Ideas

Strength of Community Framework

We propose a Strengthening Community Framework based on the development of a sense of community in every setting. This framework proposes expanding the boundaries of community to be more inclusive so that more and more people see themselves as part of a larger and growing community. When individuals experience a stronger sense of community, they feel a deeper sense of membership, heightened influence, greater fulfillment of their needs, and closer emotional connection within their community. A stronger sense of community then enables them to become more inclined to view someone else’s triumphs, concerns, and struggles as if they were their own. They’ll become more compelled to act collectively, care for one another, connect, exert control over their community conditions, and enhance their economic conditions (i.e., more cash) so that everyone can thrive. With these five Cs, people’s psychological, social, and physical well-being, and the environments in which they work, live, worship, and age will also improve. As communities strengthen their internal sense of community, or bonding, they enhance their ability to collaborate effectively with other groups, known as bridging, thereby forming larger, interconnected communities. These larger communities are then able to connect with larger systems and engage in collective action on a broader scale. Bonding, bridging, and linking to systems are all happening at the same time. The illustration below shows all these elements.

We aren’t suggesting that this change will happen easily or quickly, or that this framework ignores structural inequities and power differences. Imagine another layer of strategies and interventions required underneath what you see here that includes community organizing, conflict transformation, intergroup relationship building, and more — strategies and interventions that are not entirely new, supported by robust research, and must be brought together in this holistic approach to center community in every setting possible. We’ll discuss these strategies and how to evaluate them in the rest of this blog, first with using the framework in organizations and then in place-based communities.

How Strength of Community Can Enhance Organizations’ Effectiveness

Strengthening an organization’s sense of community can help achieve its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) goals and improve the workplace overall (see our April blog that makes this connection). Below, we present examples illustrating how the sense of community’s four elements — membership, influence, meeting of needs and shared values, and shared emotional connection — might be realized in the workplace. The implementation of any specific strategy will be contingent upon factors such as an organization’s culture and size, along with the unique needs of its employees. We plan to continue exploring how best to apply the strength of community framework by fostering and practicing a sense of community in the workplace.

• Membership. To cultivate membership as part of sense of community in the workplace, strategies should enhance trust, an employee’s sense of identity within the workplace, and other factors that enable employees to feel like they belong in the organization. This involves creating opportunities for employees to forge positive social bonds like mentorships, group engagements, or affinity or employee resource groups (ERGs) (cf. Sun et al., 2021; Hanleybrown et al., 2020). Additionally, organizations must have equitable processes and practices in place to ensure all employees can fully and authentically express their identities and cultures. Only then can employees unite under a shared organizational identity, which can be reinforced through shared symbols like merchandise, songs, and traditions (Collins & Porras, 1994).
• Influence. Within the workplace, influence involves both trusting that the leaders of an organization can effectively address employees’ concerns and believing that employees have the power to shape decisions that affect them. This trust comes from leaders following through on promises, aligning actions to values, and taking accountability if things don’t go as planned. Organizations can empower employees to influence decisions by creating avenues for feedback including pulse surveys or power-sharing committees. For example, Hilton’s Team Member Resource Groups successfully engage more than 7,400 employees, with 85 senior leaders serving as executive council sponsors to ensure resource groups can effectively influence company decisions (Pujo, 2019). In large companies like Hilton, where staff are often spread across multiple locations, resource groups can cultivate a sense of community within each group as well as throughout the company, providing an avenue that continuously expands the boundaries of community to include more and more employees. A few organizations have taken the influence element a step further by democratizing workplace processes. Organizations like SumAll and Haufe-umantis directly engage their entire staff in significant business decisions, including CEO selection (Atkinson, 2015; Minnaar, 2017).
• Meeting of Needs and Shared Values. Organizations strengthen a sense of community by ensuring they meet the needs of their workforce, which may include compensation, job security, a positive work environment, and meaningful work. Meeting employee needs has become increasingly crucial during the “Great Resignation” period as organizations struggle with retention. Consequently, we have witnessed a surge in creative solutions to better meet workforce demands. In the social sector, philanthropic institutions are providing unrestricted funding or dedicated funds to empower nonprofits to provide competitive salaries, benefits, and wellness activities to better meet staff needs (NCN, 2023; Leondar-Wright & Lynge, 2019). Additionally, nonprofits facing constraints in offering competitive salaries have embraced alternative approaches, such as flexible work schedules, remote work arrangements, or four-day work weeks (Childress, 2023).
• Shared Emotional Connection. Organizations foster shared emotional connection by encouraging frequent positive interactions as a group such as celebrating achievements as well as coping with stresses. Emotional connection arises through collective celebrations of organizational successes, anniversaries, and cultural holidays (e.g., Black History Month, Ramadan). Emotional connection also entails confronting challenging situations together. For instance, when Nokia implemented an 18,000-employee layoff, they provided these employees with a two-year transition period and extensive in-house resources to help find new jobs (Nickisch, 2023). This approach demonstrated Nokia’s commitment to its community even during a difficult period, ultimately yielding positive outcomes for the company and its remaining staff.

