Twelve Concepts

for World Service

for Dummies Smart People®

It is often said, with some justification, that the best way to hide something from an alcoholic is to put it in the Big Book. However, if one really wants something to go unnoticed, the place to put it is in the A.A. Service Manual. Though they are now listed in the Big Book (on the last two pages!), it is to the largely unknown and unread Service Manual one must go to find the equally unknown and unread essays exploring the Twelve Concepts for World Service.

In these pages we hope to provide an introduction to the Twelve Concepts for those who are not yet familiar with them. A full and complete examination is not possible merely through writing, for these principles are not a theory, they are meant to be practiced. But we can provide a simplified (we hope not 'dumbed down') explanation of the Concepts - a Cliff's Notes version, if you will. We will start by discussing some A.A. history and the Twelve Traditions, as the former will provide some perspective and the Concepts cannot be understood without a good working knowledge of the latter. We believe that understanding the rationale and purpose behind the Twelve Concepts as a whole will make them more comprehensible individually.

The vital importance of the Steps in personal recovery is self-evident to any sober alcoholic. The Traditions, intended to promote unity of the groups which foster recovery, are perhaps not quite so deeply felt. However, they can potentially arise in any A.A. meeting as groups practice them in all their affairs, and the Traditions do sometimes apply to A.A. members' everyday lives (personal anonymity, for example).

On the other hand, The Concepts concern A.A.'s Third Legacy, service outside of A.A. groups and in the world at large. Although all are welcome to attend periodic meetings with the GSR's and delegate from their Area, various regional conferences and the annual General Service Conference meeting in New York, few do unless actively involved. The ultimate practical aim of this type of service is to help the group fulfill its primary purpose of carrying its message to the alcoholic who still suffers, but it is largely done out of sight of the typical A.A. member. Therefore, the practical application of the Concepts appears to most A.A's seems as remote and hidden as the essays which explain them. There is a spiritual purpose behind the Concepts in addition to helping groups spread their message, a purpose derived from the Traditions. As Bill writes in the Twelfth Concept, the Concepts provide the Fellowship "protection against needless errors and against our very natural human temptations to wealth, prestige, power, and the like."

In order to make Third Legacy more transparent to the reader, we attach a PDF copy of the final report of a recent meeting of the annual General Service Conference. Interestingly, on page 56 of this PDF we find a proposal to combine the Twelve Concepts essays with the book Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, an action which would bring all three of A.A.'s Legacies of Recovery, Unity and Service together in print for the first time, and in the process increase awareness of the Concepts. Such a book, if it is ever approved, might be nicknamed the Twelve and Twelve and Twelve...

The proceedings at these annual General Service meetings, with their committees, motions, reports and the like, may seem abstract and far removed from the original fellowship which stated, in the Forward to the first edition of its primary text, that “We are not an organization in the conventional sense of the word.” Such an impression could reinforce the idea that the Twelve Concepts are irrelevant to sobriety in A.A., and discourage their study. But it is important to note that the Alcoholic Foundation (precursor to the General Service Board), with its board of trustees, and an office with a full time secretary devoted to A.A. affairs, both predate the Big Book. (See A.A. Comes of Age, and Pass It On for this history.) It is thus clear that A.A. has had a service structure of sorts virtually since it was founded.

The Ninth Tradition, the only one to mention A.A. organization or structure in any way, in its modern form does state: "A.A., as such, ought never be organized;" However, the second clause explicitly permits the sort of service structure seen in the attached report. "... but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve." The original, lesser-known Long Form of Tradition Nine (1946) even mentions trusted servants at the national level: "The trustees of the General Service Board are, in effect, our A.A. General Service Committee. They are the custodians of our A.A. Tradition and the receivers of voluntary A.A. contributions by which we maintain our A.A. General Service Office at New York." The seeming contradiction is resolved when we read the accompanying essay in the Twelve and Twelve. In it, we see that 'organized' is used to mean established authority and hierarchy, which are to be avoided: "Power to direct or govern is the essence of organization everywhere." (Page 172) In fact, as we have noted elsewhere on this website, power is the topic of no fewer than four of the Twelve Traditions: Traditions Two, Three, Four and Nine all deny or limit some aspect of power and authority within A.A. Such was the importance of these issues in the years of growth after publication of the Big Book. Tradition Nine, we see, discourages the creation of a power structure, while permitting the creation of a service structure.

