Conduct Agreement

This document forms part of our broader set of emerging Participation Agreements, and outlines how we currently understand our:

• expectations of how we conduct ourselves while participating in the project
• gradually escalating processes for responding to each other in situations where our conduct does not align with our collective agreements
• approach to supporting each other to hold ourselves accountable for how our actions impact each other as we learn and change together

Conduct Agreement

As participants, we agree:

• To act in alignment with our Conduct Expectations (as detailed below)
• To act in alignment with any conduct expectations expressed in our other agreements
• To take responsibility for holding ourselves and others accountable for conduct that does not align with our shared expectations by acting in accordance with the Response Guidelines (detailed below).

Additionally, all participants in the Brassica Collective share a responsibility for:

• Reflecting on the values that inform our conduct expectations towards each others (outlined below)
• Remembering that it is not enough to hold values as abstract concepts; and committing to our values being visible in the way we conduct ourselves
• Learning about our differences as we continually practice aligning our conduct with our shared expectations
• Supporting each other to conduct ourselves in ways that align with any expectations expressed in our other agreements.

Conduct Expectations

Our conduct expectations outline the ways in which we expect ourselves and each other to act. We also expect ourselves and each other to act in alignment with any expectations expressed in our other agreements.

1. Relating intentionally for living collectively

We believe that one way to help build a more just world is by intentionally acting in relation to each other in ways that actively resist the oppressive defaults that structure most relational dynamics.

Conduct that aligns with this expectation of relating intentionally includes:

• Taking responsibility for reflecting on our own behaviour and acknowledging assumptions
• Demonstrating patience, care, and empathy towards each other
• Approaching misunderstandings with curiosity
• Practicing giving and receiving feedback about how our actions impact others
• Genuinely reflecting on and learning from mistakes
• Creating conditions that support constructive discussions (recognising that these conditions can vary by context)
• Supporting each others learning and growth
• Being mindful not to fall into the oppressive default of surveilling and policing ourselves or others.

Conduct that does not meet this expectation includes:

• Behaviours contributing to oppressive dynamics (e.g., disrespectful behaviour, belittling language, bullying, harassment, etc.)
• Refusing to demonstrate curiosity or acknowledge assumptions (e.g. jumping to harsh feedback, or calling out individuals in group setting without having conversations to check their perspectives and, if useful ‘calling in’ first)
• Refusing to reflect on mistakes or respond graciously to feedback (e.g. refusal to participate in responses following an incident, responding defensively to feedback)
• Refusing to work with people who have breached this value to understand the conditions within which that breach occurred
• Not making an effort to assess what may need to change in our group to prevent further incidents.

2. Solidarity for collective liberation

We recognise that the systems we are resisting locally are the same systems that oppress people across the world on the basis of their race, class, gender, age, sexuality, ability, religion, and marginalised experiences. We believe that all of our freedom is tied up together, and we cannot leave each other behind in our fight for justice.

Conduct that aligns with this expectation includes:

• Respecting the leadership of those who are most impacted by an issue, while avoiding extractive expectations of their time/energy
• Learning about and unlearning our default assumptions and unconscious biases
• Recognising that people go about learning and unlearning our default assumptions and unconscious biases in different ways
• Practising relating-well across differences
• Co-creating opportunities for people to change oppressive behaviours
• Leveraging our collective resources to support political engagement and participate in broader solidarity movements.

Conduct that does not meet this expectation includes:

• Any form of discrimination, the use of slurs or other harmful language, microaggressions, minimisation or sidelining of forms of oppression (e.g., suggestions that we don’t have time to talk about racism, ableism, etc)
• Consistently speaking on behalf of communities you’re not part of, or taking actions against the advice or wishes of impacted communities or otherwise disrespecting or minimising their feedback
• Proposing punitive responses, such as demanding punishments, calling the cops, or refusing to provide opportunities for others to change their behaviours.

