Nonprofit Build Up® Podcast

Listen to Part Two:

 

Dr. Aleesha Taylor, Principal, Herald Advisors

Dr. Aleesha Taylor is passionate about marshaling resources to benefit vulnerable communities and address pervasive social problems. She has over 20 years of experience leading at the intersection of education, philanthropy, and international development. Aleesha is the Founder and Chief Strategist of Herald Advisors, a boutique strategic advisory firm that helps clients maximize their impact through thought partnership, organizational capacity building, program and strategy design, and leadership and team development. Herald Advisors works with a global range of philanthropies, nonprofit organizations, and networks to strengthen teams and programs and develop sound fundraising and partnership strategies. Sample clients and projects include:

Gender at the Center Initiative: Designed partnership and governance arrangements for the multistakeholder initiative to advance gender equality across eight African countries.

Lever for Change: Impact Partner leading efforts to strengthen diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice across finalists’ proposals for awards ranging from five to one hundred million (USD).

Education.org (formerly Insights for Education): Served as Interim Chief Technical Officer, establishing MOUs with the Government of Kenya and USAID and designing national and global strategies to increase the availability and use of relevant data for decision-making.

Chemonics: Provides design and implementation support for USAID-funded education projects.

Comic Relief-US: Positioned entity to leverage $23 million investment from Salesforce for global programs that address intergenerational poverty.

She is the former Deputy Director of the Open Society Foundations’ global education program, where she managed a team across five countries to implement a global grantmaking portfolio and advanced priorities and partnerships on behalf of the foundations’ Chairman and President. Aleesha was central to the creation of the Private Sector/Foundations constituency of the Global Partnership for Education’s Board of Directors and served as its representative on the Board’s Financial Advisory Committee, which channeled $1.2 billion in grant funding to developing country governments during her tenure.

Aleesha was a Lecturer in International Educational Development at Columbia University’s Teachers College, where she also completed her doctoral studies. She also holds degrees in psychology from Spelman College and the Graduate Faculty for Political and Social Sciences of the New School for Social Research. She has written numerous articles and chapters and is the Co-Editor of Partnership Paradox: The Post-Conflict Reconstruction of Liberia’s Education System, Foreword by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.

Transcript for Part 1:

[INTRODUCTION]

[0:00:08] Nic Campbell: You’re listening to the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. I’m your host, Nic Campbell. I want to support movements that can interrupt cycles of injustice and inequity and shift power towards vulnerable and marginalized communities. I’ve spent years working in and with nonprofits and philanthropies, and I know how important infrastructure is to outcomes. On this show, we’ll talk about how to build capacity to transform the way you and your organization work.

[0:00:39] Stefanie Wong: Hi everyone, and welcome to the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. I’m Stefanie Wong, Buildup’s Executive Portfolio Manager. In today’s Nonprofit Build Up Podcast episode, we are sharing part one of a two-part insightful conversation with Dr. Aleesha Taylor, a leading voice in philanthropy and nonprofit leadership. We delve into the transformative work being led by Dr. Taylor with a spotlight on Herald Advisors, a firm she founded after her impactful tenure at the Open Society Foundations.

In this episode, Dr. Taylor shares the genesis of Herald Advisors and how it emerged from her deep desire to facilitate initiatives that profoundly impact communities. She discusses the complex interplay of philanthropic funds, the power dynamics within organizations, and the system’s level changes needed to truly affect lasting impact. This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in systems change, strategic philanthropy, and the intricacies of nonprofit leadership. Dr. Taylor’s insights challenge us to think critically about how we can better support communities through authentic, accountable, and impactful philanthropy. Don’t miss this conversation that will inspire you to reconsider how you engage with the sector.

[INTERVIEW]

[0:01:59] Stefanie Wong: All right. Hi, Dr. Alicia Taylor. Welcome to the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. I’m very excited for you to join us.

[0:02:08] Aleesha Taylor: Thank you. I’m excited to be here with you, and thank you for the invitation.

[0:02:13] Nic Campbell: Of course. This conversation, I think, is going to be a really fun and engaging one, because I want to hear all about the work that you’re doing, the work that you’re leading, your thoughts on the sector. I know we’ve had conversations where we talked about all kinds of things in the nonprofit world. I’m really excited that folks get to hear your thoughts on what is happening in our space.

I want to start with Herald Advisors. Please, tell me a little bit more about Herald Advisors, how you came up with the idea for it, the work that you’re leading through it and the kinds of folks that you’re working with?

[0:02:52] Aleesha Taylor: Sure. Again, thank you for the invitation and glad to really join your long list and growing list of really, thought leaders in the space of philanthropy and nonprofit leadership. Herald Advisors was born in 2016 as I was transitioning out of the Open Society Foundations, where I was for about 10 years. When I transitioned, I was the Deputy Director of the Global Education Program. 

The idea about Herald Advisors was around facilitating initiatives, broadly speaking, and I’ll come back and talk about the type of initiatives, or things that I’ve been doing, really that impact communities and impact from my spiritual perspective, or spiritual lens, the “least of these, my brothers and sisters.” I’ve always, or long had a question, or curiosity around how philanthropic funds can be utilized actually to do this. Then, of course, that takes you into exploration, or forces you to explore the ways in which organizations facilitate these, and the ways funding is utilized and allocated, and then the power dynamics and machinations around that.

Of course, when you’re talking about organizations, you also have to talk about the individuals that work within them and also the systems within which they work. My ultimate goal, even with the goal for impact at the community level, my ultimate goal, or framework is also looking at the systems within which we all live and are supposed to thrive, at least to some extent, and what are the conditions under which that can take place. That’s the a long-winded, perhaps esoteric way. Then to complicate that, perhaps a bit further, the field within which I sit, even though I’m in the space of philanthropy, my general field is international educational development, and from that lens of how do you impact and advance “the least of these, my brothers and sisters.”

When we look at the importance and the role of education and the process of education and becoming educated and being a lifelong learner, that’s a sector within which I also believe, continue to believe that impact can be felt and where individuals can become, or learn, or gain the skills and capacities and the access and the networks and the resources to thrive in their communities in broader contexts.

Herald Advisors came together and we think about even the name, right, of how – I talk about, am I working today? Rather than saying working or housework, the question that a lot of my friends ask is, so how’s heralding? What are you heralding on, or heralding about today? When we think about when I was coming up with the name for my organization and thinking about what I wanted it to represent, the term herald came to me, or heralding came to me when looking at the root word and what it means. Essentially, the French etymology of the root word refers to a sense, an emissary that works in between two factions, the negotiator, the person that’s facilitating a way forward when there is a conflict.

In my instances, sometimes the moment of difficulty can also just as equally be an opportunity. I find, oftentimes, in our field and probably in life, we feel as though the challenges come when you’re trying to navigate an opportunity. But when you think about it, I mean, if we take the case of education, we can point to all of the gaps and the needs and in global education we talk about the funding gap. Just as I have clients that come to me when they have – they need to re-strategize to fill a funding gap, but actually, sometimes the more immediate, or the more urgent challenge is, okay, we have this huge opportunity. We have pitched this huge idea and now it’s been funded and now what do we do? How do you bring all of the various factions, or various stakeholders in a sense is a better way to say it together, to work in partnership towards an impact goal.

