3. The Constitution was created using many of the principles of Holacracy, and was formally adopted by XR UK’s Anchor Circle in March 2019. (The Anchor Circle has since been replaced by The Rebel Hive.) This update was prepared by the SOS circle in response to feedback from the movement, and adopted by The Rebel Hive on 17th March 2023.
  4. The rules in this Constitution apply to everyone in the same way — there are no privileged classes, no exceptions.
  5. The rules appear in bold text, explanations and recommendations in plain text.
  6. All circles and roles contained within The Rebel Hive and its sub-circles are bound by the XR UK Constitution. Other groups are not bound by the Constitution, but may choose to adopt it, or parts of it, if they wish to.
  7. It’s not complete or perfect. It’s always a work in progress, which will evolve as needed.
  8. If you have any feedback about how the Self-Organising System is working in XR UK, or you need training or support with using the System in your group or circle, then do please message the XR UK Self-Organising System circle on Mattermost or via email.
  9. Minor changes to this document may be made by the SOS circle. Any significant changes must be approved by both The Rebel Hive and the SOS circle, using the Integrative Decision Making process.

B. Basic Principles

  1. The Self-Organising System is designed to enable groups to act quickly and be responsive to fast-changing situations when needed, and at the same time integrate the wisdom of multiple perspectives when helpful.
  2. The System is based on distributed authority — groups and individuals within groups are given the authority and the responsibility to make decisions and do things by clear mandates that are created and agreed upon by the wider team.
  3. This means that we only use group decision-making when it’s needed, and not for everything. (Group decision-making can take a lot of time and energy.)
  4. The design of the System ensures that everyone can see who is doing what, and it promotes communication between related teams so that we can work with a common purpose across a large number of groups.
  5. The System helps us embody two of our Principles and Values: that we are based on autonomy and decentralisation; and that we actively mitigate power.

C. The Self-Organising System

1. XR UK Organism — How it all fits together

  1. a. XR UK is a movement of groups and teams working autonomously in different parts of the country, or on different kinds of project.

    2. b.

  2. Throughout this document we use the word *circle*circle to refer to any collection of rebels who are bound by this Constitution and have come together in a group or team to work with a common purpose. (This is often called a Working Group.)

    3. c.

  3. Representatives from circles come together in broader circles, to share information and coordinate activities. And any circle can also create sub-circles to which it can delegate some of its work. The result is a series of circles sitting within one another like a set of Russian dolls.

    4. d.

  4. For example, The Rebel Hive is currently the broadest UK-wide circle. It contains representatives from all the regional and national circles of the UK. It has delegated some of its work and responsibility to the Operations Circle, which in turn has delegated some of its work and responsibility to the Media & Messaging Circle. You can see what this looks like in [the overall picture of circles](https://organism.extinctionrebellion.uk/?id=0)circles.

    5. e.

  5. **Each circle must have its own *mandate*mandate which will be defined by:-**

    *
      **
    • a *purpose*purpose — the reason the circle exists / what it is working towards, as a smaller part of the purpose of the whole organism; and**and *
      • **
    • some *accountabilities*accountabilities — the ongoing work that the circle does, what tasks the circle is responsible for; and may also include**include *
      • **
    • a *domain*domain — the resources or processes that the circle is responsible for, and which may not be changed without their permission.**

    f. The mandate defines what the circle is expected to do or create, and the scope that it must operate within.

    6. g.

  6. Advice on how to write mandates can be found in [Mandates In More Detail](https://rebeltoolkit.extinctionrebellion.uk/books/building-teams/page/mandates-in-more-detail-%28and-how-to-write-them%29)Detail, together with some examples.

    7. h.

  7. Each circle is self-governing within its mandate. This means that it’s up to them how they work within their area of responsibility.

    8. i.

  8. A sub-circle is also a part of the broader circle. This means they are accountable to that circle for the work that they do, and will need to prioritise their activity as requested.

    9. j.

  9. A member of each sub-circle attends meetings of the broader circle. This is to ensure that information flows in both directions and that issues are addressed at the appropriate level.

    10. k.

  10. All XR UK rebels can view [a map of the XR UK organism](https://hub.extinctionrebellion.uk/xrgroups/group?id=35)organism on the Hub.

  11. **

    l. All decision-making authority sits with the broadest circle until delegated to the mandate of another role or circle.**

    12. m.

