NGO Soul + Strategy

SummaryHow does a climate change activist movement such as Extinction Rebellion (XR) chose among strategies and tactics on the spectrum between more 'radical' actions such as civic agitation, (nonviolent) disobedience, high-profile stunts that may lead to arrests and more 'mainstream' actions that may (or may not?) help them build a more broad public base?How does Extinction Rebellion (XR) see the distinction between insider and outsider strategies in climate change activism?Is it necessarily the case that 'radical 'activism by nature is cyclical, i.e. that it cannot be maintained on a long-term basis because of the intensity of this activism model?And how does Extinction Rebellion deal with internal as well as external equity dimensions of the fact that low-income people and/or those who face discrimination tend to get hit harder by the impacts of climate change? In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview a youth activist in the Netherlands (my original home country), on how she sees Extinction Rebellion tackle all these choices and trade-offs. Bio of the youth activist X:Student at Erasmus University College, Rotterdam, the Netherlands Involved for the last year, 4-5 hours/week We discuss: How climate change fights and climate justice issues need to be interlinked to both benefit from sustained civic actionThe nature of the three global XR  demands: 1/ Tell the Truth; /2. Act Now; 3/ Decide togetherHow environmental activism in the global south has a history of white elite-level advantage, how it rightfully has been critiqued for suffering from white elitism and how it is now trying to overcome this by focusing on embracing everybody’s contribution and being expressly inclusiveClimate change requires both civil disobedience and broad public support. Collaboration between social movements such as Extinction Rebellion (XR) and formally registered NGOs is therefore importantGroups like Greenpeace are better than XR at drawing in the media, examples such as the Netherlands NGO Milieu Defensie (Environmental Defense) are good in online petitioning, while movements like XR are good in mass mobilization. They need to complement each otherThe sustainability of engagement in XR-type activism, with its typical peak-type activities, fairly time-intensive forms of self-organization and democratic decision making styles may be challenged; XR expressly tries to compensate for this through encouraging collective self-care Here you can find all the podcasts:https://5oaksconsulting.org/podcast/Click the link below to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces. https://5oaksconsulting.org/email/Or email Tosca attosca@5oaksconsulting.org if you want to talk about your social sector organizational needs, challenges, and opportunities. You can find Tosca's content by following her on her social media channels:  Twitter: www.twitter.com/Tosca5OaksLinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/toscabrunovanvijfeijken/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Tosca5OaksTeachable: https://5oaks.teachable.com/

SummaryEnvironmental activism, environmental justice and equity concerns: what, if anything, is challenging about holding all of these three concerns at the same time?Can a better integration or balance be achieved between these 3 concerns?To what extent is radical activism cyclical in nature because it is hard to keep activists motivated for peak public mobilization moments?In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Aseem Prakash, Professor of Political Science and Founding Director at the Center on Environmental Politics at the University of Washington, Seattle (USA) on climate change activism by nonprofits and social movements. Aseem does much of his research together with Nives Dolsak, also a Professor at the University of Washington. Aseem’s Bio:Professor of Political Science; Walker Family Professor; Director, Center for Environmental Politics at the University of Washington, SeattleFormer Assistant Professor in Strategic Management and Public Policy at the George Washington University in Washington DCObtained his Ph.D. at the Dept of Political Science and the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana UniversityMBA from the Indian Institute of Management in Ahmedabad, IndiaNives’ Bio:Nives Dolsak is Professor in Sustainability Science and Director of the School of Marine & Environmental Affairs at the University of Washington, Seattle, USAVisiting professor at the University of Ljubljana, SloveniaWe discuss: Is environmental activism still guilty of white elitism? To what extent is a concern for environmental degradation, including climate change, still primarily a concern for citizens only once their material needs are met? Is the focus on environmental justice making a difference in this regard?There are few climate deniers anymore – even in the US: it is more a conflict over what instruments or ways of fighting climate change to use, not a conflict anymore over the goals themselves. Who carries most of the burden of energy policy implications coming out of climate change mitigation needs? Who loses and who wins across rural/urban areas, class, and race? Who pays for the costs of mitigation, and who gets the benefits? These are equity concernsClimate change contention and the surge of populism across the world are closely linked since class and location or place (rural vs. urban concerns) are intertwinedWhat are the merits of outsider strategies – a la Extinction Rebellion and Sunrise Movement vis-a-vis insider strategies (Environmental Defense Fund, Greenpeace (partially) etc.?‘Radical’, disruptive activism can have several benefits while it can also antagonize or turn away broader publics (see the radical flank argument)Museum vandalism to draw attention to the climate crisis is primarily a European tactic and surged in 2022; it seems to have died down so far in 2023. Resources:Aseem’s WebsiteAseem’s LinkedIn ProfileAcademic article on climate change activism motivated museum vandalism (open access!): https://www.nature.com/articles/s44168-023-00054-5Example of a article by Aseem and Nivek for broader audiences: HERETheir article on South Africa and coal: 

