Category: Event Takeaways

Thought leadership is a potentially powerful instrument for impact leaders, servicing a range of goals like increasing credibility and exposure within an organization, advancing an ambitious goal, or influencing the direction of others in the field. But how should social impact leaders sharpen their voices and expand their platforms in a noisy environment? What outlets, formats, and stages are best for advancing their ideas and reaching the right audiences. Navigating this information environment requires clarity of message, smart positioning, and strategic amplification.

On December 9, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to unpacking how members can build and elevate their thought leadership platforms. The conversation that resulted helped to simplify complex ideas, provided instruction on how to lead with empathy, and sparked fresh thinking in a complicated and evolving landscape.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the conversation appear below:

---

Key Takeaways:

Start by influencing one key decision-maker when proposing large-scale, systems change initiatives at your organization. Build a relationship with a strategically positioned stakeholder, learn their priorities, and frame your ideas in the language they use to make decisions.

Speak the business language to gain traction internally. Translate sustainability or impact goals into financial or operational terms so cross-functional partners can see relevance and value.

Simplify and adjust your message to your audiences. Clarify the core idea, eliminate jargon, and communicate in a way that your CEO, finance colleague, etc. can understand and replicate.

Lead with authenticity and show your humanity. Share what’s working and where you’re still learning; honest reflection builds trust and credibility far more than polished corporate messaging.

Anchor your message in emotion and empathy, not just logic. If you want to move people at scale, connect to what they care about, evoke feelings, and make the desired action personally meaningful.

Pair measurement with storytelling to move internal stakeholders. Reporting on rigorous data and outcomes builds confidence with executives, but individual impact stories are often what unlock buy-in and sustain momentum.

Use a clear, compelling call to action and amplify it. Don’t just share an idea; articulate what you want people to do next, make that action as simple as possible, and reinforce it across channels.

Don’t be afraid to disrupt familiar patterns. Fresh language, unexpected framing, or new forms of collaboration can break through cognitive fatigue and open space for people to think differently.

On November 18, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to unpacking how artificial intelligence is transforming the way we work, communicate, and create impact. From advancing organizational efficiency to reshaping advocacy and service delivery, AI holds enormous potential — and raises equally pressing questions around ethics, equity, and governance.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the conversation appear below:

---

Key takeaways

Treat AI adoption as a culture-change initiative, not just a tech rollout. Invest in thoughtful change-management strategies: designate AI champions, embed AI into everyday workflows, and ensure all staff achieve at least baseline competency through training.

Build an AI Champion network to accelerate culture change. Identify early adopters across functions and empower them to model practical use cases, lead demonstrations, and mentor peers. Champions make AI visible and approachable, increasing the likelihood of shifting day-to-day behaviors.

Recognize that this moment requires upskilling and unlearning. Encourage teams to move beyond legacy workflows and reimagine how work gets done with AI as a strategic partner. Beyond technical training, this requires a mindset and behavioral shift that fosters adaptability and continuous learning.

Establish clear policies to guide responsible, mission-aligned AI use. Staff need clarity on what is encouraged, allowed, and off-limits. Transparent guardrails reduce anxiety, build trust, and empower teams to deploy AI confidently and ethically.

Enable each team to define AI applications relevant to their work. Functions such as philanthropy, marketing, compliance, and operations will leverage AI differently. Facilitating team-specific exploration uncovers meaningful use cases that improve workflows and drive impact.

Clarify AI’s sustainability footprint to remove barriers. Many hesitations arise from misconceptions. Provide accurate context on energy use, environmental impact, and organizational commitments, ensuring sustainability concerns do not hinder adoption.

Identify opportunities where AI can deliver strategic value. Look for high-volume, operational, or repetitive tasks where AI can save time, enhance rigor, and create consistency, freeing teams to focus on higher-impact work.

Place-based initiatives often begin with promising pilots, but the real challenge lies in building models that endure, evolve, and create lasting change for communities. From knowing when to sunset a project, to adapting an initiative as conditions shift, or to nurture long-term, community-driven impact, place-based work raises important questions about what success truly looks like. Should scale always be the goal—or are shifts in power and resources, and other changes representative of deeper measures of progress?