  12. Projects may emerge which don’t easily fit into the existing system; for example, a project which involves people from multiple circles. In this case, it is recommended that one role takes the lead on the project, and creates an ad-hoc project team to do the work with people from wherever relevant. 

2. Roles Within A Circle — Creating responsibility for getting things done

b. Roles must be created or amended using the Integrative Decision Making process, and given a written mandate with the elements described in 1e.

c. When a circle defines a mandate for a role, the authority for whatever is included in that mandate is devolved from the circle to the role. This means decisions about whatever falls within the mandate are no longer taken at a circle level, but instead are made by the role-holder.

d. Role-holders remain bound by this Constitution, and the policies of their role, circle and broader circles, and will need to get permission to impact the domain of any other role or circle.

e. They have authority within the limits of their mandate, but must align their work with the priorities set by the Internal Coordinator of their circle.

f. If, in order to fulfil the purpose of their role, a role-holder wants to act outside their accountabilities, they must seek authority from anyone who has an existing mandate with accountabilities that cover that work. (If no mandate already exists, then it may be helpful to create one.)

g. Role-holders are accountable to their circle. The Internal Coordinator must ask them to give regular updates on their work, and invite other circle members periodically to offer feedback or voice any concerns they may have from the perspective of their role. It is recommended that this is made a routine part of the cycle of the circle’s meetings, and is not left until there is a specific problem or difficulty that needs attention.

h. At a minimum, each circle must appoint an Internal Coordinator, to be responsible for the healthy functioning of the circle, an External Coordinator, responsible for liaising with the next broadest circle, and a Group Admin, responsible for making the circle and its roles visible to the rest of the movement.

i. If no-one is appointed to the Group Admin role, then the Internal Coordinator will hold this role until the vacancy is filled.

j. The mandates for these roles are defined in Working Group Core Roles, and may not be changed. Other suggested roles that may be useful can be found in Working Group Template Roles. The mandate of the Internal Coordinator may be shared between two or more people, if that makes it easier to do.

k. Each circle may define other roles in whatever way serves their work. But mandates for roles must always form part of the existing mandate of the circle creating them.

l. A role may be dissolved by the circle using the Integrative Decision Making process. The role-holder will be included in the decision.

 3. Sub-circles — Increasing effectiveness and de-centralisation

    a.

  1. When you have too many people attending meetings of a circle, it may be more effective to divide the work between sub-circles.

  2. b. All decisions to create a sub-circle, amend its mandate, move or dissolve it, must be made by the broader circle using the Integrative Decision Making process.

  3. c. The mandate of a sub-circle must form part of the existing mandate of the broader circle, and cannot already form part of the mandate of another sub-circle.

  4. d. To create a new sub-circle —

    1. i. The broader circle must define and consent to the sub-circle’s mandate.
    2. i. The broader circle may also delegate part or all of a domain it owns to the new sub-circle.
    3. i. The broader circle will then elect the new Internal Coordinator of the sub-circle and ask them to decide what roles will be needed and how to fill them.

  5. e. The broader circle has a responsibility to support the work of its sub-circles to ensure they are functioning healthily, and also to review their work and hold them accountable.

  6. f. If there is disagreement between two sub-circles over how to manage something, they must take the issue to the broader circle for resolution.

  7. g. Sub-circles are accountable for delivering their work within the limits of their mandate, and have authority to decide how they do so. They must align their work with the priorities set by the Internal Coordinator of the broader circle and the XR UK Strategy. The Internal Coordinator may prioritise one aspect of the work of a sub-circle over another, but they may not indicate how that work should be done.

  8. h. If, in order to fulfil its purpose, a sub-circle wants to act outside its accountabilities, it must seek authority from anyone who has an existing mandate with accountabilities that cover that work. (If no mandate already exists, then it may be helpful for the broader circle to create one.)

  9. i. The External Coordinator of a sub-circle is responsible for sharing the strategy and work of the broader circle with their circle, so that the work of the sub-circle aligns with that broader strategy.

  10. It is recommended that the broader circle reviews a sub-circle’s purpose and accountabilities periodically.

  11. k. The mandate of a sub-circle may only be changed by the broader circle. The sub-circle’s External Coordinator will be included in the decision.

  12. l. If the broader circle is unhappy with the way in which a sub-circle is fulfilling its mandate, the first step will normally be to offer feedback to the sub-circle’s External Coordinator. If this doesn’t allow the issue to be resolved, then a Tension Shifting process may be appropriate.

