 Thank you for joining us for another wonderful national broadcast of the non-profit show. We have Brian Greenwald back and we're thrilled to have you joining us again, Brian. Today's conversation, which is why I said this brings us to our episode all about tech equity and we're going to really go deep into that conversation. We like to start by extending our sincerest gratitude to all of our presenting sponsors. We are so extremely grateful to have your commitment to these shows but to the sector at large. So please, if you have not checked out our presenting sponsors, make sure you go online, do a quick Google search. They will pop up. They are in every parts of the world and really leaning in and supporting you in your mission. So please do check out our presenting sponsors. We are so grateful to have their ongoing support. And thank you to Julia Patrick, the CEO of the American Nonprofit Academy. She allows me to play with her in my, you know, every day here as the co-host. So I'm so grateful to have the opportunity to be here again. Jarrett Ransom, that's me, the non-profit nerd CEO of the Raven Group. So our conversation as I had shared, we have Brian Greenwald back. Brian is the VP of business development at Generate Impact and look at here, you're also on our backdrop. So thank you so much. Yeah, it's a thrill to be supporting the non-profit show. I think it's a wonderful thing. As I mentioned to Julie, I think it's filling a very important gap in the industry and it's a real privilege to be a part of it. Thank you. You know, we have had such interesting conversations you and I offline about all things tech and you come at life from a really different perspective because you're kind of like a yenta in some ways of trying to help people figure out what's going to be a good match, what's going to be a good fit, as opposed to just selling your own product, right? And so you have a bunch of different services and all of these pieces that help an organization navigate technology. And Jarrett and I from day one, and we lived this with the non-profit show, you know, we have seen a dearth in the acceptance and use of technology from the non-profit sector. But now what Jarrett and I have been talking about and kind of seeing is we think that there's more of this issue called tech equity. And so that's kind of what we wanted to talk to you about and get your feelings on it because we think that the non-profits that had a better grip on technology could weather the pandemic better. I don't know if you think that's accurate or not. Well, I think it's, you know, I think the pandemic has laid bare the reality that we are all technology workers now. You know, it doesn't matter what your job is, you're a technology worker, and that shouldn't be saying, well, you know, I need to know how to code an application or I need to know how to be an IT administrator. It's that your job depends on your ability to leverage technology. Now, really well-designed technology is like a transparent window, and you're focused on what you're doing with that technology and really poorly, you know, leverage technology I would consider like a garage door. Like you can hear that there's stuff happening on the other side with the kids playing basketball, but you can't see a lick of what's going on. And so it all starts with the idea that technology is now a basic investment, not a cost, but investment in human capital. And that's where the conversation needs to start. So I'd like to take it down like to the first rung, right? Like what is tech equity? So when we hear this, because when I think of equity, right, like I'm all into the Jedi work, right? The justice, the equity, the diversity, the inclusion, and now we're putting tech in front of equity or inequity. Can you just like go to the very basics of like, what is tech equity? Like kind of a definition? Yeah, I mean, I think that it's kind of an emerging term. And you know, you could reframe it as tech readiness. But if you think about it as an issue of enablement, right? So if, and I like to use analogies, right? So if you're a kid who suddenly had to go to school from home and you don't have internet, and you don't have a device, and you know, you are at a disadvantage. So now ladder that up to a worker in a nonprofit who's trying to now at a distance, but now in talking about adding force to their work and removing friction from their work. Those tools enable you to do your job. And so thinking of equity as if you don't have those tools, or if those tools are seen as a cost in your organization, your organization as a disadvantage, but then you as a professional are at a disadvantage to do your work. And so technology can level the playing field. It can level playing field across countries can level play playing field across demographics. But it also within an organization, it can level the playing field of each person being able to be the best at what they do in their work environment. And that directly leads to mission outcomes. Right. You know, Brian, one of the things you said earlier was we are all working in a technology based something, right? Like everything is technology involved. I was thinking, you know, I went through and I'm going to I'm going to call myself out, but I went to McDonald's and I was in the drive through. And the the drinks are all like done