Strategy Archives - NationSwell

Influence at Work, Part 1: Earning the License to Operate

Posted on April 14, 2026May 20, 2026 by Nick Cericola

Influence at Work is a 3-part series of articles exploring what it takes for impact executives to gain and use internal influence – that precious currency required to be successful in any organization. Part 1 below begins with the foundation: earning your license to operate.

The impact leader’s work of building influence begins with establishing one’s own credibility as a business leader. More accurately, it begins with conceiving of oneself as a business leader. I have been struck in my recent conversations with seasoned impact executives by how emphatic they are in this regard. They told me there is no escaping that sense of sisyphean effort required to make the case – to get to “yes” – if your own mental model is one that differs widely from that of the CFO, COO, or any other executive who sees themself as primarily an agent of the enterprise.

Put simply, they told me you advance impact by working through the business, not alongside it.

For some leaders, this invites a shift: impact leaders should be able to think like and channel the perspective, language, and outlook of the very people they seek to influence.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

Study how the business makes money

If you can’t clearly explain how your company does what it does, you’re operating at a disadvantage. By really learning how the cash flows, how share price behaves, how the widgets get made, you not only understand what makes your own impact work possible, you understand how to decode the business’s strategy and the psychology behind its decision-making. You begin to frame impact and talk about it in language that will resonate most strongly and signal that your efforts are aligned to the business.

Tactics to consider:

Join company earnings calls and/or pull the transcript and pay particular attention to the CEO and CFO remarks in full. Note the exact language they use to describe priorities, risks, and performance. Start using that language in your own communications.
Ask your finance business partner for a 30-minute sync for you and your team to go deeper on what’s new and evolving with your business model, priorities, and financial underpinnings.

Build relationships with five essential collaborators and orient yourself to the problems they are trying to solve

Whether you’re remote or fully onsite, step outside of your vertical and “walk the halls” in your finance, product, strategy, marcomm, and talent orgs. Time spent building relationships – accruing social capital – with leaders in these departments is time spent as well as anywhere.

Prioritize curiosity about their sources of pressure and business anxiety. What are they trying to build or solve? What keeps them up at night? What defines their own success or failure? If they understand you as invested in their success – sharing in their challenges – they’ll likely be much stronger partners to you. You’ll learn how they talk, how they think, and how they see the business, allowing you to adopt or mirror those characteristics in the future when you need their partnership.

Tactics to consider:

Schedule informal 1:1s with a peer-level leader in each of the five functions and come with questions like “What’s the problem you’re most focused on solving right now?” and “How do you think about success in your role over the next 12-18 months?”
Identify one recurring meeting in each of those functions you could observe or contribute to. Even occasional visibility builds familiarity.
Find a low-stakes way to add value to one of their priorities before you ever ask for something. A relevant article, an introduction, a data point they’d find useful.
Create a simple “pressure map” to track what each key internal partner is being measured on, what’s keeping them up at night, and where they’re under scrutiny. Update it after every substantive conversation.
When a new initiative or challenge surfaces in the business, ask yourself: is there an impact angle here that serves their need? before you ask whether it serves yours.

Adopt the same information diet as your execs

To connect your work to that of your CEO and those around them, you’ve got to make sense of the world as they do. While you may not know exactly what your chief executive spends their time reading, it’s a decent assumption that they’re scanning general business coverage (WSJ, Bloomberg, Fortune, NYT) and industry / trade press on a daily basis. Personally, I find WSJ’s CEO Brief, Fortune’s CEO Daily, and NYT’s Dealbook to be excellent choices for daily news and commentary relevant to markets and business.

Tactics to consider:

Add two or three of the recommended newsletters to your morning routine and spend 10 minutes with them before you open Slack or email.
When you read something particularly relevant to your company or industry, get in the habit of forwarding it to a peer or senior leader with a one-line observation. It’s a light-touch way to demonstrate business awareness and stay top of mind.
Once a quarter, review your own content consumption and consider adding another business-focused content source into your content diet.

Track your company relative to peers and competitors

Business leaders are keenly aware of their market position relative to competitors. With social impact, they tend not to want to be laggards. The more you can stay attuned to the pressures – direct or indirect – being placed on the business by its peers the more likely you are to be able to win attention when you identify a competitor gap or opportunity space for impact purposes.

Tactics to consider:

Set up Google Alerts for your top three to five competitors with keywords tied to relevant topics like social impact, community investment, and workforce. This takes ten minutes and surfaces competitive intelligence passively.
Before any major internal pitch or planning conversation, do a quick scan of what peer companies have announced or been recognized for recently. Knowing where your company sits — ahead, behind, or alongside — gives you a sharper edge in those conversations.
Ask your NationSwell Impact Team about doing a competitor or peer scan for you.

