Search this site

Section 4 Storms Chapter 20 Wrestling with trolls Opponents will always push back — through discrediting, delaying, dividing, or even attempting to destroy. Anticipating their tactics lets you stay ahead. By reframing debates, sidestepping traps, or adapting your Near Star, you can turn their strength against them and protect your campaign’s momentum. Use an opponent’s strength against them to minimize harm. When opponents attack or push back, this can feel like the most dangerous challenge of all. Every action has a counteraction. Anticipate your opponent’s moves to stay ahead. Understanding your opponent’s perspective and likely strategies helps you plan better and avoid surprises, making your campaign more effective. We have adapted approaches from the Commons Library for this chapter. Prepare for disinformation and misinformation Disinformation (deliberate sharing of lies) and misinformation (the sharing of rumors) tend to be types of developmental storm, but can turn into situational and existential threats. The best ways to prepare for this are: Risk management Build resilience in advance. Use the other tools in this Section to predict and rehearse what you would do Assess the risks for severity and impact of any possible disinformation and misinformation campaign Prepare approaches and messages to “prebunk” and mitigate disinformation and test them out using the Red Team tool in this Section Monitoring and Reporting Monitor social media daily e.g. by gathering links to ads being run by certain types of accounts Flag content on social media channels as disinformation Responding Seed alternative narratives (see Chapter 10): Use this as an opportunity to frame the (counter) narrative you want to take hold Frame your facts well (see Section 3: Navigation). Facts alone will not stop the storm Act swiftly and carefully. A hasty reaction could make the situation worse Act efficiently. One briefing that shows how and why the disinformation or misinformation is being spread can be referred back to. Respond directly and calmly to the source (unless you suspect this to be a fake social media account) to clarify Use multiple channels where the disinformation originated and which your audiences frequent. Troubleshooting Consider audience needs (see Chapter 11) and values (Chapter 14). Facts are not always enough. Many internet users are unwilling to engage with fact checkers Reach out via trusted messengers (see Chapter 13) and communities (Chapter 12). Personal preferences and social media algorithms that serve up content to reinforce certain views can prevent your message reaching an audience Show compassion: False and misleading information causes stress and pain for people, particularly at times of crisis. Showing intersectional compassion through your work and communications is a universal way to sidestep divisive rhetoric, show genuine support for people, and build trust. “The weakness of the enemy makes our strength” Cherokee proverb Charge through developmental storms In a developmental storm, an opponent might plant the seeds of a counter narrative to yours and: Discredit: Undermine your credibility through the media or public hearings, painting your group as unreasonable or radical Discount: Minimize the problem's importance or question your legitimacy. For example, they might call your group extremist or downplay the issue's severity Deflect: Shift attention to side issues or pass responsibility to another group. For example, if you demand a hazardous waste cleanup, they might talk about an unrelated environmental bill Deceive: Spread disinformation (deliberately), or misinformation (unintentionally) Mislead you into thinking meaningful action is happening when it is not. This includes offering fake solutions or setting up misleading meetings These may hinder your progress towards your goals and Near Star. The best way to deal with these is generally to charge: Frame the debate on your terms Publicise the tactics your opponent is taking Maintain your narrative Use trusted messengers to spread your narrative Avoid engaging directly with trolls ; instead, leverage supporters to use their weight against them and expose their inconsistencies Sidestep situational storms In a situational storm, an opponent might: Delay: Pretend to address the issue without actually doing anything, hoping to wear you out and make you lose momentum Divide: Create division within your group or between your group and the community. They might try to dox (publish private information about you), attack (to disable a website or other systems or infrastructure) separate moderate members from more militant ones Dulcify: Soothe or pacify by offering small concessions or benefits, diverting attention from the long-term issues Deny: Refuse to acknowledge the problem or your proposed solution. They might claim there's no problem or it is not significant enough - or launch a lawsuit against you Deal: Offer to work with you to find a mutually acceptable solution. However, be cautious of compromises that do not provide real value This kind of storm threatens your Near Star. The best way to deal with these is to sidestep and look at how you can use the situation to your advantage. You could: Consider your opponent’s psychology: You may do better by seeking a solution or partnership with them rather opposition Create illusion: Vary your tactics to keep them guessing. Trick your opponents into misjudging your plans, e.g. by making them think you have more resources or planned actions. This spreads their focus and weakens their response Seek support or solidarity Respond through allies or messengers that your audiences trust Raise funds for legal defense Know when to negotiate: Negotiation means settling a dispute through compromise, not surrender. Probing with certain tactics can reveal if negotiation is possible. Be careful not to propose talks too soon, as this might be seen as weakness. Compromise carefully. Giving up too quickly can cost you, while being too rigid can end talks. Understanding the political, economic, and social context helps in making wise decisions Use their weight against them: Nonviolence exposes your opponents’ harsh responses and can sway public sympathy. This works by affecting three groups: Uncommitted third parties: Witnessing repression of peaceful activists moves uninvolved people to support Opponent’s supporters: Violence against peaceful protestors can create dissent within the opponent’s group General grievance group: Enduring repression strengthens the resolve of activists Adjust your immediate goals or Near Star (in some situations) Adapt to existential storms In an existential storm, an opponent might try to: Destroy: Use legal or economic means to destabilize, bankrupt or eliminate your group through legal actions or law changes to restrict civil society space. This might include threats of lawsuits or actual legal action to intimidate you In such critical situations it is crucial to adapt. Consider alternative strategies to advance to your overarching goal or Guiding Star including: Change your Near Star Concentrate your strength against the opponent’s weakness: Use indirect approaches. Create the appearance of dispersed forces to cause the opponent to spread out, making your concentrated efforts more effective. Avoid giving your opponent time to concentrate their forces against you or build belief that they are winning Redirect or share resources with other activists or organizations Adjust your focus or explore new approaches By using these strategies it is possible to “downgrade” a storm from an existential threat to a situational or developmental obstacle. Read more: Dealing with the Opposition paper https://commonslibrary.org/disinformation-101/ More detail and case studies: https://commonslibrary.org/how-to-dealing-with-disinformation/ Civil society organization vs attacks cheatsheet: https://www.metgroup.com.mx/civilstory/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/SCO-attacks-cheatsheet.pdf STORY Dealing With A Government Crackdown, India An existential storm hit an environmental organization (names withheld for protection) in India - a series of coordinated direct attacks on their choice to campaign against massive fossil fuel companies, who were in regular communications with government authorities. The storm included a long list of hostile tactics: Discredit: An organized raid on the organization’s offices one regular working Monday by government officials who accused the organization of financial money laundering Destroy: Locked organization bank accounts so that salaries, rents and even electricity bills were not allowed to be paid Deceive: Fake media stories (disinformation) circulated among different local and national media to crackdown on the organization and question their legitimacy and credibility Destroy: Threats of jail sentences without bail issued to the organization leadership Discredit and Destroy: Private raids of the houses of elderly parents of campaigners and board members Although this storm disrupted the work of the organization, its campaigners were able to take very slow, strategic, steps to emerge from the crisis. This enabled them to revert to doing their work, but in different forms. First the crisis management team focused on a few things: Framed the debate internally on their terms: They maintained transparency within the team to avoid creating any internal divisions, so they could remain united. Considered their opponents’ psychology: A delay tactic was employed to give time to the authorities to tire out and eventually shift their focus to other things. Avoided engaging directly: They maintained their narratives but did not get caught up in a media battle. Instead they focused on a legal strategy that would prove them to be legitimate in their work and the allegations leveled against them to be false. Changed their Near Star and Adjusted their focus: of winning the ongoing campaigns was shifted to keeping the organization functioning and having the resources to fight the legal battle. Redirected resources: Due to the bank account blockades bankruptcy was unavoidable so the teams had to be dismantled but with application of foresight, maintaining transparency, it was done smoothly avoiding all possible disruptions. A small team of less than 10 people was maintained along with lawyers to continue the legal cases. Shared intelligence with others: Meanwhile the original campaigns were led by partners and allies so that they didn’t lose momentum while this organization dealt with the crisis in hand. Created illusion: As a tactic, the offices were closed down or shrunk to give an illusion of success to their detractors, and to remove the risks of further raids and direct attacks. The delay tactic allowed the campaign narrative to persist, while also helping the organization to win the legal case and finally rebuild itself back to its full capacity. While many organizations were devastated in face of similar attacks, foresight, resilience and smart strategic methods to wrestle with the trolls helped this organization to survive, thrive and reinvest itself. STORY The Indigenous Land Rights Movement, Philippines State and corporate actors including large-scale mining operations had been encroaching on ancestral lands in the Philippines. The Indigenous Land Rights Movement in the Philippines, particularly among the Lumad people in Mindanao, had three objectives: Resist displacement by both state and corporate actors Protect Indigenous lands from exploitation Secure legal recognition of Indigenous land rights The movement negotiated all three types of storm caused by these opponents: Developmental Storm Discredit: Opponents, including some government officials and corporate interests, sought to undermine the credibility of the indigenous groups by portraying them as obstructive or radical The movement framed the debate on their terms , and used their narrative around human rights and environmental justice The movement used trusted messengers among media and international support to highlight their legitimate claims Discount: Opponents tried to minimize the importance of the land rights issue, with claims that the land was of little economic value or that Indigenous claims were exaggerated. The movement maintained its narrative by consistently presenting evidence of the cultural, ecological, and legal significance of their land Deflect: To divert attention, opponents sometimes focused on unrelated issues, such as alleged corruption or infighting within the movement The activists avoided engaging directly, and maintained a clear focus on their core issues and publicizing any attempts to shift the narrative away from the land rights at stake Deceive: Opponents proposed false solutions or misleading meetings to pacify the activists without addressing their core concerns The movement publicised the tactics that the opponent was taking , stayed vigilant, fact-checked the offers, and demanded genuine engagement rather than token gestures Situational Storm Delay: Government agencies and corporations sometimes made symbolic promises of consultations or negotiations while continuing with their projects The movement adapted by using these delays to build broader alliances and secure additional support from both national and international bodies Divide: Opponents tried to create divisions within the indigenous groups or between them and local communities The movement worked to foster unity and solidarity through grassroots organizing and outreach to other affected communities Dulcify: Opponents occasionally offered small concessions to appease the activists while continuing harmful activities The movement avoided being pacified by focusing on long-term goals and maintaining pressure on policymakers Deny: Opponents often tried to deny the existence or significance of indigenous land rights. The movement used the weight of opponents against them - it used legal frameworks and international human rights standards to affirm its claims and mobilize support Existential Storm Destroy: Opponents used severe repression on the movement, including violent attacks and legal actions against activists. The movement prioritized resilience as its Near Star , which helped it to: Concentrate its strength on the opponents’ weakness through high-impact legal cases Share resources with international human rights organizations who also took action Create the appearance of dispersed forces : Highlight the severity of the repression, thus galvanizing global support The Indigenous Land Rights Movement in the Philippines achieved several successes including: Increased recognition of indigenous land rights in some areas. Heightened international awareness of the issues faced by the Lumad people. Despite ongoing challenges and repression, the movement's strategic responses helped mitigate some of the impacts of the various storms they encountered, demonstrating resilience and adaptability in the face of multifaceted opposition. Further reading: https://populationandsecurity.com/lumads-in-the-philippians-an-enduring-fight-for-indigenous-rights/ ; see also https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/us-land-life ; and https://youtu.be/LwQpFmcR2eY TOOL Simulation & Preventation Review your Storm Chart. In a group, discuss the most likely crises or opportunities that might arise because of your opponents’ actions against you or others. Stick these most likely scenarios on the storm chart. Which of the “D” strategies is it similar to? Consider the four strategy types and the example responses from the storm chart. Which could you take? What might the consequences, new challenges or opportunities that could arise in the system as a result? Agree and write up your proactive plan to diffuse opponents’ pressure in advance, and reactive plan to respond to opponents’ pressure. Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 2 Equilibrium Chapter 8 Force begets resistance Systems resist change — but resistance can be turned into momentum. This chapter explores how to identify and work with “shooting stars”: disruptive forces and unexpected allies that can shift a system’s direction. There are resistant forces in every system that you can work with. The Lakota proverb “Force begets resistance” can inspire hope - and familiar frustrations - in any campaigner. When we look around we see that we are not alone in seeking change. Other activists, groups and alliances are also pursuing goals, which may align with or conflict with ours. When you act, expect reactions. At every level of the system, there will be actual, potential, or emergent resistance by people and organizations with varying degrees of success. We call these shooting stars - they can be destructive, changing the orbit and structure of planets, moons and other stars - but in many cultures, seeing one represents good luck and hope. With a systems change perspective, we recognize the important opportunity for productive disruption that might come from changing patterns of how interactions are happening, where information flows, and who is making decisions. Some of the most impactful campaigns have come from unexpected alliances across movements, when diverse actors join forces to create new shared narratives. Opponents’ apparent successes or overreactions can create important, unexpected opportunities. “Movements are born of critical connections rather than critical mass.” Grace Lee Boggs, American feminist activist Some example shooting stars which campaigns have successfully collaborated with include: Direct action organizations Schoolteachers Doctors and nurses Unions Landless movements LGBTQI+ organizations Scientists Celebrities Transport workers Startup technology businesses Activist investors (investors who proactively seek to change how companies work) Pro-tax billionaires Factory workers, e.g. in munitions factories Women’s lawyer associations Older people’s movements Bank employees Fashion models Digital activist networks, e.g. Anonymous It is essential to spot these shooting stars as disruptions and alternatives that we can work with to strengthen and build effective resistance and change a system’s health. A shooting star can create momentum for systems change, and the key is to work with it to change the system in a direction that advances toward your near and guiding stars. Often, organizations plan to achieve change assuming they can do it alone, even if they create a stakeholder map . A well-known global campaign organization is known to have had the theory of change that only it could make the difference. It has since diversified to support other local organizations better suited to handle conflicts and other issues. We need to focus on building power with and power within to dismantle or shift the power held over us. Change is not one directional. We cannot ignore those around us if we want to change systems. As extractivism worsens and morphs into newer forms to justify its continued existence (e.g.: mining for critical minerals on the African continent in the name of renewable energy for over-consumptive lifestyles in Europe and north America), cross-movement and unexpected alliances become more crucial for shifting systems. We propose that you look across the system you are targeting for shooting stars and proactively reach out to them to: Share your goals Share your system analysis and approaches to change Discuss how you could collaborate now and in different scenarios Agree on joint commitments, collaborations, and how you will share resources STORY Idle No More, Canada The Idle No More campaign was launched by four Indigenous women—Sheila Watt-Cloutier, Nina Wilson, Jessica Gordon, and Sylvia McAdam—who were concerned about legislative changes threatening Indigenous rights and environmental protections in Canada. They built movement momentum through social media and grassroots organizing, mobilizing widespread support across Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. The campaign aimed to address and oppose legislative measures such as Canada’s Bill C-45, which the movement argued undermined Indigenous land rights and environmental safeguards. The campaign took the following approach: Recognition that systemic change needs system-wide alliances: Idle No More highlighted the need for systemic change and a respectful, nation-to-nation relationship between Canada and Indigenous peoples. This became a core part of its message. Seek out shooting stars: The campaign knew it needed to build a broad coalition of supporters to challenge these policies and advocate for greater respect and recognition of Indigenous rights, so set out to work with other shooting stars. Critical connections before critical mass: The campaign emphasized the importance of collaboration between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, to tap into power within. Idle No More built diverse alliances through building power with environmental groups, labor unions, and civil society organizations, to strengthen their advocacy and influence policy discussions. The movement then used these connections to amplify its message. Tactics to help people connect, learn and organize: Used social media to connect activists and supporters across Canada and globally. Organized protests, teach-ins, and flash mobs to draw attention to issues of Indigenous sovereignty, environmental justice, and human rights. The Idle No More campaign became a movement, and succeeded in many ways: It brought Indigenous issues to the forefront of Canadian political discourse. It helped catalyze a broader public awareness of Indigenous rights and contributed to the initiation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), which was established to address the legacy of residential schools and promote reconciliation. The movement’s efforts have had a lasting impact on Canadian society, influencing public opinion and policy on Indigenous issues. It has prompted significant discussions about the need for genuine reconciliation and systemic changes to address historical injustices. Idle No More continues to play a role in the broader reconciliation process in Canada. It has helped sustain momentum for addressing Indigenous issues, including land rights, self-governance, and socio-economic disparities. The movement has also been instrumental in pushing for concrete actions and policies that support the TRC's Calls to Action and foster a more respectful relationship between Indigenous peoples and the Canadian government. Read more: https://idlenomore.ca/ TOOL Shooting Stars Spot disruptions: Look again at your Star Chart. Where are there current or emergent disruptions changing the system's balance? What relationships give them power with others or within? What might these disruptors need to have a greater impact? What could help or prevent them from doing so? Trace the path: Follow the path of each shooting star. What is likely to happen? Where is it going? How fast is it moving? Will it hit another element, relationship, or another shooting star? Assess impact: How influential could this shooting star be? What will happen upon impact? Will it cause a relationship to stabilize, stagnate, become vicious or virtuous? Will the shooting star replace another element in a relationship? What effect will that have? Will it fragment and impact multiple relationships? Consider timing: What happens if multiple shooting stars impact at the same time? Collaborate: Set up a meeting with other shooting stars (organizations, individuals) or the most relevant people to discuss them. What do others want from the system? Share your strategy. Can you find common ground to collaborate? How might that change the system and at what level? Prioritise: Which collaborations need to be prioritized, when and how? While impact on the deepest level creates the biggest change, you or your allies may need to prioritize focusing on other levels of the system simultaneously to ensure that happens. Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 1 System Chapter 1 We live in systems There is no single set of definitions for the key concepts in systems thinking and strategic communication — even the word “narrative” does not translate well into many languages other than English. For the purpose of shared understanding, however, it’s helpful to form a shared vocabulary we will use together with the S.E.N.S.E. methodology. Here is our definition of key terms: strategy, communications, and systems. Strategy Strategy: A plan of action to achieve a specific goal. It involves different actions or tactics in different places and times. Communications Communication: The broadcasting or exchanging of information, knowledge, or ideas through speech, writing, non-verbal cues, electronic or traditional media, and large-scale societal conversations. Communication is the glue that holds strategy together and propels it forward in the real world. Strategies that treat communications as an afterthought often fail. Simply broadcasting information, especially alarming or controversial content, can exacerbate denial and polarization. Framing: The choices we make regarding how to present ideas (consciously or unconsciously) that shape how people think, feel, and act, usually geared towards long-term shifts. We frame ideas using the following building blocks: Narrative: A big idea that helps you understand the world - like the bootstraps narrative of making your own success through hard work. A narrative contains types of characters, plots, and places - like the Hero’s Journey. Narratives are made up of stories. Story: A specific account of events or ideas. A story contains particular characters, plots, and places, such as Luke Skywalker in Star Wars. Stories are made up of messages. Message: An idea, talking point, phrase, or hashtag that suits the political moment, usually geared towards a short-term attitude/behavior change. Strategic Communications: An intentional communications program designed to advance progress toward a defined goal. To achieve this purpose, strategies weave together approaches from various communications disciplines, including but not limited to public relations, media engagement, influencer and digital marketing, advertising, issue campaigns, cyber advocacy, and more. Effective strategic communications begins with effectively understanding the target audience. This typically involves engaging that audience with your knowledge or ideas to inspire a shift in understanding, action, or decisions. To do this: Identify and listen to the appropriate target audience. Craft and exchange tailored, values-based information through the most effective messenger and relevant channels at the right time, in a repeated process. Design and deliver strategies and tactics from the most relevant communications disciplines, including public and media relations, influencer and digital marketing, and social and audience research. Narrative change work attempts to influence the narratives that shape laws, societies and norms, and how they are implemented. Systems Systems: Arrangements of tangible elements (e.g., people and institutions) and intangible elements (values and norms) working together towards a common goal, like in a natural ecosystem, a government, or the human body. Linear strategic thinking assumes a direct cause-and-effect relationship between elements. The classic approach involves: Defining the problem Setting a S.M.A.R.T. goal Identifying a target decision-maker and/or audience Outlining a strategy with objectives Defining and executing tactics and plans Linear thinking can work in ordered, less complex situations with few actors, but it often fails when we are seeking systemic change. Systems thinking focuses on the relationships among a system's parts, not just the parts themselves. It is like seeing a forest and understanding how trees, soil, animals, and weather interact to form an interconnected system. In systems thinking, the whole is more than the sum of its parts, and the connections between parts are crucial. Tackling problems as systems Winning campaigns, programs and projects require an effective narrative change strategy - with strategic communications and systems thinking at its heart. Use the tool in this chapter to practice applying a system lens to a common problem analysis approach, a Context Analysis, or P.E.S.T.L.E. analysis. A Context Analysis includes factors like social norms and key audiences who are not always visible but do shape the system and status quo.** Footnote: ** To run a P.E.S.T.L.E. analysis, list out the political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental factors that are or could be affecting the challenge or system that you’re facing. To run a Context Analysis, list out the social norms, narratives, emotions and audience identities as well as the P.E.S.T.L.E. factors above. CONCEPT Systems thinking embraces interconnectedness The way many of us are taught to think about solving problems is most effective for simple challenges and controlled classroom exercises. Decades of mainstream education and socialization - rooted in ‘enlightenment thinking’ from Europe - have taught us to break the world into manageable pieces and see issues in isolation from each other, addressing each challenge in turn. This common sense problem-solving approach implicitly informs how adults in many of the world’s cultures and geographies address challenges they face in their working lives, be that setting government policy or defining a company's corporate strategy. While this might be the most effective approach for organizing a family to share household chores or friends to divide up buying groceries at the supermarket, it is rarely the right approach for making real-world progress on solving more significant environmental and societal issues. The problem with this ‘common sense’ approach is that it tends to focus on treating the most visible symptoms, but not actually solving the root causes of what we see. But when we look at the world through a systems lens, we see that everything is interconnected. Problems are connected to many elements within dynamic systems. If we just treat one symptom, the effects of our interventions often lead to unintended consequences elsewhere in the system. Systems thinking shows us that everything is part of a larger whole and that the connections between all elements are critical. It helps us to be more effective.