human services delivery, loan and grant administration, and general
government. This reflects the current paradigm of creating top-
down bureaucratic structures with narrow slices of authority.
That dichotomy was not sufficient. On occasion, we have also
noted the differences between process- and project-oriented people.
We need both types in rural development, though they often do not
seem to understand or appreciate one another. An article by Bill
Traynor that described two paradigms in community development
was useful. These two different orientations explained some of what
we were observing.
The TechnicalZProduction Paradigm describes the viewpoint of
many project-oriented community development professionals and
the local officials with whom they work. This is the dominant view of
community development today. Here are its major points:
TechnicalZProduction Paradigm
• Views community residents as clients who passively receive prod-
ucts and services.
• Views development as a technical process of deal making.
• Values technicalZprofessional skills over community participation
and leadership.
• Measures performance by units created.
• Technical and financial support is tied to projects rather than com-
munity organizations.
• Opportunity and technicalZfinancial feasibility more important to
project selection than community needZimportance.
The Empowerment Paradigm has been around for some time, but
has been less widely recognized. However, its emphasis on building
strong local organizations to shape their future has been gaining ac-
ceptance recently. This paradigm is the reason the IRDC listed lead-
ership development among its top challenges, and it explains the
work we put into holding Community Leader Forums around the
state to build capacity and encourage peer learning networks. Its
major features are listed below:
EmpowermentZConsumer Planning Paradigm
• Emphasizes building organizations and power over building struc-
tures.
• Views development as a broad, citizen-led effort to direct and
shape the community’s future.
• Sees community residents as consumers of products and services
and as potential leaders.
• Uses anticipatory leadership to identify and create opportunities,
not wait passively.
194