The Lounge

Actually my first blurb should show the importance of starting with the "H" hackers. I have seen spaces open that had the benefit of structure, staff and finances fail. The founding members are those who blaze the way forward. They are the hackers and innovators, unfortunately they are not as suited for the space as it matures. I would shay there are personalities at all stages who drive change then move on for a variety of reasons.

This sounds like the history of the wild west. First the explorers, then the pioneers, then settlers, then city folk. Each new wave pushes some of the previous people out. You can't just skip forward to city folk. Someone would need the resources to build a city from scratch. If you build it wrong then people won't move there anyway.

Seems like the big lesson there is to build a Makerspace on a solid sustainable foundation and not the "Capital H" hackers that end up just leaving the space eventually anyway?

Evolution 

Of the people around at the beginning of our journey, there are very few who are still around. This stems from a variety of factors I will try to outline here. I am conflicted about the loss of these members, however, I believe that refusing to change to preserve the feeling of a group as it started would ultimately doom an organization. This is something that has caused considerable consternation personally. I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has been part of molding Kamloops Makerspace into what it is today. Even if it no longer caters to their personal need, early members laid the foundations of our organization. Our doors are always open to those who came before us.

I was told by another Makerspace Founder when we started that these organizations follow a path.  

Starting with the "Capital H" Hackers. At the risk of stereotyping, these are often anarchists, libertarians, etc. who are attracted to a disruptive counter-culture force. This is an exciting time, things change every day. Leadership is there to satisfy the regulatory need but has no true standing. Rough consensus makes all decisions and the membership is very engaged. The space is a mess and probably not safe, nothing works, but everyone is happy.

Quickly some members realize that this is not sustainable and push toward changing things. Often this is directors realizing the personal liability they are carrying or others who would like to have more utility in the space without constantly working around messes and fixing tools. Efforts are made to bring order to the chaos to the discomfort of everyone. Early members resist change and subvert decisions. This is the result of fear of losing the (often first) community that embraced their personalities and not any kind of malice. As membership grows and diversifies, the personalities that had negative impacts in other parts of their lives creep in. Authority figures, bullies, type-A personalities, etc. There is a very natural resistance that often takes the form of bullying. New members are put off by the interpersonal challenges in the space. This is often where members leave and turnover is very high.

Soon order comes in hard with a disruptive board that just drives forward to find solutions to the problems faced by the organization. This often happens with the disregard of the early members.  There is an effort to appeal to a more mainstream population. This can be reliving for some members and extremely uncomfortable for others. It can even take the form of the active running out of members who may not agree with the leadership. This is tolerated by members because of the great deal of success the space is gaining with new tools members etc. Most things work and the space becomes organized.

Then comes the crash, members become discontent with the lack of input and bullying they are experiencing. This leads to an almost complete withdrawal of input and involvement of the membership. Leadership burns out under the workload and the space becomes stagnant, vulnerable to losing members and running out of money.

Here a grassroots group often forms to right the ship. Bringing back member engagement while maintaining a leadership structure. Those who resisted change are more resigned to the need for structure and the disruptive people are quelled by the need to satiate the needs of the members. While not perfect this is often where a space stays with slow steady growth. Addressing the effects of the past becomes a key part of informing future growth and change.

If I have a single rule for establishing a Makerspace it is to develop the community first. Before looking for a building or buying tools, find the people. Given the nature of a Makerspace being a "place to make" the physical assets seem most high in necessity. The fact is a lot of Makerspaces have locations and tools we can only dream of and no one to use them.

Kamloops Makerspace started building community long before we were called Kamloops Makerspace. Through the Hack Nights hosted by the Kamloops Innovation Center, we fostered a creative and innovative group passionate about carving out their own space. We did workshops, get-togethers, movie nights, and anything else we could think of. Some worked others did not, the idea was to throw it on the wall and see if it stuck. No Memorandums of Understanding, no studies, no consultants. Just do it. Makerspaces often die due to analysis paralysis and the insistence on getting everything "right".

We had several false starts, name changes, spent energy toward specific spaces, and had it fall through. A community can weather all those challenges. If your identity as a group is tied to anything else, like a location, partner, or name you may fail.

With some regularity people reach out to Kamloops Makerspace or me for advice on starting a Makerspace. I am starting this thread to compile some of my thoughts on the subject. I would also like to encourage others who have similar experiences to share their advice here as well.  

I will be writing in a general sense about creative collectives. There may be some inferences to my experiences with Kamloops Makerspace, however, please refrain from assuming I am speaking of specific events or people as it could be in regards to a separate organization. 

My following posts are the opinion of myself influenced by others who have been part of establishing Makerspaces and similar organizations. They do not represent the stance or opinions of the Kamloops Makerspace Society, its members, or partners.