Navigating one of the biggest barriers to getting people to care about social justice: Fear

Navigating one of the biggest barriers to getting people to care about social justice: Fear

By Jonathan Meagher-Zayas, nonprofit strategist and equity warrior

…for the times when fear is the reason for resistance, I want to help fellow changemakers understand how fear happens in the workplace, the reasoning behind those manifestations, and strategies to navigate and overcome it.

In one of my previous roles, I encountered a fundraising colleague who exhibited great resistance toward anything new. Whether it was adopting a new technology tool, engaging in strategic planning, or embracing social justice and equity initiatives, they simply refused to participate. 

This individual’s reluctance significantly impacted our small fundraising team’s success, leading to frustration and even toxic behaviors like bullying and gaslighting. Despite my persistent efforts, I couldn’t break through to them until a facilitated conversation with a third-party mediator shed light on the truth—they were afraid. 

After that conversation, I approached them differently. I waited to jump to conclusions. I asked open-ended questions to understand their perspective but also to help with their empathy skills. I directed them to resources to learn more and grow. Our relationship instantly transformed. 

This experience taught me that fear is a substantial barrier to progress in our organizations and often manifests in unsubtle ways. 

I want to acknowledge that fear is not always the reason for resistance. There is narcissism, greed, ignorance, laziness, selfishness, and other reasons people resist social equity. Also, having fear without repercussions, and even irrational fears validated, is a sign of privilege

But for the times when fear is the reason for resistance, I want to help fellow changemakers understand how fear happens in the workplace, the reasoning behind those manifestations, and strategies to navigate and overcome it.

The Four F’s and the Three D’s

Fear is often disguised as other emotions and actions, making recognizing it challenging. Rather than admitting their fear, individuals may exhibit anger or discontent. Some even resort to gaslighting and deflecting the problem onto others. 

Fear is typically associated with weakness or incompetence, making it even harder for people to acknowledge their own fears. When we are stressed and have deadlines and goals, blaming others for their behavior is often easier than having the patience to understand them and support their growth. To identify fear in colleagues, I utilize two frameworks:

The Four F’s

In the field of cognitive psychology, the four F’s refer to the four traditional reactions people have when confronted with fear:

  • Freeze: Some individuals, when confronted with fear, become immobilized, opting to do nothing.

    In a nonprofit context, this may manifest as statements like, “I’m not sure how to make our organization more diverse, so let’s wait until we have a clear plan” or “I lack the skills in that area, so we shouldn’t take any action until we hire a chief diversity officer.”
  • Flight: People often avoid their fears by running away or completely avoiding the situation.

    This may manifest in an individual leaving a room or meeting, withdrawing from a committee or project, or even quitting their job.
  • Fight: Fear can trigger anger and aggressive behavior in individuals. It can be challenging to discern whether someone is genuinely angry or simply afraid of venturing into unknown territory. Recognizing irritability, anger, or defensiveness can help uncover underlying fears of engaging in new or challenging work.

    This response can manifest in multiple ways in how we traditionally think of a difficult colleauge. They can exhibit aggression either passively or directly, sabotage the new efforts of their colleagues, start arguments, communicate rudely, make sarcastic comments, or even bully and harass. The fight response could even end up in formal complaints and attempted disciplinary actions.
  • Fawn: Fawning occurs when individuals excessively praise or glorify someone or something that threatens them, as a defense mechanism.

    While typically associated with victims of domestic abuse, this behavior can also happen in the nonprofit workplace. Colleagues may overly praise their colleagues of color or queer coworkers without actively participating in anti-racist work. They employ this tactic out of fear of being called out, using their excessive praise as a shield when their actions are challenged. In reality, they may be insecure or unwilling to examine their own beliefs critically.

