Chapter Two
Where Are We Going?
We are writing this book while the COVID‐19 global pandemic rages on, while protests and legislation related to racial equity continue in the streets and in city halls—and every aspect of our lives grows more dependent on technology every day. Living within these realities, what do we see?
Technology companies have pledged to diversify their staff amid various campaigns calling for them to disclose the racial makeup of their management and leadership teams. During the first few months of the pandemic in 2020, many of those same companies offered their products at free or newly discounted options to nonprofits or even individuals. Of course, most had fine print specifying these offers weren't permanent.
The philanthropic sector is full of pledges and commitment statements about everything from addressing racial inequity to making their grantmaking more accessible and less onerous. Such assistance is indeed helpful to social impact organizations, local mutual aid efforts, and every kind of community institution, all of whom have struggled to address skyrocketing needs for critical services and programs with greatly depleted human and financial resources. In the summer of 2020, Deloitte's Monitor Institute reported an estimated 10–40% contraction in the US nonprofit sector with one out of every three organizations already closed or at risk of doing so.1
Such pledges and commitments by technology providers and philanthropy are important in many ways, but they are not enough to help many organizations and communities even to stay afloat—let alone to build a better world.
As we discussed in chapter 1, the systems and challenges around us—the same systems that created the need for an entire social impact sector to provide lifesaving and enriching programs—have also deeply influenced the technology systems, tools, and culture present in our work and lives. We cannot build a better world through only more nonprofits or more inclusive services. If the technology‐enabled systems, data collection, and even service models we employ toward a positive mission are themselves causing harm, because they are extractive, don't acknowledge our identities, or are inaccessible, we must acknowledge that harm and make change—in both the technology tools themselves and in the way we create technology for our needs.
An equitable world will require change from every one of us, as individuals and organizations and sectors and communities. Critical in this is changing our relationship with technology generally and changing the technologies we have available so that more appropriate, relevant, and equitable technology is available to meet our needs. Even more critical is practicing the big work of envisioning that we can do things differently.
Let's think for a moment about social impact work as building a house. We don't start by pulling up plans for each tool; we have a blueprint of the house and financial estimates for all the permits, materials, and labor that will be needed through to completion. We don't focus on how many saws and nail guns we have, nor do we expect that the full house can be built using only a hammer.
Similarly, we need to ensure that our relationship to technology, as individuals and as organizations, is one that acknowledges digital tools are just that: tools. Despite the efforts of Silicon Valley to frame every application and service as comprehensive “solutions,” these digital tools need to be considered with appropriate expectations for what they can actually do and what they can't. Staying focused, instead, on the goal we have ahead will enable us to select the best tools as and when needed. Keeping our community central in our processes, through engaging many people in the goal setting, decision making, design, and implementation of our work, allows us also to be accountable for technology use that causes harm and to make appropriate adjustments. To return to the house‐building analogy, if we selected tools that caused avoidable accidents, we need to find alternative ways to meet our goal without endangering our laborers.
As we build toward a better world, those putting technology to work need to be in control of the technology we choose and how it works for us, not the other way around.
OUR VISION
An equitable world is one where everyone has access to affordable, healthy food, a secure place to live, and the freedom and safety to pursue a life filled with loving relationships, joy, expression, and learning. Equitable technology includes the networks, hardware, software, and services that support everyone's access to, participation in, and fulfillment in an equitable world. Technology is integral to how we live our lives today, from registering for social services to accessing health care and from pursuing education to communicating with family, but to achieve an equitable world, our relationship to technology will need to be different from what it is today. Fortunately, the technologies we now have can be replaced by ones made in more equitable ways.
As tempting as it is to focus only on the image of that better world, we need to focus on how to create the bridge for all of us to get there. One of the lessons we can draw from how technology serves—or doesn't serve—the world today is that how you develop technology is as important as what technology you develop.
