“Stories of Partnership” is a new Q&A series by the Community Engagement Network (CEN) that is dedicated to shining a light on examples of reciprocal community-university partnerships. These Q&As are meant to center the experiences of community partners and foster a culture of continuous learning within community engagement and community engagement practices. It’s our pleasure to share the stories and insights of those who drive this essential work forward.
Meet the Speakers!
The first session of “Stories of Partnership” features Katie Crocker, the CEO of AMSSA, (Affiliation of Multicultural Societies and Service Agencies of BC). She is joined by Antje Ellermann, the director of UBC’s Centre for Migration (CMS) and its Community Liaison, Sean Lauer. This conversation was moderated by CMS’ Engagement Strategist, Javier Ojer.
Learn how to support community-university partnerships directly from the perspective of a community partner and hear the panel’s valuable insights on the importance of investing time in relationship building.
This podcast was recorded in front of a live audience on May 28th, 2024. Dive into the conversation below, available in podcast and written formats.
Listen
Attend the 2024 CMS-Sector Research Collaborations Day
Did you find this conversation insightful? Join AMSSA and the CMS for the next CMS-Sector Research Collaborations Day on Nov. 13th, 2024, from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm at UBC Robson Square. Be part of shaping meaningful, reciprocal, and long-term partnerships.
Read
Edits have been made to this written Q&A for clarity, style, and tone.
Introductions
Javier – My name is Javier. I always like to share a bit about my background: my roots are in the Basque region, which is now part of northern Spain. My privileges as a Spaniard come from a very strong colonial culture. Interestingly, my name in the Basque language means “new home” or “new house” (Etxea Berri), which feels fitting given that I’m here today, trying to understand the issues that many of my ancestors likely participated in.
I’m here as the engagement strategist for the Centre for Migration Studies. We have a lot of good questions and important topics to discuss today. I’m going to invite each of you to give a very quick introduction, and then we can weave in more about ourselves, our roles, and the experiences we’ve shared through this partnership. I think one of the strengths of this partnership is how we’ve related to each other, and I’m excited to explore that with all of you.
Antje – My name is Antje Ellermann, and officially at UBC, I’m the director of the Centre for Migration Studies and a faculty member in Political Science. I was born and raised in Germany, but I have been a migrant many times over. I left Germany when I was 18 and then lived in the UK for many years, lived in the US for many years, and then came here to these territories just over 20 years ago.
I’m also the mother of a 16-year-old, which keeps me very honest. One of the great pleasures of working within the center has been my journey toward community engagement, something I had little preparation for when it began. I’m so excited about having this conversation today, and it’s great to see everybody here.
Katie – Hi, good morning. My name is Katie Crocker. I am the Chief Executive Officer of AMSSA, the provincial umbrella association for immigrant and refugee-serving organizations in B.C. We have 92 members scattered all over the province, from large organizations like ISS of B.C., Mosaic, and SUCCESS, to the smaller ones up in Dawson Creek, Fort Saint John, and over on the island.
We provide a range of support to service providers, from knowledge dissemination, research, and policy analysis, to training and networking opportunities. We work with both the provincial and federal governments to translate how policy implications land on the ground and address the realities of different policy shifts.
I was born in Ottawa on Anishinaabe territory and moved to the West Coast, on unceded Coast Salish territory, when I was a small child. My whole story takes place here in Canada, and it’s been an interesting awakening. Like many Canadian-born people, I went through life thinking I knew a lot, only to realize, as I’ve gotten older, how much I didn’t know. It’s a bit like a Benjamin Button situation—where the older I get, the less I feel I know. But that hasn’t stopped me from seeking knowledge. My constant quest for learning has led me to really value research and the partnerships I have with the UBC Centre for Migration Studies, as well as other national research bodies that AMSSA works with.
I’m also the mother of a 16-year-old, which is an interesting stage in life. I have a 7-year-old as well, who is my spectacular little being, and he is autistic and has global developmental delay. That experience has brought me into a whole new realm, seeing the world through very different eyes. All of this helps me approach my work with curiosity and humility, which I believe are key to the success we’ve had in our partnerships. I bring that same mindset to my work every day, and I think that’s why we’ve been successful.