SummaryWhat are the strengths of a confederated nonprofit organizational structure and what are its inherent weaknesses and limitations?What is a ‘diversified network’ type of organizational structure?To what extent does having a confederated organizational structure, as well as the aspiration to be a diversified network, Impact the nature, legitimacy, adaptability, and quality of decision-making?In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Doris Bäsler, formerly Oxfam, on the potential and peril when NGOs aspire to use a network structureDoris’ Bio:Right now, Doris is resting, learning, and volunteering in Berlin, GermanyFormer Director for Strategy & Feminist Futures and Strategy & Confederation Development at Oxfam InternationalFormer Director for Organisational Development services at Transparency International, as well as head of capacity servicesWorked at Mines Advisory Group (MAG)Former Head of office as well as other roles at the country level for the International Committee for the Red Cross We discuss: The path by which Oxfam chose a confederated organizational structureThe differences between federated, confederated and corporate unitary structures, and the strengths as well as challenges of confederated structures – and how it is all about places on a spectrumHow Oxfam got stuck for a while in discussing the choice of a federated versus confederated model – and how the aspiration of a ‘diversified network’ came upA diversified network implies that there is diversification of voice: not just global South members, but also non-Christian affiliates, greater recognition of the primacy of Africa within Oxfam, diversification of affiliate business models, etcHow Oxfam tried to prevent the creation of a lot of “mini me’s”The implications for internal systems of decision making, valuing of different forms of knowledge, assets etcQuality Decision making can be challenging in a diversified network like Oxfam, but if the values and the ‘why’ and purpose are clear, this helps Quotes: “Complexity of organizational structure is not inherently negative, if you understand it”“Being a diversified network is an imperative, not a nice to have in a world within which power is clearly shifting”Resources:Doris’s LinkedIn profileDoris’ EmailRelated Blogpost Youtube video of this podcastClick here to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces.Or email Tosca at tosca@5oaksconsulting.org if you want to talk about your social sector organization’s needs, challenges, and opportunities.You can find Tosca’s content by following her on her social media channels: 

SummaryWhat is the difference between forecasting and foresight, as a skill and an area of work?What are the pitfalls when international civil society organizations (ICSOs) apply crisis frameworks to trends that are actually longer-term, intersecting, and systemic?Decolonization and diversity: how are these big current discussions and areas for taking action intersecting with what sometimes is called 'anticipatory capacity': the capacity to anticipate futures and know how to act in order to try to influence them?In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview consultants and former Amnesty International practitioners  Danny Vannucchi and Heather Hutchings, on anticipating the future of civil society operating space - the legal, political and normative space for CSOs to do their work. Their report, commissioned by the International Civil Society Centre (ICSC) as part of its long-term work on civic space, is titled: Anticipating Futures for Civil Society Operating Space.   ICSC's mission is to strengthen the impact and resilience of international civil society organizations to support people to change their world for the better. The Centre does this by convening civil society actors, offering training, research and other activities.The Centre is planning further work on civil society's anticipatory capacity and is keen to get in touch with potential partners. Email Miriam Niehaus at ICSC: mniehaus@icscentre.org Heather’s Bio:Consultant at Storm ConsultingFormer senior Advisor, Conflict and Organizational Development at Amnesty InternationalDanny’s Bio:Senior Strategy & Human Rights ConsultantSenior Strategic Facilitator at GRID ImpactAdjunct Professor at the University of California, Los AngelesFormer director of Global Strategy & Impact at Amnesty InternationalWe discuss: Foresight and forecasting are two different concepts, yet they easily get misunderstood in civil society (CS): forecasting is about the mitigation of risk and is a more pragmatic concern. Foresight is about imagining different futures, shaping visions of the future, and forging strategies to shape the future that emerges. To be ahead of trends, in other words.Crises can keep civil society in a ‘defensive crouch’, in a reactive mode. Crisis management mode is a well-honed capacity in civil society, but we do not focus enough on the trends underlying those crises. Due to a lack of anticipatory capacity within civil society, we miss opportunities to make use of or shape longer-term trends CS has sufficient awareness of macro trends, but we fail to make this knowledge actionable; what are the reasons do decision-makers not act on the data on trends that is offered to them?Future scanning is actually often primarily about good strategyCivil society collectively can improve its anticipatory capacity by pooling resources  Quotes: “How to not sit at the table laid out by others, but rather, invite others to sit at your own table – that is the challenge”“Crisis response is an important part of NGOS’ public relations 