Increasingly, part of earning your license to operate as an impact leader is about closing the distance between how you think and how the business thinks. When that gap is wide, your influence is built on the basis of successful advocacy. When that gap is narrow, your influence is built on the basis of a strong business orientation and business discipline. More on that latter piece when I share Part 2 of Influence at Work: “Becoming an Asset to the Business.”

The NationSwell Council on Workforce Innovation for a Changing World

Posted on March 27, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

We’re living through one of the most profound shifts in the history of work. According to LinkedIn data, 70% of the skills used in most jobs will change by 2030, accelerated by Artificial Intelligence. AI and emerging technologies are transforming not only how we work, but how we design work – creating new roles, redefining old ones, and making evolving skills the currency of career growth in a more dynamic and rapidly shifting labor market.

Meeting this moment requires grappling with hard questions: What will the jobs of the future be? How are we teaching, training, and upskilling learners to ensure access to opportunity is inclusive — from early career to lifelong professionals? And perhaps most importantly, how can we harness this moment to drive workforce innovation that benefits all workers?

In the first quarter of 2026, the NationSwell Council kicked off a Salon series dedicated to exploring Workforce Innovation for a Changing World. The convenings that followed connected leaders across sectors on how we can prepare a workforce that thrives amid AI-driven uncertainty and where innovation expands access to opportunity.

We’re excited to present a curated collection of the insights and essential resources we’ve distilled from these conversations.

Key Insights:

Data is a major missing piece. The best existing data on in demand skills and jobs is still 12 months behind the market. A major challenge and opportunity exists in getting large employers to share and leverage their data to better inform the field.
Future-ready skills matter as much as technical ones. As AI reshapes entry-level work, adaptability, curiosity, empathy, and learning agility are becoming foundational.
We need broad AI fluency. From those in and looking to enter the workforce, to teachers, administrators and nonprofit professionals, broad AI fluency will be required to drive meaningful contributions from society on the path AI takes in the coming years.
Deep and broad partnership will be required moving forward. No single organization can keep up alone; collaboration across nonprofits, employers, funders, and government is critical to meeting this moment.
Hope is essential. Especially for young people and communities facing layered barriers, agency, belonging, and belief in possibility remain powerful drivers of economic mobility.
This moment in AI & workforce can’t be separated from the broader cultural context. As AI accelerates amid heightened attacks on our most vulnerable communities, there is an urgent risk of further embedding harm into systems at scale. From representation in the development of AI, to data, use cases and learning pathways, equity in AI design and deployment will be essential to building a future of broadly shared prosperity.
The Redesign of work is already here. We’re at a turning point. AI and automation are changing not just how we work, but what work looks like. Many entry-level jobs are disappearing, while new kinds of work are growing in the gig, creator, and hybrid economies. As the old idea of a “career ladder” fades, people are finding less traditional and more flexible ways to build their careers. This raises an important question: if early-career jobs are disappearing, how will people get their start? We believe we need to create new kinds of beginner roles and pathways that give people the same experience and mobility those entry-level jobs once did.
Learning and training must catch up to reality. We know that traditional workforce programs often assume linear journeys — start, train, promote — but today’s workers move fluidly between sectors, roles, and even employment forms. We discussed the need for real-time, responsive learning models that evolve as quickly as technology does. Ideas included reverse mentoring and volunteerism as a pathway for skill-building and cross-sector exposure. We also emphasized the importance of creating spaces where people can “fail forward” — building confidence and adaptability through experimentation rather than perfection.
Inclusion and belonging across generations. We recognized that demographic change is reshaping the workforce conversation. Workers over 40 are often excluded from AI and tech training, even as their roles shift most rapidly. To build a truly inclusive innovation economy, we must foster belonging and skill development across all generations. That means normalizing lifelong learning and supporting mid- and later-career professionals.
The opportunity for community-centered innovation. We talked about how communities can create their own “value loops” — local systems where entrepreneurship helps solve social problems and create lasting jobs. Instead of keeping nonprofits and businesses separate, we can build hybrid models that mix purpose with profit. We also emphasized the importance of skilled trades, which are still vital, less likely to be replaced by AI, and can help anchor stronger local economies.
Anticipating, not reacting, to workforce shifts. To get ahead of disruption, we need earlier, proactive interventions — particularly in regions already feeling economic shocks, such as the DC/DMV area. We discussed the need for early warning systems, scenario planning, and community-driven transition strategies that safeguard pathways before they collapse.
The promise — and responsibility — of AI. AI is ultimately amplified intention — it reflects and expands what we design it to do. It can help grow human potential, creativity, and equity, but only if guided with care and purpose. Without thoughtful guardrails, it could instead widen existing inequities. The real question is: who will invest in the work needed — the experimentation, retraining, and community innovation — to make sure the future of work benefits everyone?

