Monday, July 08, 2019

The Power of Connecting Networks

In an earlier post, I talk about Labstorms, and how they have enabled hundreds of organizations across aid, philanthropy, government and impact investing to collaborate and experiment. In this post, I want to talk more broadly about the funding and operational “architecture” that has enabled the feedback field (some call it a movement) to develop faster and spread more widely than many other initiatives I have been involved in.
The Stanford Social Innovation Review recently published a nice piece about the creation of the Fund for Shared Insight (FSI), the launch of Listen for Good (L4G), and how FSI and L4G have listened to feedback to refine what they do. FSI has funded a number of infrastructure organizations, including Feedback Labs, and our founding partners GlobalGiving and Keystone Accountability. Together, the grantees of FSI have harnessed the power of thousands of organizations worldwide to explore and develop good feedback practices.
As I reflect on the last five years, a key takeaway for me is the power of funding a loose but cohesive network of networks. Each of FSI’s grantees has a distinct identity and focus, but they all share a common goal, namely to ask 
“What do people need to make their lives better? Are we helping them get it? If not, what should we do differently?” 
All of these organizations tackle this mission with different perspectives and strategies, but together, their impact is amplified. 
  • The SSIR article discusses how L4G has reached over 200 US non-profits (and is planning to expand). 
  • Feedback Labs has about 600 participating organizations across geographies, and sectors, funding source, specialization and approach. Some are domestic, some are international. Some are funded by philanthropy, others by government, aid agencies, private donors, or impact investors. Some provide tech infrastructure or ratings and insight; others work on policy; and many work directly on the frontlines. 
  • GlobalGiving has thousands of organizations on its funding platform, each of which gets rewarded for learning about or carrying out feedback practices. 
  • Keystone has provided in-depth advisory assistance to over 205 organizations.
Some wonder whether these individual networks should focus on their own sectors and geographies. This would be a mistake. Research on innovation suggests that breakthroughs are more likely to emerge from connecting networks, rather than depending on lone geniuses (or organizations). Each network feeds the others with insights, ideas, participants, and resources that could not come from within each network alone. Keeping these networks interconnected is what allows feedback practices to spread and thrive.
There are a few notable areas where connecting networks makes us better and faster:
  1. Ideation and Insights – How do we frame problems and issues? What would a better world look like? What are the key drivers of the existing situation as well as possibilities for bringing about a fundamental change? Big breakthroughs often come from borrowing insights from adjacent sectors and “weak ties” (sometimes those adjacent sectors can even begin collaborating in unforeseen ways.)
  2. Experimentation and Learning – These processes can happen in parallel so we can learn more, faster. Organizations and networks can also get together to look at and interpret outcomes of experiments.
  3. Experience and Resources – People and organizations can pool experience, time, money, and energy – dramatically expanding the terrain that can be covered and accelerating the pace of learning.
  4. Courage and Perseverance – When considering innovative approaches, networked people and organizations are more likely than an individual to be willing to be brave enough to try something new. And when a promising idea does not pan out right away, or seems overwhelming to one person or organization, other people in the network can be inspired by the idea or get a second wind.
  5. Faster Adoption with Lower Risk – Many funding, training, and certification platforms have tens or hundreds of thousands of users, and when they adopt partners’ ideas, the network effect can result in a much faster spread of new norms. At the same time, an “all or nothing” decision can be risky for any individual organization’s operations or business model. In a network of networks, individual risk is reduced because organizations can try different pieces – or watch and wait for others to try – without incurring huge costs of implementation.
Our “connected network” approach has been key to the momentum we have achieved in the past five years. As a community, we have explored how feedback can be the “right, smart, and feasible” thing to do. 
In the coming five years, we will grapple with how it can become the “expected” or “only” thing to do – and how that can fundamentally shift the power toward those we exist to serve.
[Originally posted at Feedback Labs.]