[0:07:24] Nic Campbell: You talked about focusing on how to impact communities. What kinds of organizations, or individuals are you working with to accomplish that systems level change that you were describing?

[0:07:40] Aleesha Taylor: I would say, I have three different types of clients typically. One, the most obvious are individual funders, individual philanthropies, and coming out of a very complex and complicated entity, which was a network of foundations, but OSF, I think, being one of the more complex philanthropies, or having been one of the more complex philanthropies. There’s a language of philanthropic organizations that I’m able to speak and understand.

Quite often, they come to me with both challenges and opportunities, and sometimes they are around board issues and governance dynamics, team dynamic strategy, or strategy issues. Broadly speaking, always under strategy, but that’s always either connected to team dynamics and how organized teams are working together to operationalize a strategy, or how the resources and dynamics are being governed within an organization. One pool of clients that we can just say is individual, or single philanthropy.

I think to that then, and I think also, because of the way in which OSF was organized and the types of organizations that we supported, a good number of my clients can then be considered really affinity groups, or networks of philanthropies. Talk about herding cats, sometimes working with one philanthropy and all of the inherent dynamics and inconsistencies and characteristics of the philanthropy field with the single organization. It’s interesting with 80 organizations signed up for a goal. It’s more akin to as many people say, herding cats.

With that, working with the heads, or executive directors, or strategy leads of various funder affinity groups. Clearly in international educational development, so education funders, some that fund global education broadly, some that focus on a specific subsector, like early childhood development, or girls education and then also, some geography-specific networks, such as organizations that are in an affinity group for funders that fund Africa program. Again, very broad, but then the strategy, or sometimes challenges are finding the various threads to connect and engage the members within these various sub-sectors.

That, and then also, again, from the network perspective, I also put funding bilateral and multilateral funders within that, so the World Bank and UNICEF and USAID and the EU and those entities that fund either directly through bilateral aid, essentially. In the international development space, or through multi stakeholder partnerships, such as the global partnership for education, that takes up, I think, the other still within this funder network piece. Then the third grouping of my clients are also our nonprofit organization. Some networks of NGOs or non-governmental organizations, nonprofit organizations, civil society organizations. Depending on the region, it depends on how they are called and also, still often, with strategy, and sometimes navigating the funders space.

For example, one of my more recent clients is a private national foundation in Zanzibar that operates as a “regular nonprofit, or implementing organization.” I’m working with them to actually shift more so into the funder space, so that they can take up more space in Zanzibar with the work that they do in education, health, and livelihood. Working with the executive director and leadership teams around what that strategic shift could look like and how it would benefit them and their strategy.

In that sense, it’s not necessarily partnering with an organization for nine months to plot out a strategy, but more around the position and understandings upon which strategies are built. I would say that that’s my sweet spot.

[0:11:57] Nic Campbell: Yeah. Go ahead, Aleesha.

[0:11:58] Aleesha Taylor: No, I was just going to say, black woman-owned small business. A lot of my work is thought partnership directly with leaders, or leaders, sometimes CEOs, executive directors, sometimes it’s a program director, depending on the challenge, but also work through a series and network of consultants that I pull in and create teams, again, to respond to the specific challenge, or opportunity, or the task that’s before us.

[0:12:26] Nic Campbell: I’m really glad that you mentioned the last part as well, that just being black woman-owned. I definitely have some questions about that that I want to make sure that we turn to. When you were talking about the different types of clients that you work with, what struck me is that all of those stakeholders are instrumental to systems change and the fact that you’re working across all three types, I think really does speak to the impact that you’re trying to have within communities.

It makes me think about the work you were doing at OSF and then the work you’re doing now and what was the catalyst for that transition. Were you seeing a space that you thought, “Oh, I can step into that space. I see this gap that I want to make sure I close.” Because in your role at OSF, I imagine you were also engaging in some way with these kinds of stakeholders as well. Now, you’re doing it within Herald Advisors. Just wanted to hear a little bit more about what was the impetus behind that transition and what are you seeing Herald Advisors stepping into in terms of the space that you weren’t necessarily stepping into at OSF, or maybe in a different way?

[0:13:34] Aleesha Taylor: That’s a really interesting question. Thank you. Interesting. I would say, the impetus, actually, for my transition from OSF and it’s been – we’re going on eight years, which is shocking. I smiled as you were asking the question, because when I look at the bulk of my clients, it’s actually still from many, it’s through word of mouth and from my network at OSF. On the one hand, we can draw a pretty straight line, right? If people look me up, you pull up heraldadvisors.com, you see a nice logo and an email address, right? That’s just about it. I don’t do much advertising in that sense.

Really, the impetus was, I think, a recognition actually that within the organization, or across the organization, I was being utilized, or my skills were being utilized almost as if I was an internal consultant. I was the deputy director of a global education program, but actually, probably, I would say, throughout the 10 years I was at OSF, never the most focused on our program strategy and program grantees and budgets. It was never more than 50%. Maybe 60% in a good year. When I joined in 2007, my first project was an education recovery project, or an education project and partnership, really, with the government of Liberia.

That then led to my transition into a role that – a title actually, that was more reflective of my role, certainly than deputy director, which really, that came after the role alignment. It’s like, you can’t have all of these random titles. But my random title, which worked well for me, was director of special projects. A director of special projects is essentially a consultant. Somebody that you bring in when it’s like, okay, here’s this opportunity, but how do we move forward? Here’s this problem, this team over here, and even within my program or my department, the people who reported to me were the initiatives that I was responsible for. It was always the individuals, or organizations, we were like, “We’re not sure how this is going to take shape, or these groups don’t really get a lot. Aleesha can figure that out.”

Initially, it led to a lot of frustration, because I’m like, “Why don’t I have a clear portfolio that I can follow?” But then, sometimes that high level, and then it became being responsive to initiatives and requests directly from Mr. Soros. That was actually very critical. At that point, I was even as the deputy director, so I had a program director, then the whoever he reported to and then the president, and then Mr. Soros. For me to be in my office and pick up the phone like, “Hi. Aleesha. George wants to talk to you.” Excuse me? How is he jumping over four levels to call me talking about, “Oh, you know that thing you did in Liberia? Burma is opening up. I think you should move.” What?

It created a lot of cognitive dissonance, because that’s that, if George Soros can call me directly to ask me to go and handle something, first of all, my money doesn’t reflect that. Like, huh. My money doesn’t reflect that and my ego responded well to it, right? But then I was like, “But wait, something is actually off here.” Then, essentially coming to the realization that internally I was being used, not used, or utilized at the consultant.

Liberia in 2007, free roads, running water and electricity, right? Burma, the first time I went to Burma, I had to get fake business cards and clean all the OSF things off of my desktop and security training to make sure how to note when you’re being followed and these people on the last day, right? To that, to then things like, oh, we want to develop a VEI strategy, but we first need an internal mapping, or benchmarking, or understanding of what would an inclusive culture look like at OSF. I lead that task force.