Sean – Hi, everybody. I’m Sean Lauer, he/him. I must also acknowledge my position as a settler here in Vancouver, on the Coast Salish People’s land and unceded territories. I’m originally from the States, specifically from Philadelphia. I’ve been fortunate to have lived in Switzerland for a number of years before coming to Vancouver 20 years ago.
I have to admit, in situations like this, I sometimes feel like I’m faking it a bit because I wasn’t really trained to do engaged research. It’s something I came to after moving to Vancouver, and I’ve since become a bit of a believer in it. Even so, I still feel fortunate that people want to hear what I have to say about it, because I often feel like I’m making it up as I go. But that’s my story and how I’ve ended up here today.
Origin Story
Javier – This series is called “Stories of Partnership”, so we’ll try to weave some stories together. You’re all pretty good at storytelling.
Katie, since it’s so important in a university setting to hear the community perspective, could you get us started? Do you have a story of how this partnership began, something that can give us the big picture and set the stage for our discussion?
Katie – I think it’s very fitting that we’re using the word “story” when talking about this partnership because there was no strategic plan, no funding proposal where you sit down and plan three, five-, or seven-years’ worth of outcomes and outputs, and then come together in a very canned and slightly predetermined environment. That’s not our story. Our story was completely organic, our story is relational, and our story is still unfolding as we continue.
A few years ago, Antje, Sean, and I sat down to discuss how this partnership would continue and how it could outlive us if any of us were no longer part of the work. We were quite clear that we didn’t want to sit down and draft a strategic plan for our partnership; we wanted the relationship to remain organic.
When I started at AMSSA in 2014, a relationship with UBC had already been established. That relationship had largely been built by two people: Dan Hiebert, a professor of Geography, and Miu Chung Yan, who is in the Faculty of Social Work. These relationships preceded me. So, when I joined AMSSA, I thought, this is interesting, right? I’m a UBC alum, so any opportunity to work with UBC is great. Here are these two highly respected researchers, and it’s kind of cool to see how this all fits together.
What I quickly discovered was that both Dan and Miu were stepping out of their comfort zones, so to speak. It wasn’t the university pushing them out into the community; it was two quite established professors and researchers who saw that there was so much more they could do in their own work by engaging with the community. They understood that by taking their knowledge out into the community, they could not only present it but also receive feedback and test the waters. They’d ask, “We’re seeing this, and the data says this, but what does it actually look like? What actually happens?” And that’s where we started to see the relationship develop even more.
The connection I had with Antje and Sean started when the UBC Migration Cluster was just beginning. We were trying to understand how our work complemented each other. At that time, we began collaborating with Kat and the Community Engagement Office, exploring the opportunity to host a President’s Roundtable on migration. This event took place in November 2019 and was a real turning point for our sector.
When I mention “the sector,” I’m referring to the settlement sector, which deals with settlement and integration. Around this time, there was a growing interest in formalizing our relationship with UBC. The migration cluster was doing impressive work, and there was talk of it possibly evolving into a center. We began to wonder if this was something we could be a part of or if we needed to replicate something similar within the community.
The year 2019 was pivotal. It presented us with the opportunity to decide whether we were fully committed to this partnership or not. As the Centre for Migration Studies was being developed, community involvement was at the forefront of our minds. It wasn’t an afterthought; it wasn’t a matter of us being included as an afterthought. There were many discussions about the role we could play and the mutual value we held in this collaboration. We deeply value the research, and it’s clear that the researchers also value the opportunity to connect with us.
For me, the main takeaway on how this partnership started is that it wasn’t pre-determined or mapped out for us. It was led by two people on the UBC side who, in my opinion, had nothing to lose and everything to gain by connecting with the sector. We responded to that, and it really gave us an opportunity to explore how we could build this relationship in a reciprocal way.
One of the things I’m noticing now, which I think is a huge shift from ten years ago, is that younger researchers are taking on this work. The established teachers and researchers who have been doing this work for many years are still here, but now the younger generation is starting to see the value in it too. So, the work we’re doing isn’t just involving people who have been in the academic world for decades; it’s also attracting those who are newly entering the field or who have had the opportunity to work in government or nonprofits while they’re completing their studies.
Javier – Thank you. I think it’s interesting how this initiative wasn’t driven by the university or institution, but rather by the efforts of two individuals.