by technology now. It's like this conveyor belt. And I was blown away and I could have sat there probably for another 30 minutes just watching the assembly line of the fountain drinks and how all of that is now programmed into technology. It's interesting. I just watched the movie The Founder, which is about Ray Cross. Yes. And so thinking about where it started, it started out with the original McDonald's brothers going out to a tennis court with chalk and figuring out a human system of how all of these people are going to be able to work together. And they were able to create a very efficient system that sort of changed the paradigm of how food is delivered. So that is a really perfect analogy of how that's evolved by thinking of technology as unleashing human potential. Right. And so what you have there is that that investment, which probably had a pretty significant upfront investment in figuring out how you could use technology to deliver drinks in terms of fundraising, thinking of it in terms of program delivery, thinking of it in terms of data analysis to be able to measure impact and measure productivity and measure engagement and how that unleashes the ability to do better things, to do more things with less people, more fulfilled people and more effective people. So thinking about the value chain of technology in nonprofit organizations as efficiency, effectiveness and engagement, technology as a force additive, as an accelerator, as an enabler for human potential. And that is why it's an investment and not a cost. I love that. I just want to bottle that clip up and just like make that go viral. It's true. And you know, I love what you said and I totally, you know, I'm waving that banner right along with you. But I want to ask this question and this in some ways is based on my own sense with a conversation I had with you. And that is, how do we know if we are challenged with our technologies if we don't even have the right attitudes? I'm not just saying, you know, a laptop that's not seven to nine years old. I'm saying just like, how do we know? Yeah, I think that there's there's signs of that in all levels of the organization. So in some of those signs, I really thought about this after our last conversation in thinking about like, what are those sort of like signs that, yep, you're tech challenged. So if your board is, you know, if you don't have someone on the board who recognizes technology as investment in human capital because they came from the trenches and they lived through the pain, or someone who has that expertise and has a technology vision and can articulate it and can express as one of the pillars of growth of entrepreneurial growth of a nonprofit is that we must invest technology to compete for donor dollars to deliver mission in the right way to the right people. Now at the line level, it's do these organ to those line line level management? Are they advocating for that technology? Are they saying, well, what's in it for me? Or that's the way we've always done it. If you kind of hear that kind of language or we can't afford it because it's a cost. That's a signal there. Now at the individual contributor level, if you're struggling with adoption, because people don't understand what's in it for them, or if people are spending a lot of time wrestling with the technology, which is not their job, right? And frustrated with it. If you have interdepartmental silos where information sharing is not happening and there's lots of process friction, or if you have people just sort of figure it out yourself, yeah, we don't have the staff to provide you support, just figure it out or find that work around to make it happen, the kind of kluji sort of, I made it work, but it's not really idea or all that water carrying of, you know, all that manual work that happens when you don't have an integrated modern technology stack. Those are some serious signs that your technology challenged and that things need to change. So I'm thinking, and this is a total curve ball, so get ready here, Brian. We're in this, I know, we're in this great resignation. We talk often about how, you know, now is the time to negotiate in your position or to negotiate in that next, you know, career position, maybe with another organization. How might we ask the question to our potential employer to find out if they're tech challenged? Because I'm thinking now we have, you know, individuals moving into other organizations. I want to make sure that I am, I have access to the systems, the training, the technology necessary to be successful. So I told you, this is a curve ball. How do we bring this up in the conversation to know before we even accept a job, if they are set up in, you know, a tech positive way? Yeah, so I think it's like the direct say, can you tell me about your investment in technology? What kind of support does staff have on a day-to-day basis? What kind of tools are going to be provided to me? Can you show me, can you fill me in on how processing technology work together? How teams work together? How do we manage data? You know, what's at my disposal to be good at my job? The job that you're asking me to do. You know, there has been, you know, in certain CRMs, I've seen testimonials where like I refuse to take that job unless I have this CRM because I can't do what I'm being asked to do without