Then it becomes people have been pressing for sabbaticals. We need to put a sabbatical review, or a sabbatical committee together to put together the guidelines for what a sabbatical should be and the blah, blah, blah, and then to interview. I’m on that inaugural committee. Then when role alignment came up, and there were some issues there, then there were we need a study to understand how some junior staff are feeling. “Oh, ask Aleesha.” Then I would find that the task, and it’s funny, because this has continued.

In some ways, while I lament it sometimes, I do recognize that it’s my sweet spot. That task, or that process that comes in, or that needs to be done, or that clarification process prior to your $800,000 strategy contract that you’re going to issue to one of the “big players” to map out your strategy, the things that you need to understand prior to that, that’s what I would end up doing for OSF. Very much so with Herald Advisors, it’s still the same thing. Every once in a while, it’s like, I need that $800,000 process, or that $500,000 process for a six to nine months with a large organization.

My preference, so I get more excited by actually, let me jump in and help you to understand the depths of these specific questions and the framing of it. The minutia of working it out over the next nine months, we do it out of necessity sometime, but to be honest, it’s not necessarily my sweet spot. It’s a lucrative spot. I get excited in those big questions and those things that so many of us avoid. The hard question that if we want to ask them, many organizations don’t really want to answer them. They want to raise them, but they don’t want to answer them. That’s where it sometimes gets into a little – gets a little problematic.

I’ve been having fun so far. There’s always the questions of, what’s next? Where do I double down? One of the reasons why I do remain, or I choose to remain somewhat obscure in the field is because I prefer and value thought partnership. Sometimes the thought partnership and just the range of clients and think about the range of challenges that can come up when you’re talking about systems change and international development, or education systems, or when you’re talking about global financing, the questions are different.

Sometimes when I think about like, okay, let me list out my offerings or our offerings on a website, the list can get so long, right? Then you limit things. But then it’s like, well, that can be boring. It’s been a very interesting exploration to date that I’m excited about.

[0:20:55] Nic Campbell: No, I love that, because I think when you were giving the examples of the kind of work and kinds of projects that you were leading while you were at OSF, a few things popped up for me. One, that you were being called by key stakeholders to exercise critical reasoning, strategic approaches. Some of them have the ability to think strategically and they have the ability to take lots of disparate pieces, put them together in a cohesive way and create a design, a cohesive design that other stakeholders could come and work from it. It’s about bringing lots of different and diverse, often diverse stakeholders to the table and saying, “Okay. I hear your goal. I hear your goal. Here’s a design that collectively takes all those things into account.”

I feel like, you’re doing that now, particularly when you’re talking about systems change. Just to hear you walk through that transition from OSF, it just seems like a natural place for you to show up in and land, and just where strategy is a sole front and center for your work. You mentioned – Sorry, you were about to say something, Aleesha?

[0:22:01] Aleesha Taylor: No. I was going to agree with you, because it’s almost like, that understanding that I bring of the various stakeholders and the worlds within which they live, that’s what I’m more fascinated by and interested in. And the strategy, or the issue, or the problem, or the challenge, that almost becomes secondary. Whereas, most of their strategy-oriented organizations, they lead with, “This is how we can create a dynamic strategy for you.” I think a part of the reason why I have that affinity is because before I got into international educational development, my first advanced degree is in psychology. It’s interesting in that sense, about understanding where different people and organizations are coming from and what their needs are and their own challenges and what they’re doing and then figuring out how can we come to a common resolution.

Sometimes it’s, we call it strategy, but sometimes it’s just conflict. It’s not much different from conflict resolution as well, right? Yeah, it’s interesting. But I’m sorry. What was your next question?

[0:23:10] Nic Campbell: No, I think that makes sense. I like just how we’re talking about this, because it’s not surprising to me that you’re interested in the perspectives that stakeholders are bringing, the goals that they have. Like, what is the context in which they’re sitting? Because at the end of the day, you’re interested in impact. If you’re interested in impact, then you clearly need to understand like, what’s my goal going into it, your goal, this other person’s goal, and how do we come together to actually get us to a place of impact? I think that all really resonates.

You had mentioned that sometimes organizations might raise questions, like raise them. We might even engage a consultant to help us raise these questions, but not necessarily respond to them. I think that that comes up a lot and I want to hear, how do you approach those kinds of situations, right? How do you talk to organizations and say like, “I will be able to work with you on this”? Do you say, “I’m not going to be able to work with you, unless you’re willing to respond to them”? When are the times when you say, “Okay, I can understand why you might raise it,” but not necessarily respond to it? And when do you absolutely say, “No, we need to both raise it and respond to it, because it’s just that critical.”

[0:24:17] Aleesha Taylor: Oh, Nic. You’re getting to the core of my challenges at the moment. Because I think that process, or practice has evolved and is evolving, and it’s becoming more and more complicated as the world progresses. I transitioned out of OSF – well, let me stop putting, making OSF the marker. But I became independent in 2016, right? That’s four years pre-pandemic. Now we’re several years, not even post, but into the pandemic. I also think about that as a line, not necessarily the moment that I transitioned to become an entrepreneur.

It’s interesting, because that distinction about raising questions versus answering questions, I think one of the ways that I have navigated that now that I think about it is actually, preferring to take on shorter and shorter assignments. Just give me the question, or give me the problem, or the challenge, or the solution that you need and let me deliver that. Starting to avoid more so, those longer-term strategy processes, those nine-month processes where you’re really getting under the hood and really uncovering the challenges, because sometimes they are fundamental challenges that go to the core of what these organizations and leaders say that they do, and then it’s increasingly difficult to just, “Okay, let me help you navigate a way to not address this,” because that’s then what it becomes.

The piece about when do I say, yes, when do I just say no. There are some organizations, and because I straddle that line between funders and grantees, so I go to the Funder Network and engage with the Funder Network and Funder conferences, where we gather and talk about trust-based philanthropy and we should all be doing core financing and all of the wonderful platitudes and principles.

Then I’m working on strategies with grantee partners and querying, well, why do you have so many projects, like strategic communications of how do we bring this together. Then they say, “Oh. Well, our funder prefers this and this funder prefers that.” I’m like, wait. Not the same people that were just in DC, wax and poetic. It can’t be the same people year after year after year, right? There are some actual clients that is like, “Yeah, let me – I can find the perfect person for you.”

Still, sometimes acting as that go between. But I’m like, “Yeah. No, this doesn’t get on. This isn’t enough money for the blood pressure spikes that these inconsistencies are going to create.” I think the world in which we live in, which is becoming increasingly divided and calls for an increasing amount of integrity and authenticity and truth-telling, navigating those lines are becoming, honestly, becoming more and more difficult. It’s something I’m currently working through in real-time, because I need to figure that out.

[0:27:31] Nic Campbell: How does being a Black woman-owned business link to all of that?

[0:27:37] Aleesha Taylor: Let’s talk about that. Not just the Black woman-owned business. I’m a Black woman from the Bronx, right? I like to bring that in every day.

[0:27:45] Nic Campbell: Every day.