Resources shared:

Beyond the Map: Rethinking How We Invest in Rural Communities

Posted on March 20, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

Rural communities across the U.S. are too often framed by what they lack rather than in terms of the deep assets, leadership, and innovation they already hold. They also face persistent gaps in philanthropic investment, infrastructure, and long-term capital, even as they are critical to the nation’s economic, cultural, and civic future

During a March 19 virtual Leader Roundtable, NationSwell, the Walton Family Foundation, the Delta Philanthropy Forum, and a great group of cross-sector leaders gathered to explore what effective, community-centered rural investment actually looks like in practice. Drawing on insights from the Mississippi-Arkansas Delta — a region that reflects both the challenges and the promise of rural America — the conversation highlighted how place-based strategies rooted in trust, listening, and long-term commitment can unlock opportunity.

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

Key takeaways:

Rural isn’t just a geography, it’s a cultural context. Rural communities are often discussed as sparse populations or hard-to-reach places, but in practice they function as distinct cultural ecosystems with their own histories, norms, and relationship structures. That shift in framing matters: Once rural is understood as a culture and context rather than a category, the equity implications become harder to ignore.

Let the people closest to the challenge shape the solution. Across the conversation, one principle kept resurfacing: the most durable ideas tend to come from the people already living and working in the place. Funders can play an important and catalytic role, but the work is strongest when capital flows from local wisdom rather than overriding it. Experimentation matters — but it matters most when communities help define what success looks like.

Redefine scale in percentage points, not raw volume. Traditional philanthropic metrics tend to privilege large urban markets because outputs are easier to maximize there, but in rural communities, impact often shows up more meaningfully as share of need met, not total number served. A smaller absolute number can represent a far deeper level of transformation.

Partner with rural communities as “test kitchens”, but also fund them beyond the pilot. Rural places can serve as ideal proving grounds for innovation because interventions can be tested at smaller scale, with lower upfront capital and clearer community feedback loops. But too often, philanthropy treats rural communities as places to experiment on rather than places to invest with. If a model works in a rural context, it may be more transferable than assumed — but only if funders stay long enough to support sustainability.

Invest in ecosystems rather than isolated projects. In rural regions, no single town or institution exists in a vacuum. What happens in one community often creates ripple effects across neighboring towns and regional networks, meaning that effective place-based investment requires thinking beyond individual grants or municipalities and designing for coordination across a broader ecosystem.

Pair data with lived experience to understand what a region actually needs. Quantitative indicators can identify where opportunity gaps exist, but can’t fully explain how those gaps are experienced on the ground. Stronger investment decisions emerge when funders use data as a starting point, then pressure-test it through direct conversation with local residents, practitioners, and community leaders. In rural communities especially, context is often the difference between a good strategy and a misfire.

Remove match requirements and other structural barriers that quietly exclude rural communities. Many rural and rural BIPOC communities are shut out not because they lack ideas or leadership, but because they lack the upfront capital required to meet standard philanthropic or public-sector thresholds. One-to-one matches often reproduce inequity under the guise of rigor; if funders want different outcomes, they need to revisit the rules that determine who can even get in the door.

Make communities of choice, not just communities of need. The goal is not simply to mitigate decline or address deprivation, but to build places where people want to stay, return, and invest their lives. That means activating local assets — including culture, recreation, history, civic pride, etc. — alongside economic fundamentals. Place-based investment becomes more durable when it supports belonging and aspiration, not just service delivery.

Rural communities of color sit at the sharpest edge of underinvestment. The most severe inequities often emerge where rural geography and race intersect. Rural Black communities, tribal communities, and colonias are places where the funding gap is especially stark, despite persistent poverty and strong local leadership. Any serious conversation about equitable place-based investment must confront that layered exclusion directly.

Resiliency and Innovation in Philanthropy

Posted on March 20, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

A year after sweeping federal funding cuts and mounting political pressure on equity- and justice-focused work, many funders are reexamining how to stay effective and principled in an increasingly constrained and polarized environment—while also stepping up to fill the void left by government withdrawal.

On March 17, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable dedicated to unearthing the future of resilient, adaptive philanthropy. Together, participants explored how funders are retooling their strategies, embracing new approaches to partnership and capital deployment, and designing innovative responses to ensure critical work continues—and flourishes—despite the headwinds.

