BETTER
TOGETHER: Restoring the American Community
By Robert D. Putnam and Lewis
M. Feldstein, with Don Cohen
Published by Simon & Schuster
September 10, 2003
Price: $26.95; ISBN: 0-7432-3546-0
Press
Release
When Robert Putnam’s bestselling book was published in 2000, its central idea — that
Americans were becoming less and less connected to one another
and to community affairs — struck a nerve with people all
across the country. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard,
found that every kind of civic and social involvement — including
membership in civic associations, participation in local and national
politics, membership in churches and social clubs and unions, time
spent with family and friends and neighbors, philanthropic giving,
even simple trust in other people — had fallen by 25 to 50
percent since the late 1960s. As Putnam traveled the nation to
discuss his findings, one question kept emerging from ordinary
Americans: What can bring us together again?
In his new book, BETTER TOGETHER: Restoring the American Community
(Simon & Schuster; September 10, 2003; $26.95), Putnam and
co-author Lewis Feldstein, who has had a long career in civic activism,
report on how Americans are developing new ways of making connections
among people, reestablishing bonds of trust and understanding,
and revitalizing civic spirit. In the final chapter of Bowling
Alone, Putnam detected early signs of civic renewal. Now, he and
Feldstein explore those trends in depth through the vivid stories
of twelve successful efforts that build community as the principal
means of addressing key needs in every region of the country.
Putnam, Feldstein, and their team of researchers found that hardworking,
committed people are re-weaving the social fabric within institutions,
organizations and communities all across America as the most effective
way to respond to civic crises and local problems. Individual activists
as well as local and national groups working in private and public
enterprises of many different kinds are building community in big
cities, suburbs, and small towns from coast to coast:
Valley Interfaith (Rio Grande Valley, Texas). Valley Interfaith
is a decades-long community organizing effort that brought such
basic services as electricity, roads, and health care to the mostly
Spanish-speaking residents of one of the poorest regions in the
United States. The special strength of Valley Interfaith — with
members drawn from 45 churches and public school groups representing
60,000 families — is that the agenda for reform emerged from
one-on-one conversations with the members, rather than being imposed
from the top down. Through these thousands of conversations, individuals
joined with one another, “making their private pain public” as
one minister described the work. Organizers followed an “iron
rule” of never doing anything for people that they can do
for themselves, and worked constantly to develop new leaders. As
a result, the power of personal relationships was translated into
civic and political strength, often in coalition with similar networks
throughout Texas.
Branch Libraries (Chicago, Illinois). With the advent of the
Internet, many people predicted that public libraries would die.
But in Chicago, the libraries are thriving and expanding because
they embody a new idea of how a library functions. No longer
a passive repository of books, the new Chicago library is an
active and responsive part of the community. It is also an agent
of change that can bring together very different types of communities,
from the wealthy Gold Coast to the impoverished, mostly African-American,
Cabrini Green. As one librarian observed, “Like the Marines,
we go in first” to help link and change neighborhoods.
The Shipyard Project (Portsmouth, New Hampshire). The Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard has been building ships and submarines for more
than two centuries, and employs a workforce of 3,000. Yet in
recent years, many residents of the historic city of Portsmouth,
just across the river from the shipyard, had come to see it as
an odd and ugly contrast to their newly gentrified city. That
gap in knowledge and sympathy led Chris Dwyer to conceive the
idea of an arts project that would reveal and explain the shipyard
to the city. The surprising result was a remarkable, two-year
effort to create a democratic, participatory dance project — involving
burly shipyard workers as well as dance professionals — which
culminated in a week of performances that moved and transformed
the entire community.
Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (Boston, Massachusetts).
A deteriorating and crime-ridden wasteland in the early 1980s,
the Dudley Street neighborhood has been saved by a civic association
that knocked on every door, overcame ethnic differences, and
now plays an ongoing role in the neighborhood. At countless community
meetings, at multicultural festivals, and through side-by-side
labor, organizers helped people in the neighborhood connect and
reconnect. “Now,” says one resident, “most
people know each other, and they talk to each other. And it feels
more like a family than a neighborhood.”
The Tupelo Model (Tupelo, Mississippi). In 1940, Lee County,
in which Tupelo is located, was one of the poorest counties in
America. After half a century of hard collective work, Lee County
has been dramatically transformed, with a poverty rate half the
national average. Tupelo is bustling and prosperous, and is regularly
cited by economic development experts as one of the top success
stories in the nation. Yet Tupelo’s turnaround had an unlikely
beginning when a liberal newspaper editor named George McLean
convinced conservative small-business owners to invest in a prize
bull so that the very poor dairy farmers—who were their
primary customers—could improve their herds, make more
money, and support more business.