	It is clear now that we ought never to name boards to 
	govern us, but it is equally clear that we shall always 
	need to authorize workers to serve us. It is the dif-
	ference between the spirit of vested authority and the 
	spirit of service, two concepts which are sometimes poles 
	apart...

	A.A. has to function, but at the same time it must avoid 
	those  dangers of  great wealth, prestige, and entrenched 
	power which necessarily tempt other  societies. Though 
	Tradition Nine at first sight seems to deal with a purely 
	practical  matter, in its  actual  operation it discloses 
	a society without organization, animated only by the spirit 
	of service — a true fellowship. (Page 174-175) 

The tension Bill percieves between authority and service, and between practical and spiritual concerns will both play a part when we explore the Concepts.

As the Twelve Concepts for World service are meant to guide Third Legacy activites, in reading about them one would naturally expect to encounter discussion of the Ninth Tradition, which has as its topic the A.A. service structure. However, there does not appear to be any explicit mention of this Tradition in the essays on the Twelve Concepts. The primary justification and motivation for the Concepts cited in the essays is actually the Second Tradition, which concerns itself with the ultimate authority embodied in the group copnscience as well as trusted servants who carry it out through their delegated (and temporary) authority. Seven of the Twelve Concepts explicitly mention Tradition Two, including each of the first five, and another quotes from the Twelve and Twelve on this topic without citation. Just as Tradition One's invocation of unity provides a theme and purpose for all the others, defining and balancing the ultimate and delegated authority envisioned in Tradition Two sets the theme and purpose for the Concepts.

We have more than just this documentary evidence, however. Nell Wing, Bill W's secretary and A.A.'s first archivist, writes in her autobiography:

	From the very first time I met him when I came to work, until his death, 
	he [Bill W.] devoted a large part of his energy and time to trying to divest  
	himself of power and authority, instead of trying to hang onto them. This  
	idea was an integral part of the Twelve Traditions. Tradition Two states:

		For our group pupose, there is but one
		authority - a loving God as he may express
		Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders
		are but trusted servants, they do not govern.

	The General Service Conference grew out of this same idea, and Bill had to 
	struggle long and hard to educate the groups to accept this responsibility 
	and authority.  (Grateful to Have Been There, Page 28-29)

Those well versed in the Traditions already know that the Short Form of Tradition Two is actually longer than the original Long Form. The second sentence of the Short Form, quoted in the previous paragraph, is a paraphrase of a segment of Tradition Nine's Long Form, which reads in part:

	"All such representatives are to be guided in the spirit of service, for
	true leaders in A.A. are but trusted servants of the whole. They derive
	no real authority from their titles; they do not govern."
		

	I've listened many times as Bill explained his own view of humility, similar
	to the early Greek "Middle Way" philosophy. As Bill expressed it, we need to 
	follow a middle road, to strike a balance - neither wearing the Uriah Heep 
	cloak of false humility, which he called "force-feeding of humble pie," nor
	straying into material achievements and admiration of one's own importance.
	Bill's definition of humility was willingness to seek God's will. 
		(Grateful to Have Been There, Page 44)

	Guilt aims at self-destruction, and pride aims at
	the destruction of others. 

	This is why I see humility for today as that
	safe and secure place midway between these vio-
	lent emotional extremes. It is a quiet place where
	can keep enough perspective, and enough balance,
	to take my next small step up the clearly marked
	road that points toward eternal values.  
		(The Best of Bill, Page 47)

	The “Twelve Concepts for World Service” to be described in this Manual are an 
	interpretation of A.A.’s world service structure. They reveal the evolution by
	which it has arrived in its present form, and they detail the experience and 
	reasoning on which our operation stands today. These Concepts therefore aim to 
	record the “why” of our service structure in such a fashion that the highly 	
	valuable experience of the past, and the lessons we have drawn from that experi-
	ence, can never be forgotten or lost.

