In the social impact space, initiatives or programs often have limited resources—money, time, people, or myriad other things. This means that social impact initiatives can rarely be "all things to all people".

This limitation must never be used as an "excuse" for exclusion or substandard outcomes, however, it can be useful for initiatives and programs to understand, map, and communicate limitations to stakeholders effectively and with empathy.

The below model is a simple, quick-reference tool that can be used for either planning or reflection on the limitations of your work. It is a graph to plot where your work (or different elements of your work) sits. It can also be useful to uncover blindspots and better understand gaps that need to be addressed.

‍

‍

‍

Understanding the graph

Terminology

‍

Disappointment

Disappointment is sadness or displeasure caused by the non-fulfilment of hopes or expectations.

‍Harm

Harm is physical or mental injury of any degree. Harm is nuanced, is experienced differently by each person, and is manifested in each person in different ways. This framework is intended to be indicative and does not attempt to diagnose specific harms. In the context of this framework, harm typically relates to harm caused by you or your initiative's actions.

‍Conscious

Conscious is to be aware—it is intentional and deliberate. Conscious actions are decided upon.

‍Unconscious

Unconscious is to be unaware—it is unintentional and often accidental. Unconscious actions are often determined without scrutiny.

‍

Quadrants

Although the graph is a spectrum in two directions, it can be (reductively) broken into four basic quadrants:

‍

Conscious disappointment

Conscious disappointment is about understanding the shortcomings of your work in advance.

This is the quadrant where you "want" your limitations to be: no one is being harmed and you're actively aware of the limitations of your work. Unconscious disappointment will often reflect the statement: "We couldn't do x thing because of x, named reason".

For example: A sexual health roadshow in rural areas not being able to visit every town due to timing and funding limitations.

Conscious disappointment helps to uncover alternatives for the gaps or limitations. e.g. creating a open-source resource for schools to use (regardless of whether the roadshow can physically visit), seeking additional funding to specifically attempt more schools, inviting other schools to the regional hubs, etc.

Conscious disappointment allows clear, up-front communication with stakeholders.

‍

Unconscious disappointment

Unconscious disappointment is only likely to be understood through feedback, or 'post' work. That is, people will inform you of their disappointment. This, therefore, inherently means that what is "subsconcsious" for you and your project, is absolutely conscious for other stakeholders.

For example: The sexual health roadshow goes into a community that has the highest rates of Chlamydia in the state, and only spends a nominal amount of time on the topic, when people in the community would have like to have seen more.

Some stakeholders may overestimate disappointment as harm, though similarly others may underestimate harm as only disappointment. Care must be taken here to understand the difference. Even within the example above, there is a fine line between disappointment and harm, as it could be argued that more time spent on the topic might help reduce associated harms.

Above all, unconscious disappointment should be taken as a learning opportunity to do better next time and tos understand what it will take (e.g. ensuring certain voices are part of the design process in future, doing more stakeholder testing, deeper research into topics, etc.)

‍

Unconscious harm

Similar to above, unconscious harm is likely only to be understood through feedback and consequences. Sometimes harm might be 'only' mild, though may result in serious consequences—including death. Legal, reputational, and financial consequences increase and the question of whether work is justified arises.

For example: The sexual health roadshow using language without realising that it further marginalises and excludes trans-students—negatively impacted participants' mental wellbeing and potentially physical safety.

Unconscious harm should be taken seriously with immediate action taken to remedy associated harms as soon as possible. If the work continues, then deep reflection and redesign is likely required with expanded stakeholders. Impact is not the same as intent and that must be recognised.

Harm must be acknowledged.

‍

Conscious harm

Conscious harm is the most insidious quadrant that you and your work should always try to avoid. Although it is rare that people intentionally want to cause harm, there are many scenarios where 'cost vs worth' become complicated and people acquiesce to harm for a 'greater purpose'.

For example: The roadshow accepts money from a funder who conditionally offers the money if the roadshow excludes trans health topics. This scenario is complicated and there is a debate to be had as to whether the improvement of sexual health outcomes for many students is worth the further marginalisation of some students.

Ethical and moral alignment amongst leadership is critical in avoiding (or making decisions) in this space.

‍

---

The above graph is not designed to be a comprehensive analysis tool, rather is a frame for thinking about, understanding, and responding to limitations of your work.

It is important to note that, like Schrödinger's cat, your work is likely to exist at different spaces of the graph simultaneously.