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

Why Labstorms Work

As I hand over the reins to Britt Lake, our new CEO, I would like to reflect a bit on the amazing journey the Feedback Community has been on together over the last few years. Though I am stepping down as CEO of the Labs, I will remain heavily involved with the Community as a Senior Advisor to the Labs. I would love to hear your thoughts on any of these posts at feedback@feedbacklabs.org.
In this first post, I want to describe the “ingredients” that make LabStorms – collaborative brainstorming sessions we facilitate every two weeks for the feedback field – so successful. In the next post, I will talk about how decentralized, distributed collaboration has been key to the field’s rapid growth. In the third post, I will reflect on how feedback can enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion. 
Earlier this year, we convened our 100th LabStorm at Feedback Labs. 
LabStorms are collaborative brainstorming sessions at which members of the feedback community help each other solve challenges and push the boundaries of feedback practice. The 100th LabStorm was with RNW Media, a non-profit based in the Netherlands that helps give voice to marginalized youth in the Middle East and North Africa. The assembled group – about half attending in person and half online – helped RNW wrestle with three questions: How do we deal with imperfect data sets? How can we best manage the power dynamics inherent in our programs? And how can we be transparent about our data practices? A write up of the conversation is here.
Feedback Labs has now facilitated 108 LabStorms, including the most recent, which brought together 21 people from 14 organizations based in 10 cities to discuss the details of the Feedback Quiz, which is scheduled to go live in the coming weeks. All LabStorms are problem-driven: one organization presents a set of challenges, and all participants spend an hour trying to help the group address those challenges. 
Over the 35 years of my career, I have noticed that many important breakthroughs come from people and organizations that have only “weak links” – that is, they work in adjacent but not identical disciplines and geographies. Connecting people and groups across weak links has been key to the flourishing of the Feedback Community. For this reason, I love the fact that LabStorms span not only the US but the globe, both in terms of presenters and participants. 
The design of LabStorms is simple. Every two weeks, an organization presents a feedback-related initiative to about 10 peer organizations and asks for help on three questions or issues. 
Their peer organizations spend the next hour trying to help them. Since we operate under Chatham House rules, participants are generally candid about their challenges, as well as modest about their advice. Feedback Labs takes notes, discusses them with the presenting organization, and publishes them if the presenters think it will help them succeed. This atmosphere facilitates learning, a common sense of purpose (and often language), and even a common identity. 
In the 89th LabStorm, held last year, the presenter was Nurse Family Partnership(NFP), a US nonprofit. NFP nurses visit low-income first-time mothers during pregnancy and for two years following birth. NFP has already shown impressive results – for example, a ⅔ reduction in behavior and intellectual problems in children. But, like all LabStorm presenters, they are not content to rest on their laurels. They ask their clients “What do you need to make your life better? Are we helping you get it? If not, what can we do better or differently?”
LabStorm number 107 featured NEST, a non-profit based in the US that works globally to give voice to workers in small businesses and cottage industries worldwide. They got help from feedback pioneers from the Center for Employment Opportunities, LIFT, Keystone Accountability, GlobalGiving, Development Gateway and many others. In the process new professional connections were established – connections that often end in ongoing relationships and collaborations.
The generosity of time, attention, and candor participants give during LabStorms is not something we take it for granted. Our team obsesses over making sure that everything – from the video-conferencing technology to the temperature in the room – works well so that there are few distractions. Each time we set the stage with the main goal: We are here to help this organization, not to criticize it or to tout our own programs. We will lift each other up, and in the process, we will make our own work more powerful. We will spur each other on, and push the boundaries of the feedback field forward in ways that no one organization could accomplish on its own.
LabStorms are a key reason that the Feedback Labs network encompasses over 600 organizations that have attended our six Summits, shared ideas with each other online, and collaborated to drive the feedback field forward.
LabStorms create a space in which organizations feel assured that their peers will support their work without stealing their thunder. Collaborations, ideas, and approaches emerge. 
This is how real learning – and real progress – happens, and it has laid the foundation for the next phase of our work together. The stage has been set, and the best is yet to come.

[Cross-posted from Feedback Labs.]

Monday, March 25, 2019

100 Days of Gratitude, Day 49: Britt Lake

I am excited to tell you that Britt Lake has agreed to take the baton as the next CEO of Feedback Labs.

This announcement from our board has all the details, but let me reflect for a moment how far we have come - and why I am excited Britt will lead us into the next chapter. I will continue to support Britt, the FBL team, and the community on strategic initiatives in my new role as Senior Advisor.

Feedback Labs started in 2013 as a lunch group of innovative organizations and leaders exploring how they might ask three simple questions: “What do regular people want to make their lives better? Are we helping them get it? If not, what should we do differently?”

Thanks to early support and encouragement from the Rita Allen Foundation, Fund for Shared Insight, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the White House, Feedback Labs came into formal existence as a project co-hosted by Development Gateway and GlobalGiving. Other key founding organizations included Keystone Accountability, Ashoka, Center for Global Development, GroundTruth Initiative, Frontline SMS, Twaweza ni sisi, and Ushahidi.