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

Key Takeaways:

Build resilience by expanding your role beyond grants.
Funders can use tools like loan guarantees, intermediary contracts, convenings, and data partnerships to unlock public dollars, de-risk capital projects, and move money more quickly to smaller and BIPOC-led organizations. This “beyond-the-grant” posture helps communities weather policy and funding shocks while preserving critical services.

Invest in leaders as people, not just as program drivers.
Sabbaticals, accelerators, and holistic leadership support shift leaders from surviving to stewarding long-term power. Funding wellness, reflection, and capacity functions as essential infrastructure for any durable ecosystem, not a luxury line item.

Move resources at the speed of community need.
Models like the Bridge Project’s direct cash to moms, rapid-response funds for immigrant communities, and crisis cash distributed through platforms such as GoFundMe show how trust-based, flexible capital can stabilize families and organizations in moments of acute disruption. Designing for speed, flexibility, and local decision-making allows philanthropy to meet the moment, not just the grant cycle.

Use data and narrative to protect civic infrastructure.
Tools like the Congressional District Health Dashboard and City Health Dashboard, paired with investigative and movement journalism, help communities see where systems are failing and where solutions are emerging. Revisiting philanthropic origin stories and aligning capital with equity, democracy, and community-defined priorities are critical to strengthening civic infrastructure.

Strengthen the ecosystem through relationships and matchmaking.
“Philanthropic matchmaking,” co-funding, and warm handoffs ensure that promising leaders and organizations can connect with the right capital, even when a single funder cannot meet a need. Transparent feedback, honest conversations about fit, and intentional network-building help great ideas secure flexible, multi-year support and reinforce that no one has to navigate this landscape alone.

Resiliency and Innovation in Nonprofit Leadership

Posted on March 11, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

A year after federal funding cuts, the dismantling of USAID, and politicized targeting of organizations advancing equity and justice, many nonprofits have been forced to adapt—revisiting their models, rethinking partnerships, and finding new ways to sustain mission-critical work amid heightened uncertainty.

On March 10, NationSwell and fellow nonprofit leaders gathered virtually for an honest, forward-looking discussion on what resiliency and innovation look like now, exploring how organizations are evolving to protect their missions, secure new sources of support, and design fresh solutions to address the widening gaps in funding and services left in the wake of these shifts. Some of the most salient insights from that discussion appear below.

Key takeaways

Build resilience through financial contingencies and diversified resources. Leaders are strengthening their ability to navigate uncertainty by planning for multiple scenarios and expanding the range of resources that sustain their work. Diversified funding creates the flexibility organizations need to adapt while continuing to serve communities.

Utilize partnerships as investments in long-term capacity. Nonprofit leaders and funders emphasize the power of trust-based philanthropy and capacity-building investments. Partnerships rooted in flexibility, shared learning, and multi-year support enable organizations to strengthen their operations while responding more effectively to shifting contexts.

Anchor innovation in a clear value proposition. In a disruptive environment where resources are constrained and expectations continue to rise, organizations are sharpening their understanding of the value they deliver. Clarity around distinct roles, interventions, and offerings, enables the sector’s most impactful ideas to emerge through creative adaptation.

Listen closely to key constituents through ongoing discovery. Resilient organizations are deeply attuned to the needs of the people and partners who shape their work. By continuously engaging communities, participants, funders, and collaborators through conversation, feedback, and observation, organizations can ensure that programs remain aligned with evolving needs.

Leverage storytelling to connect mission with impact. Storytelling is a powerful tool for navigating complexity while keeping organizations grounded in the purpose of their work. By translating outcomes into compelling narratives, nonprofits clarify the role of their programs, strengthen their relevance, and communicate both the urgency of today’s challenges and the progress being made.

Create shared infrastructure that strengthens the ecosystem. Rather than working in isolation, organizations should explore ways to pool resources, knowledge, and operational capacity across partnerships. Shared infrastructure allows nonprofits to scale impact and reduce duplication across the sector.

Strengthen the ecosystem through collective resilience. In times of uncertainty, nonprofit leadership relies on networks of support that extend across organizations, funders, and communities to enable progress toward shared goals. The strength to navigate disruption grows from shared responsibility, trusted partnerships, and the belief that the work only moves forward together.

Building Good Governance to Power Collective Impact

Posted on March 11, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

Collaboration is only as strong as the structure behind it. When priorities shift, leadership changes, or tough tradeoffs arise, collective impact efforts can be put at risk unless stabilized by good governance. The initiatives that endure look different. They build governance systems that clarify roles, set decision rules, distribute authority, and manage accountability with discipline.

