The 21 criteria: Alignment
Systemic Change
The Twelve Foundations
The 21 criteria and the twelve foundations go together. The 21 criteria measure whether a society's foundation and its coordination are built to last. The twelve foundations are the human side: what any group of people sharing its work, money and land rests on, from a team of eight to a whole town. They are listed from most important to twelfth.
They come from decades of research on communities, commons and teams that lasted. For each one, the chart says what it means, what breaks without it, what already exists in the world and how well that matches, and how OmniOne builds it in.
1 Trust and shared values
- What it means
- People hold the same values and want the same things, so they can count on one another. Shared values come first, and trust grows from them.
- Why it matters
- Without it, people guard against each other, every agreement needs watching, and cooperation stalls. With shared values, people move together. Where the system itself leaves no way for harm to happen, trust comes built in: a system with no way to steal needs no one trusted with the money (Putnam; Ostrom).
- What is out there
- Most groups rely on time and personal history, and some screen for values at the door. A fair match: both work slowly, and trust that rests only on people depends on each person staying trustworthy.
- How OmniOne does it
- Charting the Course and Tribe Match bring people together around shared values from the start. Then the system carries the trust: open records, written agreements and shared assets that no single person can move, so people seldom rely on anyone's word alone. Personal trust grows over time on top of that.
2 Free to join, free to leave
- What it means
- Everyone is here by their own yes and can walk away well, with what is theirs.
- Why it matters
- Without it, people stay because they are stuck, problems go unspoken, and the group stops listening. When leaving is easy, a group keeps earning people's place, so it listens and fixes problems (Hirschman).
- What is out there
- Cooperatives practice open and voluntary membership, a strong match. Many communities tie people in through money or property, a weak match: leaving costs people what they put in.
- How OmniOne does it
- Joining is a choice at every level, and every agreement includes a clear, fair way out.
3 Decisions by the people affected, through a fair process
- What it means
- Whoever a decision touches takes part in making it, through a process everyone sees as fair.
- Why it matters
- Without it, decisions are made for people, rules stop fitting their real situation, and the people overruled stop following them or leave. With it, rules fit and get followed (Ostrom), and people accept even a decision that went another way when the process was fair (Tyler).
- What is out there
- Majority voting, a weak match: the majority decides for everyone else. One member one vote in cooperatives, a partial match: everyone has a say, and the majority still decides. Consent methods such as sociocracy, the closest match: a decision goes ahead once everyone can live with it.
- How OmniOne does it
- ACT: if a decision affects you, you are part of it. Proposals and advice are written so everyone affected can weigh in, and an agreement already made changes with everyone affected taking part.
4 Feeling safe to speak up, with an equal voice
- What it means
- People can say what they really think, and everyone gets a fair share of the conversation.
- Why it matters
- Without it, people keep their real views to themselves, mistakes go unspoken, and a few voices steer the group. With it, a group learns from what people dare to say (Edmondson; Project Aristotle), and its shared intelligence rises when speaking time is shared evenly (Woolley).
- What is out there
- Team norms, facilitation and anonymous feedback tools, a partial match: they help, and they depend on whoever runs the room.
- How OmniOne does it
- ACT lets anyone send advice in writing, so every voice reaches the group, including people who prefer writing to speaking in front of the room. Each team's Culture Code sets how it talks and listens, and everyone stands as an equal.
5 Fairness and basic needs met
- What it means
- What people get matches what they give, and everyone's basic needs are met.
- Why it matters
- Without it, people who give more than they get burn out or pull back, and people worried about basic needs have little room to think ahead. With it, people give freely when it is returned fairly (Ostrom), and financial security frees their capacity to plan (Mani et al.).
- What is out there
- Profit sharing and cooperatives' member returns, a fair match for fairness, with basic needs left to each person. Community currencies, a partial match that helps local exchange.
- How OmniOne does it
- Contribution is returned fairly plus access to what the group shares, and basic needs come first.
6 A clear shared purpose and plan
- What it means
- Everyone can see where the group is going and why.
- Why it matters
- Without it, people pull in different directions and effort is wasted. With it, people act on their own, confident they are moving the same way (Hackman; Project Aristotle).
- What is out there
- Mission statements and strategic plans, a partial match: usually written at the top and seldom shaped by everyone. Purpose-led organizations, a closer match.
- How OmniOne does it
- A shared vision and values sit up front, and the agreement process upholds them. The GenPlan sets the direction and each circle runs its own plan.
7 Open information and trusted monitoring
- What it means
- Everyone can see what is happening and what was decided, and the people watching answer to the group.
- Why it matters
- Without it, rules get bent where nobody is looking, and suspicion grows. With it, a group keeps its own rules together (Ostrom; Cox et al.).
- What is out there
- Open-book management and public ledgers, a good match for money; decisions and their reasons often stay out of view.
- How OmniOne does it
- Open records of every decision, who made it and why. Everyone in a shared space watches it, with a monthly health check.
8 Fair repair when things go wrong
- What it means
- Small problems get a gentle response, conflicts get settled quickly and fairly, and people stay in the group.