The Three D’s

The other framework I like to understand communications and defensive responses is the Three D’s. This framework focuses on communication patterns and resistance to new ideas, particularly in equity and justice initiatives:

  • Denial (aka: “This is not a problem.”) Some individuals refuse to acknowledge the existence of problems, dismissing social justice issues as nonexistent within the organization. They may even blame those who raise concerns for creating the problem in the first place.
  • Disengagement (aka: “This is not my problem.”) Individuals who disengage may admit the existence of social justice issues but evade taking any responsibility. They may say, “That’s not my job,” or “Our DEI person should handle that.” By passing off the problem to others, they avoid engaging with the issue directly.
  • Derailment (aka: “What about other problems?”) Unfortunately, we have seen this too often. When a racial justice strategy is brought up at the organization, some colleagues mention, “Well, what about gender, sexual orientation, ability, geographic diversity, etc?” Instead of engaging with a problem, listening to the problems presented, and recognizing most issues are intersectional, they bring up other issues to overwhelm others and prevent progress from occurring.

Common reasons people are afraid

Understanding how fear manifests in our nonprofits is crucial. However, it is equally important to comprehend the underlying reasons behind it. As James Baldwin once said, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” This quote reminds us that to bring about change, we must first understand the issues at hand. By understanding the root causes of fear, we can address them effectively.

Here are some common reasons why people are afraid of engaging in social equity work at their nonprofit:

  • They do not understand. The person needs clarification on what equity work is, why it is important, or why it benefits them. 
  • They feel threatened. They may think their job is at risk or worried they will be now labeled as a bad person if they do or don’t engage in social equity work. Additionally, the prospect of having to change familiar ways of thinking and operating can be intimidating.
  • They are resistant to change. Despite change being the only constant in the nonprofit sector, people resist new things. It can be challenging and uncomfortable to embrace new ideas and approaches.
  • They are afraid of making mistakes. There is often pressure to be perfect and avoid making mistakes, even though it is human nature to err. This fear of making errors stems from the pervasive characteristic of perfectionism in white supremacy culture. Nonprofit leaders, in particular, may struggle with this fear.
  • They are navigating trauma. Past traumatic experiences can significantly influence individuals’ willingness to engage in social justice initiatives. Negative past experiences, fear of causing harm, failure to learn from mistakes, and the need to heal from personal experiences can all contribute to this fear. It is essential to acknowledge and provide support for individuals on their healing and learning journeys, including understanding the historical context and the need for healing in the face of systemic oppression. 
  • Conflict avoidance: Most of us do not like conflict. I certainly do not, but we know it shows up. We know it will exist, and instead of navigating it together, we avoid it completely until something worse happens. 
  • Lack of trust: Trust is the foundation of any meaningful change. If individuals do not trust the person leading social justice efforts or the organization as a whole, they may hesitate to engage in systems-changing work.
  • Lastly, you need to be comfortable being your authentic self. Engaging in social justice work is not just about changing the way we view our systems, but also changing the way we view ourselves. How we think about our identities, histories, and privilege shapes how we approach our work. Many individuals still need to do the self-reflection to love themselves, regardless of their access to power, and understand how they can participate in this work while also loving themselves. Healing and self-discovery are a journey we must take to be effective anti-oppressive leaders.

I encourage anyone navigating an important issue to take the time to assess, research, and discover the real reasons behind the problems. Too often, we focus on treating the symptoms instead of healing the problem. If someone is afraid of engaging in work but has irritable behavior, how is punishing them going to help them improve?

I want to clarify that the above issues help explain the behavior but do not justify them. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions but in ways not focusing on punishment but on progress and growth. 

Ten strategies to reach someone who is afraid

With both of these in mind, I want to offer some recommendations on how people can approach someone who is afraid. Knowing that someone is fearful about a change and the reason why can help us choose the best option to approach it. 

Ten Strategies You Can Take: 