	[I]deas like the following pervade the Concepts: “No group or individual should be  
	set in unqualified authority over another,”  “Large, active and dissimilar operations should be
	separately incorporated and managed, each with its own staff, equipment and working capital,” 
	“We ought to avoid undue concentration of money or personal influence in any service group or 
	entity,” “At each level of service, authority should be equal to responsibility,”  “Double-headed 	
	executive direction should be avoided.” These and other similar provisions define working
	relations that can be friendly and yet efficient. They would especially restrain our tendency to 
	concentrate money and power...
	 

	The A.A. groups today hold ultimate responsibility and final authority for our world 
	services  —  those special elements of over-all service activity which make it possible for  
	our Society to function as a whole. The groups assumed that responsibility at the St. Louis  
	International Convention of 1955. There, on behalf of Dr. Bob, the Trustees and A.A.’s old-
	time leaders, I made the transfer of world service responsibility to our entire Fellowship.
	

	The fact had to be faced that A.A.’s founders were perishable. When Dr. Bob and I had 
	gone, who would then advise the Trustees; who could link our little-known Board to our 
	thousands of groups? For the first time it was seen that only a representative conference 
	could take the place of Dr. Bob and me...

	Tradition Two, like all the A.A. Traditions, is the voice of experience, based upon the 
	trials of thousands of groups in our pioneering time. The main  principles of Tradition 
	Two are crystal clear: the A.A. groups are to be the final authority; their leaders are to be 
	entrusted with delegated responsibilities only. 

	Hence it is with a sense of great security that we old-timers have now fully vested in A.A.’s 
	General Service Conference the authority for giving shape — through the labors of its chosen 
	Delegates, Trustees, and service workers — to the destiny that we trust God in His wisdom is 
	holding in store for all of us. 

	Exactly as Dr. Bob and I earlier had found it necessary to delegate a large part of our 
	active authority to the Trustees, so have the A.A. groups since found it necessary to del-
	egate these same powers to their General Service Conference. The final say — the ultimate 
	sanction in matters of large importance  —  has not been given to the Trustees alone. By 
	the Conference Charter, confirmed at St. Louis, this authority is now delegated to the A.A. 
	groups and thence to their Conference, a body which is a representative cross section of 
	our entire Fellowship. 

	In making this momentous transfer, we old-timers deeply hope that we have avoided those 
	pitfalls into which societies have so often fallen because their originators have failed, 
	during their lifetimes, to properly delegate and distribute their own authority, responsi-
	bility and leadership. 

	We have seen how the A.A. groups, under the concept of the “group conscience,” are today 
	holding the ultimate authority and the final responsibility for world services. We have 
	also noted how, by reason of the Conference Charter and the “trusted servant” provision
	of Tradition Two, the groups have delegated to their General Service Conference full auth-
	ority to manage and conduct A.A.’s world affairs. 

	Our entire A.A. program rests squarely upon the principle of mutual trust. We 
	trust God, we trust  A.A., and we trust each other. Therefore we cannot do less 
	than trust our leaders in service. The “Right of Decision” that we offer them is 
	not only the practical means by which they may act and lead effectively, but it 
	is also the symbol of our implicit confidence. 

	Every skilled element to do the allotted job is present. No class is set in absolute 
	authority over another. This is the corporate or “participating” method of doing bus-
	iness, as distinguished from structures so common to many institutional, military and 
	governmental agencies wherein high-level people or classes of people often are set in 
	absolute authority, one over the other. 

	There is another good reason for “participation,” and this one has to do with our spiri-
	tual needs. All of us deeply desire to belong. We want an A.A. relation of brotherly partner-
	ship. It is our shining ideal that the “spiritual corporation” of A.A. should never include 
	any members who are regarded as “second class.” Deep down, I think this is what we have been  
	struggling to achieve in our world service structure. Here is perhaps the principal reason why
	we should continue to ensure “participation” at every important level. Just as there are no 
	second-class  A.A.’s,  neither  should  there  be  any  second-class  world  service  workers, 
	either.	

