Archives January 2019

Great article on power and gender dynamics – which go far beyond the US case studies the author examines.

This quote really succinctly summarizes some key pieces of the male-dominated status quo, in my opinion.

According to this script, power is meritocratic; those who earn it do so individually through their own hard work. Power has a particular look and a particular sound: tall and deep-voiced. Power is all-encompassing: a partner and children are the backdrop for a life centered on the pursuit of greatness; family indicates that the powerful person is grounded enough to be trusted, but the family is fundamentally a body that benefits from the powerful person, not a body that benefits him and fundamentally enables his success. (Bold mine).

And here is an alternate option:

From these women, the message is clear: Their strength comes from collaborative, generational efforts to move toward the good. The promise of America is not the possibility of individuals going at it alone and achieving in a high-profile way as a result, and the purpose of politics is not personal empowerment. The gift of power requires the responsibility of appreciating who came before you and how you might do your part to push forward. Powerful men have always considered their individual legacies. These powerful women seem more interested in their role in improving an evolving and complex ecosystem. (Bold mine).

Women shouldn’t adapt to the existing lie; men in the political realm should be more honest.  (Bold mine).

Thoughts?

When Honest Women Replace ‘Self-Made’ Men https://nyti.ms/2H5HQLW

Trump’s economy is great for billionaires, not for working people

And, I would suggest, this is not a problem that is limited to the US. Massive income and wealth gaps are destructive in so many ways. Stronger systems are needed, as mentioned – free post-secondary education and so many others – along with so many other changes.

So, here are a few questions that come to mind around questions of income inequality:

• At what point will it be seen as socially undesirable to be a CEO, for example, who makes massive sums of money when entry level staff are struggling to make ends meet?
• Why, in some circles, is it seen as desirable to be ultra-wealthy, find tax loopholes etc?
• On a more basic level, (this is the simple living Menno coming out in me), do we really fully challenge ourselves to not be tempted by a house/car/income that is bigger than we actually need? Do we nudge ourselves to see simple living and equality as a positive goal to embrace?
• How would our houses and lifestyles be viewed by the newcomer families that we support?
• Do we support political systems, parties and policies that truly support equality for everybody, including equality and justice for the environment?

There’s lots more that I could add, but I’ll leave it here for now. 🙂

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/16/trump-economy-billionaires-working-people?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_WordPress

Immediate fossil fuel phaseout could arrest climate change – study

This is a further reminder that critical changes are both necessary, and capable of having significant influence on the future stability and sustainability of the planet. This is a matter of choice – and it’s a choice that needs to be made now, not in a generation or two. 🙂

The study found that if all fossil fuel infrastructure – power plants, factories, vehicles, ships and planes – from now on are replaced by zero-carbon alternatives at the end of their useful lives, there is a 64% chance of staying under 1.5C.

Naturally, in order to increase that 64% to something higher, infrastructure must be replaced before it would be otherwise. In addition, other steps must be taken, starting immediately – smaller houses, more solar panels and wind turbines, removing gas vehicles from the roads as quickly as possible and other steps as well.

The work also assumes a rapid end to beef and dairy consumption, which is responsible for significant global emissions.

This means a significant, and immediate move towards a heavily plant-based diet for everybody. It means no longer viewing meat and dairy-based meals as the default for school cafeterias, restaurants, church potlucks and other places where people gather. It means making the switch even if you really like cheese and burgers and yogurt, or if meat is what you grew up eating. All of those may be true, but we are in a crisis, and drastic times call for drastic measures, and the time for change is now. 🙂

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/15/immediate-fossil-fuel-phaseout-could-arrest-climate-change-study?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_WordPress

Totally agree! 🙂

As a tangent, I will add that I find there is inconsistency around grant proposal language (inputs, outputs, outcomes, indicators etc). Feels to me that there is a lot that could be done to make that process more clear, and, by extension, more helpful – both for the donor (get more useful info) and for the partner (opens up space for more useful conversation and communication).

There are other areas where this is applicable as well, but I’ll leave it here for now. 🙂

Thoughts?

NOTE: For some reason, the link seems to be showing up either not at all, or twice. Hopefully it works when I publish. If not, I’ll try to correct it. 🙂

This was published last summer, but I just came across it today. I have experienced many of the pieces identified below – from founders and others. So, one piece that I would add is that the basic premise (openness to others’ expertise etc) is critical – but not limited to NGOs that are still being run by the founder. It can happen in that case, but it can also happen in other organizations.

https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2017/apr/12/founder-syndrome-personality-crippling-charity 

Doing a bit more digging, I came across a few articles referencing a recent NGO study in India, which suggests a heavy over-reliance on founder-CEOs, even 10-20 years or more after the organization was founded. It also indicates weak interest in building leadership capacity among non-CEO staff, both within the organization and among donors.

https://www.livemint.com/Industry/UdIacbXtoqojHsrQq4lcZM/NGOs-lack-leaders-to-succeed-current-management-study.html

“Ingrid Srinath, director, Centre for Social Impact and Philanthropy, Ashoka University, attributes this mindset to Indian CSOs being “personality driven with the CEO/founder as the key element when it comes to raising money and setting agenda. This is a handicap when it comes to building sustainable organizations. In the event of discontinuity of service by the leader, the impact is often severe and it takes years to recoup.” (Bold mine).

https://ssir.org/articles/entry/ngo_leadership_development_in_india_from_pioneer_founders_to_homegrown_lead

“As the trailblazers who built India’s nonprofit sector begin to step aside, a new study shows that NGOs face a significant gap in next-generation leadership. There are barriers to bridging this gap and building blocks to surmount them, but progress depends on founders and funders viewing leadership development as mission critical.” (Bold mine)

Although this study was based in India, these are certainly not region-specific challenges. Thoughts?