Since then, our community has expanded to include international aid agencies, foundations, nonprofits, government agencies and impact investors. Over 500 organizations have now collaborated through over 110 Summits, Labstorms, pilots, and research projects exploring how good feedback practices can be the right, smart, feasible, powerful, and expected thing to do.  We have worked together in places including Houston, Boston, Austin, New York, Hartford, London, Chonqing, Addis Ababa and many more.

Financial supporters and collaborators have expanded to include Omidyar Network, the Packard Foundation, USAID, DFID, Siegel Family Endowment, World Bank, GIZ, Global Delivery Initiative, GlobalGiving, Accountable Now, Liquidnet for Good, Nurse-Family Partnership, the Connecticut Office of Early Childhood, and the Oxford Said Business School.

Building on this momentum, the Labs is now focusing on helping the feedback community develop the tools and incentives to make good feedback practices the “only” thing to do. In this context, we have begun collaborating intensively with an expanded core group that includes Guidestar (now Candid), Charity Navigator, Listen4Good, BBB Wise Giving Alliance, Lean Data Initiative, Steve Goodall (former CEO of JD Power), and Bridges Fund Management. At the 2018 Summit, this group discussed with the community a draft set of core feedback principles, and is working on additional common standards and tools for the field as a whole.

No one is more qualified to lead Feedback Labs at this juncture than Britt Lake, who has been involved since the early days of the Labs’s founding. As Chief Program Officer of GlobalGiving, she has pioneered scalable learning tools and incentives for thousands of organizations in 170 countries - experience and expertise that will now be available to our entire Feedback Labs community.

I have worked with Britt for nearly fifteen years, both in her role at GlobalGiving and in her role on the Feedback Labs board. I am thrilled that she will now be leading Feedback Labs into its next chapter.

Please join me in welcoming Britt. I am proud of what we have achieved together over the last five years, but the best is yet to come!

Dennis Whittle
Outgoing CEO and CoFounder
Feedback Labs

Monday, November 19, 2018

101 Podcasts Before the Crash

It seems like a new podcast is being released every day.  What started out as a trickle several years ago has become a flood.  The formerly niche medium has become big business, with the hippest companies convincing podcast hosts to read their advertisements in the first person ("Let me tell you why I love this mattress...").  Some podcasts have vaulted obscure people to fame, and others are hosted by lions of the "old" media who are trying to re-boot their careers or stave off irrelevance.

The frenzy makes me wonder whether we have reached "peak podcast."  Are podcasts a fad that will burn out like the CB craze of the 1970s - or will they be eclipsed like social media has done to blogs?

Just in case the podcast bubble is about to burst, my friend Nick Hamlin and I have put together a list of 101 podcasts that we hope someone - anyone - will create before the crash.  (Nick came up with the best ones).  Please take this as permission from us to steal the titles and start releasing episodes:


1.         Some call it a rut, I call it my groove
2.          I’m not sure if I have a point, but hear me out.
3.         The opposite of elitist
4.         Oh my God, would you listen to this?
5.         I like it, but my wife, she don’t like it
6.         I just got in from Lumberton, and I just don’t know.
7.         A fine mess.
8.         Tautologies and Profundities
9.         Up to a point
10.       Not too much, Not too little
11.       Mistakes were made, but challenges remain
12.       If you look at it from exactly the right angle…
13.       CouldBe
14.       MaybeMaybeNot
15.       ConfirmingMyBias
16.       A Sample of One
17.       Unbiased But With a Variance of Infinity (HT Jeff Hammer)
18.       Optimizing Around the Wrong Mean
19.       Embroidering on the Head of a Pin
20.       Much Ado About the Wrong Thing
21.       What Is The Role of Intelligence
22.       Things We Used to Think (and Might Again in the Future)
23.       What Do We Know, and How Do We Know It?
24.       How Should I Know?
25.       Maybe I am Wrong
26.       Fifty-one Percent
27.       Until Proven Wrong
28.       MostLikely.com
29.       OnTheMargin.com
30.       Not The View of the Author
31.       Stealing Home
32.       Causation, not Correlation
33.       Eating My Own Dog Food
34.       Less Quantity, More Quality
35.       Less quality, more quantity
36.       Mean Time to Moron
37.       Push to Failure
38.       It all boils down to this
39.       I heard you the first time
40.       It’s really hard to say
41.       Not too much, not too little
42.       It all depends on how you look at it
43.       All multi-verses considered
44.       How should I know?
45.       It’s not fair
46.       Why doesn’t everyone understand how great I am?
47.       Dear in the headlights
48.       All cowbell, all the time. 
49.       Life is a 2x2 Matrix
50.       I See Your Point but I am Not Convinced.
51.       Your Behavior Doesn’t Fit My Model so You Must Be Irrational
52.       100 Reasons THAT Won’t Work. 
53.       You Don’t Know What it’s Like
54.       Bêtise, mode d’emploi
55.       Charlatan or genius I not sure. 
56.       Ex and Not Ex. 
57.       So many podcast ideas so little time
58.       An n of pi
59.       Works or Grace
60.       Given that I’ve been wrong before, what’s the likelihood I am wrong now
61.       Let’s find the root cause and tell someone to do an intervention
62.       It’s my way or the driveway
63.       Where you sit depends on where you sit. 
64.       If you listen, I will mansplain it to you. 
65.       Since geniuses are absent-minded, and I am also absent-minded, I am a genius. 
66.       I will try to be brief but I have something profound to say so it may take a while and you may not understand it. 
67.       Long pauses, deep thought, and intelligence. 
68.       Economists without garters
69.       Wars we have not waged
70.       It’s easier to see the flaws in my argument if you don’t agree with me. 
71.       The Pod with No Name 
72.       What If?
73.       How much Type II Error Can We Handle?
74.       Neither Meat nor Motion
75.       Turtles all the way down
76.       NP is not so hard
78.       Figures and grounds
79.       "Ceci n'est pas une blog"
80.       Searching under the grid
81.       In God we trust.  All others, bring data (HT Deming)
82.       Live the questions now (HT Rilke)
83.       Cargo cult science(HT Feynman)
84.       Who's missing?
85.       Wake up and Fight (HT Guthrie)
86.       Giving away my legos
87.       A Garden of Type 0 Errors
88.       Linearity is a lie
89.       p=0.06
91.       How much are you willing to bet on that?
94.       You ain't gonna need that
95.       Bizarre cathedrals
96.       The readiness is all
97.       This one weird trick is a weird trick
98.       Good/Fast/Cheap: pick 3
99.       Updating my priors
100.    Common tragedies of the commons

Some of above are from this blog post



Saturday, September 15, 2018

100 Days of Gratitude, Day 48: Laura Callanan

We will shortly announce the next CEO of GlobalGiving.  It's an emotional time for Mari and me, since GlobalGiving has been our "baby" for so many years.  But just as kids mature and go away to school, GG is ready (coincidentally, at age 18) to go on without us. Though we will remain active on the board, we will not micro-manage or meddle.  Instead, we will watch with pride as the organization moves to the next stage of life, flourishing and growing into something more extraordinary than we can currently imagine.

The truth is that Mari and I were far from the only "parents" of GlobalGiving.  I wrote earlier on this blog about Donna Callejon, who joined us as the first "adult"member of the team in 2003.  Without Donna, GG might not even be alive to go to college.  I have also written about Dave Goldwyn, Tom Bird, and Fran Hauser, former board chairs who were instrumental in steering through the early stages of adolescence and into high school.  Many others that I have blogged about (and some I will in the future) also played key roles.

Laura Callanan
But today I want to talk about Laura Callanan.  Some years ago as I was stepping back from day-to-day involvement in GlobalGiving, Mari engaged McKinsey & Company to help consolidate lessons from the first 10 years and envision how GlobalGiving could deliver on its potential for real impact in its next decade and beyond.  Since I had worked with so many management and strategy consultant teams at the World Bank, I had - how to put this? - low expectations.

That all changed when Laura Callanan arrived at our office. From the first meeting, it was clear that this woman wasn't your typical clever but predictable consultant, who maintains an ironic distance while forcing everything into a pre-determined, standardized framework dictated by their firm.

Instead, Laura threw herself into the gestalt of what we were doing, becoming a sort of strategic optometrist for a team comprised of some people who were near sighted and some farsighted.  Laura would hold various mirrors and lens up to the management team and say "Does this make it clear? No?  How about this?  OK, now is this one clearer or fuzzier?" Then she would go away and grind some custom lenses, and come back for more trials.