SummaryWhat is ‘transscalar activism’ in a nutshell? And how is it different from what academics call the 'Boomerang' model of international advocacy NGO networks?When did international NGO advocacy begin attracting the attention of academics, and why? What had shifted at that point, what had changed?What was the dominant narrative in academia for a long time? And what was wrong with that?In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Elizabeth Bloodgood, Associate Professor at Concordia University, Canada, and Christopher Pallas, Professor at Kennesaw University, USA, on major shifts in advocacy and campaigning approaches among NGOs. Trust me: their empirical research, based on practitioner case studies, is relevant for us practitioners. Elizabeth’s Bio:Associate Professor at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec, CanadaLecturer in non-state actors at the University of Pennsylvania, USAAssistant Professor at Dartmouth College, USA Christopher’s Bio:Professor of Conflict Management at the Department of Political Science and International Affairs at Kennesaw University in Georgia, USAHis research focuses on nongovernmental organizations and their role in international policymaking and development We discuss: Chris and Beth argue that how we think about advocacy strategies in relation to the roles and practices of global North and global south founded NGOs is well overdue for an updateThe argument they make in their 2022 book ‘Beyond the Boomerang: From Transnational Advocacy Networks to Transscalar Advoacy’  is linked to hot topics of today, such as decolonizing aid, and a shift in power and agency between global South-founded and global North-founded NGOs – a shift that Beth and Chris argue has already been well on its way for 10+ year. The era of the so-called ‘boomerang effect’  model in global advocacy -- in which national-level global South-founded NGOs would link up to global North-founded NGOs on advocacy causes when they did not find their government to be responsive -- that era is overTheir argument as expressed in the book implies changes in what are legitimate, needed roles for global North-founded NGOs into the future.National NGOs in the global South now choose at what scale to operate (thus the term ‘transscalar activism’) – whether local, national, regional or global -- and these days ally with Southern CSOs as much as with global North-founded NGOsThis also means that we should expect to see that global South-founded NGOs will feel less obliged to engage in marketing and reframing of their local causes in order to get international partners or global-North based media on their side.   Resources:Elizabeth’s LinkedIn ProfileFaculty page of ElizabethFaculty page of ChristopherChristopher’s Google Scholer pageBook: <&l

SummaryWhat’s problematic about philanthropy in the ways the sector has practiced it for many decades?Are there limits to trust-based philanthropy?How do boards of grant-making philanthropies such as the Global Fund for Children have to change their composition, mindset, and oversight practices to lessen a compliance and upward accountability lens and to make themselves more responsive to actual needs? In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview John Hecklinger, President and CEO at Global Fund for Children, on how we can practice philanthropy that’s less colonial in mindset and practices.John’s Bio:President and CEO, Global Fund for Children (GFC)Co-Chair, Alliance for International Youth DevelopmentChief Program Officer, Global GivingBusiness development director, Global GivingDirector of Data Acquisition in the private sectorPeacecorp volunteer (US volunteering program) We discuss: Global Fund for Children acts as an intermediary in on-granting philanthropic resources from family and corporate foundations to child and youth-focused, local civil society organizations. It also facilitates peer cohort capacity strengthening among grantee partnersWhat John learned from working at Global Giving in terms of its innovative role in introducing crowdfunding to the nonprofit and citizen-giving sector  The risks when well-intentioned philanthropic organizations reinforce a mindset of compliance and upward accountabilityGFC stimulates homegrown philanthropy because communities have assets that can be leveraged How GFC’s board had to evolve in composition, mindset and practices  composition to be liberated from simply approving ‘pre-baked’ dockets of prepared projects and to move to an approach that allowed GFC to become more flexible and responsive to needsWhat does the future of philanthropy look like, beyond grantmaking, when on-granting organizations such as GFC have taken themselves out of the picture? Quotes:“Everyone was getting smarter together once the board composition became more representative of the grantee partners it worked with” Resources:John’s LinkedIn ProfileGlobal Fund for Children (GFC) WebsiteGFC’s blogsPodcast episode #22, NGO Soul + Strategy, with Dorothy Nyambi of MEDABenchmarking study on Shifting Power among 17 CSOs (International Civil Society Centre) Youtube video of this podcastClick here to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces.Or email Tosca at tosca@5oaksconsulting.org if you want to talk about your social sector organization’s needs, challenges, and opportunities.You can find Tosca’s content by following her on her social media channels: Twitter LinkedIn Facebook 