All the strategies and interventions mentioned, from employee resource groups to alternative work arrangements, can be brought together in a holistic approach to strengthen community in the workplace to help foster a healthy, inclusive, and productive workforce.

How Strength of Community Can Improve Community Conditions

Where one lives has a dramatic impact on their well-being, especially for low-income persons, persons with limited mobility, people who fled from another country, and older adults. By promoting bonding within a community, bridging across communities, and linking towards larger systems, the strengthening community framework provides a holistic approach for community development to improve the conditions where people live, work, play, worship, and age. Taking this one step farther, equitable community development enables community members’ fair access to the resources and opportunities necessary for social, health, economic, and other systems to properly function and eliminate disparities. Strengthening community can help these members act collectively to change and improve their conditions.

• Membership. Strong neighborhoods and residential communities can develop a strong sense of membership through their names, symbols, and other distinct characteristics. By knowing who is part of the community, a sense of trust and security is developed. Neighborhood names and slogans (e.g., the “Painted Ladies” in San Francisco) or symbols and logos are often used, which can create a narrative about whether the community is successful, competent, and a place members can be proud of.
• Influence. Community organizing and other forms of transformational community engagement (i.e., practices that increase community power and influence) can help develop the influence, or power, of communities that have been historically excluded and ignored. For example, equitable community development may include strategies that build and shift power and remove barriers to voting so that residents have greater ability to get what they want out of larger systems and institutions. Just like in organizations, not only do members feel that they can influence what happens in their community, but they also feel confident that their community leaders are acting on their behalf. Leaders have a responsibility to express the needs of their members as well as be accountable to their members. As such, strategies that promote accountability and responsiveness are essential. The collective and individual efficacy that stem from increased community power or influence have, in turn, been shown to produce substantial benefits for areas such as health and the reduction of violence (see Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997).
• Meeting of Needs and Shared Values. Equitable communities get stronger by meeting the needs of all their members and ensuring that nobody is left out because of their race, gender or sexual identity, socioeconomic status, or other demographic attributes. Their priorities are based on shared values. For instance, if community safety and good schools are what residents value and desire, then the more progress they make together toward these goals, the stronger the sense of community. Members who live in communities that cannot meet their basic needs suffer individually and collectively. Community development strategies should be effective in delivering adequate, affordable housing; economic opportunity; access to healthy food; safety; quality education; and other basic needs. Effective strategies also identify those broader needs and act on them.
• Shared Emotional Connection. Shared emotional connections, as previously mentioned, come from positive experiences together or the identification with powerful experiences. We often see this through how communities respond to disasters (e.g., resident came together to help one another during Hurricane Katrina). Creating social and interactive events such as neighborhood festivals and block parties can help develop emotional connection. Broadly communicating within and outside the neighborhood can build a sense of a shared connection. Promoting neighborhood residential stability, preventing displacement, and encouraging long-term commitment to continue living in the community have also been shown to add this connection.

Evaluation and Measurement of Strength of Community

The strengthening of community framework can also be used to assess and evaluate changes in sense of community, behaviors associated with the 5Cs, and physical, social, economic, environmental, and other well-being outcomes. Both qualitative and quantitative methods can be used. The following questions can guide the evaluation:

• How are the most important needs expressed by members of participating communities being met?
• How has the strategy promoted a sense of membership, trust, and security?
• How has actual collective power and the appropriate leadership been developed for members to manage and control changes in their community?
• How has the shared emotional connection among members been developed?
• How have changes in sense of community contributed to collective action and shifts in community members’ power?