  • Assess and understand: As mentioned previously, understanding why someone is afraid is important to know how or who should be helping them. Asking open-ended questions like “Can you explain your point of view for me?”, ‘Why do you think this way?”, or “What is holding us back on this work right now?” could help build trust and a connection to understand what is happening with that person. It is also important to note that you might assess the situation and find out the person is not actually afraid. They may be biased, lazy, resistant, or ignorant, providing you with information to adopt a strategy to get through to them. 
  • Acknowledge: Understanding the problem is one thing, but acknowledging that it exists and there is work to be done is another. It may take us time to process that a difficult coworker is rejecting our work not because they don’t like us, but because they are afraid. We must also acknowledge that these issues are mostly caused by systemic oppression. Our system was designed to make people who want to change it feel defensive and self-doubt. People trying to make positive changes are not the problem. Racism and white supremacy are.
  • Practice Healing and Self-care: Healing is an act of resistance. We should ensure we are taking care of ourselves, especially when navigating tough issues. Before you jump in to tackle a leader who is afraid of change, you may need to take some time to heal from the experience and focus on reenergizing before addressing that person. 
  • Build Trust and Empathy: I always continue to say trust is the currency of change. Without trust, change can’t happen. It might be worth exploring how you can build trust with this person so they know they can be vulnerable around you. Think of our fundraising skills. Our supporters invest in our missions when they trust us more, and we must also translate those skills for advancing equity.
  • Normalize Fear: Everyone can have reservations about doing something new, and those feelings are valid. Help your colleague understand that this work takes effort and consistent change, and is sometimes difficult. Remind them it is ok to be afraid of what is next, but it is vital they continue their work moving forward. 
  • Ask for a Different Messenger: One of the most pivotal lessons for me in my community outreach career is that the messenger matters. Based on our experiences and biases, we receive information differently from different people. We have to admit that sometimes other people can get through to people better, and we should ask them to handle a difficult situation. Fleur Larsen just reminded us that we need more white role models, especially white men setting examples of anti-racist advocates. 
  • Advocate For Objective Support: Sometimes, to help the situation, you need someone objective with no stake in the outcome situation. For example, my coworker and I from the anecdote above did not finally understand each other until a third-party facilitator helped them open up about their fear. The internal team needed help to do that. If the situation persists, asking for a mediator, facilitator, coach, or disruptor to come in could help a person finally speak without fearing repercussions. 
  • Provide Educational Materials: Part of the fear is misunderstanding, and we must admit our educational systems do not educate us enough to navigate centuries of racial injustices and oppression. Therefore, sometimes we have to give people tools and resources to help them on their journey. Providing educational materials avoids overtaxing your energy (considering most nonprofits won’t pay for you to do it), and helps them learn in their own time and style. Sharing books, newsletters, blogs, social media accounts, online courses, and other resources puts the responsibility on that person to drive their journey in a way they feel safe. 
  • Share A Vision for the Change: Despite all our nonprofits having a vision for the future, many of us might need help to see a more justice-infused sector. You can help a colleague overcome that initial fear of change by understanding their motivation and communicating a future. If they are afraid to change their thinking, paint a picture of how easy it will get down the road. Or, if they are fearful of trying to diversify their donor base, communicate the opportunities and representation that could result in that effort. 
  • Walk Away: Lastly, sometimes, working with someone who is afraid is not worth your time and energy. Unfortunately, I wish we all had the time and resources to help everyone, but we can only do so much. Just as organizations evaluate if they can support a new initiative, you should personally think about that as well. It does not make you less competent because situations have many different contexts to consider. We should certainly push ourselves; however, I wish I had known earlier in my career that I cannot solve everything. Some issues are meant for others to address.

If we understand why that fear exists, we can understand how to help people along their journeys. Remember, fear does not excuse behavior, and people must be held accountable. But to hold people accountable in a community-centered way, we should focus on helping people change and bring them along our journey for social justice.

Jonathan Meagher-Zayas

Jonathan Meagher-Zayas

Jonathan Meagher-Zayas (he/him) is a Queer Latinx Millennial nonprofit strategist dedicated to addressing equity issues, building capacity, engaging the community, motivating new impact leaders, and getting stuff done. He wears many professional hats, including Fundraising and Communications Strategist, Adjunct Social Work Professor, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Consultant, Leadership Development Trainer, Social Sector Career Coach, and Social Justice Champion. He can be reached at jonathan@equitywarriorstrategies.com or on LinkedIn

Philanthropy’s golden handcuffs: The illusion of liberation and the complex balance between self-preservation and complacency among foundation workers

Philanthropy’s golden handcuffs: The illusion of liberation and the complex balance between self-preservation and complacency among foundation workers

By Andrea Arenas, Co-founder of CCF, advocate for more equitable philanthropy

In my pursuit of contributing to more equitable grantmaking practices, it became apparent that my initial honeymoon period, which boasted an abundance mindset and work-life balance, was really the cuffing of philanthropy’s golden handcuffs.