Saddleback Church (Lake Forest, California). Saddleback is
a highly successful evangelical Christian mega-church, with some
45,000 members and a sprawling complex of facilities on 74 acres
of land. Yet it manages to turn its vast crowd of “seekers” into
a genuine congregation, and then into committed, core members,
by fostering real community through intentionally organizing
congregants into hundreds of small groups. Another church in
southern California, All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena, has built
a large and diverse community of 3,500 members in a different
way. While also using small groups to promote community, All
Saints offers a blend of traditional Episcopalian ritual, social
liberalism, and religious ambiguity, in contrast to Saddleback’s
combination of innovative worship styles and religious certainty.
Do Something (Waupun, Wisconsin). Do Something is a national
organization established to encourage community activism and
develop leadership skills among young people. Yet Do Something
works by letting young people in local communities define their
own action agendas and build the commitment to carry them out.
In the small town of Waupun, a group of sixth-graders managed
to convince local authorities to improve safety at a railroad
crossing, learning valuable lessons in civic activism. Do Something’s
national leadership also learned a lesson: they had to discard
their initial strategy in order to tap into the natural social
networks in schools, rather than make an expensive and ultimately
futile attempt to create artificial ones.
Harvard Union of Clerical and Technical Workers (Cambridge,
Massachusetts). Two unsuccessful efforts to unionize support
staff at Harvard University showed the weaknesses in traditional
union organizing strategies. Then, in 1985, a group of organizers
led by Kris Rondeau chose a path that led to a new kind of union.
Instead of leafleting, telling workers what they could get for
them, and emphasizing grievances against Harvard, the organizers
slowly built personal relationships with the employees, 85 percent
of whom were women. They had multiple one-on-one conversations
with them over coffee and lunch, during which the employees could
talk about their work and their wishes and tell their personal
stories. The organizers also had the explicit goal of deepening
relationships between labor and management. They even had a singing
group that sang union lyrics old stand-by tunes. This time, the
union won. As one member put it, “An employer will never
beat a union that has a singing group.”
Experience Corps (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania). Every week at
the racially integrated Cook-Wissahickon Elementary School in
North Philadelphia, ten Experience Corps volunteers, mostly women,
all retired, ranging in age from fifty-something to their seventies
and eighties are helping to raise the ambitions and improve the
skills of kids from impoverished backgrounds. Each volunteer
(many from minority backgrounds themselves) commits fifteen hours
a week to the school, tutoring four to six children three times
a week. The program not only brings many different kinds of benefits
to the students, it builds community among the volunteers and
deploys them strategically in order to foster a sense of mission
and magnify their individual impact.
UPS: Diversity and Cohesion (Everywhere, USA). Forty years
ago, UPS was overwhelmingly an organization of white males, many
of them Irish Catholic and with a military background. Today,
minorities hold 27 percent of managerial positions, women are
21 percent of the workforce, and DiversityInc.com ranked UPS
third in its list of top ten companies for diversity in 2001.
UPS is a very large, profitable firm in a highly competitive
global industry – not an outpost of “boutique capitalism”— that
succeeded by embracing change rather than resisting it. Central
to UPS’ success has been the hardnosed business calculation
by UPS management to invest in building its entire operation
on cooperation, connections, and loyalty within its 370,000 member
workforce.
Craigslist (San Francisco, California). It remains an open
question whether the Internet can build “virtual” communities
that are truly comparable in impact and cohesion to physical,
face-to-face communities. Craigslist, based in San Francisco,
is one of the most successful online communities precisely because
it has a very close, multilevel connection to the community in
which it is located. Members not only peruse ads for jobs and
apartments, but tell personal stories, offer emotional support,
and suggest spur-of-the-moment meetings for coffee, concerts,
and even doing laundry.
A Positive Epidemic of Civic Engagement (Portland, Oregon).
Over the past three decades, Portland has moved from an average
level of civic participation to the one of the highest in America.
What magic elixir boosted Portlanders’ civic engagement
so astonishingly just as it was precipitously declining in most
of the rest of the country? The authors trace how a core of committed
activists from the 1960s helped create unusually responsive local
and state governments, which in turn encouraged more activism
and more government responsiveness in a “virtuous circle” of
civic participation.
What these diverse endeavors have in common is that they all
involve the creation of social capital: developing networks of
relationships that weave individuals into groups and communities.
Scholars, government officials, and business leaders around the
world have increasingly recognized the essential contribution
of social capital to the economic and social health of countries,
regions, cities, and towns, to the success of organizations,
and to individual accomplishment and well being. “The stories
in this book,” Putnam and Feldstein write, “show
the positive effects of social capital, the ways that people
in relationships can reach goals that would have been far beyond
the grasp of individuals in isolation. At the same time, these
people enjoy the intrinsic satisfaction of association, of being
part of a community.”
There are two main types of social capital. Some networks link
people who are similar in crucial respects, and tend to be inward-looking — bonding
social capital. Other networks encompass different types of people
and tend to be outward-looking — bridging social capital.