* Real-world systems are often non-linear and complex rather than being neatly organized into structured layers. So, where do we even begin? Diagrams like those below help us to understand the layers of a system initially. If you’re familiar with a P.E.S.T.L.E. (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental) Analysis of the issue you are facing, that’s a good place to start. The S.E.N.S.E. Methodology takes inspiration from the MobLab to adapt and extend a PESTLE analysis with a systems lens. Read through the story below as an example, and try using the tools to look at your challenges through a system lens. Footnote: *With thanks to MobLab (text adapted from MobLab presentation) STORY Help Delhi Breathe, India Delhi citizens were frustrated. By the winter of 2015, decades of air pollution in Delhi had risen to their worst levels, among the worst in the world. Human activity and demand for goods had driven industrial pollution through crop burning, and vehicle and infrastructural emissions. Together with inadequate government measures, this had big ecological impacts on Delhi and beyond. Campaigners saw how these layers of the system were interconnected, and how many different social groups were affected. They knew that bringing together Delhi’s different groups would be key to getting the government to change its policies to improve air quality. Then, they formed the Help Delhi Breathe campaign as a platform for people to share their concerns and mobilize actions. This was rooted in a broader national movement - the National Coalition for Clean Air. The Delhi campaign used social media and on-the-ground networks to spread awareness and engage people in a different vision for the city and its communities. Mobilizing Interconnected Communities The campaign connected with stakeholders who were all directly affected by the pollution: local groups, long-time activists and new participants. It used creative messaging to spread awareness and mobilize action. They targeted specific influential tech-savvy middle- and upper-class groups: Mothers and Schools: Schools monitored air quality and communicated the dangers to families, making mothers key advocates for clean air. This group was hard for those in power to ignore. Entrepreneurs: Small business leaders and startups, like a company making stylish breathing masks, joined the campaign, promoting solutions and organizing events like Clean Air Fairs. This showed that those in industry, responsible for the root cause of pollution, wanted action. Expatriates: Foreigners living in Delhi, used to stricter environmental standards, voiced their concerns, drawing more attention to the issue. Many of these people had strong connections with industry and the government. Direct actions for stakeholders to take and feel part of something bigger: Events: To demonstrate diverse support across society: The first air pollution rally in January 2016, which mobilized hundreds and sparked media debate, leading to the government’s new transportation policy. To show business support: The campaign organized the Clean Air Fair which brought green businesses and local organizations together to promote climate solutions. Petitions gathering nearly 100,000 signatures each: For air pollution displays - so all stakeholders could see the current air quality status. For approval of Delhi’s Solar Policy - so people and businesses could hold the government to account. Systemic Approach to Maintaining Momentum It takes time to build campaign architecture to influence the human and industrial layers of the system, and shift the thinking of decision-makers. Help Delhi Breathe sustained pressure and momentum by: Organizing and engaging communities: Smaller activities during less polluted seasons. Partnering with grassroots groups to push for renewable solutions, like residential solar power. Running digital and offline campaigns including polls, videos and social media content that reached millions. Help Delhi Breathe influenced public discourse, engaged diverse community groups, and successfully pressured the government to recognize and address the air pollution crisis. The campaign engaged thousands of citizens and organizations and gained 50 media mentions and millions of social media views. It also trained 40 Solar Ambassadors, created 1,750 solar assessment leads, and supported nationwide coalitions for clean air, setting a foundation for ongoing environmental advocacy. As a result, the government approved a new Solar Policy for Delhi, and the Health Minister committed to installing air quality displays so that the public could monitor their air quality at any time. Read more: https://mobilisationlab.org/stories/help-delhi-breathe-clean-air-delhi/ and https://www.purpose.com/case_studies/help-delhi-breathe. TOOL Problem Statement and Systems Circles Write down the problem you are trying to solve in 1-2 sentences. Make sure you are clear on the differences between the problem and its short- and long-term causes and consequences. Systems Circles Draw the concentric circles above on an A3 sheet and stick up on the wall. Gather a set of Post-Its. Write down and stick on each key factor that is influencing the way this system functions, one per Post-It. If you’re in a group, work individually first and then only afterwards compare notes. Write down and stick on the diagram, each actor who can help solve the problem or make it worse.; and each driving force who may persuade the decision-makers. Draw relationship lines (thick lines for strong influences or relationships, thin lines for weak ones) between the Post-Its. Group the factors. Among these, also add a question mark to any about which you are uncertain. Step Back and Discuss Consider the Problem Chart and Systems Circles together: What do these diagrams tell you about the challenge you’re facing? How do communications power those relationships? “A system is never the sum of its parts; it's the product of their interaction.” Russell L. Ackoff Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 3 Navigation Chapter 14 Values are bedrock Values are the bedrock of worldviews, shaping decisions, communities, and behaviors. To move stakeholders, campaigns must appeal to values they already prioritize—especially community (ethics, connection) and autonomy (openness to change). A stakeholder will want to act if we appeal to their values. Just as the moon, winds, and ocean currents shape the seas, the ocean floor (bedrock) also plays a crucial role by affecting the density and temperature of the water above it. Values are the bedrock or foundation of our worldview. They shape our behaviors, the communities we join, and even the people and media that set the rules for our world. Value priorities are our preferred values. They serve as standards, guiding us in deciding what is good or worthwhile. They can change slowly, or quickly if in a crisis where for example someone’s value priority of altruism might shift in order to put food on the table for their family. As campaigners and communicators, our target audience may not always prioritize the same values as us. As one strategic comms expert offered: “Remember: We are not the audience.” Our task is to appeal to certain value priorities in certain situations. We can frame messages to bring different values to the fore, helping to strengthen our audience’s ability to experience and use those values in their own decision-making. “You can't get people to change, except in the direction that they want to change.” Milton Rokeach / Shalom Schwarz We have created a guide to framing messages for different relationships and audiences based on their values, adapted from the work of Liz Manne and Harmony Labs, based on Shalom Schwarz. This guide starts by laying out four areas of value priorities: Autonomy (I): Openness to change (values like hedonism, stimulation, self-direction). These values prioritize seeking new experiences. Community (Us): Self-transcendence (values like universalism, benevolence). These values prioritize ethics, new ideas, and connecting actions to values. Authority (Me): Self-enhancement (values like achievement, power). These values prioritize personal success and influence. Order (We): Conservation (values like security, conformity, tradition). These values prioritize stability and self-esteem. This framework helps us identify the values of key relationships and individuals that maintain the system’s equilibrium. It also guides us in framing our messages to influence these relationships and stakeholders. “Feed what you want to grow, not what you want to fight - Building narrative power demands building new vocabularies. This requires making people familiar with your ideas rather than using old, harmful frames and tropes to get your point across.” Thomas Coombes To galvanize action for social or environmental change, we must appeal to the bigger than self intrinsic values of community (self-transcendence) and autonomy (openness to change). If we try to appeal just to self-interest or social status values, we are being incoherent with our mission, less effective and not building the changes we want to see. When combined with other tools discussed in this Section, we have a comprehensive way to target and frame all our messaging. Read more: Liz Manne and Harmony Labs’ Narrative Observatory on audiences, with examples from the USA: https://narrativeobservatory.org/audiences CONCEPT Ten Basic Personal Values Shalom Schwarz identified ten basic personal values identifiable across multiple cultures: conformity, tradition, security, power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism and benevolence. The Public Interest Research Centre (PIRC) created a values map to show where some of these values and their components are related. We recommend looking at the map to explore how close certain values are to each other. If a target audience prioritizes one value, it will be easiest to get them to prioritize another close to that value on the map. While helpful for considering groupings of values, we do not recommend it for targeted campaign planning purposes. Sources: *The values map and wheel are both from: Holmes T., Blackmore, E., Hawkins, R. and Wakeford, T. (2011), The Common Cause Handbook: Public Interest Research Centre https://publicinterest.org.uk/download/values/Common%20Cause%20Handbook.pdf STORY Religious Values & Climate Change, Indonesia Religion has proven to be a powerful lens, or worldview, through which people organize in Indonesia, particularly during elections like the 2019 Presidential Election. Indonesia is highly vulnerable to climate change, experiencing climate-related impacts and disasters annually, but there is not yet a unifying narrative around the drivers of and solutions to the climate crisis. With 1,340 ethnic groups and over 700 local languages, defining and identifying climate change the way that Western media and scientists do is challenging. It is liminal—existing between different beliefs and at the edges of understanding. While some local languages can describe climate phenomena as “pancaroba”, “pagebluk” or “paceklik,” there is no single term that encapsulates the scientific concept of climate change. In Indonesia, national climate audience research revealed that Indonesians place greater trust in local government figures and faith leaders over national government officials or NGOs. With 87% of the population being Sunni Muslim, Islam plays a significant role in shaping cultural and political dynamics. However, communicating the urgency of climate change in 2019 was challenging due to the diverse cultural and linguistic landscape, where Western scientific terminology wasn't easily understood or accepted. The MOSAIC (Muslims for Shared Actions on Climate Impact) campaign formed to mobilize Indonesians for climate action by aligning the message with their existing values and belief systems. The campaign needed to effectively engage the population by leveraging the values of Community (self-transcendence), prioritizing ethics, new ideas, and connecting actions to values. This approach emphasized the ethical responsibility of Muslims to protect the environment, connecting climate action with Islamic teachings on stewardship and benevolence. The campaign did this through Ecosystem Mapping and Engagement: The campaign began with comprehensive ecosystem mapping to identify key players and understand their values, needs, and current actions. Significant Islamic organizations like Nahdlatul Ulama, Muhammadiyah, and the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) were identified as pivotal due to their influence and alignment with the values of community and benevolence. These organizations were engaged through dialogue and collaboration to promote environmental stewardship as a core Islamic value. Building Trust and Collaboration: Trust and collaboration were built through various convenings, including the organization of the "Kongres Umat Islam untuk Indonesia Lestari" (Muslims Congress for Sustainable Indonesia). Triggering the Community values priority: This congress emphasized the ethical responsibility of Muslims to care for the environment, framing climate action as a moral imperative rooted in Islamic values. The manifesto developed at the congress was endorsed by the vice president, a prominent Islamic leader, further reinforcing the message. Developing Initiatives: Following the congress, the campaign developed several initiatives aligned with the values of community and self-transcendence: Islamic Philanthropy for Climate Funding: "Sedekah Energy" and "Forest Waqf" to encourage community-based environmental action, linking charitable giving with sustainability efforts. Training and incubation projects: “Bengkel Hijrah Iklim” projects led by Islamic youth leaders to empower the next generation of environmental advocates. Knowledge Hub: A "Fiqht for Just Energy Transition" to legitimize and socialize climate action within the Islamic community, ensuring that actions are grounded in religious teachings. Social media platform: “Umat untuk Semesta” was a social media platform focused on the intersection of Islam and the environment, helping to spread the message of climate action as a communal and ethical responsibility. The campaign successfully Engaged millions of Muslims across Indonesia by connecting climate action with Islamic values of benevolence and community. Gained recognition from media outlets like AP, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. Got endorsed by the Indonesian Vice President and the Great Imam of Istiqlal, the biggest mosque in Southeast Asia. Laid the foundation for a sustainable, values-driven climate movement. TOOL Finding Bedrock Which values are driving your mission and driving the key stakeholders or relationships you need to influence? Are you appealing to the bigger than self values of community or autonomy? How might you tap into your audiences’ own bigger than self values? Part 1 Draw the values chart on the left. Write on Post-Its and place on the chart: Your organization or campaign’s mission; The key relationship(s) that you need to influence; The deep loop elements that maintain the system; The communities that are most trusted by the key relationships; The messengers most trusted by the key relationships. Discuss where the Post-Its are clustered and where there are gaps. What does this tell you about the gaps in values that you need to cross in order for your targets to act? Part 2 Now, how might you frame your message to appeal to the community and autonomy values in your audiences? How could you get them to think bigger than themselves and take action? As a group, draft messages that could activate this value priority in your audience, in line with your campaign mission. Consider how these messages could work within your existing campaign branding or messaging, advocacy and communications Seek opportunities to test these messages using the techniques in Chapter 15: Decisions are Learned and Chapter 16: Emotion is Oxygen . Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 1 System Chapter 2 The simplicity of complexity Understanding a system’s complexity is essential for effective change. This chapter explains how to identify whether challenges are simple, complicated, complex or chaotic. Through real-world stories like the Bentley Blockade it shows how communities can transform systems by embracing complexity. A system’s complexity reveals how far we can shift it Systems exist within other systems. If we look closely at an organ inside the human body, we see complex systems. If we zoom in, we see cells and atoms. If we zoom out, we see millions of humans living among various structures, organisms and interconnected systems inside communities, towns, cities and countries. Understanding a system’s complexity is essential before we tackle it. There are three degrees of complexity: Complicated: Predictable and driven by cause-and-effect relationships. Although they have many interconnected parts, their behavior can be predicted if all parts and interactions are understood. For example, a car engine. Complex: Mostly unpredictable and driven by many variables, interactions, and feedback loops. These systems are adaptive and can sometimes be understood in retrospect. For example, the adaptive and self-organizing fungi on the International Space Station. Chaotic: Almost completely unpredictable, driven by numerous variables, dynamic interactions, and loops. These systems are adaptive and inherently uncertain. For example, weather patterns. Exploring Systems At any scale, interconnected systems can be ordered / complicated, complex, or chaotic. Consider crossing a river: Complicated System: In a simple ordered system, gravity pulls us into the water, a simple cause and effect. In a Complicated Ordered System, multiple factors like water currents and obstacles affect our steps. Complex System: The river's vibrant life, including fungi, ferns, and fish, adapts and self-organizes. Chaotic System: Including the weather and extended time adds many variables, making predictions difficult. “… mess is the material from which life and creativity are built …” Ralph Stacey A common mistake is trying to fix chaotic or complex problems as if they are simple or complicated. This often results in little or no progress. By analyzing and understanding the type of system, we can design a strategy more likely to succeed. For example, when crossing a river, we need to consider gravity, the canoe’s parts, slippery fungi on rocks, and emerging weather conditions. Ignoring these elements can lead to trouble. Use the complexity tool in this chapter to deepen your understanding of the system you are targeting. We have adapted it from the Stacey Matrix for decision-making and Cynefin framework . By identifying a problem as one of these types, we can start to reveal the kinds of systems, or system interactions, that drive that problem and then identify how to solve the problem. Once you have used this tool, you could run a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis.** TOOL Steps for SWOT Analysis Draw a 2 x 2 table on an A4 sheet or larger. List the strengths and weaknesses of the system you are targeting. Identify opportunities and threats to your success. Alternatively, analyze the strengths and weaknesses of your campaign and the opportunities and threats for the system or your opponent. STORY The Bentley Blockade, Australia 2014 In 2014, the coal and gas industry planned to expand operations in New South Wales, Australia, but various local communities were opposed to this expansion. The Gasfield Free Northern Rivers (GFNR) alliance had formed and needed to coordinate a movement that consisted of different autonomous groups working together: farmers, Indigenous people, townsfolk, environmentalists, professionals, and businesspeople. They faced multiple types of challenges: chaotic, complex, complicated and obvious. The GFNR alliance used the Cynefin framework to assess the best ways to handle these problems, adapting their strategies and leadership styles. The alliance organized nonviolent direct actions, conducted house-to-house surveys, held public meetings, and used social media to spread their message. They also provided training in nonviolent protest and civil disobedience. GFNR used the Cynefin framework to experiment with approaches in the following ways: Identified and Adapted to Different Situations: By nudging the system out of chaos into more structured situations through network building and sense-making narratives. Chaotic Situations: GFNR reduced the chaos of the ongoing situation to complexity by supporting new groups to form, new individuals to join existing groups, and by sharing a unifying narrative to make sense of the battle. Complex Situations: The gas industry’s next steps created many unknowns for campaigners. GFNR told the movement there were minimal rules other than “non-violent; non-negotiable.” This allowed people to organize and adapt quickly through decentralized networks and come up with new ideas. Ordered (Complicated) Situations: When problems were tricky but understandable, GFNR combined centralized and localized efforts. For example, GFNR sent resident and farmer groups together to advocate to the government. Ordered (Obvious) Situations: When problems were clear and predictable, GFNR knew it could increase pressure quickly via the movement. It used a central database and mobilized all supporters to call the Minister for Resources en-masse. Balanced structure: GFNR used different leadership styles, rotating roles and styles to respond efficiently and effectively at the right times: Distributed Leadership: Different people took on leadership roles as needed. Sometimes, leaders took charge, and other times, they let others lead. Contextual Flexibility: They changed their leadership and organizational styles depending on the situation, allowing for both centralized and decentralized decision-making. Kept Experimenting to support rapid response and Foster Self-Organization: Enabled creative and adaptive solutions to emerge by applying minimal constraints in complex situations. GFNR continuously tested different approaches to see what worked best. They kept what worked and quickly dropped what did not. Jeff Loy, Assistant Police Commissioner for New South Wales, called the Bentley Blockade, “the largest public order challenge in New South Wales police history.” It took years to build its extensive community support and sophisticated blockade tactics. In the end, the New South Wales government suspended the drilling operation and police operation, and by 2015, the government bought back all gas licenses in the region. The movement successfully protected the Northern Rivers from gas field development. Read more: https://commonslibrary.org/enabling-emergence-the-bentley-blockade-and-the-struggle-for-a-gasfield-free-northern-rivers/ TOOL Sensemaking Steps This tool will help you unpack the problem and the relationships behind it, helping you understand their complexity individually and together. On an A3 sheet, draw out the Sensemaking chart shown here and write a sentence explaining the Problem you wish to change above it. Relationships: Write out and place a Post-It onto the chart for each key relationship that is maintaining or could help address this problem, according to its level of complexity. These could be tangible or intangible relationships - from the Head of a bank to a local community leader. Connections: Draw lines across the chart between each relationship. Use thick lines for strong relationships and thin lines for weak ones. Note: You may wish to separate individuals onto different Post-Its. Complexity: How many influential relationships and competing tensions are there? Might there be other connections among them? Certainty: How predictable are the interactions between these actors and their relationships? Do you need to move the Post-Its around? Sensemaking: Consider the most significant relationships here. Is your problem what you thought it was? Is it Simple, Complicated, Complex, or Chaotic? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 4 Storms Chapter 17 Storms are stories Every system faces storms—developmental, situational, or existential—that test resilience. Preparing in advance allows campaigners to turn crises into opportunities. By diagnosing the storm type and its system-level impacts, we can act strategically rather than reactively. There are just 3 types of challenge and we can handle every one of them. In natural ecosystems, the species that survive have adapted to change around them. But many organizations perish because they fail to prepare for crises and opportunities within and around them. Often, we face crises and tell ourselves, "this too shall pass," or regret missed opportunities, rather than readying ourselves in advance. Understanding and creating storms Every storm is a tale with a beginning, a middle and an end. Although we cannot predict the weather with perfect accuracy, we can equip ourselves for what may come and build resilience to likely or potential storms. We can also create storms ourselves. For example taking direct action can destabilize a system, hinder an opponent and drive public debate around your issue. “A crisis is an opportunity riding a dangerous wind.” Chinese proverb Navigating storm types To comprehend how a storm might impact our target system or our campaign, we categorize it into three types: Developmental: Challenges a system’s identity or boosts its visibility. Situational: Hinders a system’s operations or enhances its influence. Existential: Threatens a system’s survival or enables evolution to something stronger. Analysing causes and effects To effectively handle a storm, we must analyze its causes and consequences. This involves identifying whether the problem is simple, complicated, complex or chaotic (see Chapter 2), observe its five system levels (Chapter 3), its Guiding Star and Near Star (Chapter 5) and the Deep Loop that drives it (Chapter 8). Preparing for impact Do not underestimate the impact of a storm or your ability to deal with it. Bats’ echolocation is disrupted by storms, preventing them from perceiving their environment. They take shelter and wait out the storm. But the hard truth for campaigners and organizations is that taking shelter is rarely the best option to deal with a crisis or opportunity. When we prepare in advance, we can be ready for all kinds of circumstances. Make sure you read all the chapters in this Section in order to prepare and deal with the three types of storm, because the storms will come. You will fare far better if you prepare in advance. No one wants to lurch from crisis to crisis. Footnotes: Aboriginal season charts: https://www.csiro.au/en/research/Indigenous-science/Indigenous-knowledge/calendars Chart showing Aboriginal Australian fire burning according to season: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-seasonal-calendar-illustrating-aspects-of-Indigenous-fire-stewardship-The-calendar_fig2_359670046 TOOL Storm Diagnosis Spotting Threats Draw out or print the Storm Chart. Write on one Post It at a time: A challenge or opportunity you might face Write down whether it relates to: the system you’re trying to change your campaign both Write down its corresponding Storm type: Developmental: An challenge to a system’s identity of or an opportunity to raise its profile Situational: A challenge impeding what the system does or an opportunity to boost its reach Existential: A threat to a system’s existence or an opportunity to create something stronger Write down whether this threat or opportunity in itself is: Chaotic Complex Ordered Place the Post-It on the Threat / Opportunity ring in line with the Storm type. Continue this process for all the possible threats you could face. There should be a fairly even distribution of Post-Its. Storm as system On an A3 sheet, pick the most harmful, most likely threat. Note down: Why: Why has this threat come to happen. Is it because of your campaign? Who: The storm’s Guiding Star and Near Star. The key relationships that give it equilibrium, power and set the rules for how it operates. Where: The relationships that allow information to flow and enable the threat to function. How: How the storm manifests. What: The short, medium and long term impacts are, on you and others in and outside the system. Does this tell you anything new to prepare for, in how the storm affects the system or your campaign? Eye of the storm On a separate sheet, draw out the key loops that you think are driving this storm. Add arrows to show direction, and pluses and minuses alongside them to show where some elements increase or decrease others. Identify the loops as stabilizing / stagnating / vicious / virtuous. Review the loops and identify the most critical ones. Zoom out. Could you see these loops together as one large loop? What does this tell you about what is driving the storm, and how you could deal with it? Is the storm a threat or opportunity as you originally believed? Could it evolve into one, or could you turn it to your advantage? STORY Stopping Arms Transportation To Zimbabwe, South Africa During the 2008 elections in Zimbabwe, the ruling party ZANU-PF suppressed opposition and manipulated results. Meanwhile, a Chinese ship carrying weapons for Zimbabwe's Defense Force arrived in South Africa for the arms to be sent to Zimbabwe, raising fears of increased violence. Civil society groups in South Africa aimed to prevent the ship from delivering weapons to Zimbabwe, thereby avoiding further violence and human rights abuses. They did so by understanding the type of crisis and opportunity and responding to them appropriately: There were three interrelated crises: Developmental Crisis: False election results. This was a symptom of the deeper situational and existential crises. Dealing with those was more critical. Situational Crises: Voter suppression and manipulation of results. The arrival of the ship carrying weapons. This needed addressing immediately or it would risk an existential crisis - the lives of people in Zimbabwe. Existential Crises: The potential for increased state violence and suppression of the opposition. Zimbabwe's long-term struggle with corruption and political violence. Addressing these would take longer, but understanding their connection to the situational crises were important for building strength across civil societies in the long fight against repression. Campaigners took coordinated action: Using voice at the What level: Religious groups and NGOs in South Africa protested at the Durban harbor. Blocking infrastructure at the How level: The South African Transport and Allied Workers Union refused to offload the weapons. Civil society groups and unions in Mozambique, Namibia, and Angola coordinated to prevent the ship from docking and offloading weapons in their countries. Legal challenge at the Who level: The Southern African Litigation Centre (SALC) filed a legal challenge to stop the transfer of weapons. Results: System sabotage: Unions, religious groups and NGOs navigated the connected storms to stop the system from functioning. The ship could not offload its weapons cargo in any of the ports, and eventually returned to China. Legal and social impact: The campaign highlighted the willingness of regional leaders to support Zimbabwe’s lawlessness and spurred public outrage. Showed strength of future regional solidarity and resistance: It sent a clear message against state violence in Zimbabwe. Read more: https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/chinese-arms-to-zimbabwe/ https://www.industriall-union.org/archive/imf/unions-block-arms-delivery-to-zimbabwe