  13. m. A sub-circle may be dissolved by the broader circle. The sub-circle’s External Coordinator will be included in the decision.

  14. n. If a sub-circle is dissolved its mandate will return to the broader circle, and its members will no longer have roles or mandates. The broader circle may wish to draw on the experience of some members of the sub-circle, by inviting them to join the broader circle, but there is no obligation to do so.

  15. o. Sometimes it may be necessary to move a sub-circle into a different broader circle. (This will not often be appropriate, as the mandate of a sub-circle must always be a delegated part of the mandate of its broader circle.) When it is appropriate to do so, the correct procedure is to move the sub-circle and its mandate into the broadest circle from which it can then be devolved into its new position (using the Integrative Decision Making process).

4. Policies & Domains — Preventing it all falling apart

    a.

  1. A system which only has authority distributed into roles and circles could easily create chaos and fragmentation, if there was nothing to constrain the distributed authority and create alignment when needed.

  2. b. A policy is a specific expectation which either grants or restricts authority beyond the mandates of roles and circles.

  3. c. For example, the last sentence of the Introduction to this Constitution (A9) creates a policy about who can update it.

  4. d. Policies must be created using the Integrative Decision Making process, and be communicated with all sub-circles that they affect.

  5. e. A policy that is created by a circle applies to all people, work and roles within that circle and any of its sub-circles, but not outside of that circle. For it to apply outside of the circle that created it, it would need to be adopted by a broader circle.

  6. f. Where there is a conflict between two policies that have the same scope, the more recent policy will override the earlier one.

  7. g. The Constitution overrides any previously existing policies that conflict with it, and may not be over-ridden by a new policy, but only amended in the way that is specified in A9 above.

    8. h.

  8. A domain gives responsibility for a resource or process to a particular role or circle. It may refer to something tangible, like a sound system or a bank account, or to a procedure, like posting to a social media page or liaising with the police.

  9. i. All resources and processes are the domain of the broadest circle until they’ve been specifically delegated to another role or circle.

  10. j. Role-holders and circles need to get permission to impact the domain of any other role or circle.

  11. k. Domains form part of the mandate of a role or circle, and must be posted on The Communications Hub, where rebels can see them.

  12. l. Any creation or delegation of a domain must be communicated to all the circles that may need to be made aware.

5. Choosing Role-Holders — Who has power and how to challenge them

    a.

  1. The simplest way to decide who fills roles within a circle is to let circle members volunteer for the roles they want to fill. Where this option is used, the facilitator must check that there are no objections to the appointment from other members of the circle (see the Integrative Decision Making process below).

  2. b. Where a role holds a lot of power, or needs meaningful expertise, or if there are more volunteers than are needed, any member of the circle may ask for the appointment to be made by election.

  3. c. The Internal and External Coordinators of a circle must always be appointed by election.

  4. d. There are two options for electing someone to a role:

      • The Integrative Election Process, or
      • A considered majority vote.

    5. e.

  5. Both options allow the whole circle to reflect on what is required and who would best fill the need.

  6. f. Whichever method is used, first the mandate of the role, the term of the appointment, and the qualities required to do it well are reviewed and agreed by the circle. Anyone may ask questions to clarify what is intended.

  7. g. The Integrative Election Process is as follows:

      • Everyone writes down the name of someone they would like to nominate for the role (which may be themselves).
      • Nominations are shared, and each person in turn explains the positive reason(s) why they have nominated their suggested candidate (without commenting on other candidates).
      • In the light of what they have heard, each person has the opportunity to change their nomination and give the positive reason(s) why.
      • Having heard the different reasons for the nominations, and taking into account the agreed criteria for the role, the facilitator makes a proposal for who to elect.
      • Everyone is asked if they have any objection to the proposal (see the Integrative Decision Making process below). The person nominated is asked last if they consent.
      • If there are valid objections, the facilitator makes a new proposal that seeks to integrate them.
      • When there are no longer any objections, the nominated candidate is elected.

    8. h.

  8. More information about the Integrative Election Process can be found in Integrative Election Process for Roles in XR UK.

  9. i. The Integrative Election Process may be used in a shortened form with the consent of the circle.