Challenges and Successes
Javier – Now, I’d like to shift to the university side, to the Centre for Migration Studies. Antje and Sean, I want to hear a bit about the challenges and successes you’ve experienced.
Could you also touch on the idea of a top-down versus bottom-up approach? I’m assuming that many people in the room feel that while they often hear a lot of top-down talk, the real work happens from the bottom up. How do you see some of the challenges and successes on the CMS side of this partnership?
Antje – I think one thing that really helped us as we developed our relationship was that we genuinely enjoyed spending time together. We’d go for drinks just to have fun, and I actually think that was really important. It wasn’t just a Zoom call where you sign off and that’s it. Our time together was beautifully inefficient, and there was so much value in that.
Before I went into academia, I was a community worker, but I was a frontline worker, and it wasn’t in Canada or in the settlement sector. So, I came into this with a commitment, awareness, and belief in this kind of work, but with no experience in this particular context. Like Sean, I had no training in community-engaged research during my graduate studies. It wasn’t even an option.
Starting out with these relationships, I sometimes thought, “Oh, this is easy. We trust each other, we can do anything,” without being fully aware of all the underlying structural issues. I didn’t realize the differences between the sectors or the mistrust within the sector towards UBC based on past negative experiences—relationships that broke down or promises that weren’t delivered. These are things I had no idea about, but they were always there, latent in the process of building trust.
Over time, I really came to understand just how hard it is to build trust and how much university researchers need to invest for that trust to be possible. You have to be in it for the long run; this isn’t just a short-term, project-based interaction.
Another challenge I’ve found is finances. Navigating the funding constraints within the sector, the funding models for organizations like AMSSA, and the expectations around compensation—things that wouldn’t typically be compensated within the university but are expected in the community—was eye-opening. Community organizations often rely on these funds for their operational costs. So, when I encountered these demands with a very small budget on our end, it became a real challenge. I had to figure out how to find the money to do this work the way it needed to be done, which meant prioritizing, shifting, and cutting out other things to ensure we had the funds to engage with a partner like AMSSA in a truly reciprocal way.
This is an ongoing conversation, especially since we’re all operating in funding environments that are increasingly tight. That’s one of the really big challenges. I’ve learned not to embark on community-engaged initiatives unless I can rely on solid funding support, because otherwise, it damages the relationships.
Katie – I’m going to jump in here because, ditto, right? From our end in the nonprofit sector, the perception is that UBC has all the money. You guys have all the money, and we have none. So, when I first started doing this work, I thought, “Oh yeah, let’s work with UBC. We’re going to get some funds. We’re going to get paid to do the work that we’re doing.” We don’t have core funding, so just to give you a little insight into how it works for us: I get program funding. I might get funding for a project, have a staff person, maybe some communications dollars, perhaps some subscription costs—whatever it is that I need to run that project. And then I get anywhere from 10% to 15% on top of that to run my organization. That’s to pay me, my administrative staff, cover space, bookkeeping, finances—everything comes out of that 15%. And when a project comes in under budget, I get 15% on what it actually costs, not on what the contracted amount is.
So, it’s a very precarious situation for many nonprofits because we’re operating without core funding. When we have the opportunity to work with someone who, in our minds, has dollars, it’s like, let’s do this. To then find out that UBC doesn’t have the dollars was a bit of an eye-opener. I think Antje and her team came to us with almost the exact same realization we had about them.
This really emphasizes the importance of understanding each other’s realities. I’ve learned so much about how a university operates over the last ten years, and I don’t work for a university—that knowledge has come entirely through this partnership.
Sean – I just want to build on something Katie mentioned, which I think is a big reason why our partnership works, and maybe even an idea of how partnerships should be. It’s that mutual recognition of challenges that lies at the core of what makes them successful. Katie recognizing and sharing that story about coming to a realization is a perfect example of why this partnership works. Both sides are genuinely interested in understanding the challenges each of us faces, recognizing the limitations, and seeing beyond our initial expectations as we entered into these partnerships. I think that’s key to why our relationship has been successful.
I also believe that part of this success comes from having a long-term relationship. Another important quality of successful collaborations is that they aren’t just one-off interactions. Going into a collaboration with the intention of it being long-term allows for these kinds of recognitions to happen, which wouldn’t occur as easily in one-time exchanges.
