Collective
From P2P Foundation
Contents |
Introduction to the concept of a collective
It is possible to make the case that the definition of a collective is varied and far from exact. Generally, the label applies to any group of individuals that have a common interest and engage in some form of equitable decision. This set of minimum requirements means that the definition of the boundaries of the collective may only be limited by individual interest in the common issue and by the spread of the individual understanding of and participation in the decision making process of the group.
Because of the loose definition of a collective, the word is often used to describe "loose" groups, those that have indeterminate or unclear boundaries. In other cases the term is used to describe groups that have no shared economic interests. In this manner the term is almost dismissive, or meant to serve as an expression of disdain, meaning that the group is not well enough organized to do business together, and so is not worth another thought.
In some cases the term collective is applied to groups that form around an interest or need, and when the need is met, the group will dissolve. This development path does not go through the phases of creating an organization, a legal entity, or even, necessarily, and artifact that would mark that the group ever existed. In some cases a Movement can be labelles as a collective after the fact because of the distinctive lack of a persistant organization, legal structure, or artifacts.
In many cases complex organizations retain some aspect of their historic origination by continuing to use the term "collective" to describe this organizational format. This may serve the social needs of the group, and of course the group might call itself anything it pleases. In some cases the term collective is insufficient to describe the current and more complex format of the group. For example, a group might call itself a collective even though it has formed a legal organization, elects leaders, runs a business, and owns communal assets. There may be aspects of the enterprise, like a volunteer support effort, that is self-organized and functions on the periphery of such an enterprise, that could be described as a collective, and indeed the 'parent' enterprise may even consider this voluntary effort a "member of the family," but this voluntary collective is not definitive of the organization as a whole even though the principles of self-governance within the voluntary effort might still be a part of the social atmosphere of the enterprise.
Collective as a lightweight organizational form
A collective can be formed for any number of reasons that might be classified as a common social interest. An individual could gather a collective by finding people in their neighborhood interested in changing the schedule of the garbage truck, for example. This may be enough of a reason, and a common enough issue, that other individuals would be willing to get together to discuss options. Those who gather might not need to discuss anything more simply than a common way of expressing their grievance and deciding upon where to direct their grievance. Following the completion of this set of activities the collective might dissolve and never organize again.
Forming groups around common interests is a very common activity. If your needs are similar to those above, then this might be an appropriate Organizational Form for your group.
Collective form for use in mass organizing
Because a collective can have a very broad interest and extremely simple requirements for membership and collaboration it is possible to see how a collective might grow to include hundreds, thousands, or even more. As an example, it is possible to see the [African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1955–1968) African American Civil Rights Movement] in the United States as a collective action. While many organizations and leaders were involved, in many cases it was the action of individuals, who were 'members' in some sense, of a collective with a shared interest in additional rights for African Americans. While many organizations were created during and after the period of the height of the collective's actions, these organizations were not the sole representatives of the collective, even though they held common positions. In many ways it is indicative of a collective action that individuals within the collective will hold different, and occasionally conflicting positions, and yet still find identity within the collective as a member.
A Collective as a P2P organizational form
A collective can be a Peer-to-peer undertaking. Collectives are often organized as voluntary organizations that would be considered Free Association in many respects were it not for the fact that a collective may decide to limit membership without offering recourse. Collectives are often made up of Peers who self-organize and self-govern as they see fit within the realm of their shared interest. There remains a questions as to what type of decision making process the group would use, and whether this would be a form of P2P Protocol but that needn't prohibit peers from working together in a peer-to-peer fashion. There is also a question of whether a collective would choose a commons based approach to meeting their collective interests or needs. In the case where they do choose such an approach, along with adopting some form of P2P protocol, they are well on their way to forming a P2P Network.
Individual benefit in collectives
Individuals within a collective may have different reasons for sharing an interest with other members. While this may be the case, the collective format does not preclude cooperation on the shared concerns. In many cases the collective format is considered one of the only ways that individuals who otherwise might be at conflict can cooperate. This is the case because a collective has the distinctive goal of producing a change or some of meeting of social interest, as opposed to the bolstering of an organization that might cement or cause further structural interaction between otherwise opposed parties. As an example, many individuals of varied ethnic backgrounds became interested in the African American Civili Rights movement because these individuals saw that if African Americans received a benefit, they would as well, and so they became members of the collective.
In some cases it is important to point out that the preservation of an individuals right to exploit the outcome of a collective action is often one of the motivations for the simple qualifications of a collective. Members who wish to exploit the outcome will remain a part of the collective so long as the outcome is clear and of clear benefit. By pressing an outcome towards a more specific, or non or less exploitable outcome, can several diminish the number of members in the collective.
Individual Benefit in P2P Networks
A distinguishing factor of P2P Networks, in comparison to the Collective organizational form, is that a Commons Based P2P Network assumes that the Commons, the shared interest of the network, will be subject to and exploited by peer members of the network as well as those outside the network. In most cases this requires that the peer network examines the ways and means of exploitation, and takes steps to insure that the exploitation does not diminish the Commons of the network in any undue, untoward, or unplanned fashion. This type of deliberation is more complex than that customarily supported within a collective, and so distinguishes the organizational forms from each other.
Production Systems in Collectives
Some collectives may proceed in adopting some additional legal format allowing the collective to own or administer property as a group. In most cases, though, a collective, as a group of individuals with some shared interest and collective decision making process, it is very rare to discover the shared ownership of productive assets. Instead, more commonly, we might find something more like a social contract, wherein the members of a collective that persists over time develop a familiarity with each other. Through this familiarity the individuals may begin to share resources with a simple understanding that often engages a loose form a reciprocity. In these cases individuals are sharing personal resources with each other, ad hoc, and developing agreements with each other in the same kind of ad hoc fashion. While the collective may have facilitated the formation of social ties between peers, individual members of the collective take a step forward in developing a more robust collaboration. Often these interactions are between peers who share more robust interests and common social or cultural behaviors or other signifiers.
In some rare cases a collective may oriented towards broad social interests and arrange, through minimally complex decision making, in organizing a more complex form of systematic Sharing or Non-Reciprocal Collaboration. Already, though, as the collective is more oriented towards collective action to achieve social gains, by and large, it is unclear how the acquisition of assets that might benefit only a few members directly would not be at odds with the orientation of the collective towards broad benefits for all members, and no member specifically.