[0:27:46] Aleesha Taylor: Every day. All day. Big Bronx. Never the little one. When I think about what does it mean for me to show up as my authentic self, right? When you are within an organization and within an organization, let’s say, pre-pandemic, that was a completely different question. When you’re independent, that becomes a different question. Independent now in this time when just as I said, it’s becoming more and more difficult to quiet the critical voice that I have, but then I’m responsible and in charge of what my organization means and says in the space. There’s a challenge there. That’s one thing, right? Six-foot Black woman from the Bronx. I don’t show up in any space physically demure, since I was six feet at age 12. Just the way in which I was just acculturated and how I grew up and just the things we ingest and how that shapes how I show up in the world, that’s one bucket.

The other thing that I didn’t mention before directly is that a lot of my work focused on organizations and leaders across Africa. I work with individuals who look like me, or I look, we look alike. When we’re talking about some of those inconsistencies, while the funders may be, or may have been my peers, the conversations that we have in the corridors are different. Because I can walk up, and if there are two people that look like me and they know me a bit, they may not fully change their conversation.

When someone else rolls up that doesn’t look like us, even though that other person might be my peer, that conversation changes. The challenge is, again, thinking about authenticity and integrity. What I’m wondering now is to what extent do I have a responsibility to create space for more authentic conversations? Because some of the things that aren’t said directly speak to power dynamics, white capitalist patriarchy, white supremacy, and it just comes up. I think it was Audrey Lorde, don’t actually – I’m not sure who the person who said this, but white supremacy is not the shark, it’s the water.

Whether we’re talking about philanthropy, education, international development, you can see it, right? That’s how we as a world, in this world are organized. We see it. It’s apparent all day, every day. We see it all day, every day. Do we acknowledge it? Do we recognize it? Are we numb to it? I find myself as a Black woman-owned business, where I’m recognizing now that I have to pause and listen when I hear what I used to think was like, they’ll throw away comments about, “Oh, Aleesha. We need you in this space, because you could be our voice.” Or, “You’re independent, so you can say the things that we can’t say.” That’s what I hear mostly.

Actually, separately from race. Even my conscious colleagues, or women in philanthropy and those things are like, “Oh, Aleesha, you have the freedom to say what needs to be said.” Which isn’t necessarily true, because if you say too many things about funders, they’re not opening up their strategy books to you, right? Or their books. There’s a line that also has to be navigated and tread. That’s what I keep referring to is what I’m trying to figure out in the moment.

[0:31:41] Nic Campbell: I hear all that and it really resonates, especially when you talked about thinking about how much responsibility do you have, or do you put on yourself to create space for more authentic conversation. I think that is real, because I think it’s something that we think about as black people in this space, black women in this space, particularly black women coming from you from, like you from the Bronx and from the South Bronx at that, that’s – all day, every day.

Bringing all those identities and then balancing that with the philanthropic space and being in this world and how you are advocating on behalf of your clients, working alongside them, I think there’s a lot of dynamics there. I do think about how we should engage, given our role, and then also, just recognizing you were retained for X purpose. What we’re talking about above and beyond, and so does it serve the purpose that you were being retained for, engaged for, or does it not, right? You’re costly doing that balance. I really appreciate it, just the way you talked it through.

[END OF INTERVIEW]

[0:32:49] Nic Campbell: Thank you for listening to this episode of the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. To learn more about the Build Up companies, please visit www.buildupcompanies.com.

[OUTRO]

[0:33:04] Nic Campbell: Thank you for listening to this episode of Nonprofit Build Up. To access the show notes, additional resources, and information on how you can work with us, please visit our website at buildupadvisory.com. We invite you to listen again next week as we share another episode about scaling impact by building infrastructure and capacity in the nonprofit sector. Keep building bravely.

[END]

Part II

[INTRODUCTION]

[0:00:08] Nic Campbell: You’re listening to the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. I’m your host, Nic Campbell. I want to support movements that can interrupt cycles of injustice and inequity and shift power towards vulnerable and marginalized communities. I’ve spent years working in and with nonprofits and philanthropies, and I know how important infrastructure is to outcomes. On this show, we’ll talk about how to build capacity to transform the way you and your organization work.

[0:00:39] Stefanie Wong: Hi everyone, and welcome to the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. I’m Stefanie Wong, Buildup’s Executive Portfolio Manager. In today’s Nonprofit Build Up Podcast episode, we are sharing part two of a two-part insightful conversation with Dr. Aleesha Taylor, a leading voice in philanthropy and nonprofit leadership. We delve into the transformative work being led by Dr. Taylor with a spotlight on Herald Advisors, a firm she founded after her impactful tenure at the Open Society Foundations.

In this episode, Dr. Taylor shares the genesis of Herald Advisors and how it emerged from her deep desire to facilitate initiatives that profoundly impact communities. She discusses the complex interplay of philanthropic funds, and the power dynamics within organizations, as well as the system’s level changes needed to truly affect lasting impact. This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in systems change, strategic philanthropy, and the intricacies of nonprofit leadership. Don’t miss this conversation that will inspire you to reconsider how you engage with the sector.

[INTERVIEW]

[0:01:50] Nic Campbell: When you think about the sector, given everything that we’ve talked about, what do you think we should be doing more of, and what do you think we should be doing less of? That goes for like, on the, you’re looking at funders in the space, if you’re looking at nonprofits receiving funding in that space. What should we be doing more of? What should we be doing less of?

[0:02:14] Aleesha Taylor: Can I curse on your podcast? This is PG.

[0:02:21] Nic Campbell: I think you are the first person.

[0:02:22] Aleesha Taylor: Oh. Well, listen, let me – The pioneer. What we need to be doing less of all around is talking shit, leaning into platitudes, having conferences on what people should be doing, having conferences to present the ideals of our strategy and what we’re planning to do, and the outcomes of whatever process, or retreat, or strategy refresh, just stop it. Tell me what you have done. Let’s show and prove. That’s what we need to do more of. How have you changed a life? How have you empowered organizations? Drop the link. How has this organization’s budget increased?

You’ve been funding this organization or this network for five years. Where are they today? Not the products, or the aspects of your funding, or the outputs of your funding to this organization that are now on your website. How have you helped the organization supported, empowered, enabled the organization and the individuals, or issues or systems that they seek to advance? That’s what we need to be talking about.

We funded this organization for 10 years, or for seven years we’re winding down on the next three years and this is how we are certain. This is what we are doing and this is what we have done and this is how we are certain that they will be sustainable for the next 10 years. Talk about that. How have you set them up to achieve other resources, or to be independent? How many organizations actually folded after your decade of funding? I think in that instance, that then speaks more to with a less equitably explanation to more about, I think that’s a reframing of accountability. What are you doing? How are you held accountable? Not just for the resources that you spend, I’m sorry, I may have to curse again, but for the shit you be talking. How are you held accountable?

Your strategy fell apart. The outcomes that you claimed three years ago hasn’t come to pass. The organizations that you set up have folded, and the next step is just for you to re-strategize and to re-brand yourself and keep it moving like that never happened. What? At the very least, can we talk about that? Can we acknowledge that? Because when nonprofits, if they drop the ball, then there’s a global case study and they can’t get funding and then we talk about, this is why funders have difficulty trusting and da, da.