Javier – You’re starting to talk about how we do things together, and we’ve mentioned hanging out, having fun, and how everything is organic without a strategic plan. But the question is, how do you actually prove that relationships built in a more organic, informal way actually get things done? This partnership is demonstrating that it’s possible. Even though we don’t have a defined strategic plan, things are happening. If someone were to ask, “Where are your deliverables?” we’d be able to show them.
Collaborative Initiatives
Javier – So, I’d like to shift the conversation to talk about the collaboration and the initiatives that have been happening and how they got started. After that, we can dive into discussing reciprocity in our work.
Antje – I’ll start by briefly talking about the Community Advisory Board, which is an important milestone in our partnership, especially when considering its organic nature and the absence of a formal strategic plan. But even without that plan, we do a lot of strategic thinking together, and I think that’s really important. When the Centre for Migration Studies was launched, it was clear to all of us that we wanted more than just Katie, who has been on the executive committee from the beginning as a community representative. We also wanted to establish an advisory board, though we don’t particularly like that name—we’re still using it for now.
We wanted to have a Community Advisory Board as part of our governance structure, so we put a lot of effort into thinking about how to build that board and who should be on it. The three of us, along with our colleague Suzanne Huot from Occupational Science, were involved in this process. It was really through Katie’s deep understanding of the sector that we decided to host a town hall format, where everyone in the sector was invited to participate. AMSSA’s enormous outreach capacity in the sector allowed us to gather people to discuss what they wanted from a Community Advisory Board, what they hoped to see, and what they could contribute. We received a lot of valuable ideas that shaped what the Community Advisory Board would eventually become.
We had an open application process rather than just handpicking people we were already working with or going to the usual suspects in the community. We wanted to have a real mix of people with a wide range of lived experiences, from small grassroots organizations to some of the bigger ones. It took us a year just to set up this board, which I think is unusual, but I believe the work we’re doing now reflects and builds on that intentionality.
Javier is the person leading the Community Advisory Board, and Sean, maybe you can say a few words about Javier’s role so it’s clear who he is because it’s such an important role.
Sean – Do you mind if I do something different? I actually came today with the idea of telling a story, and I really appreciate that Katie emphasized the importance of stories. It’s a sociology concept, but I truly believe that stories are what hold us together. So, if you don’t mind, I’d like to share this one story that came to mind when we were planning for the President’s Roundtable on Migration. I think it was probably in 2018 or 2019, and we had a typical planning meeting at Robson Square. The Community Engagement team was there, but Javier wasn’t with us yet because he hadn’t joined our team. There were also some other representatives from AMSSA and such.
I remember that meeting vividly, though I’m not sure why. The room was stark white—white walls, a central table that felt like it was set up for entertaining, a counter for things, and a small seating area. It was just your typical planning meeting. But what stood out to me was what happened afterward, or maybe during a break when we were waiting for something. We all sat around in these chairs, just talking. At that time, we were still a research cluster, hoping to become a center.
Everyone knew that becoming a center was our ambition, and we were having a casual conversation about it. I remember that conversation really well. What stood out was how honest and forthright the representatives from AMSSA were. They were asking, “Okay, if this is going to be a center, will there be real involvement with community partners? Will it just be a name? What will it look like?” There was a genuine discussion about the possibility of creating a center that truly engages community partners in a meaningful way.
I don’t want to pretend it was a moment where we all hugged at the end. It wasn’t like that. It was more of a skeptical vibe, with some people thinking, “I don’t believe it.” Then we went back to the planning meeting. It was just an informal conversation, but I actually think it was that conversation that sparked us to really think, “We need to do this in a meaningful way. What does that mean? What does that look like?”
We could probably tell a million stories about the back-and-forth discussions that followed, but that conversation ultimately led to the creation of the Community Advisory Board. That story is meaningful to me because it captures the informality, the organic nature of how these things happen. Sometimes you can’t predict it, and it isn’t about having a strategic plan. But that conversation didn’t just end there; it stayed with us. We had this long-term relationship, and we knew we would be working together in the future, so we couldn’t ignore that conversation. We had to think about it and deal with it, and I believe that’s reflected in the outcomes we have at the center now.
I’ll just say really quickly, since we were discussing the importance of resources, that it’s worth acknowledging something that came out of the President’s Roundtable. One outcome was the support to move forward with employing a Community Engagement Officer, someone who would realize the vision we started at that informal meeting and then further developed through the President’s Roundtable.