On November 13, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable event designed to explore what it takes to move beyond the pilot phase and built place-based impact that lasts. Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

---

Center on-the-ground leadership and lived experience. Effective place-based work starts with local leaders, residents, and young people as co-designers and decision-makers, not just “voices in the room.” When communities define the problems, interpret the data, and choose strategies, funders are able to support work that is more trusted, relevant, and durable.

Shift from standalone projects to long-term strategies. Moving from a collection of disconnected pilots to a portfolio and strategy approach allows leaders to track progress over time, reallocate resources, and adapt without “killing” programs overnight. This zoomed-out view makes it easier to align partners around shared outcomes.

Treat scale as systems change, not just numbers served. In place-based work, scale often looks like stronger civic infrastructure, policy shifts, better-aligned funding streams, and new local capacities, rather than big “vanity” reach numbers. What equally matters is what lasts after a grant cycle ends: local organizations that can attract new resources, shared data systems, and cross-sector tables that keep working.

Lead with values over metrics and logic models. Shared guiding principles – such as non-negotiable youth leadership, community involvement in all decisions, and non-extractive partnership – create the trust and alignment needed for complex collaborations. When values are explicit, they shape governance, grantmaking practices, and how power is shared between parties.

Use national power to open doors, not dictate direction. Large institutions can add enormous value by validating local models, attracting co-funders, and lending policy or communications support. But they don’t need to dictate the agenda. Showing up with humility, naming reputational or political risks transparently, and “walking alongside” community partners helps make sure big brands amplify local leadership instead of overshadowing it.

Standardize the framework but localize the solution. What transfers across communities is the evidence base, theory of change, and shared indicators for success; what must be locally tailored are the specific strategies and programs. The work is a continuous loop: look at the data, ground-truth it with residents, choose evidence-informed approaches that fit local realities, test, learn, and adapt.

Measure both the journey and the destination. Robust, shared data systems are important, but so are simple, practical signals: who’s showing up, which relationships are forming, and whether local leaders feel more connected and capable. Tracking process indicators alongside long-term outcomes helps manage leadership expectations, tells a more honest story of progress, and keeps everyone committed to the multi-year horizon real systems change requires.

On November 12, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to examining what’s ahead for diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Amid a turbulent year for DEI, the discussion was designed to unpack the pressures, highlight innovative responses, and surface practical strategies that enable organizations to safeguard hard-won gains, navigate uncertainty, and continue advancing more equitable workplaces and communities.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the event appear below:

---

Key takeaways

Maintain progress over posture. It’s critical to make progress, not a just point—staying committed to tangible outcomes rather than symbolic gestures. This mindset demands both courage and strategy: being careful not to obey in advance to external pressures or political headwinds that discourage action.

Focus on the problem you’re solving: access, opportunity, and shared prosperity to strengthen its staying power. Get clear about naming the challenges you’re solving, like inequitable access to capital or opportunity, rather than centering the focus solely on identity. This approach to language helps protect the intent of the work while expanding its reach and legitimacy across audiences.

Reimagine investment for systemic impact. Practitioners are aligning the levers of philanthropy with the principles of venture capital, while ensuring that the return on investment accrues to the communities themselves. This means mobilizing catalytic capital that addresses the intersections of material conditions such as housing, economic mobility, and entrepreneurship.

Embed equity into leadership and institutional DNA. The shift from programmatic to executive–led initiatives ensures accountability at the highest levels. By developing collectives of teams and integrating initiatives across business units, companies can ensure inclusive work becomes a shared operational responsibility and cannot easily be targeted, defunded, or liable to scrutiny.

Build local, cross-functional ecosystems to spread the risk and keep moving forward. Leaders are forging stronger alignment among legal, compliance, communications, and other teams—working in lockstep to mitigate risk without compromising purpose. The question is not whether risk exists, but who can take on what risks, and where the risks lie. Consider which local partners you can work with to keep pushing beyond where your organization is able. Ask yourself: what costs are we willing to bear to uphold our values? And what do we lose if we don’t?