I would say, in a word without an expletive, I think we have to focus on accountability. Particularly, not focus on accountability, but perhaps reframe our understanding of accountability. Because typically, it’s about the grantee, or the entity, or individual in need being accountable to the funder, or the one with the more power. How do we reframe that, so that the funder is accountable to the organizations that they claim that they are supporting? Reframe the accountability lens towards those with the power and the resources, as opposed to those that don’t have to power and the resources. I think that’s a fundamental.

Again, to go back to the talking that takes place, typically, what happens is we have a conference on. The funders get together and then you can pick two or three of your high-achieving, high standout grantees, and then you’re going to bring them to Paris, or to London, or to Texas, wherever for the conference. You just worked on a Visa, a trip, DSA. You think they’re about to come in and criticize? That’s your accountability. The person that gets the international trip to your conference, that’s how you show your accountability? Nah, we need to shift that up. We need to shift that up.

[0:06:29] Nic Campbell: Yeah. No, I like that a lot. I like that a lot. Because it makes me think about, I know we talk a lot about trust-based philanthropy. We’re thinking about, how do we create systems and processes to show the grantees like, we trust you, we trust that you’re the expert doing the work. I always think about it in the reverse, but let’s think about how a lot of these philanthropies are sitting on funds and how those funds were actually allocated to the philanthropy in the first place. It’s pulled out of extractive systems. Now we’re here. Why should the trust be like, “Oh, no, no. Let’s show them that we trust them, be the grantees.” With also like, “No, let’s show how they can trust us.”

We are the ones that should be trying to earn trust here, as opposed to the other way around. I really like when you’re talking about reframing accountability, I’m like, I’m here for it. I feel like, we talk about that a lot [inaudible 0:07:22] less of. There’s that saying like, who will check me boo?

[0:07:27] Aleesha Taylor: Who’s going to check me, boo? Seriously. It’s the absurdity of hubris, actually. Even before you get to the how were the resources amassed, let’s just for expedience, just skip over that. Then it’s like, how are they amassed and how are you allocating them philanthropically, because it’s a tax loophole, right? It’s the absurdity of sitting and acting as though, particularly for those of us who have been employed by philanthropy, as though we are bestowing these wonderful gifts that we have amassed out of some altruistic purpose. It’s like, no. You can also just pay a taxes. You can do that. Since we’re talk about system strengthening, right? I don’t know. Somehow that doesn’t move forward.

Then, again, the absurdity of amassing the wealth and really, amassing the hubris and helping to shape the laws that allow you to keep then as philanthropic funds for thought to some extent and then say like, “Oh, let’s talk about how we should trust the grantees that help to really just illuminate our hubris in many ways, in some ways. We should let you trust them.”

Then you get these different hashtags. There was one – the south has something to say. It’s always about like, “Hear me. Hear us. We have something to say.” It’s just the frame is the framing is just off. Meanwhile, the experts in some of the countries, in some of the “developing countries,” I was – I’ll give you an example. I was speaking with an M&E expert that I’ve partnered with frequently, and he’s based in Kenya. He was saying, from the beginning of the year, about a month ago, he reached out and was like, “Hey, let’s talk about what’s coming up. I’m going to need your help on this project. Or, let’s talk about how you can work together and what you have coming up that I can support you on, or we can partner on.”

I said to him, I said, “Listen, I need a couple of weeks to decompress.” I’m like, my January, essentially, was the 13^th month of 2023 for me. He said, he’s like, “Oh, I understand that, because I took last month off, so you’ve taken off December.” Because at the end of last year, he said, “I’ve never been more dejected in my life.” This is a senior male, M&E expert, one of the leading ones in the region. He said, “The level of disrespect that I had to endure, I had to stomach from individuals that come into my context that I have to treat like an expert.” Even though I have the experience, I have the contextual knowledge and I have the advanced degrees from their universities. Yet, when they come to my context with nowhere near my experience, I’m supposed to be deferential to them and they talk to me any type of way. This stops me in my tracks, because again, black woman-owned business, integrity, authenticity can see the power dynamics laid bare. It’s more and more difficult for me to move forward and say like, “Okay.”

For him, he was like, “Yes. Take the time that you need to come back to the middle, so that we can push forward.” It’s like, do I really want to push forward in that, or do I want to address it? Don’t want to create a space to address it. All of this, which you probably can hear is leading towards like, what is that container within which these conversations can be had? But not just having the conversations. How do you design and facilitate a way forward through them?

I really appreciate platforms like, Nonprofit AF, and I was just actually recently going through their initiative around crappy funding practices. I don’t know if it’s a website, but I know if you #crappyfundingpractices on LinkedIn, they’re collecting and amplifying voices, anonymously. I think that’s wonderful, because the experiences need to get out there, right? How do you catch a person before they take that four-week hiatus and essentially, push down on what they’ve gone through? How do you create a constructive space for those individuals, but also for funders and those of us who participate in and curate and facilitate, actually, that’s becoming difficult, and facilitate these critical conversations for funders? How do you open up the envelope, or open up the box, so that these conversations are more common and more public, so that we can move forward in a more authentic way? That’s a current preoccupation, I would say.

[0:12:20] Nic Campbell: Yeah, that’s my question. What does that look like? We say, okay, we need to rethink accountability. What’s the first step, right? I’m hearing like, okay, we need to create a space for conversations. But I think about, okay, we create that space, but we’re still in this framework of where is the money coming from? What’s the power dynamic, right? I truly believe power is an interesting thing, because it’s like –

[0:12:46] Aleesha Taylor: Always.

[0:12:47] Nic Campbell: – created by the folks, right? There is no such thing as power, unless you create it, or the situation then determines who has it, right? But it’s not this thing, the whole thing that you’re holding in your hands.

[0:12:57] Aleesha Taylor: It’s always at play.

[0:12:59] Nic Campbell: It’s always at play, right? It’s just such an interesting concept. When I think about the power dynamics that exist, you’re still in that same power dynamic, right? Now, how do you prove, what does that container look like to have those conversations? What does it really look like to reframe accountability in such a way that people aren’t feeling like, I’m going to be hit with repercussions, because of what I’ve said, or what I’ve shared and actually feeling like, they can be honest about the thing and that people also go on the defensive, and it’s not like the – It’s like, this really productive conversation. Accountability is not a like, you did this, so I’m doing this. It’s how do we make sure that we’re still getting towards the goal in a good way, right? I’m safeguarding from that, falling through the cracks. I just think about, how do you do that in a tangible way, in a productive way, in a realistic way, just given where we are? What is that first step?

[0:13:55] Aleesha Taylor: Yeah. I think, too, before getting to the step, I think also, understanding it from, when we think about accountability, I think we initially go to the organizational, or the, perhaps, the systems level when you think about all the different actors. Also, I think the first step is recognizing, yes, organizations need to be held accountable, but also, organizations are made up of individuals.