When I made the decision to transition from my fundraising job to philanthropy, I had a clear purpose in mind. Recognizing the immense power held by funders and their potential to reshape the sector to be more equitable, I was eager to be part of that transformation. 

However, my journey within philanthropy took an unexpected turn when I found myself wearing golden handcuffs and ultimately being fired.

The concept of “wearing golden handcuffs” refers to individuals who feel trapped in their jobs due to attractive salaries and benefits, even if they may feel unfulfilled, denied professional growth opportunities, or restricted in their actions and expressions. Financial incentives and fringe benefits create a sense of dependency that can hinder employees’ ability to challenge the status quo, often leading to emotional conflict for the individual or fostering a culture of complacency within the organization.

In my pursuit of contributing to more equitable grantmaking practices, it became apparent that my initial honeymoon period, which boasted an abundance mindset and work-life balance, was really the cuffing of philanthropy’s golden handcuffs. I wrestled with the allure of having a high-paying job with shiny benefits with the desire to translate CCF principles into philanthropy. 

In hindsight, I now realize that my golden handcuffs would tighten each time I attempted to challenge the status quo until they finally unhinged during my unanticipated termination.

Applying the Notion of Golden Handcuffs to Philanthropy

We’ve all seen those enticing, yet elusive, philanthropy job postings with fat paychecks and oodles of perks. They might seem like a dream come true, promising comprehensive health insurance, an annual professional development budget, a family leave program, a retirement fund with generous employer match, and often a wellness stipend. For fundraisers entering philanthropy, going from the nonprofit scarcity mindset – where we’re excited to eat the leftovers from donor events – to actually having money, time, and employer encouragement – where you treat yourself to a monthly massage – feels like entering paradise. But this scenario can actually trap us in a cycle of dependency, making it hard to break free and push the sector towards more equitable pathways. 

Additionally, philanthropy jobs often put us in close proximity to power. This proximity and positionality to uber-wealthy privilege can be an entirely new experience for a lot of us, especially people of color and folks from marginalized communities. We enter the philanthropy sector fired up with radical ideas of liberation and a fierce determination to dismantle the oppressive structures of white supremacy culture. 

Cue the golden handcuffs…

The golden handcuffs not only impact individuals but also hinder progress within the sector as a whole. When those in positions of power and influence become complacent, unwilling to challenge the status quo, or silenced by their fear of losing benefits, the sector’s potential for innovative and transformative change is severely limited. 

The power of the golden handcuffs is actualized when philanthropy staff lean into the rewards of complacency.

Consequences of Revolting Against the Handcuffs

People of color may find their golden handcuffs feel tighter than those of their white colleagues. They often face harsher repercussions when speaking out against injustices within the sector. The fear of losing their jobs, financial security, and benefits can be much more profound. Characteristics of white supremacy culture, such as tone policing, perfectionism, and the right to comfort, add layers to the complexity of how tight or loose your metaphorical handcuffs may feel. 

Acknowledging these dynamics is essential for understanding the internal disparities within the white-dominated ethos of philanthropy. 

In my own experience, I decided not to soften my language to be more palatable for white fragility, prioritizing my values over the restrictions of my handcuffs. I chose not to compromise my integrity, and to challenge the systems of oppression I thought I was hired to help dismantle. 

And yes, it led to my termination. 

My decision to revolt against the handcuffs was my own, and it’s not going to be the right choice for everyone. In some cases, self-preservation via self-care, creating intergenerational wealth, and maintaining mental health and a sense of security is the long game in combating oppression.

Self-Reflection Questions

It’s important to remember that breaking free from the golden handcuffs is a process that requires self-compassion and patience, and the acknowledgment that pushing too hard can lead to extremes like getting fired and feeling ousted.

Here are seven questions to consider as you assess the tightness or looseness of your own golden handcuffs:

  1. How does my financial reliance on my job impact my willingness to take risks and speak out against injustice?
  2. What specific benefits keep me tied to my current position, and how do they sway my decision-making?
  3. Am I compromising my values and beliefs to the point where it undermines my commitment to social justice?
  4. What fears or consequences do I associate with rocking the boat and challenging the status quo?
  5. In what ways does capitalism drive individualism within the sector, and how does it affect my ability to advocate for collective liberation?
  6. What strategies can I implement to maintain my authenticity, even within the confines of the golden handcuffs?
  7. How can I actively seek support and build relationships with colleagues who are values-aligned so that together we can push against the constraints of the golden handcuffs?