SummaryWhat are the characteristics of 'digitally native' campaigning organizations?How do digital NGO campaigning organizations compare and contrast with traditional, 'brick and mortar' NGOs?Do digitally native civil society organizations and traditional NGOs sufficiently seek to complement each other, in order to maximize impact? I don't think they do.In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Nina Hall, Assistant Professor of International Relations at the Johns Hopkins University, on my episode 'Digital advocacy NGOs: a necessary, complementary force'. Nina’s Bio:Associate Assistant Professor of International Relations at the Johns Hopkins University,  School of Advanced International Studies, EuropeNina's research explores the role of transnational advocacy and international organizations in international relationsPublished research on advocacy organizations and multilateral institutionsAuthor of the recent book Transnational Advocacy in the Digital Era, Think Global, Act Local (Oxford University Press, 2022)DPhil (Ph.D.) in International Relations from the University of Oxford We discuss: Nina studies progressive national digital advocacy and other digital campaigning organizationsDigital advocacy organizations use digital campaigning tactics such as online petitioning, combined with offline tactics such as street mobilization, offline meetings with campaign targets, etc. Digital advocacy organizations are less likely to work on issues that are less broadly popular, such as minority rights issuesNina pushes back on the use of the word ‘platform’ for digital advocacy organizations since the actors she studies have actual HQs, paid staff, etc.The kind of digital advocacy organizations that Nina studies have most potential to be effective in more or less democratic societies, where they are in a position to pressure elected or appointed decision-makersThe profile of most ‘members’ (i.e. supporters) of digital advocacy organizations is that of middle-class, educated, urban citizens with adequate internet accessWhat are the strengths and weaknesses of this type of digital advocacy organization, as compared to those of traditional NGOs?What's the difference between staff-stewarding campaigning approaches versus member-driven approaches? Resources:Nina’s professional WebsiteNina’s personal WebsiteNina’s book:  Transnational Advocacy in the Digital Era: Thinking Global, Acting Local, Oxford University Press, 2022Nina's book recently won the ISA ICOM best book prize, see HEREStanford Social Science Innovation Research excerpt of Nina's book - HERETwitter thread by Nina on the book – HEREYoutube video

SummaryINGOs have been rocked by scandals and allegations of abuse of power, discrimination etc. in the last 5-10 years. What kind of different types of scandals can we distinguish in our sector?Which factors that affect nonprofit scandals remain understudied?What's the distinction between integrity violations and competency violations? And should we be getting more concerned as a sector about the latterIn this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Cassandra Chapman, Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Queensland, Australia, on causes, consequences, and prevention and recovery strategies for NGO scandals. Cassandra’s Bio:Associate Professor in Marketing at the Business School of the University of QueenslandAssociate Editor at Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector QuarterlyFormer practitioner - Supporter Development Manager as well as Fundraising & Communications Manager at ChildFund, New Zealand We discuss: If the consequences of transgressions by nonprofits are directly relevant to the mission of nonprofits, then they are being punished harsher by the public and the mediaScandal consequences go up, if the nonprofit is perceived to be inactive afterward, or tries to cover it up‘Expectancy violations’ happen when nonprofits engage in ethical transgressions because nonprofits are perceived to be/are expected to be ‘good’Researchers should examine more on whether sector-level actions by nonprofit apex or peak bodies engage in apology, acknowledgment, and reparative actionsPersons who feel morally credentialled by working in nonprofits are actually more likely to transgress  Quotes:“My mission as an academic is to create usable know-how for practitioners”“People assume that there is a crisis in trust in charities; instead, actually, trust in charities has continued a little bit in charities over time” Resources:Cassandra’s LinkedInCassandra’s TwitterCassandra’s article: (this article is not available through Open Access; message Cassandra through LinkedIn and she can send you the PDF version)Cassandra’s short summary post on LinkedInAn upcoming website with summaries of articles by Cassandra: www.donorpsych.orgTosca’s essay on ‘Can organizational culture explain recent INGo scandals’ provides further perspectives Youtube video of this podcastClick here to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces.Or email Tosca at tosca@5oaksconsulting.org if you want to talk about your social sector organization’s needs, challenges, and opportunities.You can find Tosca’s content by following her on her social media channels: Twitter