During a virtual Leader Roundtable on March 5, NationSwell convened impact leaders from business, philanthropy, and nonprofits to dig into what “best-in-class governance” actually looks like in cross-sector collaboration today. Some of the most salient insights from that discussion appear below:

Key takeaways

Clarified expectations and roles require transparency at the outset of a collaborative effort. In collaboratives that represent the interests of a broader community, don’t be shy about overcommunicating about what participation will entail from the outset of the effort. Being explicit on the front end about things like time commitments, decision-making authority, and what kind of representation is needed helps prevent misalignment and helps partners understand both the opportunity and responsibility of participation.

Ensure governance bodies include leaders capable of acting at a systems level. Not every forum is designed for broad participation. Governance groups are most effective when members have the authority, perspective, and institutional backing to move ideas into action within complex systems.

Clearly distinguish between advisory voices and decision-making bodies. Successful collaboratives often separate broad community engagement from formal governance. The delineation allows initiatives to incorporate diverse perspectives while ensuring decisions can be made efficiently by a defined leadership group.

Design governance structures that enable action, not bureaucracy. Governance should create clarity and accountability without slowing momentum. Clear decision pathways and defined roles helps partners move quickly while maintaining shared responsibilities.

Invest in backbone organizations to coordinate complex partnerships. Large collaboratives benefit from a dedicated coordinating entity responsible for facilitation, communication, and operational alignment. This backbone function helps maintain momentum while allowing partners to focus on their specific contributions.

Revisit governance structures as collaborations evolve. Many initiatives begin informally, but as they grow in scope and complexity, clearer governance becomes essential. Periodically reassessing roles, processes, and decision rights helps ensure structures remain fit for purpose.

Balance urgency with long-term stewardship. In moments of volatility and uncertainty, leaders often feel pressure to act quickly. Thoughtful governance provides the discipline needed to move decisively while protecting long-term collaboration and shared goals.

Q4 2025 Social Impact Trends

TREND REPORT

Posted on March 2, 2026May 20, 2026

Download

NationSwell’s quarterly trend spotter provides impact professionals with visibility into the most noteworthy, timely, and material shifts in the field. For Q4 of 2025, our report explores the following six trends:

Food security draws mainstream attention amid government shutdown
AI-driven layoffs hit tech and service industries, but overall employment impact remains modest
Philanthropies and nonprofits are investing more in AI, but governance needs to catch up
Political leaders continuing pressure on corporate leadership and civil society
Sustainability efforts continue, but more quietly and with less accountability

Share this report

Recommended Features

PepsiCo | Feeding potential

How PepsiCo’s Food for Good is creating a blueprint for global food security

hands around a boardroom table, laptops out, in deep discussion

Practical Applications for AI in Impact Work

Takeaways from NationSwell’s virtual Leader Roundtable on Practical Applications for AI in Impact Work.

Place Based Impact: Preparing Communities for Shifts in Funding

Posted on February 26, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

Many communities are bracing for a new era of volatility in public funding. Federal and state commitments that once underpinned local economic development, workforce programs, public health, and social infrastructure are shifting—sometimes slowly, sometimes abruptly. For place-based partnerships, the question is no longer how to “navigate uncertainty,” but how to get ahead of it: building durable coalitions, diversified capital stacks, and locally anchored strategies that can withstand political and budget swings.

On February 24, NationSwell hosted leaders from philanthropy, business, and nonprofit organizations for a virtual Leader Roundtable on what it means to be proactive rather than reactive in this moment. Together, we identified some of the emerging funding realities that matter most, examined models that successfully blend public, private, and philanthropic investment, and explored how communities can lock in long-term capacity.

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

Key takeaways

Choose the sandbox before building the partnership. Cross-sector collaboration becomes more durable when partners identify a single, shared leverage point to experiment within first. Rather than attempting to solve everything at once, clarity about “where we play together” creates trust, momentum, and space for additional tentacles to grow over time.

Design for volatility, not stability. Federal funding cliffs, frozen allocations, and delayed rulemaking are cascading unevenly through state and local systems. The challenge is not only reduced dollars but radical unpredictability. Communities that build flexible structures — scenario planning, adaptable staffing, blended capital, diversified revenue — are better positioned than those waiting for clarity.

Build infrastructure that can outlast any single funding cycle. Place-based partnerships anchored around shared outcomes and generational time horizons prove more durable than programmatic responses tied to specific grants. When communities control data, define their own metrics, and align around long-term goals, funding shifts become disruptions — not existential threats.

Centering long term resilience while meeting emergency needs is critical. Crisis funding often pulls oxygen away from structural work. While emergency pivots are necessary, abandoning long-term capital strategies undermines resilience. Patient investment may move more slowly, but it builds the conditions that reduce the need for perpetual crisis response.

