Is this forum a ‘pull’ or ‘push’ thing, i.e. is it driven by the existing bodies looking to recruit fresh blood or by young turks looking to take over the reins and makes things happen? If this is not a simplistic question then the answer is important.

Catalysts are specific. They act in a certain domain where they have proven success. Above some level they change their whole field, organising and what-not. And so it grows. Interactions with other fields spawn fruitful networks of relationships. This is the bottom-up ‘push’.

The top-down ‘pull’ tends to be political in nature and its agents often pop into existence at the behest of a ‘leader’ or committee. Where needed and appropriately devised, they can get the job done, more or less. When less lucky, they can lack focus, talking lots but not really catalyzing anything. At worst, they can be obstructive and possessive.

Sorry if this is rant-ish. My limited experience has included both forces so I’m always interested to know which is being applied in any situation. I’ll get my coffee now.

Initial thought is that politicians do this nurturing thing well, in that a senior politician will take a younger one under their wing within their area of responsibility. Junior ministers and all that. Similarly within parties you’ll see defacto families emerging (I notice this with the Lib Dems in SE Brum) where the old dogs pass down their tricks to the young pups.

The problem is local politics is terribly disengaged from the rest of the city and voter turnout for local elections is pathetic. The causes for this are up for debate but the fact remains there’s a detachment that world and the more practical, “doing” world you’re coming from.

So what fuels this succession system in politics? Party power, I guess. It’s good for the party to ensure the next generation is up to the task, ensuring the other lot don’t get an advantage. Similarly in big business. But neither of them are putting the city first. A close second maybe, but not first.

My reading of the issue would be how do you get people who are not overtly political and who care about the city in a constructive way to get the skills to become leaders? Which is pretty much what you said reading back.

I’m rambling, but for me people lead by example and people follow when they’re given something to follow with. Going back to my “openness” schtick maybe we just need to give these people the tools to easily communicate with the rest of the city in a way that doesn’t interfere with busy schedules and isn’t mediated by the established ways of thinking. Then let others who have the time and/or power take their ideas and implement them. Sort of an all-ages village elders type model.