it. That's right. And so I think just like you're negotiating for salary or just like you're sort of trying to understand what's being asked for you of you beyond the job description. I think being really direct and saying like, I really need to know, I'd like to know what tools are going to be at my disposal, what support is going to be at my disposal. Tell me about your IT team. And if they're like, yeah, we have this one person who's full-time who does it in addition to, you know, email campaigns, then that's a warning sign. Yeah. Well, thank you for that. You know, I love that question, Jared. And it makes me think of a question that came in to our Friday ask and answer. And somebody said that they, their company issued really old laptops, and it was really impeding their job. They weren't contemplating spending their own money and going out and buying a new laptop just for that work, because they realized that's what they needed, but their organization wasn't getting it. And the question to us was, how do I navigate this on the interpersonal relationship with my spouse? Because they're like, what the hell? You know, we're not going to spend $1,500 on this. You know, the nonprofit needs to do that. But I think that's a common situation. Well, you know, we've talked about this before, the fact that I believe in a benevolence economy, which is where the world needs to head, is that for profits need to start acting more like nonprofits, right? They need to be about, you know, investments and well-being fulfillment as much as shareholder, you know, profits. But nonprofits need to act a little bit more like for-profit businesses. And so along with, yeah, pay equity, right? So there's different kinds of equity. So just because you have a heart-centered person, you decided to focus on improving the lives of everyday people, doesn't mean that you should have to sacrifice on salary. Doesn't mean that you should have to sacrifice on tools to do your job well. And so I think it's kind of the employment contract, right? So the organization needs to recognize that if they don't make these investments, they're going to have a lot of turnover. They're going to have a lot of people burning out. They're not going to find the best talent. And that is a challenge, understanding that it's donor dollars that are funding these things and grants that are funding these things. But what is the actual cost of not doing these things? You're not going to be able to raise as much money. You're not going to be able to deliver as much services. You're not going to have the talent that's going to have the kind of impact that you want to have. And so again, I think it falls back to this fundamental understanding of investment. And in my mind, in no uncertain terms, should an employee of a nonprofit be pulling money out of their own pocket to get the tools to do their job. It's not a fair ask. And I think that that's a sign that maybe you should be looking for a more forward-thinking organization to work for. Yeah. Thank you so much. That all of that, again, is phenomenal because we do get that question quite a bit, you know, is how much money should the organization set aside or line item for various opportunities? A big one is the, you know, professional development, but also this, you know, systems and technology and do we have what we need to be successful? And so that's that's a valid question. And I would imagine that many of you that may be watching today's show either live or recording, as you're looking to, you know, negotiate your current position or your next position, that technology and the tech equity is a really big topic. I know I just love that you brought that up, Jared, from the get-go. Like as you are looking at this, and I would add maybe as you're going towards, you know, a review or, you know, re-evaluating where things are within your unit or your team, that needs to be a conversation as well. And, you know, from the organization's perspective, if you're not giving your employees the tools that they need to be effective, you then now have an underutilized resource. And so that is a cost, is a hidden cost, and it, but it's calculatable, right? When you're considering the ROI of that investment and making that mind shift to technology is table stakes. It's, it's non-negotiable that people need to have the right tools to do their job effectively. Wonderful. I love it. Okay, we did not have to blend. I know, I'm just like, hmm, yeah, I think this is a powerful discussion to have that we need to revisit it. And we don't have a lot of time, but part of the things that I wanted to ask you about, that DevTail into this is, is human-centered design. We've had you on a couple times, I've been speaking with you offline, and you do bring this up. And I've got a witness, I kind of like, oh yeah, I know what that is, and how this all works. But I don't think I really do. So I'd love for you to take some time, and I realize that this is a much bigger concept. But could you kind of tag us into that discussion? Absolutely. So, so let's characterize it through the lens of the conversation that we've had so far, right? All of these things, it's really easy for me to say, well, you know, tools are non-negotiable. You know, we need to think this way. But it doesn't happen automatically, right? So actually, human-centered