Social Impact Organizations
It is likely that employees, volunteers, board members, or others who are part of a social impact organization with a mission to do good—whether through direct service or not, on a local scale or a global one—believe that the work of the organization matters. Many communities are supported through a diversity of valuable social impact organizations, from food pantries and book banks to concerts in the park, and advocacy efforts to shift local policies to advocating for the rights of community groups. These missions are all important pieces of the fabric of programs, services, and support that have direct impact on communities everywhere. The best way to further the value of these missions and programs is to ensure that the administration and delivery of the work is advancing the mission, too—and not inadvertently contributing to the issues the mission aims to address.
Technology is a big part of this unintended negative contribution—from extractive data collection to perpetuating digital exclusion. And those working in social impact organizations are in a critical position to catalyze change for the way technology is selected, implemented, budgeted, planned, and used toward the mission.
For technology to work for us, we don't need everyone to get a degree in computer science or learn to code—we don't have to all become highly trained technologists for technology to be successful. It's critical that we all actively engage with people who approach shared problems from different angles and perspectives. We need people who are experts in their missions and community's needs to collaborate with us on the many challenges we face. Leading practitioners in particular are well positioned to ask important questions, require processes for selecting and using technology that best meet the mission, and connect the opportunities of technology systems to the important impact they want to achieve.
Our vision is for technology projects, funders, and policymakers to prioritize the participation and perspective of communities most affected by the many intersecting systems we're working to change.
Funders and Investors
All those who are part of the funding mechanisms of social impact and technology—be that private philanthropy, corporate philanthropy, venture capital, individual donors, or other financial resourcing models—are in a critical position to shift these systems and sectors toward change. In order to meet the missions of social impact organizations, as well as the needs of our communities, the resourcing for that work must change in a number of important ways.
Like those working in social impact organizations, funders of all types must understand how the emergence of their roles and sectors exist only because of the same systems that created the community's needs in the first place. Capitalism, white supremacy, and other extractive systems of power perpetuate inequitable realities. Together, we need to fundamentally shift how we resource projects, organizations, and technology development in order to produce different outcomes.
In many of the existing funding dynamics for social impact work and for technology development, the power and focus are on the funders, who can decide if or how a project moves forward. This dynamic needs to be reversed so that the communities and people receiving the social impact work and technology can be the ones setting the priorities. We can't continue to perpetuate the belief that those with the most money know best; instead, we need funders and investors who believe that the resourcing they bring to a project is in service to the knowledge, lived experience, and vision of those doing the work and those for whom the work is designed to serve. Along with this belief comes the reminder that supporting social impact work and technology development requires resourcing that is not exclusively financial. Many funders, regardless of their type or size or investment area, have access to power, relationships, capital, services, and infrastructure that can all be leveraged toward the goal.
Our vision is for resources to be managed and prioritized by communities and organizations putting technology to use for positive impact, so that their needs and realities are centered in development, instead of on the priorities of those with the most financial assets.
Technology Creators and Providers
Technology creators or service providers are positioned at the crux of significant power and responsibility.
In our world of accelerating digital connections, communication, and information sharing, technology creators and providers hold many of the keys to unlock what we can do today and where we might go tomorrow. Critical to unlocking opportunities is recognizing that technology is not neutral. Technology tools—data management systems or social media, accounting tools or artificial intelligence—cannot be neutral, because humans created them. The cumulative biases, beliefs, lived experiences, and understanding of those creators naturally guide and limit how they imagine a potential solution, as well as how they design technology to deliver it.
We don't even necessarily need neutral technology. But we do need to reconsider who a technologist is or could be, how and where technology is created, and what our technology providers could do to be accountable for the full impact of their products.
Our vision is for those who stand to be most affected are brought into the process to give perspective and experience in the development of technology, with a deep understanding of the real‐world use cases for users prioritized over profit.
Policymakers
Those who make policies about the ways technology is built, funded, or used essentially design guardrails and checkpoints. It is important that they have a complete understanding of community context, access, and implications of technology. Do the policies prioritize safety and minimize harm? Or do they favor those with the privileges of knowledge, access, and resources, forcing everyone else to wait?