	The “Right of Participation” is therefore a corrective of ultimate authority because 
	it mitigates its harshness  or  misuse. It also  encourages us who serve A.A. to accept 
	the necessary disciplines that our several tasks require. We can do this when we are 
	sure that we  belong, when the fact of our “participation” assures us that we are truly 
	the “trusted  servants” described in A.A.’s Tradition Two. 

	The Rights of “Appeal” and “Petition” of course aim at the total problem of protect-
	ing and making the best possible use of minority feeling and opinion. This has always 
	been, and still is, a central problem of  all free governments and democratic societies. 
	In Alcoholics Anonymous individual freedom is of enormous importance. For instance, any 
	alcoholic is a member of A.A. the moment he says so; we cannot take away his right to 
	belong. Neither can we force our members  to believe anything or pay anything. Ours is
	indeed a large charter of minority privileges and liberties. 

	Hence we believe that we shall never be subjected to the tyranny of either the major-
	ity or the minority, provided we carefully define the relations between them and forthwith 
	tread the path of world service in the spirit of our Twelve Steps, our Twelve Traditions, and 
	our Conference Charter — in which I trust that we shall one day inscribe these traditional 
	Rights of “Appeal” and “Petition." 

	Just as the A.A. groups find themselves unable to act decisively respecting world service  
	affairs unless they delegate a great amount of active authority and responsibility to their  
	Conference, so must the Conference in turn delegate a liberal administrative authority to 
	the General Service Board, in order that its Trustees may act freely and effectively in the 
	absence of the Conference itself. 

	From top to bottom, our whole service structure indeed resembles that of a large corporation. 
	The A.A. groups are the stockholders; the Delegates are their representatives or proxies at 
	the “annual  meeting”; our  General Service Board Trustees are actually the directors of a 
	“holding company.” And this holding company, the General Service Board, actually owns and 
	controls the “subsidiaries” which carry on our active world services.

	This very real analogy makes it even more clear that, just like any other board of directors, 
	our Trustees must be given large powers if they are to effectively manage the principal world 
	affairs of Alcoholics Anonymous. 

	Up to the present time our experience shows that this balance of powers between the 
	Trustees and the Conference is thoroughly workable. We have taken great pains to reserve 
	final authority to the Conference by practical and traditional means. By legal means we 
	have delegated ample functional and discretionary authority to the Trustees. We believe 
	this balance can be maintained indefinitely, because the one is protected by tradition 
	and the other by law. 

	If, therefore, in the years ahead, the Conference will always bear in mind the actual  
	rights, duties, responsibilities and legal status of the General Service Board, and if the 
	Trustees in their deliberations will constantly realize that the Conference is the real seat of 
	ultimate service authority, we may be sure that neither will be seriously tempted to make a 
	“rubber stamp” out of the other. We may expect that in this way grave issues will always be 
	resolved and harmonious cooperation will be the general rule. 

	Our Trustees, as a body, cannot be burdened with a mass of lesser matters; they must 
	not concern themselves with the  endless questions and difficulties which arise daily, 
	weekly and monthly in the routine conduct of the World Service Office and of our pub-
	lishing enterprises. In these areas the Board cannot possibly manage and conduct in 
	detail; it must delegate its executive function. 

	There is always a powerful connection between money and authority. Whenever we con-
	centrate money, we shall inevitably create the temptation for the exercise of too 
	much executive authority, an undesirable condition for us. Therefore we should stren-
	uously avoid placing too much money or too much authority in any one service entity. 
	These are potent reasons for maintaining separate incorporations for each of our 
	active services.  

	These observations are not intended to bar any future needful change. It is urged only 
	that we avoid unnecessary repetitions of those painful experiences and mistakes of the 
	past which sometimes resulted from too much concentration of money and authority. It 
	can only be left on the record that we still see no workable way to convert the Board 
	of Trustees into an active, “all-purpose” service corporation. 

	We now come to the principal theme of this particular Concept: How can we best streng-
	then the composition and the leadership of the future Board of Trustees, the Board 
	which in years to come will have to exercise A.A.’s primary leadership in world service  
	administration, the trusteeship which will in fact have to assume most of my former 
	duties and responsibilities in connection with A.A.’s world services? 