- Why it matters
- Without it, small problems grow into splits, and generous members stop giving when unfairness goes unanswered. With it, quick, low-cost repair keeps small problems small (Ostrom) and keeps generous members giving (Fehr and Gächter).
- What is out there
- Mediation and restorative justice circles, a good match once a problem exists; they begin after the harm is done.
- How OmniOne does it
- Prevention first: a solutionary culture heads problems off before they start. Then a clear repair path: a gentle reminder, a direct talk, and a conflict ladder with set timelines.
9 Protection from takeover
- What it means
- What the group built stays with the group, whoever founded it, funded it or holds the most.
- Why it matters
- Without it, a group is most often taken over from inside, by the people with the most money, keys or history, and what everyone built ends up serving a few.
- What is out there
- Steward ownership, purpose trusts and community land trusts, a good match: they tie assets to a purpose, with control usually held by a small board.
- How OmniOne does it
- Money funds the work, and control stays with the agreements. Roles are handed back on schedule. Today shared assets are held by several signers. The full design goes further: everyone affected puts in their own decision, the way ACT works for every decision, so no small set of signers decides for everyone.
10 Small self-run groups inside larger ones
- What it means
- People work in small teams that run themselves, linked into larger circles.
- Why it matters
- Without it, a group outgrows close trust, decisions drift to a few, and people stop knowing each other. Close trust holds up to a certain size, and nesting lets a system grow while every team keeps running itself (Ostrom; Dunbar).
- What is out there
- Self-managed nursing teams and communities that split as they grow, a strong match, usually with no way to stay linked afterward.
- How OmniOne does it
- Teams of 3 to 8 inside groups of up to about 40. When a group grows too big, it becomes two linked groups, and each keeps its own problems small and local.
11 Shared practice and belonging
- What it means
- The things a group does together that make it feel like home: meals, gatherings, celebrations, ways of greeting and working.
- Why it matters
- Without it, a group becomes a set of transactions and people drift away. Communities that lasted kept up shared practices, and the ones serving the wider world lasted longest (Kanter). Shared meaning holds people together more strongly than demands alone (Sosis).
- What is out there
- Shared meals, festivals, rituals and retreats, a strong match wherever a group keeps them up.
- How OmniOne does it
- Each team's Culture Code and space agreement, retreats and workshops, and ETHOS levels that mark growth together.
12 Renewal: regular review, handing roles on, and designed endings
- What it means
- The group checks itself regularly, passes roles on, and lets things end well when their time is done.
- Why it matters
- Without it, rules and roles harden, the same people hold power for good, and the group stops adapting. Living systems stay alive by renewing themselves (Holling and Gunderson).
- What is out there
- Term limits and sunset dates on rules, a partial match: they renew roles and rules, and seldom the group as a whole.
- How OmniOne does it
- Every agreement has a review date, there is a yearly review, roles rotate, and a group that closes names who carries on its work.
Decisions (3) and feeling safe to speak (4) are two foundations, and ACT serves both: everyone a decision affects takes part, and anyone can send advice in writing.
How the twelve were chosen
The backbone is Elinor Ostrom's eight design principles for commons that lasted for generations, which won the 2009 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and held up across 91 later studies. Research on teams, intentional communities, fair process and living systems added four more: free to join and free to leave, protection from takeover, shared practice and belonging, and renewal.
The first eight rest on Ostrom's tested principles. The four added ones are each well supported by research, and bringing all twelve together as one set is our own synthesis. Groups do best with all twelve in place; the order here is our judgment, weighted toward building a whole new way of living together.
Sources
- Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. Cambridge University Press.
- Ostrom, E. (1998). A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action. American Political Science Review 92(1).
- Ostrom, E., Walker, J., and Gardner, R. (1992). Covenants With and Without a Sword. American Political Science Review 86(2).
- Cox, M., Arnold, G., and Villamayor-Tomás, S. (2010). A Review of Design Principles for Community-based Natural Resource Management. Ecology and Society 15(4).
- Wilson, D. S., Ostrom, E., and Cox, M. E. (2013). Generalizing the core design principles for the efficacy of groups. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 90.
- Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. Harvard University Press.
- Tyler, T. (1990). Why People Obey the Law. Yale University Press.
- Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 44(2).
- Google re:Work. Project Aristotle.
- Woolley, A. W., et al. (2010). Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor. Science 330.
- Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., and Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function. Science 341.
- Fehr, E., and Gächter, S. (2000). Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments. American Economic Review 90(4).
- Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading Teams. The five conditions.
- Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work; (2000) Bowling Alone.
- Kanter, R. M. (1972). Commitment and Community.
- Sosis, R., and Bressler, E. R. (2003). Cooperation and Commune Longevity. Cross-Cultural Research 37(2).
- Rubin, Z., Willis, D., and Ludwig, M. (2019). Measuring Success in Intentional Communities. Sociological Spectrum.
- Dunbar, R. I. M., research on natural group size limits (the social brain).
- Holling, C. S., and Gunderson, L. (2002). Panarchy. Island Press.