The laws, policies, and regulations for the internet and digital tools that get made today will either accelerate or hinder the efforts of other groups working for change, including social impact organizations, funders, and technology providers. Regulation and requirements around our digital infrastructure can't be thought of as something with clear geographic boundaries or as something constrained by financial penalty. Our digital infrastructure will only become more global; the systems for designing and enforcing policies for that infrastructure need to be global, too.
As noted earlier, the outcomes for policy work will be most successful when those potentially most affected are brought into the process to offer their perspective and experience. When communities who have been harmed by the technology tools and associated legal policies around them are able to convey their experience—not just once but repeatedly, in regular communication—the clarified need can influence the necessary improvements.
Our vision is that all policymaking concerning technology be designed with awareness of the full, continuing impact of that technology on its end users. Such accountability for impact, harm, and repair can most directly produce viable outcomes.
TECHNOLOGY THAT IS ACCOUNTABLE TO COMMUNITY
Ultimately, the fetishization and veneration of technology, especially the newest and shiniest of technologies, isn't sustainable—or even accessible—for many people. What is sustainable is values alignment, deep investment, and thoughtful planning. If we can commit to the work of realigning these values in ourselves, our organizations, and the world around us as part of the work toward any other social mission or cause, we could more readily build new, different, and equitable technology.
Our relationship to technology, largely created for and by the most privileged communities in our world, is a core component of the dismantling work necessary at all levels. We will not meet our missions and heal the societal harms our work addresses without a readiness to establish a practice of changing how we think about, use, create, invest in, and implement technology within our work.
What We Value
We can't expect different results without changing the way our social impact efforts, technology development, funding, and policymaking begin: with what we value. Here is where we start:
- An equitable world requires that we value the knowledge and wisdom of lived experience. The most affected individuals and communities need to be central to decisions about solutions and priorities.
- An equitable world requires that we value the participation of a diversity of people in decision making, planning, and building technology—regardless of their technical knowledge or training.
- An equitable world requires that we value accessibility as a priority from the start in all technology and social impact work.
- An equitable world requires that we value the multiple ways that change is made, balancing the need to meet immediate challenges with a long view for how we can systemically eliminate those challenges.
- An equitable world requires that we value the strength of collectively creating a vision of a better world. No single voice, visionary, or author of a future will work for everyone.
- An equitable world requires that we value the dedication of individuals and communities in pursuing knowledge, experience, and skills. A diversity of people with deep training and practice offers valuable resources in collective efforts for change.
None of this is new, and yet all of it is new. So many people have yearned for a different world—a freer world—in so many definitions of that idea. Many leaders, community organizers, developers, designers, and laborers have pushed for change in their fields and in their communities. Though progress has been made, some obstacles still feel insurmountable, and in many ways what to try next can feel equally unknowable.
But if we orient our compass by the values listed here, even though we don't know what the path ahead will look like, or even what the final destination will be, we can trust that we are headed in the right direction—because we are focused on inclusion, accessibility, and accountability to each other.
This Is Where We're Going
Although we don't know exactly what a world with these values will look like, we can start putting together a basic idea, especially in contrast to Figure 1.1 about the systemic exclusion where we are today. Figure 2.1, Future State, instead imagines some of the components of a more equitable world we are building toward.
The first important difference with this illustration of systemic inclusion, as compared with that of systemic exclusion in chapter 1, is that people are not only present but active participants shaping and enjoying their lives. There is space for connection and collaboration; there are resources available for everyone to share. Sustainability and justice feel accessible to everyone, with relationships and accountability serving to support and protect individuals and the community. Ultimately, this is a world where people and the earth are thriving, joy and rest are plentiful, and growth is celebrated.