Conduct Supporters

In the following guidelines, ‘conduct supporter(s)’ indicate those participants who are acting in the relevant conduct supporter role(s). These roles, and how they differ from ‘participation buddies’ are expected to be clarified by a Conduct Supporters Agreement; if no such agreement exists then we expect to implement a single ‘care supporter’ role with the following set of responsibilities:

• Responding to requests by other participants for care following situations in which supportees felt (or contributed to others feeling) misunderstood, participated in or witnessed a conflict, and/or experienced harm.
• Responding to requests by other participants to help those who want to hold themselves accountable for their role in mistakes, misunderstandings, conflict, and/or harmful situations.

Each interval, participants can opt into this role. If no participants opt into this role, the associated responsibilities will be transferred to each participant’s respective ‘buddy’.

Response Guidelines

Drawing on lessons from transformative justice movements, these responses include actions that we are individually responsible for (e.g., approaching misunderstandings with curiosity), as well as actions we take responsibility for as a collective (e.g., paying for and participating in cultural awareness training). When participants act at odds with our shared expectations, we agree to be guided by the following processes, choosing the first listed response appropriate to the situation and escalating to additional responses if/as needed.

1. Listening & Learning

Situations this process applies to:

• When any participant shares that they feel uncomfortable with another participant’s specific actions, behaviours, or word choices.
• When any participant shares that they have experienced an action, behaviour, or choice of words of another participant as being out of alignment with our shared expectations (as outlined here or our other agreements).

Response process:

• We expect each other to acknowledge that our behaviours can impact each other by listening when others share how they experience our behaviours, AND
• We commit to reflecting on the impacts of our behaviours on others so that we can continue learning from our differences (if requested, this will happen within a timeframe agreed to by those involved)

Further actions when relevant:

• Debrief: we treat the sharing of feelings as a request for acknowledgement of someone’s perspective of a situation, not as an opening for discussion. If we need clarification or want to discuss the situation further, we will ask our conduct supporter(s) to help us debrief our experience and reflect on how our behaviors were experienced by others.
• Apologise: if any mistakes or misunderstandings are identified in our reflections, we apologise to those impacted and commit to further learning
• Agreement review: all participants are expected to reflect on the ways our collective practices structure how we relate to each other and propose amendments to agreements where relevant
• Escalate: if reflections identify misunderstandings or disagreements, or patterns of behaviour that are out-of-alignment with our shared expectations, then we request our conduct supports to initiate the Structured Dialogue or Behaviours-Expectations Calibration processes, as appropriate

2. Structured Dialogue

Situations this process applies when:

• Participants within a group setting discuss something in ways others find uncomfortable or disruptive; or
• Participants are unable to directly resolve a misunderstanding or disagreement, or
• Participants are navigating a conflict and are willing to communicate directly, but have come to an impasse

Response process:

• Direct dialogue: participants will be asked to arrange a time to engage in dialogue directly, outside of the group context; support to structure this dialogue can be requested from their conduct supporter(s).
• Mediated dialogue: if a misunderstanding, disagreement, or conflict is unable to be resolved directly, the conduct supporter(s) will either mediate or organise an external mediator to hold space for participants to continue their dialogue.

Further actions:

• Escalate: our conduct supports will initiate a Behaviours-Expectations Calibration process if we refuse to participate in dialogue when requested.

3. Behaviours-Expectations Calibration

Situations this process applies to:

• When any participant acts in ways that others experience as violating our conduct expectations, notably:
  • A refusal to align their behaviour with shared expectations (e.g. refusing a request for Structured Dialogue)
  • Patterns of behaviours that compound within a specific context (e.g. persistent microaggressions), OR
  • A single serious incident that is out of alignment with shared expectations (e.g., a singular incident of intimidating behaviour)

Response process:

