"Solidarity power was also used to do base-building work among formerly enslaved people, free Black people, Quakers, and other allies. Numerous organizations were founded in different countries in the late 1700s and early 1800s, such as the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, formed in London in 1787, and the Anti-Man-Hunting League, a secret society formed in 1854 by about five hundred Black and white men in Boston to prevent Black people from being kidnapped and enslaved."

Never heard of these organizations.

Quite intereseting...

The book in question can be bought here.

DuBois

While I won't say to not read these materials, I would recommend being skeptical so long as they do not have a goal of building revolution. There is an entire cottage industry of organizing recommendations by people with much simpler, liberal, and reform-friendly goals that suck up all the air in the room with inadequate strategies and often ones that are just plain incorrect. Example: a fellow organizer once got me to read a book where one of the examples of alleged good organizing was in opposition to an enemy of the US empire that was deposed through US military action. The book praised the activist group's tactics and coalitions and theoretical basis and tried to ignore the fact that bombing the country did infinitely more.

Instead, I recommend throwing yourself into the work and prioritizing strategy itself, as a rule. Ask the obvious questions if your goal is to establish, carry out, and evaluate strategy. What does success look like? What are your goals? How will you know if it's working? How will you adjust? How do tactics compare to the strategy?

Example: a goal might be to increase engagement among membership that is dissatisfied. Your strategy meetings should be about how to retain and engage them. The tactic might be to have direct conversations with them about what single thing they'd like to see changed. Then you have a strategy meeting to pick a campaign that has overlap with their interests. Then you do the campaign and see whether it had the desired effect. By doing this, you will learn what is effective and how to probe more effectively. You'll find, for example, that people need to see value in their own contributions, so organizing "for the cause" but against their theoretical grounding will lead to alienation, so you need to address one of two things: (1) further a shared theoretical base or (2) adopting different actions.

Anyways I don't want to get in the weeds. I just want to share that in my experience the thing that is missing is a lack of seriously doing any strategic planning at all, let alone constructively criticizing that strategy. Doing serious strategizing is the creation and testing of theory and the theory you develop will be wrong often enough that you need to be able to reorient around correct ideas, and to recognize when they are wrong because the impact is counterproductive or leads to an unscientific approach.