design is saying it all starts with human capital. It all starts with people. And when people come into these complex issues, there's going to be lots of different vantage points. There's going to be lots of different experiences and insights that while they might not align and they might create, you know, organizational friction and organizational dysfunction, if just sort of left to the power structure, the hierarchy of the organization that exists today, what human-centered design practices can do is, first of all, create a level playing field. So when you're doing a human-centered design workshop or going through a human-centered design process, sometimes called design sprints, you know, there's lots of different terms. The bigger concept is design thinking, which is something much bigger than that. What you're doing is you're entering into a co-creation process with everyone who has a stake in the outcome. Now, what kind of challenges are really suited for human-centered design? It's where the answer is not obvious. It's not really meant for like sort of very straightforward problems that have very straightforward logical answers. It's where maybe you don't have enough information or maybe it's a really complex problem that feels chicken and egg and it's not going to be straightforward or where there's a lot of emotions around it or whether there's a lot of different stakeholders that have very different needs or whether innovation is really important. So what you do in a facilitated human-centered design process is you bring all of those voices together and you actually in an activity-based and a co-creation-based type of workshop activity, you're basically serving tons, surfacing tons and tons of insights and then you're doing sort of ideation and prototyping and refinement to come to a solution where you're actually driving towards divergent thinking. So convergent thinking is logically, rationally, this goes with this. Everybody knows that, so let's do that. But oftentimes that doesn't create innovation, but things that don't naturally fit together when you try to figure out ways to make them fit. That tension actually is where innovation happens. That's where new ideas emerge. And then the side benefit of doing a human-centered design process is everyone who needs to buy into that solution participated in the development of that solution. And so because everyone has skin in the game, there's much more a chance for commitment. It's not about consensus. So I would say if you really boil it down, consensus should never be the goal. Commitment should be the goal. But the only way that commitment happened is everyone who is impacted by the change participates in developing that change, even if their ideas don't get adopted. But human learning theory and team building and change management theory really says that if people get a chance to use their voice, they're much more willing to adopt the committed solution, even if their idea wasn't used. So it's a really wonderful way. And it's great for technology because in technology, there's so much complexity and there's so many different preferences and voices. And it's scary and this kind of takes that away. And then finally, since I'm a really long talker, it kind of breaks the 80-20 rule of meetings where 20% of the people occupy 80% of the time because it's activity based. Everyone is on a level playing field. Everyone's voice. That introvert in the corner sometimes has the most important thing to say. But because I'm in the meeting and I talk so much, they never get that chance. So this is a way to actually create some cohesion in your culture as well. Okay, but how do you tag this into the concept of tech equity? Because it seems to me like, you know, people are making the decision, okay, everybody, this is the technology you're going to use. It never seems like we come to the table as a group and figure out or voice what we need. Because technology is one of those, you don't know what you don't know. And so how do we... Yeah, absolutely. That's again, where... And another way of sending human-centered technology, which is something we talk about a lot, is technology lasts. So you start with understanding what are the challenges of the people. And you focus on sort of with technology not being a participating topic, but what are we trying to accomplish? Where are our challenges? Where are our friction points? Where do we need to add force? Where's our inter-departmental or inter-colleague misalignment? Get a really clear understanding about that. Then it's like, how can we build low fidelity analog processes that not considering technology that we know based on our culture and the things we need to achieve are going to really work for us? What's the business needs? What's the business gaps? What's the skills gaps? What's the process gaps? What are we lacking? And then once you really have that lens, then and only then should you look at technology and say, okay, you can make an informed choice about what technology is going to actually meet your human needs. And that is the shift. We deal with it all the time where people want to look at the other end of the line. Let's pick a tool and then figure out and then just tell the staff, this is what we're using, figure it out or even we're going to do the adoption, you know, training and stuff