	We are apt to warp the traditional idea of “principles before personalities” around to 
	such a point that there would be no “personality” in leadership whatever. This would 
	imply rather faceless automatons trying to please everybody, regardless.

	At other times we are quite as apt to demand that A.A.’s leaders must necessarily be  
	people of the most sterling judgment, morals, and inspirations; big doers, prime examples 
	of all, and practically infallible.

	Real leadership, of course, has to function in between these entirely imaginary poles of 
	hoped-for excellence. 

	The influence of ultimate authority must always be felt, but it is perfectly  
	clear that when delegated authority is operating well it should not be constantly 
	interfered with. Otherwise those charged with operating responsibility will be 
	demoralized because their authority to do their work will be subject to arbitrary 
	invasion, and because their actual responsibility will be made greater than their 
	real authority.  

	To sum up: Let us always be sure that there is an abundance of final or ultimate author-
	ity to correct or to reorganize; but let us be equally sure that all of our trusted ser-
	vants have a clearly defined and adequate authority to do their daily work and to discharge 
	their clear responsibilities.

	All of this is fully implied in A.A.’s Tradition Two. Here we see the “group conscience” 
	as the ultimate authority and the “trusted servant” as the delegated authority. One cannot 
	function without the other. We well know that only by means of careful definitions and  
	mutual respect can we constantly maintain a right and harmonious working balance.  

	Far more than most of the Trustees, these servants will be in direct contact with A.A. 
	world-wide, and their performance will be constantly on view. They will perform most 
	of the routine labor. They will carry on most of our services. They will travel widely 
	and will receive most visitors at the Headquarters. They will often originate new plans  
	and policies. Some of them will eventually become Trustees. Because this group will 
	form the visible image of world service, most A.A.’s will measure our service values by  
	what they see and feel in them. Members of this group will not only support the world 
	leadership of the Trustees; in the nature of the case they will be bound to share world  
	leadership with them.  

	Such are the realizations which we can all use every day of our working lives. Add to 
	these the further thought that no organization structure can fully guarantee our Head-
	quarters against the depredations of clashing personalities, that only the sustained 
	willingness to practice spiritual principles in all our affairs can accomplish this, 
	and we shall never need to have any fear for our future harmony. 

	There are significant aspects of these Warranties which should be considered. Notice, 
	for example, that all of them are counsels of prudence — prudence in personal related-
	ness, prudence in money matters, and prudence in our relations with the world about us. 
	For us, prudence is a workable middle ground, a channel of clear sailing between the 
	obstacles of fear on the one side and of recklessness on the other. 

	"Here on the one hand we erect a safeguard against any hasty or overbearing authority 	
	of a simple majority; and on the other hand we take notice of the rights and the fre-
	quent wisdom of minorities, however small. This principle further guarantees that all  
	matters of importance, time permitting, will be extensively debated, and that such debates
	will continue until a really heavy majority can support every critical decision that we 
	are called upon to make in the Conference.  

	Of all societies ours can least afford to risk the resentments and conflicts which 
	would result were we ever to yield to the temptation to punish in anger.

	For much the same reason we cannot and should not enter into public controversy, even 
	in self-defense... Nothing could be  more  damaging to our unity and to the world-wide  
	good will which A.A. enjoys, than public contention, no matter how promising the immed-
	iate dividends might appear. 

	Therefore we expect that our Conferences will always try to act in the spirit of mutual 
	respect and love — one member for another. In turn, this sign signifies that mutual trust 
	should prevail; that no action ought to be taken in anger, haste, or recklessness; that 
	care will be observed to respect and protect all minorities; that no action should ever be 
	personally punitive; that whenever possible, important actions will be taken in substantial  
	unanimity; and that our Conference will ever be prudently on guard against tyrannies, great 
	or small, whether these be found in the majority or in the minority.  

	Freedom under God to grow in His likeness and image will ever be the quest of  
	the Alcoholics Anonymous. May our General Service Conference be always seen as  
	a chief symbol of this cherished liberty.

	To a man, we of A.A. believe that our freedom to serve is truly the freedom by 
	which we live — the freedom in which we have our being.