• Conduct supporter(s) help a participant write a notice of concern:
  • A participant can share their experiences of other participants’ behaviours as violations of our conduct expectations with their conduct supporter(s) at any time.
  • Conduct supporter(s) will help participants to write these concerns and will initiate the formation of a working-group to respond to them.
• Form a working group to identify pathways forward (this working group can include any participants, including affected parties; but, at a minimum, it should include conduct supporter(s) of participants impacted and those whose actions are impacting others). When a written notice of concern is shared with conduct supporter(s), a dedicated working group will take responsibility for:
  • Identifying avenues of support for participants impacted by their experiences of our conduct expectations being violated.
  • Identifying any specific behavioural changes needed to address the concerns raised (and a time-frame for these changes to be undertaken if relevant).
  • Identifying avenues to support participants to alter their behaviours to better align with shared conduct expectations
  • Providing participants named in a notice of concern with a written description of:
    • Concerns raised,
    • Expected behavioural changes (individually and collectively),
    • Resources available to support behavioural change, and
    • Timeline of expected behavioural change
    • Warning of any consequences for behaviours of concern persisting beyond that timeline (e.g., pause on participation)
• Conduct supporter(s) to help us hold ourselves accountable for responding to a notice of concern by:
  • Supporting participants to treat the sharing of concerns as a request for acknowledgement of someone’s perspective of a situation, not as an opening for discussion. If we need clarification or want to discuss the situation further, we will ask our conduct supporter(s) to help us debrief our experience and reflect on how our behaviors were experienced by others.
  • Helping participants access the relevant supports and engage with expected behavioural changes
• Alter behaviours: the behavioural changes requested will depend on the situation; they may be specific to an individual or be relevant to all participants. Examples include:
  • An expectation that a participant learn more about how their behaviours can impact others (e.g., attend anti-racism training)
  • An expectation that a participant alter specific behaviours to re-align with shared expectations (e.g., by learning how to avoid contributing to another participants’ specific experiences of micro-aggressions)
  • An expectation that we improve our collective approaches to aligning our behaviours and expectations (e.g., organising group-wide training or amending our agreements). Further actions:
• Escalate: the Behaviour-Expectations Calibration working-group will initiate a Pause on Participation process if we refuse to participate in these responses processes

4. Pause on participation

Situations this process applies to:

• A major violation of collective values or agreements, including sustained inappropriate behaviour. For example, harassment and bullying, and persistent discriminatory behaviour as a result of refusal to engage in Behaviour-Expectations Calibration processes.

Response process:

• Form a working group to implement the pause on participation: we will call a working-group (this can include any participants including affected parties; as a minimum, at least the conduct supporter(s) of those impacted and the conduct supporter(s) of those whose actions are impacting others should be involved, noting that different people may rotate into these roles depending on the duration of the working group). This working group will:

  • Determine the time-frame of a pause from any participation in events and spaces
  • Determine the conditions that will need to be met to lift the pause-on-participation (these should be specific and feasible actions, such as participating in mediated conversations with those involved, offering apologies or acknowledgements of the harm caused to impacted participants, attending training, demonstrating learning and understanding in a particular area and a commitment to changed behaviour).
  • Work with affected parties to assess what broader changes may be needed (potential examples include, creating new group training, investing in more mutual care and mutual aid (including those who have caused harm), facilitating and mediating conversations between affected parties, working groups, or the all participants)
  • Support return to participation if/when relevant conditions have been met. Agreement review: all participants are expected to reflect on the ways our collective practices structure how we relate to each other and propose amendments to agreements where relevant Further actions:

• Escalate: the Pause on Participation working group will initiate an Involuntary Exit process if the conditions for returning to participation are not met within the specified time-frame.

5. Involuntary Exit

Review Conditions

This agreement will be reviewed in any of the following circumstances (whichever comes first):

• Whenever a participant proposes an amendment to this agreement
• When any agreement in the set of Participation Agreements is amended
• Prior to the first participants living in a collectively stewarded site
• After the Behaviours-Expectations Calibration process has been initiated five times
• Every two years

Context Questions & Assumptions

Where can I find more information about the jargon terms and associated assumptions in this agreement?