One day, after months of this, she brought in some lenses and the team's reaction was "Wow - that is it! We can see both up close and far clearly now!" So we locked in those lenses, and they became the strategic framework that enabled GlobalGiving to grow to serve more than 20,000 projects in 170 countries - providing nearly $350 million from 800,000 individual donors and some of the world's most innovative companies and foundations.

Most consultants walk away from one job to the next.  But we clicked so well with Laura that we asked her to join the board - and within a short period the board elected her as chair.  This year, Laura oversaw the search and recruitment process for our new CEO.   As we wrestled with the large pool of exception candidates, she helped us keep our eye on the prize - i.e., the heart and soul as well as strategic promise of GlobalGiving.  I am confident that the result will speak for itself in the next chapter of our growth.

Laura could easily have rested on her laurels at McKinsey - or at Rockefeller Foundation or the National Endowment for the Arts, where she held senior roles.  Her status would have been high, and the work (though stressful) would have been predictable, remunerative, and low-risk.  But here's the thing: Laura has guts and vision, too:  A couple of years ago, she decided to leave that security behind and become an entrepreneur herself, launching Upstart Co-Lab - an initiative to unleash a whole new way to invest in creativity and artists as a means to spur innovation and new solutions to the world's most pressing problems.

Upstart has already made a splash, and I have no doubt it will reach maturity in due course and go off to college itself.  I hope to play a small role in supporting her to make that happen.

Friday, June 22, 2018

Monday, June 18, 2018

Do You Know the Next GlobalGiving CEO?

Mari Kuraishi announced recently that she will be stepping down as chief executive of GlobalGiving, where she has spent the last 18 years of her career. This is almost as emotional for me as it is for her. Not only was I her co-founder when we launched GlobalGiving; we also got married three years later.

Why did we decide to leave our high-flying jobs at the World Bank to start GlobalGiving? The Harvard Business Review has a good piece that gives lots of good background, but it all boiled down to this: Mari and I were unwittingly thrown together into a situation where we (accidentally) gained a couple of insights about a possible new way to fund development projects, and we said to each other“What the heck – life is short; let’s go for it.”

And so we launched what became the world’s first global crowdfunding platform. We weren’t exactly sure what to call it at first, because the word “crowdfunding” had not even appeared in print. And we had no experience doing a startup or running a tech-based platform (the web itself was barely a decade old). Yet we decided to go for it, and though the first few years were humbling, GlobalGiving gradually got traction, and today it has helped nearly 20,000 community-based projects in 170 countries raise hundreds of millions of dollars.

GlobalGiving allows any bona fide community organization in the world to post a project designed to make their world a better place. There’s no guarantee the project will be funded, but the GlobalGiving breakthrough was providing a platform for them to have their voice heard.

An unexpected side-benefit has been to allow donors of all sizes to have their voices heard as well – no longer do small (or even large) donors need a fully staffed foundation to due diligence, make fast, secure disbursements, and monitor progress on projects almost anywhere in the world. Hundreds of thousands of individual donors, as well as many leading companies and foundations now use the platform.

Along the way, GlobalGiving has had to innovate in many dimensions, some of which are radical but "under the hood” efficiencies and some of which are user-facing (the ability to get detailed reports and provide feedback across the world).

A number of these innovations will provide the foundation for the next leader to take GlobalGiving to $1 billion and beyond – they already inspired the creation of Feedback Labs, and they may even create the kernel of a new operating system for aid and philanthropy.

As I look back, three things leap out as me as key ingredients of GlobalGiving’s success:

First, put the people we seek to serve front and center of what we do. This seems like common sense, but it was radical at the time, and we built GlobalGiving ground-up to let the people themselves have the primary voice in what happens in their communities.

Second, a spectacular team is the secret sauce to breakthroughs. We have faced many obstacles along the way, and it is usually the team rather than the founders who not only solve problems but have radical insights about new innovations.

Third, it’s all about the network – not just the organization. GlobalGiving can serve so many people in so many countries so effectively because of the relationships it has built with thousands of organizations around the world.

Whoever is lucky enough to become the next CEO of GlobalGiving will inherit an awesome team, a tremendous network, a fabulous board, and all the ingredients required for another fundamental innovation in the aid and philanthropy world. Someone who merely wants to be a steward need not apply. GlobalGiving is looking for a high-flyer who says to herself or himself: “What the heck – life is short; I am going for it.”

UPDATE: We have found a great new CEO for the next chapter of GlobalGiving!