7th May - Is the ‘forum’ broken?


This is one of a series of reflections on what I’m noticing through my work with individuals, teams, and organisations as a coach, alongside my broader work through Be The Waves - an organisation I founded in Q4 2025 to strengthen collective responsibility in how we lead, decide, and act in systems, all grounded in a central question: how we create the conditions for real agency, forum, and movement, and what I often describe as stewardship—a shared responsibility for what we shape together and what we leave behind.


I was watching Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on BBC.

On in the background at first.
But I found myself staying with it.

Not because I was drawn in - but because something about it held my attention.

There was clarity in parts.
People speaking relatively well.
Moments of agreement - though often loosely defined.

And Laura Kuenssberg, doing what she does.
Competent. Familiar. Holding the line.

But something about it - and the wider political media landscape it sits inside – didn’t sit right.

Not just because of what was being said.

But because of what it was happening inside.

This isn’t really a forum.

And that matters.

I’ve spent years creating and holding forums - for individuals, teams, organisations.

Spaces where people don’t just speak, but work something through:

Where we agree
Where we disagree
Where we get specific about where and why

And then, crucially:

What do we do - given the reality we’re in, and the outcome we’re trying to create?

Not just perspectives.
But commitment.

Something we are willing to act on.

What I see instead

When I look at political media - and beyond that - the political system itself - I see something different.

We are very good at:

  • Expressing positions
    Refining arguments
    Staging disagreement

But far less effective at turning any of that into:

  • Shared responsibility
    Deliberate consensus
    Actual movement

We often talk about politics as if the problem is disagreement.

I don’t think it is.

The issue is that disagreement rarely becomes something generative.

This is bigger than politics

This isn’t about politics as a side.

It’s about something more fundamental - how we make decisions, hold difference, and create movement in any system.

You can see it in politics.
You can see it in organisations.
You can see it in teams.

The real misalignment

Right now, three things feel disconnected:

  • Agency - people having a real effect

  • Forum - where meaning is made and difference is held

  • Movement - what actually changes

We have voice - plenty of it.
We have visibility.

But the connection between voice and consequence is weak.

So what we get is:

  • Conversation without direction

  • Debate without development

  • Visibility without movement

This isn’t a criticism. It’s structural.

Programmes like Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg are doing what they’re designed to do:

  • Clarify

  • Challenge

  • Attempt to hold power to account

That matters.

But they are not designed to be an effective forum.

And increasingly, neither is the political system itself.

We are trying to hold a level of complexity inside systems that weren’t built for it.

So complexity gets compressed - into interviews, headlines, positions that can be explained in seconds.

And we call that “debate”.

For most people, it doesn’t feel like agency.

It feels like watching.

I see this everywhere

In organisations too.

Smart people. Good intent. Real care.

And still - things stall.

Not because people aren’t capable.

But because the space itself can’t hold enough of the system at once for something new to emerge.

So everything gets pushed too quickly into:

Decisions
Alignment
Action

Before anything deeper has had time to form.

Which leaves me with a question

Is our political system actually an effective forum for creating agency and movement?

Or are we mistaking visibility for effectiveness?

And this week, that becomes real

On 7th May, many of us will engage with this system.

The question isn’t just:

Who do we choose?

It’s: How are we choosing?

Not just based on position, personality, or even policy in isolation.

But based on something deeper:

  • Who is creating real agency - where people can influence what happens?

  • Who can hold real forum - where complexity is worked, not reduced?

  • Who is committed to movement - not just messaging, but sustained change?

Because what we’re really choosing is not just a representative.

We’re choosing:

The quality of forum we participate in
The degree of agency we’re given
The likelihood of movement on the things that matter

And beyond that:

Who is thinking and acting with stewardship –
not just for the next cycle,
but for the next 50–100 years, across people, place, and planet.

The deeper question

Who is willing to look at the political process itself?

Not just operate within it - but examine how it actually creates:

  • Agency

  • Forum

  • Movement

Because if the system isn’t generating those things, then part of the work is not just choosing within it - but strengthening how it works.

Because this is what I’m landing on

We don’t just have a political problem.

We have a forum problem.

(If you’re curious what I mean by “forum” – I’ve written more on that here.)

And until that changes, we’ll keep having the same conversations - just in slightly different forms –
without much actually moving.

Onwards

In my work as a coach, I help people lean into that - individually and collectively.

And through Be The Waves, my intention is to help organisations and sectors do the same; by building collective agency, forum and movement - to create conscously held and stewarded change.

You

What are you carrying?

If something in this resonates - or you’re trying to think something through, or want to carry responsibility better - just reply.

stefan@stefanpowell.co.uk

Next
Next

Effective Forum: Where Conversation Becomes Movement