Sequence cross-sector roles intentionally — don’t assume alignment will happen organically. Many effective tools already exist across philanthropy, government, finance, and community organizations, but they operate in silos. Progress depends less on inventing new models and more on clarifying who de-risks first, who follows, and who sustains momentum over time.

Shift from dependency to agency in funding relationships. Traditional funding flows often create quiet dependency rather than shared ownership. This moment presents an opportunity to reimagine civic infrastructure so communities are less reliant on shifting political winds and more grounded in mutual aid, local partnership, and distributed leadership.

Define your highest leverage point with ruthless clarity. In periods of contraction, organizations that articulate a singular, sharp value proposition are better positioned to build durable partnerships. Simplicity creates alignment; alignment creates momentum.

Educate internally before reacting externally. Policy shifts, whether related to Medicaid, SNAP, or federal allocations, cascade through state and county systems unevenly. Investing in internal understanding of implementation realities builds smarter, steadier responses than reacting to headlines alone.

Plan for long-term disruption, not a return to “normal.” Assuming a political pendulum swing will restore prior funding norms creates strategic blind spots. Durable strategy accounts for sustained volatility rather than temporary turbulence.

Recognize that local governments are capacity-constrained, not idea-constrained. Municipal leaders are absorbing compounding responsibilities as federal roles recede. The barrier is rarely imagination; it is operational bandwidth and systems capacity. Partners who reduce friction and bring execution support add more value than those offering additional strategy alone.

Use this moment to reimagine civic infrastructure, not just fortify it. Resilience should not mean reinforcing fragile systems that created dependency in the first place. Volatility can serve as an opening to rethink power, partnership, and local agency. Cultural imagination and narrative often precede structural change.

Five Minutes with… Goodstack’s Aylin Oncel

Posted on February 26, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

As corporate impact programs grow more ambitious, they’re also becoming more complex. Employee engagement, grants, foundations, and product-led giving often evolve in parallel — built by different teams, on different systems, at different moments in time. The intent is strong — but without shared infrastructure, friction sets in: fragmented data, inconsistent governance, duplicated nonprofit relationships, and rising operational costs.

Enter Goodstack, which was built to address that disconnect. As expectations around transparency, compliance, and measurable impact continue to rise, the need for connective infrastructure has become more important than ever. Rather than layering new initiatives onto old systems, Goodstack helps organizations unify nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance, and reporting into a cohesive impact operating system — allowing distinct programs to remain purposeful while connected in execution.

For this installment of Five Minutes with…, NationSwell spoke with Aylin Oncel — VP of Social Impact at Goodstack — about what breaks down when social impact efforts remain siloed, why infrastructure is emerging as the next frontier of corporate impact, and what becomes possible when programs evolve from ad hoc initiatives into a connected, compounding strategy.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: How would you describe the core problem Goodstack is trying to solve for in corporate social impact — what tends to break down inside companies when CSR programs, employee engagement, and product-led giving aren’t connected to each other?

Aylin Oncel, VP of Social Impact, Goodstack: In my role as VP of Social Impact at Goodstack, I spend a lot of time talking with companies that are deeply committed to doing good, but are navigating increasingly complex impact ecosystems. What I see consistently is not a lack of intent, but a lack of connective infrastructure.

Many impact efforts across an organization start off siloed. Employee engagement, grants, and product-led giving are usually built at different moments, by different teams, in response to different needs. That’s a realistic and often effective starting point. The challenge emerges as those programs scale.

As organizations grow, disconnected systems begin to create friction. Impact data fragments, experiences become inconsistent, and strategic alignment becomes harder to sustain, both internally and for the nonprofits on the receiving end. We often see the same nonprofit relationships managed across multiple tools, different verification standards applied across programs, and teams spending significant time reconciling data rather than learning from it. Operational costs increase, global rollouts slow down, and risk rises when governance and tracking are inconsistent.

Goodstack helps by providing shared infrastructure that allows these efforts to remain distinct in purpose, but connected in execution. By standardizing nonprofit verification, donation flows, governance, and reporting across programs, we help company impact evolve from standalone initiatives into a coherent, resilient impact operating system.

NationSwell: How do you define the role Goodstack is actually seeking to play for companies, and why does that distinction matter in the current CSR landscape?

Oncel, Goodstack: We think of Goodstack as infrastructure for corporate impact, and also as a strategic partner helping companies bring their impact efforts together in a way that’s sustainable over time.

Our role is to provide the core systems companies and nonprofits can rely on, including nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance frameworks, and shared visibility across employee programs, customer experiences, foundations, and grants. Our partnership shows up in helping teams see and operate those efforts as part of a single impact strategy, rather than as separate initiatives competing for attention or resources.