Breaking Free and Advancing Justice

While the decision to revolt against the golden handcuffs is deeply personal, we can seek out allies and build relationships with like-minded individuals in the sector. These trusted colleagues can serve as sources of support and encouragement, helping us combat complacency, fostering accountability, supporting us when we lean into risk, and risking their own benefits when the consequence feels too great for us. 

It’s important to remember that breaking free from the golden handcuffs is a process that requires self-compassion and patience, and the acknowledgment that pushing too hard can lead to extremes like getting fired and feeling ousted. Maintaining a moral compass and pursuing systemic change is challenging, as the system is designed to prevent us from attaining this. In philanthropy, white supremacy culture’s biggest misdirect is the false sense of security that the golden handcuffs bring. 

Let’s be real with ourselves by acknowledging the fears and obstacles we face, and recognizing how tight or loose our golden handcuffs fit. The only way to combat complacency is to recognize when it’s sneaking into our work and by identifying at what cost.

Andrea Arenas

Andrea Arenas

Andrea Arenas (she/her) is dedicated to reimagining the world of fundraising and philanthropy through community-driven approaches. She is the founding Co-Chair of Community-Centric Fundraising, and with over 17 years of nonprofit experience she recently began her own fundraising and philanthropy consulting business. She’s a proud mama and when she’s not conspiring with others to shift the sector, she’s playing in the mud, collecting rocks, and tide pooling with her son.

You can find Andrea at andrea-arenas.com and on LinkedIn — and tip her on Venmo.

The imperial nature of empirical research: The importance of experiential knowledge in the nonprofit sector

The imperial nature of empirical research: The importance of experiential knowledge in the nonprofit sector

By Alli Rolle,Fundraising strategist and fierce community advocate

[The quest for “objectivity”] deprives us of valuable information that contextualizes results and outcomes.

The way we conceptualize knowledge is finite. 

We laud the number of theories posited, the amount of tests conducted, or simple studies that barely integrate principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion. What it means to live, however, has been dismissed as “non-empirical,” relegated to being an individual notion of life in a society built on colonialism, racism, and hetero-patriarchy. 

As a Black, queer fundraising strategist, this is a reality I know all too well. 

When I began in the sector, one of my first tasks was to review a survey aimed at increasing donor diversity. What I read was a surface-level attempt to capture the vast experiences of people of color. Gender identity was limited to the binary, only providing the options of “man,” “woman,” or “other.” The descriptor of other could not begin to contextualize the experiences of 2SLGBTQ+ folks, nor could it encompass the multitude of identities that exist in our community. 

The category of race was also defined in ambiguous groups, most prominent to me was the descriptor of “Black.” “Black” did not consider the vast experiences of African diasporas. “Black” could not begin to describe the intersectionality of harm. This descriptor of “Black” implied lives that could be generalized, as did the other broad descriptors that followed.

Since then I have encountered more surveys like this than I can say, but I have rarely seen the incorporation of a life lived. I’ve been told this clashes far too much with the quest for “objectivity,” and that is where the problem begins.

This quest deprives us of valuable information that contextualizes results and outcomes. The continued exclusion of experiential knowledge has led to sweeping generalizations based on race, class, and gender.  

Womanist scholar Audre Lorde stated that “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” Lorde’s words must serve as a warning if we seek to demolish the colonial foundations of the sector, and what it means to have knowledge within it. Simple surveys can’t quantify the experiences of BIPOC individuals, nor can an A/B test describe the impact of a message or mission. 

It is time to embrace experiential knowledge, and that must start today. 

Let’s be frank; your reconciliation campaign lacks authenticity without the knowledge of Indigenous communities. Your Pride outreach does little without the voices of queer, trans, and non-binary folx. Your efforts to expand donor diversity are minimized without diverse perspectives, and your knowledge will remain finite without the richness of real-life experiences. 

Why We Must Decolonize Research and What It Means to “Know”

For BIPOC, 2SLGBTQ+, and disabled people, research does not indicate an innocent pursuit of knowledge. It is a structure built on exploitation and exclusivity, and within it is the sustained power of colonial ideologies. 