A lot of it for me comes back to the questions that are raised, and the questions like an earlier question that you asked. People want to understand the questions, but don’t want to answer the questions, right? Having those one-on-one conversations with leaders, where you also create space for them also to ask themselves, rather than going with the platitudes. I’ll give you an example. One of my recent clients, a network that is based in Africa, they advance, or operationalize a current trend in the sector, or in the field, field of international development, I would say broadly, and also, philanthropy of localization and empowering local organizations.

It’s a network of grassroots organizations and different things. They have various products and different and advocacy initiatives. Their whole thing is about being locally led and local leadership and such and such, and our board is all made up of representatives of the network and organizations that we fund and da, da, da, da, da. All of the rhetoric about localization. That sounds great. I was like, oh, we can build a – and really corner of the market and get your communications together, because you should amplify this and this is what funders are looking for and da, da, da, da, da.

But then you start talking to the actual network members, and it’s like, “Oh, okay. You’re on the board. What’s the budget approval process?” “Oh, we don’t look at the budget.” “Excuse me?” But the network is locally led and your board is in the location, because it’s all about proximate leadership and da, da, da, da, da, and we’re shifting the power dynamics. But your board doesn’t have a view into your budget in terms of the decision-making. You don’t have a regular process. When I’m speaking to the board chair about regular basic governance processes, she’s like, “Oh, you have to ask the executive director.” What? Smoke and mirrors, right? That’s actually not my point.

Now, this network, they’re pretty. I’ve gotten some high-level funding and everybody’s like, “Oh, this is great. Don’t they da, da, da, da, da.” But when I talk to my colleagues and peers in the field, where it’s like, actually, what her board chair said, it’s almost like a personal affront, because they have bought into, oh, as I did. This is a wonderful example of localization and power dynamics and they’re pushing back and da, da, da. But when it’s like, let me explain to you how it’s smoke and mirrors, that’s where things stop. The individuals that I might be sharing this with don’t know how to move forward, because you’re like, “No, but I believed in this person. You mean she’s lying?” I’m like, “I’m not saying she’s lying. I’m just saying, all that stuff that was on that panel in DC, if you talk to the board chair, she does not know what you’re talking about.”

It’s not even about marrying those two. How do you move forward in reality? Because I think, just as human beings, we want to grab on to what appears to be a straightforward solution. But when it’s like, actually, that’s not a straightforward solution, this is actually complicated and we need to dig in. The more you dig, you’re getting into personal power dynamic issues, racism, colonialism. It’s all there, but we don’t talk about it, because it’s uncomfortable.

It’s uncomfortable for me too, because I, since I’ve already used the word, I’m going to use it again, am somebody who thinks bullshit should be called when it appears. But that’s not necessarily expedience. Especially when we are in a system, or in a global society and global community, where even when the complications are laid bare before us, the power of the single story, the power of the neat narrative, that’s what we, I think, are prone to shift towards, and to take up and the world just doesn’t work like that. What was your question? I feel like, I’ve been rambling. Which question am I –

[0:18:45] Nic Campbell: Thinking about the first step. How do we reframe –

[0:18:48] Aleesha Taylor: Yeah. Thank you. Yes. The first step is, how do we, so if I ask for myself and how I try to facilitate it. I’m not saying this has been successful in each time. One of the critical questions that needs to be asked is to help people understand and come to terms with the reality of the way things are happening, or the disconnect between their approach, or what they say they want their approach to be, or what they say they want their impact, or outcomes, whatever it is, to be. How do you make sure that you identify questions that help lay bare the actual reality, and then also, create a process to actually move forward in it, as opposed to just allowing the smoke and mirrors to move forward to continue, because they sound good. That, again, I think, brings us back to lack of accountability. Because then, honestly, it’s, again, a struggle.

This client, when the final deliverable in the process was wrapped up, I was like, “Actually, please remove my name and my consultant’s names and my logo from your document, just so you work with consultants.” The actual Herald Advisors report, that’s branded in a locked PDF document. Use it. Don’t use it. The pieces that you’ve requested. Here are the different sections in a Word document. You can use and change at will, because she wanted to change it, and that was actually the challenge. You come to an end of a process and like, “Oh, this is what it should say.” It’s like, but you’re bored in your network and your staff over the past nine months didn’t say that, right? That’s not the outcome of the process.

Essentially, it was like, here’s everything. Use it as you will, but keep my name out your mouth. I had to say that, because one of her funders, and again, straddling that fence. I know the networks, the nonprofit organizations in West Africa, East Africa, Southern Africa as well, and also their main funders. When I advertise like, “Oh, I’m doing such and such with so and so,” their funders are calling me like, “Aleesha. I just heard da, da, da. Did you find this?” Then I’m like, I don’t want to be involved. Because once you ask me a question, I am past the days of curtailing, especially if I think you’re on some nonsense and you’re lying.

I’m more likely to quote your board chair than I am to quote you. At the end of the day, that then – I’m not a whistleblower. I’m a strategist. I don’t mind being a whistleblower. Trying to figure out like, how do I stay out of those conversations, right? Because in the smoke and mirrors, I’m going to shine the light on the facts and the truth. Because otherwise, we’re just going around in circles. My sector is education. Post-pandemic, even pre-pandemic, there was a study about post-COVID education systems and funding. They were looking at, so of course, then you have the global goals towards completion of basic education, then most countries that’s either from ninth grade, some through, let’s say, completion of primary and secondary school.

Then you have a test where you can equate the level of learning after the level of education, or learning that has taken place. There are countries where after 10 years of education, they have the equivalent of a second grade, or third grade education. You have a high school diploma, or high school certification. But when you test your skills, are at the level of a third grader in 2024. I’m sorry, that was in 2020 pre-pandemic. Post-pandemic, and these are too many countries to say the name, right? Again, “developing countries.” There are some countries where it’s like, “Oh, okay. At the end of 12 years, the education equivalent will be 1.5 years of education.” That’s crazy. We’re setting up, talking shit in circles. What? No.

The cognitive dissonance, it’s almost, you know what I feel like? I feel like, I’m at the same place where I was when I decided to make the shift out of OSF, where like, this cognitive dissonance is too much. The way that I’m being used at this – if the president and chairman of OSF can call me directly to ask for, Aleesha, would you consider?” My money should not be looking like this. I’m not saying it was bad, but it was not equivalent to picking up the phone, talking like, “Hi, Aleesha. George wants to talk to you. Can you come by? You want to come by for lunch?” What?

First of all, yes, I do. I’ll be there. But it was a discomfort in a sense. That internal dissonance. I feel that same internal dissonance now, where it’s like, I’m not saying things are bad. By many lenses, they’re excellent. But that dissonance, it’s becoming stronger and stronger. Also, because of just the state of our world and how I assess my role in it. Definitely watch this space. Not even watch this space. Look for a space, because I don’t even – I have marked out my space besides people can find me on LinkedIn. But there’s a conversation that I’m going to, with these questions, the same, similar questions to what you’ve been asking, then going to, and the process of curating and rolling out before the end of this month. I will say, that certainly, by March 2024, I’ll raise this conversation in a different way. In a more overt way.