Measurement of sense of community over time has demonstrated its relevance and usefulness across a variety of situations and contexts. For instance, an organization may monitor its sense of community to enhance key performance indicators (KPIs) such as staff retention, engagement, and innovation. Similarly, a community coalition might assess its members’ sense of community to strengthen its capacity for collaboration, collective efficacy, and impact.

Various measures exist to assess sense of community or similar concepts (Stewart & Townley, 2020). The most widely used measure is the Sense of Community Index (SCI) (Chavis et al, 1986), developed by Community Science. The SCI is based on the theoretical framework proposed by McMillan and Chavis (1986) and measures the four key elements of a sense of community: membership, influence, meeting of needs, and shared emotional connection. A higher sense of community, as measured by the SCI, has been linked to numerous positive outcomes such as reduced substance abuse (Mayberry et al., 2009; Stevens et al., 2010), greater academic success (Rovai, 2002), increased civic engagement (Chavis & Wandersman, 2002), and improved overall well-being (Wang et al., 2015; Pozzi et al., 2014; Prati et al., 2016).

Building upon feedback provided on the first iteration of the SCI, we have since introduced the Sense of Community Index 2 (SCI-2), a revised 24-item version designed to address the psychometric and theoretical concerns raised with the original scale (Chavis et al., 2008). This updated instrument is short, easy to administer, and demonstrates strong reliability and validity. The SCI-2 is now the most used instrument to measure a sense of community in the social sciences. It has been translated in 15 languages, used across diverse cultures, and in various contexts (e.g., urban, suburban, rural, and Indigenous communities, workplaces, schools, universities, and online communities). The SCI-2 has been cited 58 times between 2008 and 2019 and there have been more than 800 requests to use it. The SCI-2 and other sense of community-related resources can be found here: https://senseofcommunity.com/soc-index/.

There are also other unintrusive ways of assessing a sense of community (Hyde and Chavis, 2006), including:

• Focus Groups and Interviews
  • Questions to assess sense of community; and
  • Questions to identify and define community indicators and how to measure them.
• Observational Methods
  • Documentation of street-level symbols of belonging;
  • Neighborhood observations of behaviors; and
  • Photos of social events, common spaces, and other community scenes.

What’s next?

There is no doubt that there are challenges and downsides to community development. We’ve seen through history that the development of a sense of community can bring out the best of the worst in people. Boundaries can be impermeable or inclusive. We have seen communities who shut outsiders out; and conversely, we’ve seen communities that have intentionally embraced a culture of inclusion and diversity. Our future work will explore how organizations and place-based communities can develop and evolve to embrace greater inclusion of diversity and increase equity. What is most important for us to understand to embrace a community-driven approach is that when we see others as part of our community, we want them to be treated fairly. They’re no longer “others” but members. Our relationship with those in our community who have less is no longer one of charity, but of caring and solidarity.

Look out for a blog about principles for building intergroup relations and their application as we continue to unpack the strength of community framework.

References

Atkinson, D. (2015, July 21). Executives And Managers Should All Be Elected. Techcrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2015/07/21/executives-and-managers-should-all-be-elected/

Chavis D.M., Lee K.S., & Acosta J.D. (2008). The Sense of Community (SCI) revised: The reliability and validity of the SCI-2. [Conference paper]. The 2nd International Community Psychology Conference, Lisboa, Portugal.

Chavis, D. M., & Wandersman, A. (2002). Sense of community in the urban environment: A catalyst for participation and community development. In A Quarter Century of Community Psychology (pp. 265-292). Springer, Boston, MA.

Chavis, D. M., Hogge, J. H., McMillan, D. W., & Wandersman, A. (1986). Sense of community through Brunswik’s lens: A first look. Journal of community psychology, 14(1), 24-40.

Childress, R. (2023, November 8). Nonprofits That Can’t Offer All Employees Remote or Hybrid Work Still Have Options. The Chronical of Philanthropy. https://www.philanthropy.com/article/nonprofits-that-cant-offer-all-employees-remote-or-hybrid-work-still-have-options

Collins, J. C., & Porras, & J. I. (2005). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. Random House.