• The ‘collective’ referenced in this agreement is the Brassica Collective, as described in our handbook
• This agreement assumes familiarity with our broader set of Participation Agreements, and any ambiguities in this agreement should be interpreted in that context. In this context:
  • ‘we’ refers to all current participants in the Brassica Collective.
  • A ‘current participant’ is everyone who has opted-in to their ‘minimum responsibilities’ to the collective for the relevant interval(s), as described in the Responsibilities and Expectations Agreement
  • If we have a Conduct Supporters Agreement then references to ‘conduct supporter(s)’ indicate those participants currently acting in the relevant conduct supporter role(s) it describes.
• This agreement draws on lessons from transformative approaches to navigating conflict and disability justice approaches to moving at the speed of trust. Also see the‘Conflict is Inevitable: Knowledge Roundup’.

Will I get kicked out of the collective if my behaviour fails to meet the expectations expressed in this document or one of the other agreements?

• No, no no no no! This document is intended to be useful in a wide range of situations from small everyday missteps to serious ongoing unacceptable behaviour.
• The intention is that the response guidelines can be used to support a structured response to each situation within that range.
• We aim to be using these processes often and early when engaging with the project and each other to respond well to inevitable mistakes, misunderstandings, conflict and instances of harm.

Why do we need a Conduct agreement?

• In this collective, all participants share responsibility for aligning our behaviour towards each other and those in our wider communities with our foundational set of values.
• We recognise that it is not enough to hold values as abstract concepts; our values matter when they are put into practice.
• A conduct agreement can help us foster spaces where we can build trust with each other and relate well across our differences by:
  • Articulating shared understandings of our expectations of how we conduct ourselves in relation to each other
  • Outlining how we take collective responsibility for situations when the ways we act in relation to each other contribute to misunderstandings, conflict, and/or harm.
  • Outlining our processes for navigating situations in which our shared expectations for how we act in relation to each other have not been met.

What are the assumed values reflected in this agreement?

• The values informing the RAD housing goals that inspired this initial configuration of the Brassica Collective
• Transformative justice - see ‘Transformative Approaches to Conflict Resolution’ for a set of resources introducing some of the key concepts and practices associated with Transformative Justice. In brief:
  • Transformative justice approaches aim to avoid simply restoring the conditions within which a given misunderstanding, conflict, and/or harm occurred by seeking to understand how we can change these conditions for the better (both individually and through our collective practices).
  • This approach informs our intention to practice providing each other with care when we experience harm as well as helping each other to hold ourselves accountable when we learn we’ve caused harm to others.

What are examples of behaviours that can contribute to oppressive dynamics?

Oppressive dynamics emerge from power imbalances that perpetuate oppression. These power imbalances emerge in the context of societal structures (including policies, institutions, and cultural norms) that reinforce inequality, marginalizing individuals and communities. Individual behaviours that can reflect and reinforce these broader oppressive power dynamics in ways that tend to contribute to harmful situations include:

• Bullying (e.g., deliberate intimidation)
• Harassment (e.g., unwelcome personal attention)
• Disrespectful behaviour (e.g., unwelcome sharing of personal information or private communications)
• Belittling language, prejudiced comments, or thoughtless jokes about another person’s identity, personal characteristics, and/or life-choices (including but not limited to: gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neuroatypicality, physical appearance, race, religion, eating habits, health decisions, and drug use).

Why doesn’t this agreement consider all possible scenarios we might face as a collective?

• We think it is impossible to predict all possible scenarios. We are creating a ‘how to’ guide as a starting point to guide us in more concrete ways and will update this as new scenarios emerge.
• We expect this agreement to be updated as we try, fail, learn, and review our shared expectations of how to navigate the ever-changing dynamics of our collective.
• In building our capacity for navigating our interdependent responsibilities within the collective, we recognise the importance of positioning our participation in this group within our broader support networks (e.g, by mapping out ‘pods’ of people we trust to provide us with care when we experience harm as well as those who we trust to help us hold ourselves accountable when we learn we’ve caused harm to others).

Attribution

This Conduct Agreement draws on an unpublished version of the Code of Conduct prepared by the CommonGuide highlighting ways to include transformative justice considerations.