Cohousing-L Mailing List: Size of Communities

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

I just posted a version of this on the sociocracy [at] yahoogroups.com list and 
thought it might be relevant here too. The subject was circle size.

From research on group size by R. Dunbar, "The social brain hypothesis and its 
relevance to social psychology" from a paper presented at the Sydney Symposium 
of Social Psychology in 2006.

Groups norms:

> "support clique of best friends (5), the sympathy group (12-15), the number 
> of individuals contacted at least once a month (and the overnight camp in 
> hunter-gatherers) (30-50), the social network (150), megabands in 
> hunter-gatherer societies (500) and tribal groupings (1500)"

This is my experience too, with the larger groups being more structured. 

We have 43 units and began with ~56 members including ~7 children, some not 
very active or visible. At any one membership meeting there were about 20 
people unless it was a critical subject then ~35 was more normal. 20-25 was a 
good number to represent all views, give adequate time for discussion as well 
as resolving objections, and sharing news. 35 was a lot and many just listened 
or had little to say. No time for news. Rounds become long.

Now we have close to 100 people including ~20 children. When one person has 
moved out 2-4 adults and children have moved into the same unit. And others 
adopted children, took roommates, or acquired partners and then children. So it 
isn't the number of units -- its the number of people.

Meetings, however, are about the same size. Which means that many people are 
not there. I tend to make decisions feeling that we are not all represented. It 
feels less like a community. Or a community in which half are sort of vague, 
shadowy figures. In the full group meetings I often think more about the people 
who are not there than those who are.

I still hesitate over names because we have had a large number of changes in 
the last year or so. But some have been here 2-3 years and I still don't know 
where they work or what they like to do or if they have a sense of humor.

Knowing everyone well--it will take much longer than initially. Partly because 
we no longer have meetings twice a month. It's just too many people-- 
especially for an introverted writer. I'm not out and about that much and often 
don't go to more than one team meeting or social event a week (cohousing is 
full of them). That's where people get to know each other. But I would have to 
go to a lot of them to get to know everyone because each event attracts 
different members.

The structure is also much tighter now with more rules and people staking out 
territories. And more lists of who does what. More security with keys locked up 
and door codes more closely protected. Less information flows naturally. You 
know only what that 5 support group or your team knows. Part of that is 
organizational maturity. We have been moved in for almost 15 years but there 
was a period of 2 years of organizing. So ~17 years as an organization.

With more people in any given age group, there also more exclusive 
relationships by age. And household type. Couples flock together. Children have 
fewer conversations with adults other than their parents. (Teens not even with 
their parents!)

The ideal in sociocracy is 20-40 in a circle but 20 is the ideal. If a circle 
is too small there is less general knowledge and fewer perspectives. 

I miss meetings in which almost everyone is there. A sense of the whole is 
better conveyed with everyone in the same room sometimes.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Sociocracy: A Deeper Democracy
http://www.sociocracy.info