like that. But they are on the outside of that process. Adoption is not going to be what you think it's going to be. And oftentimes, because you didn't do that exploration, you're not even sometimes solving the right problem. Yeah. And they certainly won't be committed to using it or being successful in that. I think the human center design, what you described is what I refer to as design thinking. Is that is that a synonym? Is that the same? Yes. Design thinking is a bigger topic because it involves ethnographic research and massive amounts of data collection. Human center design is really where you can kind of focus in on the human element. But design thinking is something even bigger. I would really recommend checking out Jean Ledka, who is at Darden University here in Charlottesville at the University of Virginia, who is an absolute pioneer in applying design thinking and human center design to business. She really innovated in that and she has courses and there's some great books out there too that perhaps, you know, we can share with viewers. But it's a very effective and especially in non-profits where people are heart centered and people are more willing to sort of have those conversations and do things like draw a picture. It can be a very effective tactic. Yeah. And I love it. You know, it's really about when I like to say is, you know, okay, why are you not successful? What would you need to be successful? And oftentimes, what I've noticed, Brian, and maybe you're the same, people come from a place of negative, right? I can't do this because I don't have fill in the blank. So I like to start with what don't you have? Why are you not being able, you know, to be successful? Okay, here's what you don't have. So what I'm hearing you say is, right, if you had something that could solve your problem for XYZ, ABC, is that something that would help you in your everyday life, right? And they're like, yes, that's what I've been asking for, right? And so people support that in which they help create. That's correct. And I think you I'm so glad that you raised that point because every human center design process and design thinking process starts with something called a how might we statement. That's right. And so you don't describe things as a problem. Or as you say, how might we improve our fundraising operation? How might we deliver more services to our clients? How might we, you know, enable whatever it is your goal is. And so you always start with building. And the other thing is, it's not a traditional brainstorming. There's no editorializing as you're going through the process. It's, you know, you even have house rules like you shouldn't use the word but you use the word yes and because the idea is to build on each other's ideas. And of course, you'll get to a refinement stage. But if you leave it wide open at the beginning, you're going to get the biggest opportunity to again, innovate and come up with something that everyone can commit to. There's a great book that I would highly recommend called five dysfunctions of a team, which talks about the difference between consensus and commitment and how commitment is so much more valuable than consensus. And human center design processes help you drive to commitment. Love it. Wow, I'm so excited because these are the types of discussions that I love. I'm, I really, really appreciate you saying some things that kind of clicked for me. And with so many of the questions that we get, different ways of looking at it, I think it's just been great. I think we are going to have some amazing conversations with you, Brian, really exciting to have generate impact with us. Here's Brian's information generate impact.com. Brian is beautiful writer has some blog pieces on within the website that I think is going to be growing and he'd be seeing more thought leadership from him on that. And he's going to really be somebody that we lean on for things tech, but in a different way, not just which button to hit, you know, but literally why are we hitting those buttons. So really exciting to, yeah, really exciting to have this conversation. We're just so appreciative that you would spend time with us. If we haven't met, I'm Julia Patrick, CEO of the American nonprofit Academy. I've been joined by my trusty sidekick, the nonprofit nerd herself, Jared Ransom, CEO of the Raven group. Again, are presenting sponsors. It's so amazing to me, Jared. When I look at our sponsor board, the number of these organizations that have really navigated towards technology, how they're representing themselves, how they're communicating themselves and even offering services. Right. Well, and Brian, as you said, like we all have a technology based service, you know, each and every one of us are truly involved in delivering something to do with technology. So thanks for bringing that to our attention as well. Yeah, it's been great to be here. Yeah, it changes of the way that you think about something and look at the future for me. I mean, it's really an amazing, amazing thing. So I'm again, to our sponsors, we thank you and we are so appreciative of your support of the nonprofit show. Hey, another great episode tomorrow. We will have yet another wonderful guest on. And as we end today, we want to remind everyone to stay well so you can do well. We'll see you back here tomorrow, everyone.