https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/24/zimbabwe.china Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 5 Energy Chapter 25 Endings are beginnings This section reflects on the natural role of endings in movements and organizations, emphasizing that letting go can preserve energy, legacy, and justice for future work. It encourages reflection, renewal, and passing on resources or roles when needed so that movements can continue evolving within the wider ecosystem. Even our fire must one day be put out. The impact of climate change has resulted in more and more destructive forest fires that ravage ecosystems and reshape our environment. This is changing in front of our eyes and we are the cause. The fourth and most important question of reflection is “What, me?” Endings are natural and we should embrace them as we embrace birth within the cycle of life. The cost of a bad ending for an organization can include the loss of skills, experience, goodwill, data and legacy. It can even include the burden of trauma that staff and volunteers may carry to their next employer, group or movement “Endings are part of the natural cycle of growth, change, renewal and innovation within the nonprofit sector.” Stewarding Loss Project: Sensing Endings toolkit While fire can be destructive, it can also bring good change and renewal. When we encounter setbacks we must also be ready to “fail fast” and move on. We must learn to ask ourselves and others when it is time to tend down our fires and pass on the embers to others to continue the movement for change. “History is a relay of revolutions.” Saul Alinsky Normally evaluation methods and impact assessments are used at the “end” of a campaign if a goal has been achieved, if a major defeat has occurred, or if a funder withdraws its money. But the planet keeps turning and the ecosystems around us continue to seek harmony. In this Section we have reframed evaluation as reflection and action, to learn how the system has changed and what has become of our energy. Now we must train ourselves to learn what to do with that energy when it is time to pass it on. “We must ask if.. structures and organizations continue to serve the purposes for which they were first created. Are they true to the spirit that once inspired them?” F. David Peat, From Certainty to Uncertainty Many groups and organizations set up their campaigns and programs to honor people, communities or places that have been lost or harmed. The passion that we have for our work is strong and lasting. However it is important to continue to ask ourselves if we are helping in the best way to achieve the changes that people and communities want. It may be better to distribute our resources to others who can better disrupt the status quo instead of interfering with their efforts. We might have been important in getting the movement to this point, but we may not be able to take it further. Maybe we have run out of money or lost support from our partners. The answers lie in the wider ecosystem. Which is why we recommend any campaigning you do includes movement strength, equity and justice as key outcomes, connected to your Near Star and Guiding Star. “I’m not saying get rid of those twelve notes. I love what music has done and what it will be. But as a musician who is concerned about music, I say, what’s beyond those twelve notes?” Ytasha L. Womack, Afrofuturism: The World of Black Sci-Fi and Fantasy Culture Here we share two concepts: the Three Horizons to help you think about the necessary path to change, and a Movement Compass to identify what stage your movement is at. Then we share two tools: an Integrity Checklist to identify if you need to continue your role in achieving that change and a Fire Tending tool to understand how to wind down your role and redistribute efforts. If you have completed the exercises in this chapter and decided to continue your campaign, we recommend that you return to the start of the S.E.N.S.E. process to check if the structure and equilibrium of your target and of your organization remain the same as before. Footnotes: Rosamond Stone Zander and Benjamin Zander, The Art of the Possible, p. 8 Read further: The Gesturing Towards Decolonial Futures reciprocity commitments as an example: https://decolonialfutures.net/ CONCEPT Three Horizons The International Futures Forum and other futures practitioners developed this model over ten years to understand and guide cultural change. It helps explore new ideas and actions when the future is uncertain. It can also be applied to organizations. The three horizons are: Horizon 1 - Business as usual - The organization continues doing what it has always done. As a person: Risk averse Manager. Consequences: The dominant narrative, power and relationships in the system prevail. Questions to ask ourselves: What is business as usual and how did we get here? Why do we believe our efforts are no longer fit for purpose? How quickly do we need to wind down? Is there anything we need to retain or not lose? What is dying here and how can we help it to let go and leave well? Horizon 2: Disruptive innovation As a person: The Entrepreneur Consequences: They see the benefits of both models and can apply the innovative thinking from H3 to help achieve the future that H1 really wants deep down - leading to H2+ rather than H2- Questions to ask ourselves: What are the competing visions of the future? How can we collaborate and not derail each other? What does being disruptive mean, politically, economically, socially, technologically, legally and environmentally? What are the roots of those disruptions and what would it mean to cultivate not co-opt them? How might we help helpful disruptions to spread and who could we work with? Horizon 3 - Big picture future thinking As a person: The Visionary Consequences: The future we want. They will require us to take risks, experiment, rethink things completely. Questions to ask ourselves: What is the future we want to bring about? What seeds of that future already exist, that we might help cultivate? How? On whose work are these possibilities built upon? What is being born here and how can we help it to arrive well? CONCEPT Movement Compass Image/graph sourced from Beautiful Trouble: https://beautifultrouble.org/toolbox/tool/the-movement-cycle Movement NetLab and Beautiful Trouble have refined Herbert Blumer’s attempts to map out the cycle of social movements. While movements and campaigns can evolve, flex and fluctuate in many different ways, this tool’s six movement phases can help identify patterns and next steps: 1. Enduring Crisis: Growing Public Anger Movements often start in times of injustice and frustration Focus on building your group, raising awareness, and forming strong relationships Clearly define your issues and create a compelling story to attract supporters This helps create opportunities for action 2. Uprising: Heroic Phase Identify which phase your movement is in to focus your efforts effectively The uprising phase starts with a trigger event that motivates people to act This phase is driven by a renewed sense of purpose, even without long-term plans 3. Peak: Honeymoon During growth, your cause gains significant attention Stay focused on your message and goals Use this time to recruit new members, refuel, and gather resources for the future 4. Contraction: Disillusionment After some successes, momentum may slow down, and internal conflicts may arise Focus on well-being and create safe spaces for emotional recovery Explain that this phase is normal and use it to analyze progress and consolidate gains 5. Evolution: Learning and Reflection After setbacks, it is time to rebuild Reflect on past experiences and reorganize your movement Start new projects and experiment with new goals to give your movement fresh energy 6. New Normal: Re-growth Strengthen alliances, build infrastructure, and develop skills and relationships Now, take bold actions and set the agenda in anticipation of the next crisis or trigger event Beautiful Trouble shares that the Movement Cycle helps you see contractions not as failures but as strategic phases. It guides movement organizers on what to do next and suggests effective tactics and strategies for each phase. Remember to stay grounded during high points and optimistic during low points. Read more: Use the interactive version which provides more tips on strategies and tactics for each movement phase: https://beautifultrouble.org/compass STORY Cree Campaign Against James Bay Hydroelectric Dam, Canada The Cree people of Western Canada faced an existential crisis in the 1970s and 1980s with the proposed James Bay Hydroelectric Project by Hydro-Quebec, which threatened to flood their lands and disrupt their traditional way of life. Initially, Cree leaders focused on a legal campaign to halt the project, leading to temporary victories but ultimately losing ground as the Quebec Court of Appeal overturned favorable rulings. The need for a strategic shift became evident with the announcement of Phase 2 of the project in 1989. Around the same time, Cree elders had begun to step down from the Grand Council which had been directing the campaign. Younger members began to join the Council, including new Grand Chief Matthew Coon Come. This leadership would have had to consider questions such as: Are we focusing on the right deep loop and relationships? The deep loop driving the system included a disregard for indigenous voices. By shifting to more nimble and newsworthy public engagement, the campaign could have more success. Are we the right people to do this work? Greater public engagement was not something that the Cree elders had previously pushed for. By the time the first dam had been built, a younger group of Cree had taken seats at the Cree Grand Council. Are we effective in working with communities? Yes. The community trusted the Grand Council and now gave a mandate to the Grand Council to use any means necessary to oppose the construction of the second phase of the project. Should we partner with others or give them space? The decision to engage public and international partners such as Greenpeace and Sierra Club proved crucial in amplifying the Cree’s cause. Their strategy broadly followed a movement cycle: Enduring Crisis: Faced with governmental disregard, the new leaders tapped into growing public anger over environmental and indigenous rights, building a movement that resonated beyond legal confines. Uprising: They ignited the "heroic phase" by focusing on direct action, such as protests, media campaigns, and international outreach, shifting from a purely legal focus to public engagement. Peak: During the "honeymoon phase," the Cree’s cause gained significant attention, particularly in the US, where environmental and human rights became rallying points, sustaining momentum. Contraction: Anticipating internal conflicts and fatigue, the leaders ensured that the campaign was community-driven, maintaining morale and solidarity. Evolution: After the initial setbacks, the Cree reflected, reorganized, and adjusted their strategies, keeping their ultimate goals in sight. New Normal: The campaign evolved into a broader movement, embedding indigenous rights and environmental concerns into the national conversation, influencing future policies. The second phase of the campaign was successful: The campaign focus shifted from a narrow legal battle to a broader, more effective public campaign that engaged communities, media, and international audiences across the system. This holistic approach ultimately led to the suspension of the second phase This strategic transition of leadership guided by systemic thinking, ensured that the Cree could navigate their movement effectively through its various phases, achieving their goals while laying the groundwork for future advocacy. Note: For more on how the Cree were successful by focusing on the Who level of the system, see Chapter 3: Levels are Levers. Read more: The Cree Nation of Waskaganish: The James Bay Project https://waskaganish.ca/the-james-bay-project/ Non Violent Direct Action database: https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/cree-first-nations-stop-second-phase-james-bay-hydroelectric-project-1989-1994 The Link Newspaper: The Hydroelectric Crises - The Fight to Live in the North, https://thelinknewspaper.ca/article/the-hydroelectric-crises-the-fight-to-live-in-the-north TOOL Integrity Checklist Step 1: Review your fire chart and your soil, star, ocean and storm charts in a group, ideally with allies. Step 2: Ask yourselves these questions: Is the system change we want still necessary? Are we focusing on the right deep loop and relationships to make this change happen? Has the decision-making process and communication in the system we want to change stayed the same? Are we the right people to do this work? Are we being effective when we work with communities to create the change we want? Should we partner with others or give them space to help achieve our vision or mission? Note: If many of your answers to these questions are No, it may be time to start tending down your fire and winding down your organization. Use the next tool for this purpose. Note (warning signs): Your campaign has passed its intended deadline or end date You are using emergency funds to keep the campaign alive The rest of the movement regularly feed back that your efforts are not needed You’ve stopped caring You feel you have something to prove You fear failure You’ve changed You’re trying to deliver on the many hours you’ve put in You think you do not have another option* TOOL Trending Down The Fire NOTE: This tool is not a replacement for professional advice, legal, financial or otherwise. This is designed to help you to think from a systems and strategic communications perspective about how to wind down your work and support others to take your movement further. Step 1: Document the evaluation, exploration and learning you’ve done so far to make your decision to shut down your campaign or organization. Step 2: Levels: Draw out a chart of your system with levels at Why, Who, Where, How and What. Step 3: Why: As a group, write the names of other campaigns or organizations working to achieve similar system change to you, and which have similar values / interests to you, on Post-Its. E.g. These campaigns or organizations may not do public campaigning, but may center women and girls in their work. Step 4: Who: Stick these Post-Its to the system level that the campaign or organization work at - e.g. influencing key relationships / reaching audiences / campaigning to change taxes. They may not yet be active on your specific issue, but may be aligned to your values. Step 5: Where: Audit your assets - the skills, funds, connections you have used in your campaign: staff, resources, funding, relationships. Which of these organizations and groups are used to working with similar assets? Step 6: How: Audit your approach so far. Which of these organizations could pick up and run with your work? Which have strong governance (management, accountability) structures and practices? Which could resume momentum fairly quickly while maintaining the integrity of your approach? Which could adapt and pivot to Storms successfully? Step 7: What: Sustainability - Do you have a viable succession plan, including how you will wind down or up your work? Could you transfer assets to another organization? Are there hidden costs to this? What essentials do you insist that anyone taking on your assets does? Step 8: Discussion: Meet with the rest of your community, allies and those you might like to pass on the torch of your work. Negotiate and agree a handover. Step 9: Narrative: What are the moments you, your team, rights holders you work with, your allies and others would like to mark? How can you bring people together to celebrate? What story do you want to tell that can strengthen the movement and help it go further? Previous Chapter Conclusion

