The Working Group as a ToolThe Working Group as a Tool

Working groups are a common tool in the toolboxes of institutions – be they governmental, academic or cultural. They are a versatile tool, used for a variety of reasons. The Cambridge Dictionary defines a working group as “a small group of people, for example one chosen by a government, that studies a particular problem or situation and then reports on what it has discovered and gives suggestions”. This definition paints an interesting picture – an authoritative body selects a group of people to look at a particular situation, they report their findings along with some suggestions, and then the work of the working group is done. It is administrative, temporal and functional.

Too often, working groups are characterised as a purely practical tool, used to solve an institutional problem or tick a bureaucratic box, and then disbanded once the problem has been ‘solved’ and the box ticked. This understanding neglects the potential of working groups and all the unexpected inventiveness, charm and insight they can produce along the way and indefinitely afterwards. I, too, have understood working groups in much the same way as dictionaries tend to define them, and have become aware of their wider potential through my participation in the Collecting Otherwise working group over the past few months.

Although this working group, like the Collecting Otherwise initiative itself, is situated within an institutional context, namely the Nieuwe Instituut, the group members illustrate how this working group felt and operated as if it were a separate entity, ‘protected’ from the institution from which it emerged. While acknowledging the inevitable institutional aspects of the working group – such as the “privilege of institutional resources”, namely funding, and the “conditions, expectations and protocols that accompany these resources” – the members attribute an experimental quality to this working group, embodying a “degree of transparency and relationality” that distinguishes it from traditional institutional contexts or dynamics that they have experienced.

The working group’s proximity to the Nieuwe Instituut has also facilitated and encouraged its members’ access to the institution’s extensive programme and variety of resources, providing both a window into the institutional context and a safe haven on its outskirts.

Collecting Otherwise exemplifies the misconception that working groups will, or must, function in a similar way to the institution from which they emerge, thus demonstrating one of the important facets of the working group as a tool. Members of the Collecting Otherwise working group acknowledge how the dedicated commitment of the Collecting Otherwise founders and facilitators – Setareh Noorani, Delany Boutkan and Carolina Valente Pinto – has enabled such a dynamic to be both created and sustained, understanding that it has probably “required a lot of negotiation” with colleagues and departments within the institution.

As with any tool, it requires intentionality, awareness and sensitivity in order to work safely and to its full potential. Collecting Otherwise is underpinned by a belief in the possibilities of engagement with other institutional practices, including working groups. This initiative demonstrates how there can be patience and friendship where there is often urgency and protocol. Working group members are invited and integrated into Collecting Otherwise’s various projects, demonstrating how they naturally integrate such values into their practice.

Although the working group itself is a multipurpose tool, each invited member composes and cultivates the mechanisms within the group that allow the tool to function smoothly. This is something that institutions interested in setting up their own working groups should be sensitive to and aware of – who did you consider necessary to invite and participate in your working group, and why? What do you think they represent? What biases guide these decisions, and how will they affect the intentions behind the working group?

When a working group is formed by invitation, as the Collecting Otherwise working group was, it is a curated space. So it is important to ask what kind of group is being curated. Is your working group trying to represent or extend your institution? These questions are important to ensure that the conversations, dynamics and perspectives of a working group do not simply replicate those of the home institution. On the other hand, these questions are crucial for considering and mediating how working group members – if they differ from the host institution’s expectations of its network – will be received and understood when brought into contact with the institution.

Each member of Collecting Otherwise was endlessly interesting, curious, kind and talented, and although I was not involved in the invitation process, nor am I aware of the intentions behind it, I noticed how each of them naturally connected and bounced off each other, bound not by their professions or backgrounds, but by a shared interest in collective questioning and critical brainstorming. Our conversations may have started with topics or projects relevant to the Nieuwe Instituut, but these were starting points rather than limiting parameters. I experienced and appreciated how the meetings left ample space to explore issues beyond ‘work’ or our common goals, without limiting each member's contribution to a particular specialisation.

Rather, together we have created a space in which ideas, issues and knowledge can be unravelled and re-tangled, pulled apart and then put back together again. Between the formation and ‘completion’ of a working group there are a myriad of memories, intentions, achievements and celebrations that the group shares with each other.

There was no sense of urgency in the Collecting Otherwise meetings; we took our time and let each person’s thoughts take us wherever they wanted, enjoying each departure and arrival. Even though we were all logging into the Zoom call from different parts of the world, it felt as if we were sitting together in the living room, with the chat acting as a coffee table – articles, pictures, video clips, words of encouragement and jokes being dropped all over the place.

Although often framed by its temporality, a working group never really has to end, and the Collecting Otherwise working group reinforced this notion. For example, some working group members have reflected on how the working group and its talking points and methods had emerged in other collaborative projects or in conversations with friends or partners. In this way, the collective conversations and insights of the working group continue to travel elsewhere – taking on unexpected afterlives around the world. The working group’s shared documents and Miro boards are material evidence that the time spent as a collective never really ends, but can always be returned to.

Although the working group itself is a multipurpose tool, each invited member composes and cultivates the mechanisms within the group that allow the tool to function smoothly. This is something that institutions interested in setting up their own working groups should be sensitive to and aware of – who did you consider necessary to invite and participate in your working group, and why? What do you think they represent? What biases guide these decisions, and how will they affect the intentions behind the working group?

When a working group is formed by invitation, as the Collecting Otherwise working group was, it is a curated space. So it is important to ask what kind of group is being curated. Is your working group trying to represent or extend your institution? These questions are important to ensure that the conversations, dynamics and perspectives of a working group do not simply replicate those of the home institution. On the other hand, these questions are crucial for considering and mediating how working group members – if they differ from the host institution’s expectations of its network – will be received and understood when brought into contact with the institution.

Each member of Collecting Otherwise was endlessly interesting, curious, kind and talented, and although I was not involved in the invitation process, nor am I aware of the intentions behind it, I noticed how each of them naturally connected and bounced off each other, bound not by their professions or backgrounds, but by a shared interest in collective questioning and critical brainstorming. Our conversations may have started with topics or projects relevant to the Nieuwe Instituut, but these were starting points rather than limiting parameters. I experienced and appreciated how the meetings left ample space to explore issues beyond ‘work’ or our common goals, without limiting each member's contribution to a particular specialisation.

Rather, together we have created a space in which ideas, issues and knowledge can be unravelled and re-tangled, pulled apart and then put back together again. Between the formation and ‘completion’ of a working group there are a myriad of memories, intentions, achievements and celebrations that the group shares with each other.

There was no sense of urgency in the Collecting Otherwise meetings; we took our time and let each person’s thoughts take us wherever they wanted, enjoying each departure and arrival. Even though we were all logging into the Zoom call from different parts of the world, it felt as if we were sitting together in the living room, with the chat acting as a coffee table – articles, pictures, video clips, words of encouragement and jokes being dropped all over the place.

Although often framed by its temporality, a working group never really has to end, and the Collecting Otherwise working group reinforced this notion. For example, some working group members have reflected on how the working group and its talking points and methods had emerged in other collaborative projects or in conversations with friends or partners. In this way, the collective conversations and insights of the working group continue to travel elsewhere – taking on unexpected afterlives around the world. The working group’s shared documents and Miro boards are material evidence that the time spent as a collective never really ends, but can always be returned to.