The sector’s reliance on wealthy, white donors has shaped research as we know it. Far too many studies have focused on the perception of white donors in an effort to preserve their position as the “savior” of the oppressed

This model has led to a deficit in our understanding of donors, “beneficiaries,” and the issues communities face on a day-to-day basis. In following this framework, we now have research results and outcomes that are critically under-informed, and this must be addressed immediately.

My mentor used to say, “you may have 15 years in the sector, but I have 40 years of being Black.”

This is a principle that, I believe, should be widely embraced in the sector. The incorporation of experiential knowledge is crucial in the development of anti-colonial and equity-driven initiatives. For many organizations, it is a matter of where to begin. 

So, How Do You Start Incorporating Experiential Knowledge?

  1. Establish Anti-Colonial and Anti-Racist Principles

To incorporate experience ethically, nonprofit organizations and agencies must dismantle their notion of research and the way it “must” be done.

Goings and colleagues proposed anti-racist principles based on Indigenous values and approaches. Some of these principles include the centralization of BIPOC experiences, consideration of intersectionality, an acknowledgment of positionality, self-education, and the prioritization of community engagement. 

These principles can be tangibly applied through methods such as capacity-bridging. Capacity-bridging creates a collaborative environment that empowers community while redefining “expertise.” This process requires an acknowledgment of diverse forms of knowing, and it is through this acknowledgment that one can effectively amplify BIPOC, 2SLGBTQ+, and disabled voices. 

Cultural humility is key in the application of this method, and the incorporation of experiential knowledge as a whole. This combination of self-reflection and recognition is the first step in embracing anti-racist principles, and constructing paradigms that break the colonial mold. 

  1. Embody the Transformative Praxis

Thambinathan and colleagues outlined the transformative praxis. Its embodiment has three dimensions: theory, values, and practice. 

Theory requires the composition of questions that are community inquiries. This means that research must be conducted with – not for – BIPOC, 2SLGBTQ+, and disabled communities. The exclusion of community insight from the composition of theory produces frameworks, processes, and results that remain under-informed. An inclusive theory composition process is essential in producing expansive qualitative research.

In this vein, values should be developed with a community-oriented lens. Through practices such as capacity-bridging, the values of the study, and your long-term objectives, are informed by experiential knowledge.

Finally, practice refers to the capabilities and services researchers offer the community. I also like to view it as what the community provides to the research. In this bi-directional relationship, inclusivity is key. Organizations should actively seek to uplift BIPOC experiences in a collaborative way.

  1. Provide Space for Truthtelling…and Criticism

To conduct research that successfully serves Indigenous, Black, and other marginalized communities, the data collection process must foster narrative agency. 

Research being conducted at the Iyé Creative serves as a wonderful example of how this can be done. Their community-based model examines the experience of food insecurity through the incorporation of experience-sharing. This qualitative research returns agency to African diasporas on Vancouver Island and allows them to direct the narratives regarding their lives and livelihoods. This work also considers the impact of background and intersectionality. In doing so,  it doesn’t generalize the experience of food insecurity to “Black” individuals, but analyzes how immigration, employment, and income inequality all play a role. 

The incorporation of experience-sharing further expands our qualitative knowledge. For white-led organizations, it also provides space for criticism and adjustment. Through active and continuous dialogue, the pitfalls in research approaches can be highlighted and addressed. It is here where the decolonization of research can truly begin. 

Where Can These Steps Take Nonprofit Research?

When knowledge sharing occurs in an affirming and inclusive way, we increase our understanding of issues under-recognized and unaddressed. By uplifting the experiences of BIPOC, 2SLGBTQ+, and disabled communities, we demolish the colonial foundations of what it means to “know” and abolish processes that generalize racialized lives. 

It is important to understand that the decolonization of research won’t be achieved in a month, year, or multiple years. This journey requires a continuous commitment to collaboration, a willingness to serve as a student and accomplice, and a reconceptualization of knowledge as you know it.