[0:24:29] Nic Campbell: I’m looking forward to that for sure, because this conversation is just making me think about, we’re constantly thinking about accountability and building it into our systems, the processes that we’re looking at, infrastructure itself within organizations. Just making me think about like, how do we articulate that to folks that we’re not working with, and have that conversation about reframing accountability, and actually building it into your systems and processes and policies. Accountability is not just something happens and now you’re thinking about how to react to it. It’s like, what is the infrastructure of your organization saying?

[0:25:06] Aleesha Taylor: Exactly.

[0:25:08] Nic Campbell: – right, to have those kinds of conversations.

[0:25:08] Aleesha Taylor: Is there a process or a space? Some organizations, they look at it in terms of, they communicated in terms of – and this is for larger organization, like corporate organizations where I’ve seen them put out reports around how much – the extent to which junior staff speak up at all staff meetings, or the extent to which junior staff versus senior staff submit, or contribute new ideas in conversations. Sometimes it’s just those metrics to show that actually, there is a process and there is a space.

Here’s an example of when somebody brought up a very difficult question, or a very difficult issue. Rather than sweeping it under the rug, or just talking about how heartbreaking and difficult it is, oh, my God, to think about this, because really, like, oh, my God, our strategy isn’t about that and we try to do blah, blah, blah, and then you cry and move on. How was this issue actually dealt with and addressed? Sometimes addressing it is just creating the space. I think part of the challenge is and what complicates, perhaps communicating the extent to which organizations center accountability is that we believe, not just in terms of accountability, but generally, that things have to have a resolution, or a clear solution.

Sometimes it’s just like, this messy thing came up and we didn’t know what to do and we’re still not sure what to do, but here’s how we created space to address, or discuss, or to explore, or to return to, or to just, you know what, we acknowledge and it is what it is. Let’s move forward. But let’s not move forward by pretending it didn’t happen. This is it. This is here. We need to address it, and we will. We don’t know what to do right now, but we need to focus on this specific, the task at hand. As opposed to, “Oh, yeah. We’ll set up a task force,” and then never hearing about it again. How is it at least acknowledged?

A key challenge is just avoiding the tendency, just to rush towards resolution and a neat story. Because there’s no such thing as a neat story. That’s the other thing. Even if we think about trust-based philanthropy, it sounds too good to be true, and it is. All of the rhetoric around core funding and such and such, and funding strategies, enough projects, and philanthropy and international development, wonderful. Love it. Until you go and talk to the grantees. The ones that you would assume, like they’re definitely on core funding. Still project-focused. Why? Because the funder prefers it that way. Just creating space and leaving space for the messy is critical.

[0:28:05] Nic Campbell: Agreed, agreed. I know we talk a lot about infrastructure and build up and how we can make sure that we are building organizations that can support the work and the leadership that you’re talking about. I think, even creating that space, and we spent a lot of time talking about what that space could look like, and I do think that that is where we tie it to infrastructure, right? How do you ensure that your organization is set up in such a way that it allows for these conversations to not just surface, but they are being brought to you, right? Brought to the stakeholders that are part of that decision-making and how that organization moves forward and approaches the work.

I really appreciate everything that you’ve shared, Aleesha. I feel like, we can continue to talk forever about all the topics. I feel like, it just is a signal that we should continue the conversation and make it more of a second part to this. I know you mentioned that you’ll be talking a bit more about how we’re setting up these conversations and thinking about the space that we’re creating us to have impact in a good way, and that comes later this quarter and later this year. I think, bringing back to have that conversation about like, here’s what that first step looks like, and here’s how we’re thinking about it and holding it would be an amazing conversation to continue.

[0:29:29] Aleesha Taylor: I’d appreciate that. Actually, I mean, I can tell you what it is. I have another entity and domain called Just Philanthropy. Because in my own, I guess, internal musings of what the way forward looks like, I keep coming back to this idea, or concept of a justice-oriented philanthropy. What would philanthropy look like if it centered justice? What does that mean? It’s interesting, because the way in which it’s building out is actually those series of questions. What do funders need to ask themselves? What do boards need to ask themselves? What are the questions that bring up these critical issues, right?

Now, I have those questions. I have the framework. But it’s the question of, okay, but how do you move forward? Because we have the containers, where you can raise these things. But it’s almost like, I keep thinking about, I don’t know if you’ve seen those maps about, did you do this? Yes. Then it goes on another branch. No. Then it goes on another branch, right? I sometimes use one. There’s one that’s floating around about how to have a good day, or how to manage your mornings. Did you sleep well? Yes. Then it goes in one direction. No, then 10 minutes of meditation. That’s where we are in the build out, or the building up. But I’m also recognizing and why I said it’s going to be, I want to curate conversations. It then becomes a bit much about just me and the people that I saw partner with, and answering those questions.

Sometimes it’s the echo chamber and preaching to the choir. What I want to do and what it will become, even before the framework and website is built out is just curate a conversation through a hashtag, because I had to remember. At first, I was thinking about, oh, okay, trademark and copyright and da, da, da. It’s like, actually, it’s just about to be #justphilanthropy on LinkedIn, and start the conversation there. Then it’s also, in that sense, a means of more of a collaboration from the beginning.

The other piece of that, one of the things that we didn’t talk about and we can pick this, I love a conversation about that as well as then, a follow conversation about this as well, is also beyond the frameworks and the principles and what justice philanthropy could be. What does it actually look like? I’m putting together a project. But this is a long game, because it’s an impact investment, national systems, national commodity. It’s a whole other thing. Looking at how private public, private sector capital, public government capital, and philanthropic resources, how can they come together, again, looking at all of the various players in the universe in a particular context, in a way that centers and benefits vulnerable communities, and it’s in the seaweed market?

Getting into the climate change and blue economy. This is something that’s happening in collaboration with the government of Zanzibar and the Zanzibar seaweed company, because again, as an education specialist, I’m concerned about, are the babies going to school? All the research says, if the mother has resources at the end of the month, the babies are going to school. It’s this shift, right? Because when we think about justice, one element of justice that has to be there is, is there – to what extent is there some a redistribution of wealth? Not talking about, oh, we should trust the grassroots farmer to be able to provide reports. No. Actually, they should trust you to improve their livelihoods.

January of 24, at the end of the month, there were $2 left over. By January 2028, can they have $10? If not, they don’t trust you. We can’t trust you, right? If we’re talking about it in that sense. Anyway, I’ll put more meat on that, and that’s a long game though. That’ll take another several years. In the meantime, the curation of the conversation and promotion of Just Philanthropy, or justice-oriented philanthropy in a way that creates space for truth to come forward, but also provides a platform to discuss solutions, or to present and debate solutions, but in a non-BS smoke and mirrors type of way. I’m trying to find the middle ground.

[0:34:09] Nic Campbell: I’m very excited. I’m very excited about Just Philanthropy and I’m looking forward to what’s coming next there, because I do think like, what does it look like to center justice?