  10. j. The process for a considered majority vote is as follows:

      • Anyone willing to stand for the role declares an interest. Other members of the circle may also nominate someone who has not put themselves forward.
      • Someone speaks on behalf of each candidate, giving the positive reasons why they would fill the role well (without commenting on other candidates).
      • There is a round of clarifying questions for the candidates.
      • A vote is taken by secret ballot. Each full member of the circle has one vote.
      • If the vote is tied, then a casting vote is made by the circle’s External Coordinator. If the External Coordinator isn’t present, then the casting vote passes to the Internal Coordinator. If neither Coordinator is present then one person is chosen at random to give the casting vote.
      • Everyone is asked if they have any objection to the candidate with the most votes being elected (see the Integrative Decision Making process below).
      • If there are valid objections, the facilitator works with the objector and candidate to integrate them. If an objection cannot be integrated a new election is held without including that candidate.
      • When there are no longer any objections, the candidate with the most votes is elected.

    11. k.

  11. More information about the process for a considered majority vote can be found in Considered Majority Vote for Roles in XR UK.

  12. l. The process for a considered majority vote may be used in a shortened form with the consent of the circle.

    13. m.

  13. It may be appropriate to conduct some of either process in the candidates’ absence, so that objections can be voiced more candidly.

  14. n. The appointment becomes effective once it is recorded on The Communications Hub by the Group Admin.

  15. o. Role-holders must be appointed for fixed terms, which must be agreed before their appointment.

  16. p. Internal and External Coordinators must serve a maximum term of 6 months, so that elections are held at least every 6 months for these roles. This ensures that authority within a circle is refreshed at regular intervals, and allows for fresh ideas to keep things from becoming stuck. A Coordinator may stand for re-election at the end of their term. This allows for continuity and gives people time to grow into their roles.

  17. q. The Internal Coordinator of a circle keeps track of when re-elections need to be held.

  18. r. In some cases it may be appropriate for a single role to be filled by more than one person.

  19. s. Where a large number of people are being elected to fill a role, it may be helpful to use a different election method such as single transferable votes.

  20. t. Any member of the circle may call for an election for any role-holder at any time.

  21. u. The External Coordinator of a circle must call for an election for Internal Coordinator at the request of the broader circle they sit on.

  22. v. The Internal Coordinator of a circle may attend a meeting of one of its sub-circles to call for an election for its External Coordinator. They have the right to object to the person the sub-circle elects.

  23. w. If a role-holder wants to step down before the end of their term, they must let their Internal Coordinator know, so that someone else may be appointed, or the mandate withdrawn.

6. Joining A Circle & Asking People To Leave — Keeping things healthy

  1. a. To be a member of a circle, all rebels must agree to act in alignment with XR’s Demands and Principles & Values and this Constitution. They must read and agree to our Ways of Working and our Volunteer Agreement, and agree to work for the mandate of their circle.

  2. b. To join a circle, rebels must be invited by the circle’s Internal Coordinator on the basis of a clear fit between work that needs to be done and their skills and abilities. Anyone may suggest someone be considered, and potential new members may be invited to attend a meeting as an observer as part of that consideration.

  3. c. In this system authority is earned — people earn the right to be a member of a circle and attend meetings by actively filling a role and working on at least one project for the circle. This prevents meetings being clogged up by people attending and sharing their views about how things should be done when they aren’t actually involved in any work.

  4. d. The Internal Coordinator of a circle must keep the Group Admin informed of all changes in circle membership, to enable records and communication channels to be kept up to date. The Internal Coordinator may decide whether someone is or remains a member of the circle, by considering whether they do any regular work for the circle and attend meetings when needed. (If there is any doubt about this, then the Internal Coordinator must follow the steps outlined in 6f to 6i below.)

    5. e.

  5. Conflict within circles can be difficult to manage. This can lead to people withdrawing from their work, or even the movement. It can sometimes also be a rich source of creativity and strength, if handled well.

  6. f. If it becomes apparent to the circle’s Internal Coordinator that a circle member is:

    • not properly fulfilling their role’s mandate, or
    • not doing any work in the circle, or
    • violating XR’s Principles & Values, Ways of Working, Volunteer Agreement or this Constitution,

  7. g. Then the following steps must be taken:

    • The Internal Coordinator has a direct conversation with the circle member to attempt to resolve any issues and help them meet their accountabilities.
    • If that doesn’t resolve the issue, the Internal Coordinator brings it to the whole circle for feedback and review.

    8. h.