Both bonding and bridging social capital are essential. Bridging
social capital is harder to create than bonding social capital — after
all, birds of a feather flock together. So the kind of social
capital that is most essential for healthy public life in an
increasingly diverse society like ours is just the kind that
is hardest to build. For that reason, Putnam and Feldstein have
paid special attention to the challenges of fostering social
networks that bridge the various splits in contemporary American
communities.
Certain common themes emerge from BETTER TOGETHER’s stories.
In none of these stories did people set out to build social capital.
Their goals were to raise farm income in Mississippi, or help
poor kids in Philadelphia, or deliver packages competitively
across the US, or build parks in Portland or save souls in Los
Angeles. But they all focused on strengthening social networks
as key to achieving their ends. These cases make it clear that
developing robust social capital takes a great deal of time and
effort, since it develops mostly through extensive face-to-face
conversations. A related theme is the unparalleled power of personal
storytelling, which allows people to articulate their own experiences
and goals, and to recognize themselves in the stories of others.
For the creation of social capital, smaller groups are better.
But for extending the power and reach of social networks, bigger
is often better. The dilemma can be resolved, in part, by creating
networks of networks — nesting smaller groups within larger,
more encompassing ones. Moreover, social capital is usually developed
in pursuit of a particular goal or set of goals and not for its
own sake. Social capital is generally a means to an end and an
important fringe benefit, but not in itself the main aim.
Putnam and Feldstein note that community building sometimes has
a warm and fuzzy feeling, a kind of “kumbaya” cuddliness
about it. While these stories have some elements of this, they
also show that building social capital is not free of conflict
and controversy. Social capital represents not a comfortable
alternative to social conflict, but a way of making conflict
productive. By organizing some people in and some people out,
social capital can have a negative effect on “outsiders.” Social
capital relies on informal sanctions and gossip and even ostracism,
not just on fellowship, emulation and altruism. In short, the
concept of social capital is not totally sweet, but has a certain
tartness. Each of the stories in BETTER TOGETHER illustrates
the extraordinary power and subtlety of social networks for enabling
people to improve their lives.
In his landmark study Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam expressed
the hope that the disturbing decline in community in America
over the past three decades might be reversed with the creation
of new kinds of institutions and forms of association. Now, he
joins with Lewis Feldstein to describe some examples of what
could be the beginning of that process. Putnam and Feldstein
write, “If BETTER TOGETHER provides insight, unlocks new
ways of thinking, and sparks enthusiasm that contributes in even
the smallest way to such a revival, it will have more than justified
our hopes and efforts.”
ABOUT THE AUTHORS: Robert D. Putnam is the Peter and Isabel
Malkin Professor of Public Policy at , where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses
in American politics, international relations, comparative politics,
and public policy. He is the founder of , a program that
has brought together leading practitioners and thinkers for a
multi-year discussion to develop broad-scale, actionable ideas
to fortify our nation’s civic connectedness. Before coming
to Harvard in 1979, Putnam taught at the University of Michigan
and served on the staff of the National Security Council. In
2001-2002 he served as President of the American Political Science
Association. A former Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government,
he has also served as Associate Dean of the Faculty of Arts and
Sciences, Director of the Center for International Affairs, and
Chairman of the Department of Government at Harvard. He has been
consulted by both the Clinton and Bush White Houses, by leading
governors and members of Congress from both parties, by British
Prime Minister Tony Blair, Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern,
and by national leaders from Germany to Finland to New Zealand.
He has written numerous books including the best-selling (2000),
and more recently a collective volume Democracies
in Flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society (2002).
He lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Lewis M. Feldstein is President
of the n. NHCF is New Hampshire’s statewide community
foundation, the principal source of venture capital for the state’s
nonprofit community. NHCF finished 2002 with approximately $214
million in assets and received $25.4 million in gifts. Feldstein
worked with the civil rights movement in Mississippi in the 1960s
and served for seven years in senior staff positions to New York
City Mayor John V. Lindsay. Prior to coming to NHCF, Feldstein
served as Provost of the Antioch/New England Graduate School.
Feldstein serves on several Boards of Directors for nonprofit
organizations. He co-chaired with Robert D. Putnam the Harvard
University Saguaro Seminar: Civic Engagement in America. Feldstein
was selected as one of the ten most influential people in New
Hampshire in 2000 by Business NH Magazine. He lives in Hancock,
New Hampshire.
Don Cohen is coauthor (with Laurence Prusak) of In Good Company:
How Social Capital Makes Organizations Work. He is editor of
Business Value Directions, the journal of the IBM Institute for
Business Value.
is an initiative of the
at .
c/o The Saguaro Seminar, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
79 JFK Street, Cambridge, MA 02138
Phone: 617-617 495 1148 FAX:
617-495-1589