Thanks for the great insights Spencer - however I was interested to see that you didn’t touch on one of the main reasons for non-profits to engage in a collective impact effort, and that’s alignment to their mission or purpose. In an ideal world this would be the primary motivator to get involved, although as you pointed out, there are a number of practical realities that can be the enemy of collaboration. It takes bravery to put mission above commercial considerations alot of the time; maybe we need to make this a 6th component for collective impact? After all, if you are not putting your mission first as an organisation - then can you truly justify your worth and community impact?
Thanks very much, Andrew & Joy. Andrew, I agree that organizations should be motivated by an opportunity to serve their missions better, and also think we should better align interests with mission. If we ask people to act against what appears to be in their own interest, we’re asking them to be extraordinary - and some will be. But I’d like to see truly effective collaboration become more the normal thing to do.
I zero’d in on your bullet point #3 - “They understand how to pursue collective impact funding opportunities successfully.” Do you have more writing on this? Would love to learn more about your perspectives.
Great piece of thinking. I guess adressing coordination of funders so that they set synergistic expectations about outcomes is one important piece to solve this jigsaw. Have you or other people writyen about such a strategy?
Ruth, I haven’t written specifically about that, but it sounds like a good topic. For now I’d just say that since it’s natural to fear change, and fear is compounded by mystery, it’s important in any change effort to prepare people for it, so they understand both how the new system will work and how they’ll be able to succeed within it. In collective impact that would mean helping nonprofits grasp what would make a CI initiative truly credible, in all five dimensions, to the people who are asked to fund it. I think it’s a challenge similar to the one faced by startups, which need to convince investors of the potential of their product, market opportunity, growth strategy, key staff and executive team.
Frederik, yes, I think funders are going to be key drivers, through making impact-targeted investments, and that some investments will be coordinated across multiple funding sources. I plan to write more about this, but meanwhile here’s a great article from the New York Times on moves in this direction by leading funders such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation and others: “Major Foundations, Eager for Big Change, Aim High”, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/giving/major-foundations-eager-for-big-change-aim-high.html
Since 2010 I explained my social action based on collective impact theory and irá 5 components. I have shared my 20 years social impact and innovation experiences describing the socesses and failures I have experienced in each one of the 5 collective impact elements. I consider the back bone organization the cathalizer of the other collective impact elements which can not be achived if the back bone does not exist and do what it has to do. Good article. Thanks.
Hi Spencer I thought this was a great and very insightful article. We’ve been through a two-year process on climate change to establish the We Mean Business coalition (http://www.wemeanbusinesscoalition.org) where the lessons learned map almost perfectly onto your insights. If you are looking for case studies I’d be interested to discuss.
COMMENTS
BY Andrew F
ON December 10, 2015 03:31 PM
Thanks for the great insights Spencer - however I was interested to see that you didn’t touch on one of the main reasons for non-profits to engage in a collective impact effort, and that’s alignment to their mission or purpose. In an ideal world this would be the primary motivator to get involved, although as you pointed out, there are a number of practical realities that can be the enemy of collaboration. It takes bravery to put mission above commercial considerations alot of the time; maybe we need to make this a 6th component for collective impact? After all, if you are not putting your mission first as an organisation - then can you truly justify your worth and community impact?
BY Joy Burkhard
ON December 10, 2015 04:03 PM
Fantastic!
BY Spencer Critchley
ON December 10, 2015 07:25 PM
Thanks very much, Andrew & Joy. Andrew, I agree that organizations should be motivated by an opportunity to serve their missions better, and also think we should better align interests with mission. If we ask people to act against what appears to be in their own interest, we’re asking them to be extraordinary - and some will be. But I’d like to see truly effective collaboration become more the normal thing to do.
BY Ruth Richardson
ON December 11, 2015 11:55 AM
I zero’d in on your bullet point #3 - “They understand how to pursue collective impact funding opportunities successfully.” Do you have more writing on this? Would love to learn more about your perspectives.
BY Fredrik Lindencrona
ON December 12, 2015 02:54 AM
Great piece of thinking. I guess adressing coordination of funders so that they set synergistic expectations about outcomes is one important piece to solve this jigsaw. Have you or other people writyen about such a strategy?
BY Spencer Critchley
ON December 12, 2015 09:24 AM
Ruth, I haven’t written specifically about that, but it sounds like a good topic. For now I’d just say that since it’s natural to fear change, and fear is compounded by mystery, it’s important in any change effort to prepare people for it, so they understand both how the new system will work and how they’ll be able to succeed within it. In collective impact that would mean helping nonprofits grasp what would make a CI initiative truly credible, in all five dimensions, to the people who are asked to fund it. I think it’s a challenge similar to the one faced by startups, which need to convince investors of the potential of their product, market opportunity, growth strategy, key staff and executive team.
BY Spencer Critchley
ON December 12, 2015 09:34 AM
Frederik, yes, I think funders are going to be key drivers, through making impact-targeted investments, and that some investments will be coordinated across multiple funding sources. I plan to write more about this, but meanwhile here’s a great article from the New York Times on moves in this direction by leading funders such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation and others: “Major Foundations, Eager for Big Change, Aim High”, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/giving/major-foundations-eager-for-big-change-aim-high.html
BY Ana Gonzalez
ON December 13, 2015 02:42 PM
Since 2010 I explained my social action based on collective impact theory and irá 5 components. I have shared my 20 years social impact and innovation experiences describing the socesses and failures I have experienced in each one of the 5 collective impact elements. I consider the back bone organization the cathalizer of the other collective impact elements which can not be achived if the back bone does not exist and do what it has to do. Good article. Thanks.
BY Jim Walker
ON December 14, 2015 12:10 PM
Hi Spencer I thought this was a great and very insightful article. We’ve been through a two-year process on climate change to establish the We Mean Business coalition (http://www.wemeanbusinesscoalition.org) where the lessons learned map almost perfectly onto your insights. If you are looking for case studies I’d be interested to discuss.
BY Spencer Critchley
ON January 3, 2016 03:57 PM
Thanks very much, Jim. I had a look at We Mean Business and it looks fascinating. I’d be happy to talk more about it.