  8. The circle and circle member may agree to do one of the following:

  9. i. If a resolution can’t be reached after two or more reasonable attempts have been made, the Internal Coordinator may ask the circle to vote on whether to exclude the circle member from the circle.

7. How To Make Decisions — Moving things forward together

  1. a. The following ways of making decisions must be used for the following situations:-

— Decisions to create or amend policies or mandates for roles & sub-circles

b. These decisions must always be made collectively in meetings, because the views of the whole circle need to be integrated when distributing authority. Collective decisions may be made at any formal meeting of a circle. There are no attendee or quorum restrictions, but all circle members must be given reasonable notice of the meeting and enough time to consider the proposal.

c.

  • Any member of the circle may bring a proposal. An invited guest may bring a proposal, with the agreement of the circle.

    • d.

  • Proposals must explain the need that the proposal is seeking to address and how the proposal will help to meet that need. (A guide to writing proposals is contained in A Guide To Writing Proposals.)

    • e.

  • If the Internal Coordinator of the circle is not convinced that the proposal addresses a genuine need, or thinks that there may be a better way to address it, they may speak to the proposer before it is brought to a meeting.

    • f.

  • The facilitator must use the following Integrative Decision Making process:

    • A person presents a proposal for a new policy, role or sub-circle, or to change an existing one.

    • Whoever needs to may ask clarifying questions. Only questions to better understand the proposal are allowed. No reactions. The proposer may answer.

    • Each person, one at a time, gives their reactions to the proposal. No discussion or cross talk. If the meeting is online, no typing in the chat. The proposer does not react.

    • The proposer may amend the proposal if they want to based on the reactions they have heard. This is optional. Only the proposer speaks at this step. The proposer may also respond to some of the reactions where helpful. No other discussion or feedback.

    • The facilitator asks each person in turn if they have any objection to the proposal. This is not the same as asking if they like it, agree with it, or think it’s the best way forward. The question is not “Do you think this is a good idea?” or “Is this how you would have designed things?”, but rather “Do you object to giving this a go?” or “Is this safe enough to try?”. Objections are often helpful, as they may alert the circle to consequences that haven’t yet been fully considered. They are a welcome part of the process of making a good decision. Circle members respond from the perspective of their role, not their personal opinion.

    • For an objection to be valid,

      • Either all of the following conditions must apply:
        • The objection must be a reason that the proposal causes harm — where harm is defined as degrading the ability of the circle to achieve its mandate; and
        • The proposal must limit the objector from achieving the mandate of one of their roles; and
        • The objection must be created by the proposal and not exist already; and
        • The objector must give a reason why they are reasonably sure the harm will happen or why they don’t consider the proposal safe enough to try;
      • Or the grounds for objection must be that the proposal goes against a policy of the circle or its broader circles, or breaks a rule in the Constitution, or clearly violates XR’s Principles and Values or Volunteer Agreement. (The facilitator may also object to the proposal on these grounds.)

    • If there are no objections, the proposal is accepted.

    • If there are objections, the facilitator speaks with the objector to help clarify whether their objection meets the conditions above. It is the facilitator’s job to determine this. They do not consult the other circle members, but they must explain their reasoning. If in doubt, objections are considered valid. If the objections are not deemed valid, then the proposal is accepted.

    • If there are valid objections, then the facilitator may decide either to process them immediately if they seem resolvable, or to suggest they are processed outside the meeting so that it doesn't take up everyone else's time.

    • To process valid objections, the proposer integrates them where possible by adapting the proposal so that the objections no longer exist.

    • The facilitator holds another objection round for the integrated proposal.

    • Once there are no further objections the proposal is accepted.

    • It becomes effective once it is recorded on The Communications Hub by the Group Admin.

    g. For what seems to be a minor or non-contentious proposal the following short version of this process may be used instead:

    • The facilitator asks if there are any clarifications needed or any objections to the proposal. If there aren’t any, they ask for a show of hands to formally indicate no objections.

    h.

  • More support for considering whether objections meet the criteria of the Integrative Decision Making process can be found in Objection Testing.

    • i.

  • This process will not normally be used to make operational decisions, as these will be made by the role-holders with the relevant mandates.

    • j.

  • As a last resort, if the process above has been tried without arriving at a decision, and there is either:

    • a reason the decision needs to be made in the current meeting, or
      • if an item is being processed in its third meeting,

    then the decision may be made by simple majority vote. Where there are more than two options being considered, circle members must be asked to indicate all the options they could work with, and the option that most members can work with will be chosen. This is different from asking people which is their preferred option, and allows the option that the fewest people have difficulty with to be selected.