Hanleybrown, F., Iyer, L., Kirschenbaum, J., Medrano, S., & Mihaly, A. (2020). Advancing Frontline Employees of Color. Boston: FSG.

Hyde, M. M. & Chavis, D.M. (2006). Sense of community and community building. In Cnaan, R.A., & Milofsky, C. (Eds.), Handbook of community movements and local organizations. New York, Springer.

Leondar-Wright & Lynge (2019). Staffing the Mission: Improving jobs in the nonprofit sector. Class Action. https://classism.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/CA-StaffingTheMission_Web-Final.pdf

Mayberry, M. L., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. (2009). Multilevel modeling of direct effects and interactions of peers, parents, school, and community influences on adolescent substance use. Journal of youth and adolescence, 38(8), 1038-1049.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of community psychology, 14(1), 6-23.

Minnaar, J. (2017, December 6). This Company Democratically Elects Its CEO Every Single Year. Corporate Rebels. https://www.corporate-rebels.com/blog/haufe-umantis

National Council of Nonprofits (NCN) (2023). 2023 Nonprofit Workforce Survey Results: Communities Suffer as the Nonprofit Workforce Shortage Crisis Continues. https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/nonprofit-workforce-shortage-crisis#:~:text=Key%20Findings&text=More%20than%20half%20of%20nonprofits,with%20the%20public%20the%20most.

Nickisch, C. (Host) (2023, December 13). The Hidden Costs of Layoffs. (No. 36) [Audio podcast episode]. In HBR on Leadership. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/podcast/2023/12/the-hidden-costs-of-layoffs#:~:text=But%20Harvard%20Business%20School%20professor,higher%20turnover%2C%20and%20lower%20innovation

Pozzi, M., Marta, E., Marzana, D., Gozzoli, C., & Ruggieri, R. A. (2014). The effect of the psychological sense of community on the psychological well-being in older volunteers.

Prati, G., Albanesi, C., & Pietrantoni, L. (2016). The reciprocal relationship between sense of community and social well-being: A cross-lagged panel analysis. Social Indicators Research, 127(3), 1321–1332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1012-8.

Pujo, P. (2019, June 13). Successful Employee Resource Groups: 5 Strategies from Top Companies. Affirmity. https://www.affirmity.com/blog/employee-resource-groups-5-strategies/

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319-332.

Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy. science, 277, (5328) 918-924.

Stevens, E. B., Jason, L. A., Ferrari, J. R., & Hunter, B. (2010). Self-efficacy and sense of community among adults recovering from substance abuse. North American journal of psychology, 12(2), 255.

Stewart, K., & Townley, G. (2020). How far have we come? An integrative review of the current literature on sense of community and well‐being. American Journal of Community Psychology, 66(1-2), 1

66-189.

Sun, J., Song, Y., & Yu, G. (2021). How to expand and fill the self in organizations: the role of interpersonal processes in the employee organizational identity construction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 634691.

Wang, M. C., Nyutu, P., Tran, K., & Spears, A. (2015). Finding resilience: The mediation effect of sense of community on the psychological well-being of military spouses. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 37(2), 164-174.

About The Authors

David Chavis, PhD, Senior Fellow, specializes in building the capacity of communities to develop sustainable equitable systems change strategies to address complex social problems at the community, state, and national levels. David has published in practitioner and scientific journals on subjects of community capacity building systems, systems change evaluation methods, sense of community, and grassroots community organization.

Kien S. Lee, PhD, Vice President of Consulting, has expertise in research, evaluation, and other capacity building in the areas of equity, inclusion, and cultural competency, as they pertain to health disparities, immigrant integration, civic participation, leadership development, and community and systems change. Kien’s commitment to bridge science, practice, and social change led to her appointment to Governor Martin O’Malley’s Commission to study the impact of immigration on Maryland and receive the Distinguished Contributions to Practice in Community Psychology award.

Marissa Salazar, PhD, Associate, has extensive experience in using research and evaluation to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in organizations. She specializes in developing, implementing, and evaluating strategies aimed at promoting inclusion and racial equity, and focuses on building leaders’ capacity to champion anti-racist policies and practices. She especially brings a wealth of knowledge in white allyship.