Adapt and sustain commitments amid scrutiny. Even as language shifts and brand sensitivity heightens, the overwhelming majority (94% of purpose-driven companies) continue the work. Many are increasing investment in ERGs, volunteering, and community engagement because changing words, not work, allows employees to feel continuity of mission while maintaining public trust and compliance.

A strong future hinges learning from our past, and having the courage for tomorrow. “History is repeating and rhyming, and it’s a great teacher.” By staying committed to the work while strategically responding to external conditions, organizations can thrive amid headwinds. Communicating clearly about what is changing and what remains constant, helps counter perceptions of retreat, while sharing authentic stories of impact reinforces enduring credibility.

In today’s fractured attention economy, advancing policy and advocacy goals has never been more complex. For impact leaders, breaking through the noise requires new strategies to connect with hard-to-reach audiences, build trust across divides, and mobilize stakeholders around urgent issues.

During a November 4 virtual Leader Roundtable, participants explored how leaders are navigating these challenges and reimagining advocacy for the current moment, examining the innovative approaches to earning attention, translating awareness into action, and ultimately driving meaningful change.

Some of the most salient insights from the conversation appear below:

---

Key takeaways:

Effective advocacy begins with reframing, not resistance. When audiences arrive with hardened beliefs, direct confrontation rarely works. The most persuasive advocates find new points of entry — rephrasing the question, offering a story, or isolating a single relatable detail. Shifting the frame in this way can help to bypass defensiveness and move people from ideology to empathy. 

Small numbers, clearly told, drive disproportionate impact. In an age of data overload, specificity is what lands. Audiences can’t meaningfully conceptualize millions or billions, but they can relate to the story of a family trying to eat on $2 a meal. The same principle applies to action: small repeatable steps — writing one email, attending one meeting — build the muscle memory that sustains movements over time.

Authenticity is operational, not aesthetic. For mission-driven companies, credibility isn’t a tone of voice, it’s an infrastructure. True authenticity comes from governance models, internal accountability, and consistency across decades, not from reacting to what’s trending. The most resilient organizations root their advocacy in explicit values and distribute ownership across teams so that no single marketing cycle or leadership change can dilute the mission.

Action is the currency of trust. Many organizations talk about values, but far fewer design concrete actions that invite participation. The strongest campaigns make it easy for people to act — not just to emote — and measure success by policy, practice, and participation rather than by clicks or sentiment. Over time, that clarity of purpose builds deeper loyalty than any consumer-facing brand push. One member pointed out that organizing is a ladder and not plank: once an individual takes an action, they are more likely to take another, but are less likely to jump from the bottom rung to the top.

Inside large organizations, effective advocacy depends on internal rigor. One participant described a “scorecard” framework that guides crisis-response across marketing, comms, policy, and philanthropy. Each potential intervention is scored on employee, customer, and corporate impact, which enables the company to move quickly while maintaining transparency and fairness. This kind of cross-functional infrastructure transforms reactive decision-making into principled, replicable action.

Speed and alignment are as important as intent. In the wake of any crisis, momentum is everything. When systems are pre-built and ownership is distributed, teams can mobilize in hours instead of days — ensuring that compassion isn’t slowed by bureaucracy. The organizations that respond best have built their playbooks long before they’re tested.

Digital should drive people towards community, not away from it. While online engagement remains vital, younger generations increasingly crave in-person organizing — IRL spaces to connect, learn, and interact away from screens. The next wave of advocacy will merge the reach of new digital frontiers with the depth of human connection.

Clarity and courage still cut through the noise best. In a saturated attention economy, the most enduring messages are the ones that blend moral clarity with concise storytelling. Whether addressing AI ethics, social justice, or climate resilience, audiences are drawn to organizations that speak with conviction and lead with transparency.

Hope isn’t naive — it’s strategic. At a time of polarization and fatigue, hope is a mobilizing force in and of itself. By naming progress, celebrating persistence, and grounding advocacy in tangible wins, leaders can replenish the emotional reserves that movements depend on.

When it comes to data: Show, don’t tell. When complex systems are made visible, they become impossible to ignore. Mapping inequities or visualizing unseen harms helps people understand scale and proximity, transforming abstraction into urgency and urgency into action.