Section 4 Storms Chapter 19 Foresight is 20:20 Preparation and rehearsal are the backbone of crisis response. Warning signs signal storms early; practicing scenarios builds resilience, adaptability, and trust. With role play and monitoring systems in place, organizations can anticipate challenges instead of reacting blindly. You’re not prepared until you have practiced how you will respond. Trust can take years to build but minutes to destroy. Some crises hit suddenly, while others, like funding cuts or anti-immigration narratives, creep in slowly. CONCEPT Warning Signs In natural ecosystems, dolphins detect changes in water salinity and birds sense air pressure to know when a storm is coming. We need a similar system to monitor the early signs that a crisis or opportunity is coming, and we also need to rehearse what we will do when the storm comes. We recommend: Using the storm chart section on What to monitor to look for warning signs Creating a thermometer to rank the severity of crises and opportunities, and identify when to monitor / prepare / respond / pivot. Plan for unpredictability. We should start from what needs to change and the barriers to change, and situate our efforts within that orbit, rather than imagining everything flows from what we do. From that we can identify a way forward. And then iterate constantly. Jim Coe and Rhonda Schlangen, No Royal Road CONCEPT Building Resilience Likewise, the foundations of a strong campaign or organization lie not just in planning but building a supportive culture. This strengthens our resilience as well as our ability to use the four strategies for storms and our ability to pivot quickly. Some organizations advocate for resilience organizing as opposed to campaign organizing - prioritizing resilience, culture and movement strength are equally as much as the external change you seek.* We recommend you look at your campaign or organization as a system, look for warning signs of storms, and build resilience as follows: Generations of community knowledge and practice have helped people survive and adapt to natural disasters. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Inga community in Colombia used their strong community networks to organize harvest distribution based on families' locations, helping them cope with movement restrictions.** Campaigners should always be prepared for crises or opportunities. Good crisis management is 90% preparation. By practicing key scenarios, campaigners can build resilience and adaptability. The most common path to success is not raw innovation, but skilfully riding a wave of change. Richard Rumelt, Good Strategy Bad Strategy Organizations often plan for crises by writing down a full risk register but rarely do so for opportunities. Some evaluators suggest a "pre-mortem"—imagining the campaign failed a week after launch and asking what went wrong. We propose going one step further. After understanding the system (Section 1), creating a storm chart (Chapter 15) and understanding good internal and external stakeholder responses (Section 3) - run a “role play” exercise in real time for every key threat and opportunity. Discuss which of the four strategies from Chapter 18 you may need. We recommend the following principles inspired by resilience practices in your rehearsal: Practice collectivism: Share resources and learn from others affected. Stay connected: Set up alternative communication methods if usual ones fail. Hybrid networks that combine instant messaging together with physical leafleting can reach further. Protect critical connections: Support older people, women, and others to keep communities together. Find goodness and tap into tradition: Make time for positive activities like games or music. Take the long view: Do things today that will help in the long term. Read more: More steps you can take: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/20/authoritarianism-trump-resistance-defeat Steps you can take include: building and funding a support network of allies - see Solidarity Uganda’s rapid response system here: https://mobilisationlab.org/resources/creating-a-rapid-response-system/ How disinformation works effectively and how newsrooms can copy that: https://www.niemanlab.org/2018/11/whats-disinformation-doing-right-and-what-can-newsrooms-learn-from-it/ Sources: *Read more on resilience-based organizing from the US-based Movement Generation Justice and Ecology Project here: https://commonslibrary.org/propagate-pollinate-practice-curriculum-tools-for-a-just-transition/ ** https://www.ifad.org/ar/web/latest/-/story/indigenous-knowledge-and-resilience-in-a-covid-19-wor-1 STORY Identifying Palm Oil Company Strategies, Indonesia The mass production of palm oil in Indonesia has raised major concerns across local communities and the human rights and environmental movements due to large-scale land conversion and loss of forests. Environmentalists have also become concerned by traceability and social aspects like labor rights in palm oil supply chains. Every year during political moments and the forest fire season (the peak is usually July to September), palm oil becomes a high profile media issue. The palm oil industry has been very successful in using Public Relations (PR) to create a developmental storm (see the Storm Chart earlier in this Chapter and Section) at this time to influence Indonesian public debate to support their work. Indonesian civil society articulated a need to build collectivism and resilience to better influence and then shape the public debate about palm oil. Civil Society communicators identified the organized and consistent PR strategies used by the palm oil industry: Warning signs: Where: Business and economics media and social media featured many palm oil articles and stories. Who: Government officials and academics were key spokespersons. Who: The main narrative was usually shaped by those in power and tied to economic development, positioning palm oil as a commodity that reduces poverty and provides jobs for people and smallholder farmers. Why: The deep narrative was nationalism in the face of foreign interference Highlighting how the palm oil industry has been the pride of Indonesia, Framing a “false choice” that NGOs or foreign countries) who “criticize” the industry are foreigners trying to harm the palm oil business / trying to ‘dictate’ what Indonesia should do. Civil society developed campaigns together in advance of the peak forest fire season that could prevent some of the palm oil industry’s rhetoric dominating media: Resilience strategies to help organizations simulate scenarios to charge, sidestep and adapt: How and What: Showcase stories of local communities to add more perspective of what happens in practice, to counter the current narrative that highlights the economic aspect and benefits for smallholder farmers. Who: Partner up with academics to have credible and curated data in hand, to debunk and question the claim made by the companies Why: Develop counter-narrative that also use the economic and nationalism angles, and engage with the business community to find a way for them to tell stories linked to this counter narrative. Knowing the momentum and tactics of the palm oil industry have been key to preparation that will make their storms easier to handle. This helps Indonesian civil society to build resilience and monitor for when the storm hits. TOOL Early Warning Signs Agree responsibilities Review your Storm chart. Add monitoring responsibilities on Post-Its to the outer ring as shown here with names for your team who will be responsible - we suggest rotating this. Set baselines Set up a thermometer to rank the threat levels. Ask yourself the following questions to help you. Developmental storms How often do you want to see your organization mentioned and in which media? Do you want to see a positive article every month, or is that not important? How will you stay in touch with staff opinions on your work, ensuring that staff feel their views are valued? How will you celebrate actions taken? What would you like to know from key audiences? Could you carry out an annual survey? Are there quick ways to check in on these views? Situational storms and Existential storms When will a threat or opportunity become serious for you? Who could you work with to handle it? How might you need to pivot? TOOL Simulation & Prevention Gather a group of at least 6 people in 1-2 rooms (with laptops) if you can. Include trustees or volunteers if you need to - it is important you have a big enough group. Pick a crisis or opportunity from those most likely to happen to you, for example a widespread mainstream media and social media attack on your organization, or a million dollar donation from a celebrity. Write it out in 2-3 sentences. Make sure it has serious implications for the communities, your organization, and the communities you work with. In a group, allocate roles as follows: One person to coordinate the session and timekeeping One person to represent an aggressor or duty bearer (e.g. extractive company CEO) One person to represent an enforcer (e.g. government decision-maker) One person to represent two or more journalists One person to represent members of the public, trolls, and rights holders One person to represent your organization or campaign In real time, the coordinator will: Start the clock Announce when there is a new event or headline that people have to respond to Tell individuals playing roles that they need to act or respond It is for each of those people to decide what to do and how to respond. Next take a 20 minute break and debrief on what you learned from the exercise. What surprised you? What scenarios do you need to prepare for and how? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 5 Energy Chapter 22 Reflection is action This section highlights the importance of collective reflection as a form of action, using tools like monitoring, evaluation, and emergent learning to understand how systems are shifting. Drawing from traditions like Aboriginal yarning and Paulo Freire’s praxis, it emphasizes making sense of change through stories, data, and community dialogue. Review changes across the rest of the system before focusing on your own area. We make sense of the changing world through stories. Aboriginal peoples speak of “yarning,” the act of coming together with others to talk and allow ideas to surface and evolve. Paulo Freire talked about praxis, or action-reflection: the need for people to engage in a constant cycle of action and reflection in order to understand and change their social reality.* We propose that we recognise reflection as a form of action. We need to make that act of respectful reflection with others a part of our everyday lives . “Leaders who… insist on imposing their decisions, do not organize the people - they manipulate them. They do not liberate, nor are they liberated: they oppress” Paulo Freire The first question of reflection is “What?” In other words, what do we evaluate? Common reflection methods include monitoring, evaluation, or impact assessment to see if goals were met. It is important to measure what matters, not just what's easy. An uncommon sense approach begins by looking at if and how the system changed, in terms of shifts in power, changes in narrative, and changes to its Near Star, Guiding Star and deep loop. This helps us see changes we might not have noticed and informs our plans. “The past is not a fixed entity, but a constantly shifting story we tell ourselves.” Adam Curtis Throughout this book, we have proposed indicators to help you monitor your campaign as it unfolds: The boundaries of the System and its contents The relationships and deep loop giving the System its Equilibrium The target stakeholders and our Navigation to reach and activate them The Storms we may encounter These are tangible elements of the system that you can measure. In this chapter we share with you a campfire dashboard tool for group work to understand changes in the system. Keep this process simple and easy to revisit. When you review these indicators we recommend you summarize and consider the findings using four principles of emergent learning***: Raw data (research, numbers) and filtered data (opinions, stories and experiences) Insights - making sense of that data Hypotheses - what we believe may help us based on the above Opportunities - Events, meetings or times coming up that provide an opportunity to test our thinking Each principle helps us to separate out data from insights, insights from hypotheses, and identify opportunities for improvement. Footnote Sources: *Pedagogy of the Oppressed ***Adapted from Four Quadrant Partners work on Emergent Learning Tables, http://www.pointk.org/resources/files/Introduction_to_Emergent_Learning_Tables.pdf STORY Bell Bajao Campaign, India 2008-2011 Breakthrough, an India and US-based human rights organization, launched the Bell Bajao (Ring the Bell) campaign to call on men and boys across India to take a stand against domestic violence by performing a simple bystander intervention – ringing the doorbell when they witnessed domestic violence taking place. The campaign had the following objectives: Make the issue part of mainstream conversation Increase knowledge about and change community attitudes towards domestic violence and towards HIV-positive women Alter individual behavior Reflection on past campaigns to shape the Bell Bajao campaign: In previous campaigns, men were featured mainly as perpetrators of violence. Bell Bajao sought to activate solution-focused values and priorities by highlighting mens’ roles as thought leaders, partners and an integral part of the solution to reduce violence Previous campaign evaluations found that Breakthrough’s nuanced messaging (combining HIV/AIDS and Violence Against Women) was too complex to be absorbed by mass audiences. This time, the organization used a broad and easily understood message about domestic violence, making other nuances secondary Breakthrough did further research including through a baseline survey of public attitudes towards domestic violence. This found that: people rarely took action when they noticed domestic violence occurring ; that both men and women equally were likely to take action ; while men tended to take the lead in intervening if they did take action. This helped refine the campaign messaging even more, resulting finally in the simple, direct message ‘Bring domestic violence to a halt. Ring the Bell’, with men and boys being the key audience Monitoring and Evaluation of the Bell Bajao campaign Breakthrough did further reflection and identified: Changes at system levels: After two years, the campaign was not able to assess behavior changes and the impact on women (What level) but did gather information on changes in knowledge and attitudes shared. How level (community infrastructure, delays and loops): Many interviewees were surprised that a person could interrupt domestic violence “giving any trivial reason” Where level (information flows): The campaign reached out through both media and education networks in one district, and just through media in another: In