Rome Meeting: Action

The meeting occurred between 11th – 15th September 2017.

It was very well organised by our experienced local partner, Archivio della Memoria, who arranged a  venue close to the centre in Trastevere.

The SEDETT Meeting venue

AdM also provided, outside the business aspects of the project, general guidance & cultural activities including expert city tours.

The meeting was marked by having, in attendance what was for Pathways, the youngest ever representative

Alvaro, aged one and half months (he is the one being carried)

There was also another unusual attendee who made his first appearance at a project meeting in February 2017

& went on from Rome to enjoy himself enormously at another meeting in the Czech Republic

‘Accrington’, as he is known to his friends or ‘Stanley’ as he is known to his owners, found that the Rome experience was not always to his liking – or maybe it was that he was just an unwanted intruder

AdM had also organised meeting with social enterprises – Casa Delle Donna itself

and a refugee centre in the city


There were also the project activities to be explored and developed – the prime purpose of the partnership gathering in Rome. The planned activities were desigend to engage partners in developing two of the three outputs of the programme.

There was very little progress….

….. though there was talk & with partners engaged in a considerable degree of listening.

The impact was that many partners were dissatisfied with the process & methods being used.

It was felt that the meeting seemed stuck on repeated outlines & with management issues rather than engaging in action that led towards practical outcomes.

These concerns were expressed publicly to the meeting by 2 of the partners (both highly experienced project managers). The comments included a view that there seemed to be no final outcome to Output One: the research work made by partners 6 months ago remains as just the raw material…
…& consequently there is little development of Output Two beyond an image called ‘the bucket’ – which was presented as a ‘framework’.

The ‘Bucket’
or should it be ‘funnel’
Rome funnel
(for those who like such images go and sate yr appetite here)

The difficulties also arose with Output Three which requires partners to explore the value of creative activities. There was no satisfactory progress towards real engagement in proposed activities & with those presented for action before the meeting. Consequently the various practical ideas presented to the group since the start of the project, have yet to be seriously considered.


However, where partners have ‘picked-up’ and used an idea, there has been considerable success:

And in a project running parallel to SEDETT, there is an excellent example of the way in which unusual creative activities by enthusiasts, can have very positive social impact:

SEDETT needs this type of creative thinking!

Despite the lack of progress on the details of the project there were enjoyable social activities which allowed the partners to develop practical conversations that may have impact on the future development of the project.

There was also amusement for some in discovering they were drinking wine from a traditional ‘fiasco’. The term seemed, to them, to have a ‘contextual appropriateness’.

For others, the most significant moment was observing a City Council wagon stuck in a hole – another appropriate image for the present situation of SEDETT.

It easily escaped thanks to its ability to lift itself – creating a suggestively useful, but unlikely, metaphor for the future of the Sedett project