Alli Rolle

Alli Rolle

Alli Rolle (they/them) is an award-winning artist, scholar, non-profit leader, and activist. Honoring the legacy of their ancestors, Alli seeks decolonial futurities that bring about collective liberation. Alli’s work centers an Afro-Queer-futurist approach that both critically reflects on – and reimagines – life possibilities for the Black, Indigenous, Queer, and other marginalised people. Outside of the fundraising sector, Alli shifts theory to praxis by creating art-based programs that disrupt the historic and ongoing processes that subjugate marginalised bodies.

Join us in LA or Toronto for a community brunch, August 5

Join us in LA or Toronto for a community brunch, August 5

This event has passed.

When: Saturday, August 5, 2023 10:30 am local time

Where: Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A. at the Aon Center, 707 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90017 or Toronto, ON, Canada at Pantages Hotel, 200 Victoria St, Toronto, ON M5B 1V8

Details:

Come join us for a delightful morning of brunch with the Global Council Members! This exclusive event offers a unique opportunity to connect with these newly appointed folks in a relaxed and intimate setting.

Indulge in a mouthwatering spread of delectable dishes while engaging in lively conversations about healing, justice, innovation, and future plans.

Space is limited, so secure your spot now. Food and beverages will be provided. We can’t wait to see you there!

 

Bridging the gap: Building impactful public-private partnerships for community empowerment

Bridging the gap: Building impactful public-private partnerships for community empowerment

By Laura Camila Rivera, Director of Marketing: Igniting Growth and Championing Equity in the Business Landscape

When these alliances are deeply rooted in community needs and guided by transformative leadership, they have the potential to bring about significant transformational change in marginalized BIPOC communities. However, not all partnerships are created equal…

The increasing interconnectivity of the world has led to a significant rise in the importance of public-private partnerships (PPPs). These partnerships bring together sectors and resources to work towards promoting change. 

When these alliances are deeply rooted in community needs and guided by transformative leadership, they have the potential to bring about significant transformational change in marginalized BIPOC communities. However, not all partnerships are created equal; some partnerships I’ve seen in Massachusetts are great examples. From my work at a quasi-non-profit organization, I’ve seen that the state is home to several noteworthy PPPs that have successfully brought about positive change in communities. 

However, there are also a few eyebrow-raising partnerships that have not been able to deliver the desired results. Across the US, there are dozens of examples of PPPs that failed due to corporate greed, soaring costs, lack of transparency, and overly optimistic projections.

It is crucial to thoroughly assess the efficacy of such partnerships to confirm that they genuinely contribute to improving the lives of the constituents they aim to serve. This will allow us to establish more successful and meaningful public-private partnerships that can drive positive transformations in historically disadvantaged communities.

The Role of Leadership

Effective leadership plays a crucial role in the success of public-private partnerships. Building genuine relationships with partners and giving priority to community needs is essential. Leaders must allocate sufficient time and energy to steer partnerships from transactional to transformative. 

For such partnerships to be truly impactful, they must be founded on mutual trust, common values, and a shared goal of driving positive change.

In Boston’s Roxbury, the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI) is a remarkable success story of community-led transformation. DSNI was founded in the 1980s as a response to disinvestment and neglect that caused severe urban blight in Roxbury and North Dorchester. The neighborhoods suffered from vacant lots, illegal dumping, burned-out buildings, and more but the residents took action and established DSNI.

DSNI prioritized transformative relationships with the public sector, private businesses, and the local community, rather than transactional partnerships. This community-based organization achieved a historic milestone by obtaining eminent domain over vacant land in Boston’s neighborhood through a successful petition to the city. This was the first time such authority was granted to a community-based organization in the United States.

Since then, DSNI has launched numerous initiatives throughout its history with the goal of revitalizing the community, such as the development of community gardens, low-cost housing, parks, and even commercial areas. 

Nurturing a Community-Centric Mindset

To truly benefit the community through partnerships, a community-focused approach is crucial. This involves prioritizing the community’s needs through inclusive and forward-thinking strategies, while also building genuine relationships and trust with partners. 

One effective method is involving community members in the partnership development process, actively listening to their concerns, and integrating their feedback into the partnership’s objectives.

For a dash of inspiration, let’s look westward to Holyoke Food and Equity Collective (HFEC). This alliance of local farmers, food co-ops, and community organizations is making strides in tackling food insecurity in Holyoke. How? By genuinely caring about what the community thinks and wants. A transformed urban food landscape has resulted, delivering fresh and locally sourced produce to those in greatest need.