That distinction matters because impact work today is inherently cross-functional, while expectations around trust, compliance, and measurement continue to rise. Companies need flexibility in how they activate and scale giving, but they also need a partner who understands the full ecosystem and can help connect programs into a cohesive strategy. When that foundation is in place, teams spend less time rebuilding systems and more time focusing on outcomes, engagement, and long-term impact.

NationSwell: You’ve identified a gap between different internal CSR stakeholders — HR, foundations, product, sales — who often aren’t talking to each other. What’s lost when that fragmentation persists, and what becomes possible when those efforts are connected?

Oncel, Goodstack: When CSR efforts stay fragmented, the biggest thing that’s lost is momentum.

Each team may be doing meaningful work in isolation, but those efforts rarely reinforce one another. Employees don’t always see how their time or giving fits into a broader narrative. Impact data lives in disconnected spreadsheets. Leaders miss opportunities to understand what’s resonating, what’s scaling, and where real outcomes are being created.

When efforts are connected through shared infrastructure and standards, participation tends to increase because experiences are simpler and more transparent. Insights improve because impact is measured consistently. Companies move from one-off campaigns to an always-on strategy that scales across teams and geographies. Impact shifts from episodic to compounding.

NationSwell: Without getting into proprietary details, can you share an example of a moment when things really clicked — when a company started to see its impact efforts as one connected system, and changed how they worked or thought about CSR?

Oncel, Goodstack: One of the clearest “click” moments I’ve seen is when a company realizes it no longer needs separate systems for nonprofit programs, employee giving, and grants. Once the underlying infrastructure is standardized across nonprofit verification, donation flows, and shared reporting, impact stops feeling like a collection of disconnected initiatives and starts functioning as part of the company’s operating system.

Teams spend less time managing logistics and more time thinking strategically. Reporting cycles that once took weeks begin to happen in near real time, and moments like GivingTuesday shift from one-off obligations into genuine opportunities to accelerate engagement. Volunteer initiatives spark interest in giving, giving data surfaces the causes employees care about, and those insights inform grantmaking nominations and company-wide campaigns. Product-led programs reveal new opportunities to engage customers more meaningfully. Instead of running ad hoc initiatives, teams learn from patterns, adapt faster, and move forward with a shared sense of purpose.

NationSwell: How would you describe the next evolution of CSR, and what signals tell you whether or not we’re already moving in that direction?

Oncel, Goodstack: I see the next evolution of CSR unfolding across three dimensions.

First, expanding stakeholder engagement by embedding giving into products and everyday experiences. Thoughtful design makes participation intuitive and expands who gets to be part of impact.

Second, meet employees where they already are. Atlassian, a Goodstack partner, exemplifies this approach in its employee engagement program. As Atlassian employees volunteer and donate, they earn rewards for themselves and nonprofits they care about directly on the platform – with high-impact activities unlocking bigger rewards. It recognizes a wide range of giving behaviors and gives people a clear, flexible path to increasing their impact.

Third, connecting efforts across teams so impact isn’t experienced as a series of disconnected programs, but as a cohesive narrative that demonstrates compounding progress over time.

The signals are already here. More leaders are asking not just how much was given, but who it reached, what changed, and how programs influence behavior and outcomes. That shift in questioning reflects a maturing field.

NationSwell: Goodstack sits at a unique intersection of data, infrastructure, and ecosystem visibility. How do you think about using that vantage point to not just report on impact, but to help shape better decisions?

Oncel, Goodstack: We’re thoughtful about how we use data and AI, because visibility alone doesn’t drive better decisions. It has to be paired with strong infrastructure, clear standards, and human judgment.

Where AI becomes powerful for us is in reducing friction and surfacing patterns that are difficult to see across large, complex impact programs. That can include revealing where engagement drops off, where interest clusters around specific causes, or where programs unintentionally overlap. These insights help teams act with greater confidence and intention.

Importantly, AI isn’t replacing decision-making. It’s supporting it. By pairing intelligent systems with verified nonprofit data, consistent governance, and transparent reporting, we help leaders spend less time reconciling information and more time designing impact strategies that are intentional, equitable, and resilient over time.

NationSwell: For CSR leaders who feel stuck repeating the same campaigns year after year, what’s one question they should be asking themselves if they want to unlock a more integrated, strategic approach to impact?

I’d encourage leaders to step back and ask, what problem are we actually trying to solve?

It’s easy to default to familiar formats and moments on the calendar without reassessing whether they’re still aligned with today’s challenges. Instead of starting with what you’ve always done, it can be more powerful to focus on how you might unlock new impact in service of your goals and overall mission.

