2 years of Uniting the Movement – Are we a social movement?

Reading all the positive articles and stories celebrating 2 years since the launch of Uniting the Movement (UTM) made me reflect on progress and how I see things. Over the last couple of weeks through discussions with various system partners there seems to be a common question emerging. Are we a social movement or are we organisations delivering a national strategy? Is it both? Can it be both?

The last 12 months

If year 1 of working in UTM felt to me like it was a new dawn, looser and energising, the last 12 months within UTM have felt more controlled and stalled. I wasn’t quite sure why they were the first thoughts into my head so I went off and read about social movements other than the one I’m working in every day. To see if there was learning that might explain why ‘control’ and ‘stall’ were on my mind. And to get a fresh perspective.

“…a social movement agitates for change and then they get pushback. And the real thing that differentiates a successful movement from an unsuccessful movement is how do they react when they get that pushback?…”
What makes social movements succeed? Professor Hahrie Han, World Economic Forum

Was year 1 of UTM ‘agitating for change’ and year 2 has seen the ‘pushback’?

The research suggests there isn’t a blueprint for how to build a perfect social movement. From the various things I read and watched, this short video from Professor Hahrie Han particularly resonated as it feels like UTM is in a ‘pushback’ phase. And it provided a helpful structure for me to initially make sense of my thoughts.

The pushback phase

UTM was launched during the Covid pandemic. It landed at a time when the spotlight was on inequalities. It became more obvious to more of the country that these sorts of crisis impact certain communities far more than others. Getting the support and resources to those who needed it the most was the priority and done with urgency. Communities and services worked together to help each other and save lives. The health of the nation was talked about every day. UTM ‘agitated for change’ at the right time when it launched.

Social movement theory suggests that following a period of agitating for change you get a pushback phase. When cultural norms and longstanding ways of doing things collide with the emerging new future, creating a sense of pushback. A pushback that may be unintended consequences of certain actions and may be deliberate behaviours for many reasons.

What changed from year 1 into year 2 that might explain a pushback phase for UTM?

Some of the things I’ve heard people mention as being different in year 2 compared to year 1 of UTM are listed below and could be driving the pushback. Do they hint at a bureaucratization phase of UTM?

“The most successful social movements are simultaneously bold and pragmatic. They simultaneously negotiate but also hold big ideas.“

• Long-term funding for system partners was agreed and started to flow in year 2 to individual organisations. Year 1 the emphasis was more on organisation alignment around tackling inequalities and applying for funding. The funding wasn’t guaranteed. Did something change once the funding was secure for individual organisations?
• Doing what is needed to support the pandemic and communities was the focus in year 1. Pressure to articulate value for money and demonstrate impact became more prevalent again in year 2 as the pandemic eased and the political spotlight on value for money returned. How do we pragmatically manage this measurement question?
• Austerity, political instability and health service challenges in their own right took centre stage in year 2, as the focus in mainstream media shifted away from these things as being part of Covid response. Is society reverting to type as it is facing challenges it is more accustomed to?
• UTM was different not for ‘what’ it outlined but for the ‘revolution of the how’. Were the changes in the ‘how’ not clear enough quickly enough and therefore the ‘what’ got people’s attention more in year 2 as it was more tangible and understandable. How do we tell a stronger story that knits together the how and the what?

Clearly many other factors could be influencing a pushback phase within UTM but how could we hold, negotiate and work through together the big ideas and questions emerging across UTM?

The positive is that learning from other successful social movements suggests there is a way forward through this tricky phase.

How might we work through the pushback phase? Some pointers within social movement theory that might help UTM;

Don’t mistake attention for power – Lots of people are talking about similar things. Eg, getting investment to where it most needed or new approaches to evaluation. How can we create the conditions for high attention topics like these to influence the way structures and processes are designed? The attention around these topics is coming from brilliant people across a range of sectors. But it doesn’t seem to be easy for them to actively participate in reshaping how things are designed. How can we make participation in UTM from being possible, to being probable, to being powerful? What will it take for powerful participation?

Aim to organise not just mobilise – The recent news that bespoke support for the leisure sector was not included as part of the Energy Bills Discount Scheme created outrage. Outrage being a common feature of social movements. Multiple voices expressed their outrage via multiple channels across the sport and physical activity sector. But that outrage has felt disconnected and at times a case of who can shout the loudest. How could we organise this type of outrage to make it work together better for the aims of UTM?

Develop a quick reaction time – The reaction of organisations across UTM to the Covid crisis showed what is possible. How we can work together in quick and trusted ways to support and get resources to those struggling the most to be physically active. There was so much learning that suggests we could make responding quickly together to big challenges the norm. How could we speed up how we work together within UTM?

Stick with the things we care about – The Montgomery bus boycott lasted 380 days. Within UTM there are many systemic issues that people deeply care about and want to change. Some issues feel like they stick and some feel they come and go. Progress around issues such as climate change has come from a mixture of relentless persistence, attention and outrage. How do we sustain our drive to change the things we deeply care about? What different tactics can we adopt that have proved successful in bringing about change on deep-rooted societal issues?

“How many social movements do we have in the 21st century that could sustain a boycott for 380 days?“

Embrace self-governance and democracy – There are certain policies and decisions that will significantly impact on the direction of UTM. Eg, how and where money is targeted across places and why. How can we bring people together around these levers of change in democratic ways given their importance on the movement? How can we make decisions more as a movement?

“It’s about people putting their hands on the levers of change and becoming architects of their own future.”

Make relationships more important than functions – What influences how physically active someone is and why opportunities to be active are not equal for everyone are incredibly diverse, fast moving and inter-connected. Much of what will influence UTM in the future is unknown. How can we strengthen the relationships between people across UTM at all levels? So that when the inevitable next challenge arises we are consistently well connected to work through these together and don’t have to see a new influence on UTM as requiring a new function, programme or investment.

Don’t forget the basics – There is some simplicity within complexity. How can we make it easy for people to find each other and connect? To know who is working on what and where. To know what is going on and how they can engage. Spreadsheets still have a purpose. Anchor points for significant issues and priorities helps communication to flow.

Make decisions in constant conversation with the people who need the change the most – Only the people experiencing inequalities and injustice know what works for them. What barriers they are facing to being active. But we haven’t yet created the conditions for the people we want to support to consistently be involved in decision making. There are examples emerging in placed-based work. But it isn’t a norm. How could we re-design the way we make decisions? We are seeing in the work exploring how place, system partners and relationships come together the need to make decisions more as a movement and go beyond looking at this as individual organisations. Mindsets matter here. Eg, is where an organisation wants to work the same thing as where the movement needs it to work?

After reading, reflecting and discussing this with many colleagues across a wide variety of organisations I remain positive UTM can react to and work through the pushback. And become a successful social movement. Reading up on social movement theory has helped me to normalise where UTM feels like it is and why that may be. Other ‘movement’ approaches are launching in 2023; Our Dorset – a movement for movement and Oxfordshire on the move just 2 of the many I have seen recently on social media. All great opportunities to learn about movement building.

The big question I continue to reflect on and will continue to discuss with colleagues remains. Are we a movement or are we organisations delivering a national strategy? Is it both? Can it be both? Particularly given that “no social movement has had a unitary strategy for victory.”