Storysharing lacks best practice approaches.

Lately, I have found myself saying, “Just because something is a common practice, doesn’t make it a best practice,” on repeat. Storysharing has been a staple of professional spaces for as long as most of us can remember. However, we still have few, if any, best practice strategies for accessing and employing this method of communication.

Storysharing is a vital activity for raising awareness, advocating for change, and connecting with others to build safe communities. Storysharing is often pivotal in policy change and rallying the public to get behind an issue. Storysharing is often the first and sometimes the only way organizations engage people with lived and living experiences. This engagement typically revolves around fundraising for causes and supporting programs that can improve awareness or address specific issues. But are organizations employing or accessing sharers’ stories in ethical ways? Are they operating in trauma-informed ways when inviting individuals to share stories for their causes or programs? Or are we (as fields) perpetuating the transactionalization of stories to gain momentum and move our efforts forward?

When individuals with LLE choose to share and own their stories in ways that serve their needs and wellbeing, storysharing becomes an undeniably powerful method for creating change. This change is most often focused on the needs of other individuals, organizations, or society at large, rather than the person sharing in the cause. I have asked dozens of sharers, “How many groups or organizations have followed up and checked on you after you shared for them?” 99% have said, “ZERO.” Most often, we are asked to share, and then groups move on to the next work day or event without considering what this could mean for some.

There is more to the spaces of LLE than stories, and when we ONLY center LLE approaches around stories, we risk missing out on the deeper contributions people can offer. We also lead many LLE persons to believe that their only value stems from the trauma, loss, or grief they experienced and not from the knowledge or healing they found afterward. We have to understand that storysharing does not benefit every person, and it isn’t the best way for some people to engage or help others or care for themselves.

What happens when storysharing is the only engagement method?

Ethical and person-centered communication plays a central role in how we invite, guide, and honor sharing. Even encouragement to share has ethical implications that should remain at the forefront. Without clarity or care, storysharing can feel exploitative or unsafe. It can leave sharers navigating internal turmoil or even being retraumatized. It can upturn their normalcy and sometimes leave them to manage on their own.

Storysharing isn’t simple, and it doesn’t always mean only good will come of it. Harm can happen. Those employing storysharing should proactively work to prevent and mitigate potential harm for everyone, including the sharer.

Questions organizations or groups should ask themselves before seeking a storysharer:

• Why are we asking for this story?
• Who benefits most from this story?
• How are we compensating and/or caring for the sharer? (If you can’t compensate, how are you being transparent about this?)
• Are we ensuring there is an option for the sharer to say no, without consequence?
• What supports do we have in place?
• What is our follow-up protocol?

Ethical storysharing embodies the best practices we all strive to achieve. It cares for the audience, improves potential outcomes, supports the sharer, AND facilitates deeper connections. People with LLE bring more than stories, they bring insight, strategy, and leadership, but when we ask them to share their stories, we need to remember they are more than their stories, they are people.

#LivedExperience #Storytelling #Communication #CoCreation #Leadership #NarrativeStrategy #SystemsChange