[0:34:19] Aleesha Taylor: Yeah, and we don’t know. That’s the thing. That’s about also, had to realize, because I kept getting stuck, because I’m like, “Oh, we have to map this out.” I was like, actually, the point is that actually, we don’t know, and that’s actually the truth. When you say, what do we need to stop doing? I have to tell myself, “I need to stop talking mess to myself.” That’s probably the first step.

[0:34:42] Nic Campbell: That’s right. That’s right.

[0:34:43] Aleesha Taylor: Stop talking shit to yourself.

[0:34:47] Nic Campbell: Aleesha, this conversation has been so powerful, and so inspiring really, because it’s making me think about how we can continue to, like you said, you’ve spent a lot of time talking about creating a space. When I hear about creating that space, it’s about that space to have authentic conversations, that space to have, like you said, for the truth to come out, as we hold that truth to being true. And to really think about how we problem solve in that space and come up with solutions. Not just talking, talking, talking, but how do you also problem solve and solve for things in that space.

When we talk about centering justice and what does that look like in philanthropy. Just even say that out loud, it’s like, what does that look like? Again, when we think about where the money has come from, and then what does it mean to really center justice and who’s leading the organizations that are receiving the funding. So many things that will come from it.

I just want to say, I really think that the conversation, the points that you’ve raised have been so incredibly powerful. I want to ask you a question to help us continue to build knowledge through books and people you should learn from, or about. What book do you think we should read next, or what artist do you think we should be paying attention to?

[0:36:12] Aleesha Taylor: Ooh. Let’s see. One is on my to-read list, then one is on my nightstand that I’ve just started, but haven’t gotten through. The one that’s on my to-read list is called Black Liturgies by Cole Arthur Riley. She also has an IG feed called Black Liturgy. The book is a compilation of the meditations that she puts forward through her IG feed. I’m sure more than that. I raise that because, and it’s connected to these questions. One of the reasons why it’s been so impactful for me, just her platform is because it taught me, or is teaching me to actually sit with the difficult thing.

Sometimes you got to sit in silence. It’s essentially about contemplative meditations, and how do you sit with these critical and challenging and difficult thoughts and ideas and realities without running away from them? She provides some context around that. It’s certainly spiritual, but not religious in that sense. I’m glad that that work is out in the world. It’s the first to come to mind, because it’s at the top of my own list.

Another one, and it’s interesting, because these two say a lot about me. I hope you weren’t hoping for some strategy 101, or decolonizing wealth. The other one, it’s called A Geography of Faith: An Altar in the World, by Barbara Brown Taylor. What it is, interestingly, thinking about what is justice and when we think about faith and Christianity and what it’s – I mean, really, if you talk about smoke and mirrors, what it purports and how Christians act in the world throughout history. 

Anyway, but A Geography of Faith: An Altar in the World is just about how – and I’m only into the intro, but the point is through the way we live our lives, that that is how we express our faith. Not because we’re a great church goer, or we lead whatever missionary thing, or the outward signs of faith, in a sense, or the traditional signs of faith, but it’s actually about how you live your life, the practice of how you live your life, and that being what we should put forward. I would recommend those books, An Altar in the World by Barbara Brown Taylor, and Black Liturgies by Cole Arthur Riley.

I guess, I should add one that I actually have read. That would be actually, I won’t recommend a book, but actually, a genre, which is Science Fiction/Afro Futurism. Even if you’re not into Afro futurism, then perhaps, just science fiction in general. I say that, because when the pandemic emerged, first of all, I have never been into science fiction, right? I need a linear story. Someone like Tony Morrison, I absolutely love, but I read her for the exquisiteness of her prose. But by the time you start jumping around, I’m lost, right? It’s something about my attention. I’ve just never really gotten into. I see science fiction, for example, the same way. I’ve just never gotten into the genre. I’m like, “No, I’m not into that.”

Octavia Butler, I’ve never read her, until about a year ago. It was the pandemic that actually where I noticed that my friends and colleagues, particularly if they were into Octavia Butler, if we’re talking about Black people, if they were into Octavia Butler, they had the language for the dismantling of society, but also, how you reframe it and rebuild the just worlds. Whereas, me and many other people, we were just stuck what actually is happening. The conversation amongst people who were into science fiction, Afro-futurism, they at the very least had a language and a process, or an openness to reimagining, or to imagination that those of us who are like, “No, I need a linear story.” Like, when things are no longer linear, I didn’t know how to break out of.

Again, that goes back to our, perhaps, human preference for a neat linear story with a resolution, or leave off with a single question for all of this openness and now we get to create and blah, blah, blah. I wasn’t into all this. It’s helping me actually to think about, what does justice-centered philanthropy look like. Before you get to that, what actually is justice? Oh, I get to sit back and rearticulate and imagine afresh what justice actually is, or should be, or could be? Wow. It’s my reading now, an openness and understanding, even of an author like Octavia Butler, which has helped me to just expand my own imagination. I would encourage that. That’s a three for one.

[0:41:43] Nic Campbell: Perfect. We are going to include all of those references in the show notes, so that people can –

[0:41:50] Aleesha Taylor: Wonderful.

[0:41:51] Nic Campbell: – get those books, and just step into that genre that you’ve talked about, because we’ve also talked about it during a previous podcast episode around Afro-futurism.

[0:42:00] Aleesha Taylor: Wonderful.

[0:42:02] Nic Campbell: Definitely come up in much the same way that you described. Aleesha, thank you so much for your time.

[0:42:08] Aleesha Taylor: Thank you.

[0:42:09] Nic Campbell: As I mentioned, I’m very interested in what that space creation looks like, that we talked about as it relates to building an organization, redesigning an organization to then influence this work and operations. Thank you so much again for just speaking life into those tools that I think nonprofit leaders will be able to use to help them build bravely. Thank you again.

[0:42:33] Aleesha Taylor: Absolutely. Thank you, also, just for all that you do and all that you put into the field. I am continuously amazed and also, humbled by your humility, and the organizations that you – you just mentioned, my building an organization after seven years and the organizations that you have built and the insights and skills that you have and the ways in which you commit your organizations to building just the cache of organizations and initiatives that are in our communities and that serve our communities and serve as we started, what I said, the least of these, our brothers and sisters. I am so proud of you and I’m grateful to even just be a part of this ongoing conversation about building up brave organizations and initiatives, and just how to be brave, how do you show up as brave. When you’re from the big BX, what else can we do?

[0:43:30] Nic Campbell: All day, every day.

[0:43:32] Aleesha Taylor: Okay. Exactly. There you go.

[0:43:34] Nic Campbell: Thank you so much, Aleesha.

[0:43:36] Aleesha Taylor: Absolutely. Thank you.

[END OF INTERVIEW]

[0:43:39] Nic Campbell: Thank you for listening to today’s episode of the Nonprofit Build Up Podcast. To learn more about the Build Up companies, please visit www.buildupcompanies.com.

[OUTRO]

[0:43:52] Nic Campbell: Thank you for listening to this episode of Nonprofit Build Up. To access the show notes, additional resources, and information on how you can work with us, please visit our website at buildupadvisory.com. We invite you to listen again next week as we share another episode about scaling impact by building infrastructure and capacity in the nonprofit sector. Keep building bravely.

[END]