the first district awareness of the Domestic Violence Act rose from an average of 3% to 21% In the second district, awareness of the Domestic Violence Act rose from an average of 3% to 8% Who level (the rules and who shapes them): It was unclear if significant changes took place in the knowledge, attitudes and behavior of among community leaders and opinion shapers specifically as there was no in-depth study of their opinions Why level (the mindset): Emergent data from the opinions given by respondents: Changed attitudes: A marked decrease (9%) in respondents who felt that women should remain silent when experiencing domestic violence. An increase (90%) in respondents who felt that women should take legal action. A decrease in respondents suggesting that women just live with it or commit suicide. Interviewees commonly shared that “one should make efforts to stop domestic violence”. Changed knowledge and attitudes: Interviewees most commonly shared what they learned from the television ads was that “one can stop domestic violence without saying anything to the aggressor.” Before the campaign, research found narrow understanding of domestic violence, primarily associating it with dowry-related harassment, while other forms like emotional, economic, and sexual abuse were less recognized. After the campaign, research found that a significantly higher proportion of respondents reported understanding that emotional abuse, threats, economic deprivation and sexual abuse are also forms of domestic violence. After the campaign, a significantly lower proportion of respondents identified domestic violence as dowry-related harassment. Changes in Relationships and Deep Loops Giving the System Its Equilibrium Pre-campaign research suggested that: Social norms perpetuated a harmful loop of silence and inaction towards domestic violence. A significant proportion of the population believed that domestic violence was a private matter, leading to widespread non-intervention. Post-campaign evaluation found: A positive change in opinions: in the district reached by media and education networks, respondents said they were more likely to report domestic violence (47%), especially amongst female respondents (69%). Changes in Target Stakeholders and Navigation to reach and activate them Time: The evaluation found that at least two to three years of sustained effort is needed for community mobilization. It is possible to build knowledge and skills more quickly, but behavior and attitudinal change requires time. Navigation: The campaign needed to keep innovating to maintain excitement - such as through video vans, which were popular with youth. This added to the existing output through media, schools, television, radio and print ads. The campaign learned to do outreach via schools rather than just media, to have the most sustained impact on shifted knowledge and attitudes. Changes during and following challenges and opportunities Raw Data: Challenges included financial constraints during the 2009 economic downturn, language diversity across India requiring translations, and community skepticism towards Breakthrough as an external organization. Insights: These challenges provided insights into the need for adaptable, resource-efficient strategies. For example, the difficulty in securing free airtime led to a greater emphasis on grassroots mobilization and digital engagement. Hypotheses: The campaign hypothesized that despite financial and logistical challenges, sustained community engagement, coupled with strategic media placement, could still drive significant change. Opportunities: These challenges also created opportunities for innovation like a greater focus on digital platforms to reach a wider audience during the economic downturn. Breakthrough adapted by intensifying efforts in community-driven events, video van tours, and integrating messages into popular culture, ensuring continuous engagement despite limited resources. Read more: https://www.endvawnow.org/uploads/browser/files/bell_bajao_case_study_english.pdf TOOL Campfire Dashboard Part 1 Step 1: Recreate your system chart and deep loop from Sections 1 or 2 as a five-layered campfire shape, and add via Post-Its the key relationships at each level. Step 2: Write any shifts in the system onto Post-Its and stick them on the left side of the diagram. Step 3: Draw thick lines between Post-Its that have contributed significantly to each other in a positive or negative way. Step 4: Review the chart. What does this tell you about how your campaign is doing? Step 5: What are the strongest deep loops? Are they stabilizing / stagnating / vicious / virtuous? What does this tell you about where you need to focus your efforts? What are any unintended consequences for other parts of the system, e.g. civil society or the dominant narrative? Go deeper: You could use red, orange and green post-its to give a traffic-light ranking to the significance of each change. The chart should then give a color-coded sense of how the system change is progressing. For example: Add a positive system boundary shift (e.g. your team is being consulted by your government) to a yellow Post-It and the System section Add a powerful relationship that has been destabilized, to a green Post-It, and stick in the Equilibrium section Add a Storm that set you back to a pink Post-It in the Storms section Part 2 Summarize your findings under four headings: Raw data (research, numbers) and filtered data (opinions, stories and experiences) Insights - opinions of that data Hypotheses - what we believe may help us based on the above Opportunities - Events, meetings or times coming up that provide an opportunity to test our thinking What are the most significant changes to the system and at which levels? What can you celebrate? What can you improve on? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Browse Chapters Close Home Contributors Content Filter Search Results Introduction Section 1: System Chapter 1: We live in systems Chapter 2: The simplicity of complexity Chapter 3: Levels are levers Chapter 4: Autonomy is myth Section 2: Equilibrium Chapter 5: Systems Do Not Die Chapter 6: Relationships Are Power Chapter 7: Solidarity is a verb Chapter 8: Force begets resistance Chapter 9: Loops can be unlocked Section 3: Navigation Chapter 10: Narrative is water Chapter 11: Needs are motives Chapter 12: Communities are currents Chapter 13: The messenger is the message Chapter 14: Values are bedrock Chapter 15: Decisions are learned Chapter 16: Emotion is oxygen Section 4: Storms Chapter 17: Storms are stories Chapter 18: Flexibility is perseverance Chapter 19: Foresight is 20:20 Chapter 20: Wrestling with trolls Chapter 21: Change is constant Section 5: Energy Chapter 22: Reflection is action Chapter 23: Truth is human shaped Chapter 24: Seeds are fruit Chapter 25: Endings are beginnings Conclusion Contributors Voices from around the world Uncommon Sense was shaped by the insight and collaboration of over 120 climate communication specialists from more than 20 countries. Their collective wisdom helped craft the strategies, stories, and tools within these pages. Below are the writers and editors who distilled that global knowledge into the lessons and shareable insights found throughout Uncommon Sense. HUGH MOUSER A systems coach, campaign strategist and strategic communications leader, Hugh believes in the power of people, movements and organizations to think creatively and transform the world. Hugh has spent 20 years leading teams and building multi-country social and environmental justice organizing programs for NGOs from Greenpeace to Oxfam. An ICF-accredited coach, Hugh has helped leaders from across the corporate and non-profit sectors to achieve their goals from starting new businesses to winning campaigns. Hugh led the campaign that made age discrimination illegal in the UK, managed Greenpeace and Oxfam digital strategies that mobilized millions and secured climate commitments from Procter & Gamble and Kellogg, introduced Global Witness’s first successful planning toolset, and co-created a record-breaking anti-racist ActionAid crowdfunder with activists in Ghana. Hugh is passionate about biomimicry, complexity thinking and indigenous methods of inquiry. He is fluent in Spanish and Portuguese and is a committed intersectional feminist who believes in building sustainable and transformative movements. RATHANA CHEA Listed in 2024's Most Impactful Asian-Australians, the Winner of the Asia Pacific CEO of the Year Award, University Vice Chancellor's Human Rights Award, Centre for Independent Journalism Award and Advisor to the Groundswell Giving Major Donors Circle, Rathana is the Founding CEO of the Multicultural Leadership Initiative. Rathana has spent over 20 years working internationally strengthening people, building organisations and delivering impactful strategies. He has worked in the areas of environmental sustainability, climate change, human rights and technology. He has served on senior management and executive teams in Europe, Australia, Asia and globally for Greenpeace, Amnesty International, the Sunrise Project and other leading change agents. He has also served on countless boards, including as Vice Chair of ECC, a peak body for multicultural communities, as well as serving on the board of leading advocacy and campaign training institutes such as, New York based Mobilisation Lab and regionally-focused AktivAsia. Rathana has co-founded and successfully scaled up numerous social enterprise, not-for-profit and charity startups into fully-fledged impact-focused organisations across Asia and Australia. Rathana holds several qualifications across multiple disciplines from Oxford University, UNSW, the London School of Economics and Political Science, and the University of Technology Sydney. ENGGAR PARAMITA Communications professional with 15+ years of combined experience in multi-national advertising agencies and non-profit organisations. Her role is focused on advancing the use of strategic communications to help organisations achieve their objectives and have their voices heard. She has worked on development projects on various topics, such as sexual reproductive health, agroforestry, and climate adaptation. In her current work with the Strategic Communications Initiative in Indonesia (Development Dialogue Asia/DDA), she combines strategic grant-making, insights and research development, and partner collaboration to strengthen the pro-climate narrative building in Indonesia. In 2020 - 2023, she led the first-of-its-kind, nationally representative research on public beliefs and behaviour on climate change and collective action. The research project is a collaborative work with Communication for Change, Kantar Indonesia, and the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. Enggar holds a Master of Communication from the University of Queensland, Australia and a Bachelor of Social Science from the University of Indonesia. DR. MERLYNA LIM Canada Research Chair in Digital Media and Global Network Society and a Professor of Communication and Media Studies at the School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University. Lim's research and publications explore the interplay between digital technologies and society, focusing on power dynamics, justice, citizen engagement, and democratic processes. As the founder and director of the ALiGN Media Lab, Lim grounds her research empirically in Southeast Asia and the MENA region, advocates for recognizing the Global South as a crucial research hub, and emphasizes addressing its issues on its own terms. Her notable publications include Social Media and Politics in Southeast Asia (Cambridge University Press, 2024), Roots, Routes, Routers: Communication and Media of Contemporary Social Movements (Sage, 2018), and Online Collective Action: Dynamics of the Crowds in Social Media (Springer, 2014). In 2016, Lim was elected to the Royal Society of Canada's New College of Scholars, Artists, and Scientists. Throughout her career, she has delivered over 200 invited talks and received more than 150 media mentions. Before joining Carleton University, Lim held positions at Princeton University, Arizona State University, and the University of Southern California. For more, see: merlyna.org. DR. NICOLÁS LLANO A communication and media researcher, educator and practitioner. Currently, he is the Insights & Research Manager at Food Nature Climate Dialogue, the global strategic communication initiative of the Climate and Land Use Alliance. He holds a PhD in Communication Studies from São Paulo University and is a lecturer at Fundação Getúlio Vargas' School of Communication, Media and Information. DR. THELMA RAMAN Director of Research and Education at the Multicultural Leadership Initiative, Thelma has over 30 years in education and training across Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. She has held several academic and managerial roles across various institutions and organisations. Thelma has extensive experience in developing and presenting education and training programs for diverse audiences in a range of areas including climate change, sustainability and business. Thelma’s fervent belief in the power that education has to inspire change led her to complete a PhD in Education for Sustainable Development in 2017. Since then, she has been actively working to engage individuals, organisations, and communities to take action towards creating a safer and more sustainable world. Thelma holds qualifications across multiple disciplines including education, business, history, politics and geography from RMIT University, University of New South Wales, Deakin University, University of Auckland and the University of the South Pacific. She is also a Fellow with the Higher Education Academy, United Kingdom. MATT DAGGETT Founding Director of the Strategic Communications Initiative for the Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA). An accomplished philanthropic and non-profit leader with an expertise on environmental issues, strategic communications, global campaigns, and organizational governance. Mr. Daggett brings extensive experience managing teams and working with partners in Latin America, SE Asia, Europe, the US and Central & East Africa with a focus on catalyzing change towards more just, sustainable food, forest, and land use systems. Prior to joining CLUA, Matt was the Global Campaign Leader for Forests at Greenpeace International. In this role, he guided global teams advocating for forest conservation and Indigenous Rights protection in the Amazon, Congo Basin, Indonesia, and Northern Boreal forests. Previously, Matt served as the Strategy Director for Greenpeace USA, an Associate Partner at Dalberg Global Development Advisors, and a Consultant at the Boston Consulting Group in London. Matt earned an MBA at Oxford University in the UK and a BA in Government from Harvard University in the USA. DIYA DEB Executive Director of Mindworks Lab, a global cognitive science innovation lab . Incubated in Greenpeace, Mindworks pioneers new approaches to creating change built on understanding of how the human mind works. Diya grew up in India and has spent close to two decades working both in the grassroot and international NGO spaces in leadership roles . She has headed up campaigns in Amnesty International India and was the Campaign Director in Greenpeace India, worked with the Indian nobel peace laureate Satyarthi to mobilise millions of youth globally, worked in the field of child rights, human rights and climate for all these