That might mean pulling different levers, such as engaging customers in giving, designing employee programs that drive meaningful behavior change, or increasing access to funding and visibility for nonprofits that are often overlooked. When infrastructure is stable, leaders have the freedom to think creatively, test new approaches thoughtfully, and learn from what works.

The shift isn’t about reinventing the wheel. It’s about being clearer on the outcomes you want and more strategic in how you get there.

A Better Marketplace: Aligning Workforce Supply and Demand

Posted on February 13, 2026May 20, 2026 by Brianna Provenzano

Despite historic investments in workforce development, America’s talent marketplace remains deeply fragmented – employers can’t find the skilled workers they need, while millions of workers remain underemployed or left out of opportunity altogether.

During a NationSwell roundtable on February 10, leaders from business, philanthropy, education, and policy came together to explore how we can better align the disparate pieces of the workforce ecosystem. Below are a few of the models that surfaced that are bridging the gap between training supply and employer demand, and driving real results for workers, businesses, and communities alike.

Key Takeaways:

Design workforce strategies for non-linear career journeys. Real-world careers rarely follow a straight path from education to employment. Adults cycle through transitions – career changes, skill updates, pauses, and reinvention. Yet, many workforce systems remain built on linear assumptions (train → place → exit) and risk excluding the learners they aim to serve.

The opportunity:

Design pathways that anticipate re-entry and reinvention
Normalize career cycling
Build systems that assume movement, not permanence

Extend support beyond initial job placement to enable sustained economic mobility. Entry into a role is only one milestone. Workers often stall after landing their first opportunity. The true test of alignment isn’t placement – it’s progression. Continued upskilling, advancement pathways, and alumni engagement are important to achieving long-term economic mobility. We need to be asking if workers are building durable mobility over time.

Sustained mobility requires:

Continued upskilling
Advancement pathways
Alumni engagement
Financial capability support
Clear progression toward a thriving wage (not just a living wage)

Close the communication gap between skills and courses. There is a fundamental disconnect between how employers articulate needs (skills, competencies, capabilities) and how education systems structure offerings (courses, credits, seat time). Translating between these frameworks, and moving toward skills-based validation, remains a critical alignment challenge. Research from WGU highlighted that employers struggle to evaluate skill sets beyond resumes. Employers prioritize critical thinking, adaptability, problem-solving, and emotional intelligence – but struggle to see those signals clearly. Translating between these frameworks – and moving toward credible, skills-based validation remains a central alignment challenge.

Anchor curriculum development in employer-identified skill gaps. Effective training models are co-designed with employers, focusing on what companies are hiring for now and where talent shortages persist. Demand-driven alignment strengthens both learner outcomes and employer confidence in training pipelines. Hands-on training models reinforce the importance of foundational technical competency alongside durable human skills.

Build post-graduation ‘captive ecosystems’ that promote talent portability. In K-12 education, we have a captive ecosystem: learners are enrolled, connected to infrastructure, supported by shared tools, and guided through a structured progression. That system – while imperfect – creates continuity, accountability, and exposure to skill-building environments. After graduation, that ecosystem dissolves. For many workers – especially those who are low-income, career-changing, or not attached to a large employer – there is no comparable structure guiding ongoing development, skill validation, or mobility. Navigation becomes fragmented and self-directed in a system that is complex and rapidly evolving.

The opportunity is to intentionally design post-secondary and workforce ecosystems that replicate the strengths of captive ecosystems: continuity of support, access to shared infrastructure and tools, structured exposure to experiential learning, ongoing skill validation, real-time labor market insight, and clear progression pathways.

Embed experiential learning as a core signal of readiness. Experience is increasingly the differentiator. Learners must be able to demonstrate capabilities in addition to acquiring knowledge. Simulations, project-based learning, real-world datasets, internships, and apprenticeships were framed as essential mechanisms for building confidence, validating skills, and meeting employer expectations for experience. Experiential learning lowers risk for employers, provides tangible evidence of capability, builds durable skills in real contexts, and supports transferable skill translation (especially for veterans or career changers).

Adapt to how AI is reshaping hiring patterns and skill expectations. AI is not eliminating talent demand – but it is reshaping it. Employer data indicates a shift toward mid-level talent, reduced entry-level hiring in certain sectors, and increased emphasis on AI fluency alongside durable human skills. This evolution heightens the importance of adaptable credentialing and experience-building pathways. Lagging data – often 12 months behind labor market realities, also limits responsiveness. Real-time data systems and better cross-platform integration are critical to staying aligned with demand.