As a result, we conceived what that role might be—the role of a Community Engagement Strategist at the center. We thought about what that would look like and what the purpose would be. There are a few unique aspects to it. One is that the position is actually supervised by both a university supervisor and a non-university supervisor at AMSSA. I think Javier should tell us what that job involves because he lives it every day and knows it best.
Javier – So, the position very much followed the nature of the partnership and was really exploratory. It was like, “Okay, how can we do this? How can we align this role with the feeling of the relationship and our understanding of what it is?” You’ve mentioned some key words that I’ve been noting, like intentions, the reality of institutional work, honesty, and reciprocity. What was interesting for me was that we didn’t exactly know what the role would be, but we were willing to take the time to explore and let the process inform itself.
This was particularly fascinating for me because, in my past life, I worked internationally and have always felt that I could serve as a bridge between community and academia. From the beginning, there was a lot of clarity around the need for space and flexibility. We engaged in a lot of strategic thinking, designing sessions where just the four of us, or someone relevant at that moment, would participate. We do a lot of that—thinking, talking, and planning—and it’s very fundamental.
For me, it was incredibly interesting to see how the pieces came together, fitting with the development of the relationship. We addressed topics in the relationship between academia and the sector that weren’t normally discussed or brought forward.
So, it was really about asking, “How do we build these things? How do we start thinking about a collaboration framework?” If this is about relationality, we have to know each other on both sides. That becomes one of the most important aspects. How do you get to know each other? How do you build those relationships? How do you make this work truly about engagement?
One example would be all the time we’ve invested in building the Community Advisory Board. We realized that the way institutions operate is real, and we have to be aware of our intentions, knowing there’s always going to be a bit of a gap. That’s the gap we want to be mindful of, and we need to be honest about it. I think honesty is crucial because it allows us to acknowledge the things that don’t work well or the aspects we don’t like as much from the other side. We put those issues on the table and say, “Hey, this is happening, this is working, and this isn’t.”
Antje – I also want to say something about the position. We’re talking about it now being sustainable, with funding secured for several years, but I want to emphasize that this isn’t funding from UBC. We were able to secure this funding through a big grant and were fortunate enough to write the position into that grant. This highlights one of the real challenges with these initiatives at UBC—the presence of seed funding without a commitment to making these positions permanent. That’s crucial for these relationships, right? The ability to credibly commit to an initiative beyond just a part-time, two-year pilot period is essential. If we hadn’t received that grant, the position would have ended there. So, we were really lucky in that regard, but it also underscores our precarity, and I know you’re all aware of that on campus.
Do you want me to say a few words about how that work led into Research Day? Our vision was very much about not being action-oriented from the start. We didn’t want to jump straight into action; instead, we wanted to figure out the things both CMS (Centre for Migration Studies) and the community members were committed to. One of these areas of intersection was decolonization, which we all felt committed to exploring. We asked ourselves, “What does it mean to decolonize our research, the way we work, and service delivery? What does it mean to do all this work as settlers on these lands, most of us being settlers?”
This was significant because it put us all in the same boat, feeling uncertain about how to move forward. There wasn’t an expert in the room—everyone was new to this journey. In that sense, the advisory board isn’t really an advisory board in the traditional sense. That’s not the relationship we have. Instead, we’re figuring things out together, and it’s been incredibly fruitful to have perspectives from the other sector.
So, part of the work is really about having ongoing conversations that keep resurfacing. For instance, when we discuss something, we ask, “How does this intersect with colonization? What would decolonizing this look like?” One important event we held last year was Research Day—officially called CMS Sector Collaborations Research Day. It was a day we held in the community, featuring panels of university researchers and practitioners, focused on understanding each other and our constraints.
We looked at what it means for a junior faculty member who hasn’t yet secured tenure to engage in community-based research, considering questions of funding, timelines, and the mutual misconceptions that each sector has. There are many misconceptions on both sides, and it was important for us to address them. Initially, we thought Research Day should be about showcasing research, but instead, we focused on having conversations about what we need to understand about each other if we want to enter a research collaboration, while also weaving decolonization into those discussions.
Katie, what’s your perspective on Research Day?