years to lead strategy, engage and mobilise people. She also has acted in advisory capacities to several non profits and has co-founded her own initiative PowerSouth focussed on women leadership in grassroots. Her experience of working in harsh political and social realities in India has strengthened her resilience in crisis and made her an advocate to decolonise knowledge and drive systemic change in the global south. JUDE LEE Leading the Climate Diversity Foundation, a long time womens' rights and environmental campaigner for over 20 years, Jude and is a leader in climate advocacy. She has a strong focus on promoting climate action, diversity, and JEDI(Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion). Jude served as the Deputy Executive Director at Greenpeace East Asia, where they manage one of the organisation's largest offices and oversee an annual budget of approximately $45 million USD. Jude's work is characterised by a commitment to inclusive and equitable solutions for the most pressing environmental issues. As the lead for the Climate Diversity Foundation is the Director of Asia Partnerships for the Multicultural Leadership Initiative. NANA DARKOA SEKYIAMAH Cited as BBC's 100 inspirational and influential women in the world, Nana is the author of The Sex Lives of African Women, which Publishers Weekly described as “an astonishing report on the quest for sexual liberation” in their starred review. It was also listed by The Economist as the best book of the year. She is also co-founder of Adventures from the Bedrooms of African Women, a website, podcast and festival that publishes and creates content that tells stories of African women’s experiences around sex, sexualities, and pleasure. In 2022. In 2023, New Africa magazine listed her as one of 100 inspirational Africans. RENATA SENLLE A journalist with 20 years of experience in various areas of communication. Since 2020, she has been Communications Manager for strategic relationships with digital influencers focusing on socio-environmental issues at Diálogo Brasil. She has a master's degree in Communication Sciences from ECA/USP and a doctorate in Feminist Studies from the University of Coimbra. VON HERNANDEZ Leading Filipino environmental activist based in Manila, Philippines, who has been campaigning on climate and pollution issues for nearly 30 years. He is the Global Coordinator of Break Free from Plastic, a global movement of about 3,500 organizations representing millions of supporters, working. together to end the plastic pollution crisis. Previously, Von was Global Development Director of Greenpeace International where he oversaw the development and performance of Greenpeace’s national and regional offices worldwide. He also served as the Executive Director of Greenpeace Southeast Asia (GPSEA), where he led some of the group’s most successful campaigns and programs in Southeast Asia. He co-founded and spearheaded various environmental coalitions and partnerships at the national, regional, and global levels including the Ecowaste Coalition in the Philippines and the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA). In 2003, he was awarded the Goldman Environmental Prize for his work, which led to the first national ban on waste incineration. Von was also recognized by Time magazine as one of the Heroes for the Environment in 2007. He graduated from the University of the Philippines (BA English), and holds a Masters degree in Public Management from the National University of Singapore. DR. AMIERA SAWAS A feminist researcher and advocate who works at the intersections of climate change, gender justice, public participation and the social contract. Amiera has almost 20 years experience working on these issues across academia, the private sector, think tanks and NGOs, with her most previous roles at Climate Outreach, ActionAid and the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College. Amiera has a PhD on water and human rights in Pakistan and is a contributing author to the IPCC sixth assessment report on gender and climate security. As a person of both Syrian and Irish heritage, with close links to Pakistan, she has lived life with an acute awareness of the impacts of colonial histories and believes passionately in the need to decolonise. BEC SANDERS Director of Research at the FrameWorks Institute. Before joining the FrameWorks team in 2022, Bec worked for ten years in framing research, mostly in the UK and Europe. She was Research Lead at the Public Interest Research Centre and then a consultant supporting non-profits, charities and grassroots campaigners with evidence-based reframing strategies. She has led mixed-methods research on framing climate justice, anti-racism, and LGBTQIA+ equality. One of her areas of expertise is in values, and applying the Schwartz values model to communications. Working with the Common Cause Foundation she investigated the connection between perceptions of other people’s values and civic engagement, publishing on this in Frontiers in Psychology, and she was a contributing author to the Springer book Values and Behavior: Taking a Cross Cultural Perspective. Her work has also been featured in The Guardian, Vice and The Psychologist magazine. She holds an MA in Psychology and Philosophy from the University of Edinburgh. DR. LORI REGATTIERI Has directed global and regional portfolios in the philanthropic sector, successfully managing projects across multiple disciplines and regions. As the former Senior Fellow for Trustworthy AI at the Mozilla Foundation (2022-2023), they played a pivotal role in advancing ethical AI practices. In recognition of their impactful work, Lori received the Media Ecology Association's 2024 Jacques Ellul Award for Outstanding Media Ecology Activism. With over 15 years of experience, Lori has worked at the intersection of digital transformation, strategic communications, and policy strategies to promote just and sustainable technologies. Their expertise includes working with progressive political movements, climate justice, indigenous peoples, afro-descendants and local communities (IPADLC) rights, LGBTQIAPAN+, and queer issues, particularly in the Global Majority world. Lori collaborates with a range of stakeholders, including governments, inter-governmental agencies, foundations, companies, NGOs, CSOs, academia, and grassroots organizations. They earned a PhD in Communication and Culture from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). Their research has focused on cybernetics, information theory, digital methods, decolonial equity, and social justice, as well as internet laws and policy issues. More info is available at eco-midia.com. NATALIA VIDALON A senior strategic communications professional with more than 10+ years working in sustainable development, conservation, and indigenous rights. She has extensive experience in project design and management, qualitative research, and communication strategies for the private and public sector and environmental projects and organizations. Natalia has worked for the Ministry of Environment in Peru and civil society organizations, where she has led communications and fundraising strategies focused on fighting illegal activities, environmental defenders, advocacy in favor of Indigenous territorial rights, and establishing key protected areas, focusing on the Peruvian Amazon. She specializes in communication diagnosis, stakeholder and media engagement, and strengthening local communications initiatives. She is a Social Communicator from the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, where she has also taught in the Communications Master Program. She has a master’s degree in International Development from the University of Manchester, UK. Currently, she works as Strategic Communications Manager in Peru for Diálogo Colombia & Perú. RIKA NOVAYANTI Co-founder and Steering Committee member of MOSAIC (Muslims for Shared Action on Climate Impact). Her leadership led to the launch of a manifesto supported by the Vice President of Indonesia. Through this manifesto, MOSAIC developed initiatives to leverage Islamic philanthropy for climate funds and utilize Islamic infrastructure for climate solutions. MOSAIC also earned a Silver Medal in the Partnership and Collaboration category at the Anthem Awards. Her expertise is in strategic communications on climate and environmental issues. Currently she is consulting for the World Bank’s Environmental, Natural Resources and Blue Economy (ENB) team. She is also a Senior Advisor for Purpose Climate Lab, and serves as a Board Member for Solar Chapter, a nonprofit focusing on improving access to clean water through renewable energy and water monitoring systems. Rika has significant experience in structuring and implementing system convening and fostering collaboration among unlikely partners. Rika frequently writes or speaks on climate and environmental issues, particularly around environmental behavior and strategic communications. She is also an awardee of the USAID Program to Extend Scholarships to Achieve Sustainable Impacts (PRESTASI) and Australian Awards Scholarship (AAS). YEMI AGBENIYI A climate leader with a background in health policy and pharmaceuticals, Yemi is a experienced business operations and management leader. She currently serves as the Director of Global Operations for the Multicultural Leadership Initiative, where she plays a crucial role in shaping organisational strategy. Her work has allowed her to explore and champion sustainability and climate initiatives across Africa, striving to make the continent a safer and more sustainable place for its people. Yemi holds a degree in Pharmacy from Obafemi Awolowo University in Nigeria, along with additional certifications from the University of Cape Town and the University of Cambridge.

Section 3 Navigation Chapter 11 Needs are motives To spread a counter-narrative effectively, we must understand who needs to act, what drives them, and what barriers block them. Every individual or institution is a decision-maker, influenced by needs, motivations, and relationships. Campaigns often fail by assuming truth alone will persuade; instead, analyzing psychographics, power dynamics, and barriers helps us prioritize the audiences most likely to create systemic change. Needs help us prioritize who to target. We have identified the (counter-)narrative we want to spread. Now we need to know who needs to act, what barriers are in our way, and how to reduce those barriers. Remember, everyone is a decision-maker, making about 35,000 decisions each day. At this point, we could base our approach on one key tactic designed to reach a specific target audience with one or a few key messages. But without a more nuanced understanding of the audiences we need to reach and activate, we will likely fail to achieve the systems-level change we seek. Every decision maker, community or institution we need to reach or activate is an audience. Since everyone makes decisions, we need to navigate many streams of decision-makers to reach our ultimate target. A typical campaign might focus on one decision-maker or their supporters and assume what drives them. That campaign might also assume that the morality of their argument will win over the decision maker. But power doesn’t always care about our truth. Instead, we should look at the psychographics of each target audience and the key stakeholders that are able to influence them: their needs, motivations, their ability to influence, their lifestyle and personality. This helps us to prioritize who is most likely to act or share information. Next, we must understand the barriers preventing stakeholders and messengers from acting or sharing the new narrative. Look at the tangible and intangible factors in the strongest relationships, and the deep loops that are blocking the new narrative. Consider visible, invisible, and hidden power. Some elements might not support the current system or narrative but may still block a new narrative. TOOL Obstacles As Targets Scope Draw a Venn diagram with components of key relationships from Section 2. Include decision-makers and parts of the media ecosystem. Identify anyone or anything visible, invisible, or hidden that prevents your new narrative from taking hold. Place these stakeholders on the diagram. Profile the stakeholders Who or what is at the center that you need to focus on? Who or what matters more than others (e.g., loose regulations or public apathy)? Draw a matrix with persuadability on the x-axis and influence on the y-axis. What does this tell you? Consider How are these stakeholders affected by the issue? What do they need to survive or thrive in the system? What is their lifestyle: time-rich or time-poor? Do they like to be seen in public? What is their personality? How do they behave in public? How do they like to be seen? Why might these stakeholders be motivated to act? Why might they start, stop, or continue some action or information sharing? How can they influence the outcome we want? How many people can they influence? Is their ability easy to restrict or stop? What risk or reward is there for them taking the action we want? How do we need to influence them? Explore Could more than one theory be true? How might you test these theories? Which stakeholders should be the main targets of your campaign? Is it best for others to target other parts of the system? Previous Chapter Next Chapter

Section 1 System Purpose To understand the overlapping systems we live in that are both moving and restrictive. How to use this section Read this before you do any other analysis of the problem. What is a system? A system is an arrangement of tangible elements (e.g. people and institutions) and intangible elements (values and norms) working together toward a common goal, like in a natural ecosystem, a government or the human body. Here, we use layers of earth and a soil chart to explain systems, the various actors within them, and the effects of changes within them. We live in systems The Lakota people of North America and Indigenous Australians do not have a word for "nature" because they see humans and nature as one system, not separate entities. This interconnected view is a more logical and strategic way to see and understand the world. Simplicity in complexity Push your hands into the soil, and you may feel earth, seeds, shoots, rocks and insects. Removing what you think is a weed or pest can affect the growth of nearby plants. Understanding that we are all interconnected is the first step to understanding complexity. Learning the difference between ordered, complex and chaotic systems helps us define our approach. Levels are levers Exploring a system deeply helps us understand why its structure works. Each level of a system is like a layer of soil, with deeper layers having more control. To change a system fundamentally, we need to understand its deepest parts. Autonomy is a myth Many systems thinking use the metaphor of an iceberg to emphasize the importance of considering the hidden problems beneath the surface. This is useful, but thinking about soil layers is better. First, most of us will never see an iceberg in person, but all of us can put our fingers into the earth. Second, we believe it is essential to emphasize the connections between the many elements of a system. Rather than just ice, a system consists of roots, rocks, water, dirt, seeds, and worms, all in active connection. Footnote: * https://silvotherapy.co.uk/articles/nature-connection-native-americans Section summary Previous Chapter Next Chapter