Collective action provides a pathway to greater scale, durability, and innovation. It also distributes and mitigates some of the risks that can undermine or deter individualized approaches. But what are the most successful, proven, and accessible forms of collective action in practice today? Which examples can we look to for how various models work at their best? And what should impact leaders be asking and weighing when determining the best ways to advance shared goals with would-be collaborators?

On October 30, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to exploring The State of Collective Action by introducing new analysis on the most prevalent models for collaboration, sharing a new resource designed to help leaders identify which approaches best fits their goals, and spotlighting other ways we’re helping you spark connection and partnership within our ecosystem.

Some of the most salient insights from the discussion appear below:

---

Key takeaways

The field is evolving from “should collaborate” to “must collaborate.” With accelerating technological change and complex social challenges, collaboration is shifting from a desirable practice to a core strategic capability. Leaders reflected on when to launch new coalitions, when to join existing ones, when to sunset from partnerships, and how to balance urgency with sustainability.

Collective action requires clear structure and governance. Coalitions succeed when they establish shared purpose, defined roles, transparent governance, and mechanisms for accountability. Structure promotes consistency, momentum, and alignment across diverse partners.

Collaboration frameworks help leaders choose the right model. Taxonomies, like that contained in NationSwell’s new resource on collective action models, and playbooks for collaborative work are helping the field gain clarity on when to convene, when to follow, and when to partner. These models guide decisions on structure, decision-rights, and stewardship, reducing duplication and increasing efficiency.

Equity must be a design principle. Lower barriers to entry and open pathways for smaller organizations, grassroots partners, and historically under-resourced communities to meaningfully participate. Flexible funding, capacity building, and intentional inclusion practices are essential.

Trust and relationship-building are core infrastructure. Sustained and equitable collaboration is rooted in trust. Transparent communication, shared decision-making, and ongoing engagement build the social capital needed to navigate tension, share power, and stay aligned through long-term systems-change efforts.

Resource the work behind the work. Collective success depends on establishing resourcing backbone functions such as convening, coordination, communications, and shared measurement. Micro-grants and operational support help ensure all partners can contribute fully.

Measure what matters. Participants noted that impact measurement remains a difficult yet important aspect of effective collaboration. Ideally, partners should identify their key leading and lagging indicators at the outset of an initiative, ensuring transparency and accountability from the beginning.

Eighty percent of health outcomes are shaped by social drivers, not just clinical care. But too often, investments overlook community-based solutions that prioritize gaps in trust, access, and care. In this NationSwell virtual roundtable, we’ll explore how cross-sector leaders can elevate, resource, and integrate the approaches communities already trust – building a stronger, more human-centered health system in the process.

On October 14, NationSwell hosted a candid virtual conversation on the journey toward health equity: how to identify and support proven, underinvested solutions – such as Community Health Workers; how to invest effectively in the social determinants of health; and ways to strengthen your impact through practical strategies, peer-tested insights, and emerging norms.

Some of the most salient insights from the discussion appear below:

---

Key takeaways

Invest in the workforce that builds trust where systems cannot. Community Health Workers (CHWs) are essential to closing care gaps in rural and underserved areas. Their deep community ties, cultural fluency, and lived experience make them uniquely equipped to connect people to care. 

Offer sustained funding for CHWs. Grants are part of the solution, as is Medicaid reimbursement; but for communities to truly thrive with help from CHWs, we need to start integrating CHWs into public health solutions that are sustainably funded. First port of call: Connect with your local CHW networks and support their work on this mission.

Keep care rooted in the community, not clinic-bound. As healthcare systems integrate CHWs, maintaining their proximity to communities—not just clinical settings—protects the authenticity that makes their work effective. Additionally, the human connection CHWs provide ensures that technology and convenience don’t replace trust and understanding. Over-medicalizing their role risks diluting the very trust and creativity that make their work transformative.

Pair digital literacy with inclusion. From patients and caregivers to CHWs themselves, digital literacy determines whether emerging health tools close gaps or widen them. Building confidence, access, and comfort with digital health platforms is essential to realizing the promise of tech-enabled care.