SummaryA number of NGOs have aimed to strengthen their global legitimacy by adding more global South members/affiliates. Is this truly a valuable strategy? Does it help with legitimacy to be more 'globally balanced'? What are the hard lessons learned about how to manage this process? And how do local civil society as well as government respond? Hazem Fahmy, the CEO of the CARE Egypt Foundation and former Country Director of CARE USA-line managed Egypt Country Office, is an excellent source of wisdom on all of this. He, together with his senior leadership and with other 'change champions' in his broader team and in CARE globally, shepherded CARE Egypt's transition into full membership.What does Hazem consider the most interesting or rewarding about the ‘art and science’ of change leadership?Equally, what is the most difficult or frustrating about this experience with change management and leadership?In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview Hazem Fahmy, CEO of CARE Egypt Foundation, on CARE Egypt’s Country Office transition towards full membership. Hazem’s Bio:CEO of the CARE Egypt FoundationCountry Director for CARE Egypt Country OfficeWorked at CARE Egypt for 19 yearsPhD from New Mexico University in Water ResourcesWe discuss: CARE USA had overseen the CARE Egypt Country Office for almost 60 years before it transitioned to full CARE membership (with a voice in global governance)These kinds of transformations should not be seen as a project but as a change journeyThe addition of global South members to CARE’s confederation means that new topics have been introduced within CARE: it has changed the organization’s discourse on what mattersHow the new global South  members demanded that global North members too should live up to the same  standards that are expected of them Organizational change processes like this always take longer than expected, but that is acceptable– it's about living up to the intention of change, not about project deadlinesHazem finds it rewarding to hear people who used to be doubtful about this strategic direction now applaud what has been achievedOne cannot be overfocused on keeping staff comfortable by saying that most things will not changeEgyptian civil society largely accepts the CARE Egypt Foundation as part of its own, while Government has started to involve it more in consultative roundtables - so the transition to full membership has helped with local credibility.  Quotes:“Change management means navigating a lot of ambiguity, it is a discovery process; change is not a project”“Don’t leave influential people behind”“I am not denying there is a privilege in being tied to the CARE mothership” Resources:Hazem’s LinkedIn profileHazem’s EmailWebsite of Care Egypt FoundationHazem’s blog: Youtube video of this podcastClick here to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces.Or email Tosca at 

SummaryWhat is most difficult or challenging about operating as a leader in a place like Oxfam?What does it take to lead from a political frame in NGOs?Rational persuasion: is it overrated? In this NGO Soul+Strategy podcast episode, I interview John Samuel, Oxfam Asia Regional Director on influence and power in complex NGOs. John is an expert on Organizational Development. He is also the founder of Bodhigram, an Indian grassroots social movement, John’s Bio:Regional Director of Oxfam AsiaFormer President of the Institute for Sustainable Development and GovernancePresident & CEO of Trancivic InternationalPresident of the National Centre for Advocacy StudiesCEO of FORUM-Asia, the Asia Forum for Human Rights and DevelopmentInternational advisor at UNDP We discuss: What John is most excited about in Oxfam at this moment, as well as what can be challenging as a leader in OxfamOxfam is a complex organization, combining multiple DNAs of the respective affiliates, their histories, organizational systems and national cultures - how to navigate this most effectivelyWhat it takes to develop relationships of trust in an organization like Oxfam: negotiation across differences, people, power, and national cultures. Also understanding where people are coming from, rather than using the same measuring scale on allHow integrity, truthfulness, conviction, and principles can bypass or negate internal organizational political dynamicsJohn's experience is that some people are mission-focused; some are career-driven; and some task-driven; knowing how to recognize these different drivers is helpful. Quotes: “Organizations are about people, systems, and power”“An organization is a living system, it’s organic; an institution, on the other hand, is about systems”“Humans are fundamentally relational, so you lead through people and relationships”“Leadership is about communication acts, through language”“Power is not what you have but what you are perceived to have” (Saul Lewinsky) Resources:John’s LinkedInWebsite of Bodhigram, the grassroots social movement founded by John John’s blogs:Dancing with dreams reflects part of the philosophy of BodhigramOn leadership and language John’s predictions for a 2030 future for INGOs Youtube video of this podcastClick here to subscribe to be alerted when new podcast episodes come out or when Tosca produces other thought leadership pieces.Or email Tosca at tosca@5oaksconsulting.org if you want to talk about your social sector organization’s needs, challenges, and opportunities.You can find Tosca’s content by following her on her social media channels: Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Youtube