I've been considering the intersection of intentions/agreements/connections as a way to create a field that continues to hold people and their experience long after events, workshops, parties, retreats, trainings--in a particular light and trajectory, ideally in a way that is supportive, sovereign, loving, and growthful.
If these three "subfields" aren't strong enough together in concert/collaboration with each other, participants who don't feel validated and held in their experience in the current field might decide to move to another field (of intentions/agreements/connections) if this new field seems to be better able to hold their experiences and support them in making sense of them safely.
However, this can also cause people to reinterpret their experiences in a way that occurs as more harmful or look from that new field into the old field in a way that seems more harmful.
And fair enough, whichever field they land on will seem to be the one which is the best/safest/truest/most accurate.
This to me might call for us to continue to evolve and strengthen the combination of the subfields mentioned above in any community:
1. Intention field:
When creating a group experience, how can you foster a collective intention which is not only supportive of the group as a group, but also of every individual with their individual needs/desires/pace/boundaries/experiences/traumas who might otherwise be driven and pulled along despite desiring something different. How can you create an intention field that allows both collective power while also respecting individual power/sovereignty/agency? Also how are the intentions of the group manifested in concrete measurable results? (ie actions, projects, decisions, efforts, energy, offerings, etc)
2. Agreement field:
When creating a group experience, what agreements and rules can be created to support soft and hard boundaries around the vision and intentions for this experience?
Here you can imagine agreements as declaring the "playground" that the participants will be in (helping them know whether they are playing inside or outside of the playground) in as is pertains to the behaviors and actions supporting the intention field, while rules are like the "fence" around the playground, thus crystallizing more specifically what qualifies as unwanted behavior which would constitute crossing a line of acceptable behavior (for example, it might be a good idea to declare that an event will not allow play which involves blood or impact for various reasons related to the intention field.
Here it's important to understand the power of an agreement/rule field as it gives greater space for the participants to get a sense of the integrity of their actions/behavior and will allow them to play full out within this field without (or with less) worry of stepping over someone else's boundary if they agreed to also play in the same intention and agreement field. It also creates a space for the participants to *support* each other in holding the agreement field rather than police each other as they will all feel they have the power to hold this field both individually and collectively.
3. Connection field:
This article would not be complete without acknowledging the benefits of a strong collective and individual connection field. What I mean by this is the quality/strength/resilience of the relationships between the members of the group. The greater this quality, the greater the trust present, and the greater the ability for each member to consent freely--as well as feel safe to change their mind along the way--and engage gracefully knowing full well that they are supported however they show up, "warts and all", and feel safe including themselves fully even in a context where they might make mistakes. Knowing and feeling the connection between them and other and between everyone else will create a kind of universal collective trust which will support members in both looking at their own evolving behavior with the support of others while also look at other people's evolving behavior in order to support them.
In a way, the connection field becomes a genuine expression of the agreement field held by messy humans full of both light and shadows rather than members trying to--individually--embody often difficult to discern and hold archetypes and roles which might also feel constrictive and static rather than dynamically adapting to each person's growth trajectory.
Final words:
As you can see, each field both builds on the previous one and at the same time synergizing with together with the other two.
The intention field is the seed.
The agreement/rule field is the expression (in behavior/actions) of the intention field, giving it substance and allowing participants to know where they stand in terms of integrity with the intention field.
The connection field is then what is created not only be prior relationships between participants, but also by the intention field expressed by practice within the agreements/rule field as it facilitates graceful engagements between participants, thus building trust which then leads to greater safety and consent moving forward.
Is this the sort of technology you could use in your communities? I have been creating and co-creating community experiences/workshops/festivals for decades, and it's always a pleasure to share this experience with my communities.
If you'd like to chat more, DM me!