Care for the workers. CHWs often absorb community trauma and carry the emotional weight of their work, all while navigating precarious pay and limited protections as a predominantly female workforce. Sustaining this workforce requires mental health support, fair compensation, and respect for their labor.

Let lived experience lead policy and partnership. CHWs bring generational wisdom and firsthand knowledge that should inform every level of system design—from funding to regulation. Creating spaces where CHWs co-lead with clinical and policy leaders ensures decisions reflect reality, not assumption.

Lean into urgent needs that CHWs are uniquely positioned to address. The aging population brings strain on “sandwich generation” caregivers, the need to create “hospital at home”, and a social connection crisis for older Americans. CHWs are uniquely able to support

Build a common table for collective progress. Advancing health equity demands cross-sector collaboration grounded in shared definitions and mutual respect. When CHWs shape the future of their profession alongside healthcare, corporate, and policy partners, we build not just better programs—but the health system the world needs next.

Artificial intelligence is reshaping nearly every corner of our lives — from how we work and learn to how we participate in civic life. Yet as the technology races ahead, governance has struggled to keep pace. 

During a candid panel discussion at NationSwell Summit on October 22 hosted by David Gelles — New York Times reporter and author of Dirtbag Billionaire — Mike Kubzansky, CEO of Omidyar Network, and Miriam Vogel, CEO of EqualAI, explored how society can steer AI toward the public good. Kubzansky emphasized the urgent need for public oversight and values-based regulation that puts people, not profit, at the center of innovation, while Vogel highlighted practical steps organizations can take now — from embedding accountability in everyday workflows to cultivating ethical reflexes inside teams — to ensure AI serves all communities equitably.

A full recap of the panel’s insights can be found below.

---

Takeaways:

“We shouldn’t expect profit-driven companies to prioritize the public good — that’s not how capitalism works. If we want AI to serve society, we have to build the incentives and accountability to make that happen.”

  — Mike Kubzansky, CEO, Omidyar Network

• Artificial intelligence isn’t a future issue — it’s a governance crisis happening in real time. The world is deploying AI faster than it can define what “good governance” means. Most organizations use AI in some capacity, but few have internal standards, accountability systems, or a clear understanding of what responsible use looks like.
  
• Every technological revolution has had a societal reckoning — except this one. From pharmaceuticals to nuclear energy, past innovations prompted debate and regulation. In the digital era, no such collective framework exists, leaving critical decisions to private companies and market forces rather than shared values or public consent.
  
• The real gap isn’t technical — it’s institutional. There are no common definitions, standards, or liability frameworks for AI use. As a result, companies set their own rules, often inconsistently. Building shared norms and accountability mechanisms is now as urgent as any technical breakthrough.

“You cannot regulate your way out of this; governance starts inside the organization. Every company needs to know how it’s using AI, who’s accountable, and what happens when something goes wrong.”

— Miriam Vogel, President and CEO, EqualAI

• Governance begins inside organizations, not in Congress. External regulation alone can’t ensure safe or ethical AI. Companies need internal “AI hygiene”: clarity about where AI is used, who is accountable, and how issues are surfaced and resolved. Without internal governance, regulation becomes meaningless.
  
• Regulation does not stifle innovation; confusion does. Rules provide clarity, not constraint. Some of the most innovative economies operate under strong governance frameworks. Real innovation thrives in environments where safety, trust, and transparency are built in from the start.
  
• Public trust is collapsing, and AI literacy is the cure. Half of Americans report being more afraid than excited about AI. Those who understand it are more optimistic, suggesting that AI literacy — not hype or fear — is the foundation for responsible adoption and social trust.
  
• Profit-driven systems won’t self-correct. Expecting companies to prioritize ethics over revenue misunderstands capitalism’s incentives. Governance must come from a mix of policy, investor expectations, and board accountability — ensuring AI’s social license to operate.
  
• There’s still time to design responsible AI — but only if we demand it now. Responsible AI isn’t theoretical: it requires clear accountability, transparent testing, and leadership ownership. The companies that get this right will be the ones that earn both consumer trust and long-term viability.