The urban farms project, one of HFEC’s key initiatives, promotes community gathering, education, and empowerment. HFEC places a strong emphasis on youth leadership programs, kindling the spark of advocacy in young hearts. They have successfully nurtured relationships with local schools, businesses, and nonprofits, and made advocacy a cornerstone of their work. HFEC’s holistic approach involves regular community meetings and investing in local leadership, particularly youth, to ensure the next generation of community leaders is ready to uphold and advance the cause of food equity. By advocating for systemic change, HFEC is not just fighting food insecurity, but also building a brighter future for the entire community.

Empowering Communities Through Collaborative Decision-Making

Transformative change is a team sport. Successful partnerships require essential components such as steering committees and a facilitative leadership approach. Steering committees play a crucial role in bringing representatives from all partners to make informed decisions and guide the partnership’s direction. 

On the other hand, a facilitative leadership approach fosters collaboration and shared decision-making among partners, promoting transformative change through community-driven actions. By implementing these strategies, partnerships can effectively engage in sustainable development and achieve their shared goals.

Let’s look at the Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP). This public-private partnership is doing collaboration right. The steering committee, composed of healthcare providers, community organizations, and patient representatives, is the heartbeat of BHCHP. Their efforts have successfully revolutionized healthcare for Boston’s unhoused population, showing just how much can be achieved with effective collaboration and shared decision-making.

BHCHP is an excellent example of collaborative decision-making due to its integrative and inclusive approach to healthcare. The program brings together a multidisciplinary team of professionals to provide holistic care for its patients, recognizing that their health issues intersect with other challenges. BHCHP also partners with other agencies to reach more patients and ensure consistent care, seeking input and feedback from these partners. BHCHP places a strong emphasis on patient involvement, and this respect for patient autonomy and involvement is a key feature of the program’s collaborative approach.

Reflecting and Learning from Others

Learning from both successes and missteps is crucial in public-private partnerships. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s Green Line Extension project serves as an example of a partnership that encountered obstacles. The project aimed to extend the existing Green Line northwest from a relocated Lechmere Station into Somerville and Medford, two densely populated municipalities underserved by public transit. However, the project experienced delays and budget overruns, resulting from inadequate management and coordination between public and private partners. This forced residents to continue relying on more expensive or less efficient means of transportation and over time became disruptive for local communities. This instance highlights how a lack of clear communication and shared vision can create difficulties in PPPs.

With these issues in mind, it’s imperative to maintain a critical perspective on the planning and long-term impact of public-private partnerships. To do this transparently, entities must encourage open lines of communication throughout the project lifecycle and actively seek the public’s feedback. As citizens, we need to actively participate in these decision-making processes to ensure our voices are truly heard. I urge you to attend public meetings, make your concerns known to local representatives, and leverage social media platforms to raise awareness, especially when these decisions and projects have a direct impact on our friends, families, and communities.

By learning from others’ experiences, making our voices heard, and holding governing bodies and private entities accountable, we can aspire to build partnerships that serve and empower our communities.

Laura Camila Rivera

Laura Camila Rivera

Laura Camila Rivera (she/her/ella) is an energetic and accomplished Director of Marketing & Communications at Commonwealth Corporation, a quasi-public workforce development organization dedicated to strengthening Massachusetts’ labor market. With an extensive background in marketing and a deep commitment to diversity and equity, Laura’s work is instrumental in promoting skills training and boosting job creation throughout the state.

Before joining Commonwealth Corporation, Laura honed her skills in change leadership at a prestigious consulting firm and throughout different Board engagements within community-based organizations. Her knowledge and experience in managing change initiatives have made her a force for innovation and transformation within organizations, skillfully navigating challenges and opportunities in the ever-evolving workforce landscape.

In addition to her role at Commonwealth Corporation, Laura is the founder of CAMI Studio, a creative agency that supports non-profits and BIPOC/Women-owned small businesses. Laura’s unique blend of marketing expertise, change leadership, and passion for social equity makes her a standout leader in workforce development, continually pushing boundaries and paving the way for a more inclusive and successful Massachusetts.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/lauracamilarivera/

https://lauracamilarivera.substack.com/