Figure 2.1 Future State: Systemic Inclusion
These themes and values are present throughout the following chapters in myriad ways—from the case studies to the new models for making change. There are many more situations and considerations that could be added to this illustration, but our hope is that this is a visualization that supports reflection and imagination. Identifying where more ideas could be added to this illustration is itself practice in pushing our minds to more and better realities. On the right side of the illustration there's a bridge leading somewhere beyond the page, which signifies our goal that the conversations and efforts that we individually and collectively take after reading this book will help build a bridge to what comes next. As we make progress in the long journey of changing our world, this illustration can be replaced by new ones that bring us closer and closer to a world that works for all of us.
WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO GET THERE?
This is a book about technology. This is a book about equity. This is a book about how we can meet community needs. More than anything, this is a book that asks you to ask questions, that invites you to join us in stretching our imaginations so that we can more readily embrace inclusion, accessibility, and accountability, and thus work more intentionally toward a world that works for all of us.
So how do we get there? The following chapters focus on different parts of the whole, including: the ways technology is used for social impact, how technologies are developed, opportunities for funding technology use and creation, changing the processes for designing and managing policies, and the various ways certain communities are excluded from accessing these spaces. These chapters also explore how we can change each of those pieces to instead prioritize the needs of affected communities, to build accountability around that impact, and to divest from old systems and patterns that do not serve equitable outcomes.
In chapter 3, we look at the way Rescuing Leftover Cuisine invested in technology to increase their impact and even scale the organization. This chapter is focused on technology used in and developed for social impact organizations, including technology culture and leadership development, as well as technology systems and investments.
In chapter 4, we learn about a technology project at John Jay College to better identify students at most risk of not graduating so that they can be connected to appropriate services. This chapter addresses technology development, both inside social impact organizations and for use by social change efforts, from the process of development and who is included to the ethics of developing technology today.
In chapter 5, our case study profiles the intentional prioritization Okta had on giving back to the sector and the formation of Okta for Good. This chapter covers how social impact work and social impact technology are funded through philanthropy, venture capital, and more. We discuss the way financial assets can be better directed into social change and how investments in technology are ultimately investments in communities.
In chapter 6, there are two case studies profiling the Rural Community Assistance Partnership and the National Digital Inclusion Alliance. This is the policymaking chapter but, importantly, we consider both policies that are made about technology and opportunities for that work to better engage communities, as well as how technology is used to support policymaking—all at the local, regional, national, and global levels.
In chapter 7, we spotlight the work of Atutu through the Project Sunbird initiative in Myanmar as an exemplary example of community‐centered work. In this chapter, we focus on what may be required or valuable to enable communities to engage with the groups previously covered in chapters 3 through 6, including internet access, training, and social infrastructure.
Each of these chapters includes a Case Study to offer an in‐depth exploration of a diversity of organizations and models already underway. These case studies each include direct quotes from someone involved in the profiled project, but it is important to acknowledge that each of these projects involved many more people in the past, today, and will include others in the future. Though they may not be quoted and named in the chapter, we are grateful for their leadership and contributions.
At the end of each of these chapters are Questions for What's Next. These are questions to ask ourselves and others to open up our imaginations to what is possible, to challenge assumptions and existing systems, and to bring us into closer relationships across these various sectors.
In chapters 8 and 9, we reflect on the five previous chapters and connect the themes, opportunities, and needs between them. Where we will go and what we will build next will be influenced by what we choose to value and how we enable collective changemaking, technology development, funding, and policymaking.
In chapter 10, we provide resources to support you starting conversations about this book with those you work or organize with, including discussion questions for reflection as well as an aggregation of the questions from within the chapters throughout the book.
We have identified throughout this book a variety of actions you can take to further this vision. But our biggest ask is this:
Whoever you are, wherever you are, you are part of this work. Start imagining something new today.
NOTE
- 1. Gabriel Kasper et al., “COVID‐19 Scenario Planning for Nonprofit and Philanthropic Organizations,” Deloitte, July 2020, https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/covid-19-planning-scenarios-for-social-sector-organizations.html .