    • k.

  • If the vote is tied, then a casting vote is made by the circle’s External Coordinator. If the External Coordinator isn’t present, then the casting vote passes to the Internal Coordinator. If neither Coordinator is present then one person is chosen at random to give the casting vote.

    • — Decisions where a role has been given a mandate

    1. l. All role-holders may make decisions about any issues covered by their mandate. These decisions are made outside of meetings.

    2. m. Where a decision is fairly straightforward, won’t greatly affect others, or needs to be made quickly, a role-holder may make that decision entirely on their own.

    3. n. A role-holder may not make a decision that goes against a policy of their role, the circle or its broader circles, breaks a rule in the Constitution, or clearly violates XR’s Principles and Values or Volunteer Agreement. They will need to get permission before impacting domains that they do not own (see 4j above).

    4. o. Where a decision is likely to be more contentious or affect other roles or circles, and there is enough time to do so, a role-holder must consult other people who will be meaningfully affected, as well as those with relevant expertise.

      5. p.

    5. The idea is to create transparency, and collect input proportional to the impact of the decision, not require unnecessary delay or a burdensome number of meetings. The precise balance of how much or how little feedback to seek is up to the role-holder to decide.

    6. q. Once they have heard all the advice and perspectives they have received, the role-holder decides on what they believe to be the best course of action. The point is not to create a watered-down compromise that accommodates everybody’s wishes, it is about accessing collective wisdom in pursuit of a sound decision.

    7. r. More information on how to use this Advice Process can be found in The Advice Process.

    — All other decisions

      s.

    1. If a circle is set up correctly with clear role-holders, there will rarely be anything that doesn’t fall into the two categories above. For any other decision which falls within the circle’s mandate and is not covered by a specific role, the facilitator may decide which decision-making process to use. For example, they may:

      • delegate the decision to a circle member, or
      • simply seek agreement from circle members, or
      • test for levels of support by show of hands, or
      • use any other decision-making tool, or (if all else fails)
      • take a vote.

      2. t.

    2. Suggestions on how to choose which process to use can be found in On The Streets Decision Making Guide.

    — Who decides?

    1. u. Every full member of a circle (see 6d above) who is present at the relevant meeting may play a part in collective decision-making processes.

    2. v. Role-holders must represent the perspective of their role, not their personal opinions; and External Coordinators must represent the mandate of their sub-circle, not the opinions of its members.

    3. w. If the External Coordinator of a sub-circle is unable to attend a meeting, they may nominate another member of the sub-circle to attend in their place. The Internal Coordinator of the broader circle must be informed before the meeting.

    4. x. If a sub-circle has elected joint External Coordinators, then only one of them may attend any particular meeting of the broader circle (unless the broader circle agrees otherwise), and only one of them may participate in the decision-making processes.

    5. y. Anyone present as an observer does not take part.

    6. z. In the case of a vote, each member of a circle has one vote, regardless of how many roles they hold.

    7. aa. Where a circle contains link roles from other circles (not the External Coordinators of its own sub-circles), they will not take part in the circle’s collective decision-making unless that is specifically agreed by the circle, either at the time of the role’s creation, or in relation to a specific decision.

      8. bb.

    8. More information on link roles and how to create them can be found in An Introduction To Link Roles and the Hive Policy on Link Roles .

    9. cc. Where a decision does not fall within the circle’s mandate it will need to be taken to a broader circle for consideration.

    8. Meetings — Making them more efficient and enjoyable

    9. Record-Keeping — Creating transparency & improving communication

    1. a. Every circle within XR UK must publish and maintain an up to date profile on The Communications Hub, including:

      • their mandate (purpose, accountabilities, domains and policies);
      • a way for others to contact them (eg email address, or Mattermost channel); and
      • the names and mandates of their Coordinators and other role-holders.

    We all want to see real and urgent change in meeting the climate and ecological emergencies.

    May this Self-Organising System empower us to be
    the most effective movement we can be!

    a speaker with a loud hailer addresses a large gathering of rebels on hte steps of Trafalgar Square, London

    This version was revised from a version originally created by Nick Osborne at evolvingorganisation.co. You are free to copy it subject to these licence terms.

    Back to top