Before hearing Andrew Means on the SSIR podcast, I would listen to the stories Not-for-Profit organizations tell about their work and couldn’t help but be inspired. Hearing the exceptional rags-to-riches story about a person experiencing homelessness that used an NPO’s employment program and now manages a local million dollar company would move me to open my wallet.
Another common narrative is based in data. After hearing that upon completion of the employment program 85% of participants (people experiencing homelessness) became employed, I became convinced the program is ‘doing something right‘.
Look more closely at the stories and you’ll notice they have two common deficiencies.
First, they fail to link the complex nature of the problem to the need for their program. As a complex problem, homelessness is multi-faceted with causes sprouting from racism, poverty, abuse, family violence, mental illness, and addiction to name a few. Are you able to articulate how the employment program addresses some of these broader facets of homelessness?
Second, the stories tell us what has been accomplished in the past but fail to articulate why it matters for the future. Has the story about the employment program taught us about the ways in which being employed will impact people experiencing homelessness in the future?
Means believes our stories need to go beyond our comfortable narratives to include how the program/organization has impacted the broader systemic context.
Yes. Impact. When I think about measuring impact I am immediately overwhelmed by where to start while remembering past attempts rife with pitfalls and blind alleys. But Means believes it’s the key to making progress on complex, systemic, nasty, intractable social problems and he has a tidy little formula to get us started.
World with your organization – World without your organization = Impact of your organization
Tidy to say. Still messy to do. Fortunately Means gives us a couple tips and some excellent examples to get us thinking about starting.
Counter-factuals: provide us with an accounting of what would have happened if the organization/program had never existed. This would mean asking how many of the participants getting a job after completing the employment program would have landed employment anyway. Then setting this against the 85%.
Displacement: helps us articulate how our work causes ripples in the broader context. It might mean asking how many participants getting a job after completing the employment program are filling positions otherwise filled by equally qualified people already in the labour market and setting this against the 85% too.
Granted. Quantifying displacement and counter-factuals can be time-consuming and possibly expensive. But Means is nudging us towards authentically confronting the gap between what we want to accomplish and what we are actually accomplishing.
The result will be a community making more informed decisions about contributing towards outcomes we actually want to achieve rather than outcomes we pretend we are achieving.
When we join the crowd at the Annual General Meeting, it is with the expectation that we will hear the stories that make us feel like we are in the presence of something that matters. But the stories are stuck in a rut. They have a predictable plot involving the usual characters. Think the movie Star Wars.
Means is nudging us towards telling more complex stories by introducing compelling storylines and new characters illustrating the relationship between complex problems and our work. Think the movie Interstellar.
Whose Story Are We Telling? Featuring Andrew Means from Stanford Social Innovation Review Podcast
You must be logged in to post a comment.