Katie – Ditto. It’s the same thing from the other side. Like I mentioned in my introduction, there’s still so much we don’t know. You can’t enter a meaningful partnership with someone—it’s like any relationship—if you don’t understand the realities that person is facing.
Because we’ve approached this in such an organic and relational way, it felt presumptuous to organize a day and just say, “Hey, here are all the different research projects happening right now.” And there are many, right? The work we’re doing to build the partnership is happening simultaneously with the work being done in the community. I want to emphasize that it’s not like everything is on hold, with no research happening in the community while we figure out how to make it all work. We’re building the car while driving it. The research is happening, the partnerships are active, and the community is actively involved with the Centre for Migration Studies, and vice versa. That’s really important to note.
One thing I want to make sure I pass on to those of you here looking to build research partnerships is that there’s another aspect to these relationships that isn’t necessarily rooted in academic researchers or direct service providers. Some of our biggest successes have come from leveraging UBC staff positions and relationships that aren’t tied to researchers or tenured professors but are connected to offices like the Community Engagement Office or the Equity and Diversity Office. Javier is another great example of this.
On the sector side, if you’re looking at any field—whether it’s medicine, social work, or something else—there’s usually an association or a point of contact that isn’t necessarily a direct service provider but an organization that specializes in this kind of work. Leveraging those relationships is important. My experience has often been what we jokingly call “1-800-dial-a-client.” It’s like, “Hello, I need 20 Syrians between the ages of 16 and 18, and we’ll give them a $5 Starbucks card next week, please.” That’s what we were getting, and there’s just no place for that. It’s a hard no—thank you, hang up the phone kind of situation.
But when there’s a relationship between UBC staff positions and associations or indirect service providers, it changes the dynamic. For example, I don’t have 20 Syrian clients—that’s not what we do. So, those are two important groups that need to be at the table. If you’re looking at building partnerships, go beyond just the academic researchers and the service providers who have that client base. Engage the UBC staff and your indirect service providers, whether through associations, colleges, or credentialing bodies.
Sean – Building on Katie’s point, I do think there’s something unique about the partnership we’re discussing here because it isn’t solely a research partnership. Many of the partnerships I’ve been involved in were research-oriented, but this one is different. Katie touched on all the key aspects, but I think it’s worth highlighting that what we’re doing is unique.
Today, we’re talking about how this partnership isn’t just research-based; it’s about building an infrastructure for collaborations and imagining what a collaborative Centre for Migration Studies looks like. It’s more about creating the foundation for how to work together effectively.
Reflecting on the Partnership and Understanding Reciprocity
Javier – There’s one thing about this collaboration that I want to quickly point out because we’ve been talking a lot about the relationships, the hanging out, and the good spirit we share. You can see that we have a great time together, and that’s very important.
But it’s also important to acknowledge that there are times when we disagree, and you can feel the tension. You must be ready to be uncomfortable, especially when we start talking about topics like decolonization. We all have our own ideas and discomforts, and sometimes it’s about allowing each other to push a little bit.
These moments are important, and while they might not be reflected in this 45-minute session, they do happen.
Katie – I can talk about that. I was brought here for my honesty, so I’ll tell you—as a community partner, it can be very difficult sitting at a table full of professors, doctors, and PhDs. There’s a hierarchy. It exists in the sector, and it definitely exists when I’m sitting at a table with our funders. Suddenly, everyone starts putting on their best behavior, minding their P’s and Q’s. But for me, it can be disruptive to walk into a room and hear, “Oh, you’re from the community. Isn’t that nice? You do such meaningful work, it must feel so good.” Then, when you try to get a word in, it’s, “Oh, the community person is speaking again, isn’t that nice?”
That’s the discomfort I sometimes have to sit in, and while I’m perfectly comfortable with being uncomfortable, not everyone is. So, if you’re from UBC, it’s something to keep in mind when you’re bringing the community in. I’m a hard-nosed businesswoman—I run my organization like a business. At the end of the day, what I do with my profits is my choice, and I choose to reinvest them back into my company, which is why I’ve been in the nonprofit sector. But let me tell you, the community has an enormous amount of experience and expertise. They bring immense value and deserve to be treated like they have that expertise and value.
Make sure that the people in the room aren’t just thinking, “Oh, how nice that the community person is here and has something to say,” because that doesn’t feel very good.
Antje – I can speak to that because it’s certainly been part of my learning journey. When this relationship started, I didn’t fully recognize the depth of expertise that existed on the community side. I’m still learning. As professors, and as a university, we often think of ourselves as being at the forefront of progressive causes, leading society in various ways. But that’s not always true.
As I’ve gotten to know Katie, AMSSA, and her fantastic staff, I’ve realized there are so many areas where I, as a center director—and like most people in admin, I didn’t receive any formal training to be a center director—have so much to learn. I find myself looking to Katie for guidance because there’s so much experience there. For example, when it comes to questions of EDI (Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion), AMSSA is so far ahead compared to my experience at UBC. Writing a strategic plan, having a good communication strategy, knowledge mobilization, and events—they do it all so much more professionally than we often do here. Their policy engagement at all levels—municipal, provincial, federal—shows such depth of expertise.
This has been a big learning journey for me, and also a practice in humility, realizing that there are many areas where we’re really just mediocre at UBC.
Insights, Feedback, and Advice to Staff
Javier – So, Katie, there’s one question we wanted to put out there for you: What specific advice would you give to UBC staff who are involved in leading and supporting this community-university engagement?
Katie – I’ve touched on this throughout the session—we’ve talked about reciprocity, understanding each other’s realities, and the importance of building genuine connections. It’s not just about showing up on a Zoom meeting, but actually taking the time to get to know and understand each other. We need to recognize the role that the sector and the community play, how the work we do differs from yours, and how there are also a lot of similarities.
One of the funniest realizations I’ve had in this partnership is that I have more flexibility than you do. I can do more with less, which was surprising to me. For example, trying to get a catered lunch out of you people is really difficult—it shouldn’t be that hard to feed people!
It’s important to look at this as a long-term commitment. Too often, people come into the community, take whatever they need, and then leave. Please take the time to establish some sort of lasting relationship. People always say they don’t have time, but it’s about priorities. Am I a priority for you? If I am, then you have time. If I’m not, then you don’t.
We’ve discussed power dynamics and their importance, but one thing I’d really encourage everyone to do, whenever possible, is to include the community at the governance level.
I hate the word “governance.” It plagues me as a nonprofit—capital G, governance, lowercase G, governance. It’s a word that infiltrates my day, but it’s important that we’re not just “the community person who said something cute.” We need to be there at that governance level. It’s ironic because we’ve talked about the informality of this partnership, the lack of a strategic plan, and the absence of a seven-year roadmap or anything like that.
But solidifying the community’s role in governance means that this partnership will live beyond us. So, when Antje decides she’s going to go kayaking for the rest of her life, Sean moves to a houseboat in Ladner, and I do whatever it is I’m going to do, the relationship will still be there within the governance structure. Don’t just come to the community to dip into the well—bring the community on board as you’re developing and creating your governance.
Javier – On the flipside, I think this might be relevant because, Katie, you’re talking about taking the time—and you do have the time—to establish relationships. I want to be mindful of how much time is actually allowed for that within the structure at UBC and what your supervisors or leaders permit. You all are a good example of making time for this, but I would say that’s not the norm at UBC. Sean and Antje, do you want to add something about that?
Antje – I feel like I’m just repeating what Katie said, but I’ve learned that I can be very efficiency-minded. I know how to get things done quickly and efficiently. But I had to learn the value of letting go of that mindset and understanding the importance of unstructured time together. Sometimes, it’s not clear what we’re getting out of it—there’s nothing tangible to show for it in the moment—but it’s the foundation for everything we want to do.
Now, I understand that, and it’s become clear to me. We have three, four, or even five-hour meetings sometimes, and there are very few people in my work with whom I spend that amount of time. But those meetings are crucial because they define what we’ll do in the next few months. They’re a really important and worthwhile investment of time.
Sean – Some of our colleagues don’t take those half days to do this kind of work, so it is a bit of a commitment for us to do it. It stems from what we want to achieve—it follows from our values and goals. So, yes, it takes effort, but it makes a difference. The fact that it’s fun, that it’s a learning experience, all of that makes it worthwhile.
We hope you enjoyed the conversation between AMSSA and CMS and gained some valuable insights that can support your own community and university collaborations.
And if you’re a UBC staff member working in the vast realm of community-university work, please consider joining UBC’s Community Engagement Network.