EarthWork Collective

?? Is tech really built for everyone? Too often, gender is treated as a taboo subject in tech, resulting in systems and products that are designed for men by default. But what happens when half the world's population is left out? ??? Payal Arora looks at why gender needs to be a core consideration in tech development - not an afterthought. From biased algorithms to exclusionary design, the consequences of ignoring gender are real. ?? Watch the full interview from #ReshapingWork2024 on our YouTube channel https://lnkd.in/g4YKAuHk #FutureofWork #AI

Sometimes, “Let it go” can become “Hold it lightly,” and when that happens, the heart expands. Even if you can’t let go today, see if you can hold lightly—take a big step back, find a new perspective, or acknowledge that you can’t control everything about a situation.

Very often, when we have sought to create change at scale, we've focussed on how we can influence the behaviour of many individuals; nudging people towards better choices, designing interventions that encourage positive behaviours or compliance with a process. Is it time to shift the balance from changing individuals to changing the systems around them? Not just just redesigning choices - but reshaping the conditions that create them. Three strategies: 1) From isolated interventions (programmes that focus on single issues) to connected ecosystems (addressing the wider structures that reinforce them) 2) From downstream fixes (helping people cope with existing systemic barriers) to upstream redesign (removing those barriers altogether). 3) From designing for individuals (individual compliance) to designing for relationships (family, workplaces, communities, institutions). https://lnkd.in/erHWUHRW.? By?Noel Hatch who posts consistently great content on?Medium?on local systems change & deserves a big audience.

You don’t have to stay in your lane. You do need to check your blind spots before changing lanes. What gets people in trouble isn't tackling unfamiliar topics. It's being ignorant of their own ignorance. A mark of wisdom is entering new terrain with an extra dose of humility: https://lnkd.in/e-E3m35s

I have seen many, many “diagnosis” icebergs before, but never one attempting to represent the more beautiful world our hearts know is possible… so I made these. It’s still - and will remain - a work in progress, so your insights are welcome with open arms and heart! What resonates? What’s missing? How do we birth this future together? Or is it already being birthed - by us and through us? What communities do we know already embody these worldviews? How can we learn from them? ?? *Edit: Just realized page 2 needs some minor adjustments: “the unraveling over time” and “systems driving fragmentation” need to be updated. Here's the link to the corrected version: https://lnkd.in/ehU2dBVk Also, thank you so much to all those who left comments and suggestions…this has turned out to be a beautiful co-creation! I will reply to each one of you as soon as I get the chance????

?????????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???? ?????? ????????. If communities are dysregulated, they: ? Replicate power dynamics. ? Recreate urgency & burnout. ? Struggle with conflict & trust. But when we (co-)regulate, it's possible to: ? Heal collective trauma. ? Build trust-based movements. ? Hold complexity without fracturing. So, when nervous systems stay reactive, conversations stall, accountability fails, and justice work retraumatizes. This 5-minute crash course breaks down ?????? ?????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????? ???? ?? ???????????????????? ???? ???????????????? ????????????. And how we can rise out of reactivity. Swipe through the carousel to learn more ?? ??????'?? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????????????: - How does this show up in your work? - What practices are you experimenting with? ?????????? ???????? ????????? Connect with me, share it & join the Systemic Shift Newsletter.

How many people need to be in a room before two people share a birthday? The answer will change how you think about team dynamics...?? ___________ ?? Repost to share this idea

Transforming How We Think About Collaboration: The 'Collaborative Innovation' Approach ?? ?? ?????????? ???????? ?????????????????? ?????????? Instead of seeking lowest-common-denominator agreement, start with a powerful vision that attracts committed changemakers. ?? ?????????????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????????????? Rather than "open door" meetings, carefully select participants to ensure the whole system is in the room — from grassroots to grasstops. ?? ????????-???????? ????-???????????????? Move away from "develop-then-present" to working together in real-time, leveraging collective intelligence. ?? ?????????????? ???????????????? ?????????????? Stop pushing for false harmony and start using differences as catalysts for innovation. ? ?????????? ?????????????????????? & ???????????????? Build the strategy through action rather than endless planning sessions. What's powerful about this approach is how it transforms resistance and diversity into sources of innovation. It's not about getting everyone to agree — it's about weaving different perspectives into transformative interventions. Insights from Russ Gaskin, CoCreative and Ashoka's Leading Multi-stakeholder Collaborations course?? ?? How do you navigate the tension between inclusion and focused action in your collaborative work? #SystemicChange #Collaboration #Innovation #Leadership #CollectiveImpact

When faced with high-pressure situations, how do you remind yourself that there are always more choices than meet the eye? "If you have a gun pointed at your head it is not just give in or be killed, you have 146 other choices." This is something that Mike Ross repeats back to Harvey Specter in the series Suits. It got me think what it might mean... At first glance, it challenges the illusion of a forced binary—give or be killed. It suggests that any situation, no matter how dire, contains far more possibilities than we initially perceive. This is not just about strategic options but about expanding our conceptual space for action. Perception and Agency When faced with coercion, our brain often narrows choices to fight-or-flight, or in this case, comply-or-die. But the claim of 146 choices urges us to step beyond that reactive state and consider alternatives that might not be immediately obvious. For instance, can you distract? Can you stall? Can you engage the person holding the gun in conversation? Can you make them laugh? Can you create an opening for escape? These are strategic choices, but there are also internal choices: Do you face death with dignity? Do you feel fear, or do you feel calm? The Role of Creativity This is an invitation to think creatively under pressure. It suggests that constraints—even the most extreme ones—do not erase our ability to innovate. The number 146 is arbitrary but serves to jolt us out of binary thinking. It is reminiscent of lateral thinking, where seemingly impossible situations can be transformed by reframing the problem itself. A Commentary on Power and Resistance The phrase can also be read as a reflection on power dynamics. Those in power often present their demands as binary: comply or suffer. But history is full of people who, when given impossible choices, found subversive ways to resist. From political prisoners using silence as defiance to civil disobedience movements finding the third, fourth, or hundredth path, this perspective is about reclaiming agency from those who attempt to dictate the terms of survival. Existential Implications On a deeper level, this could be about the fundamental nature of choice. Even under absolute duress, the human mind can assert some form of freedom—whether through strategic action, internal resolve, or reimagining the situation itself. This is akin to Jean-Paul Sartre’s notion of radical freedom: even in the most coercive circumstances, we are still choosing our stance, our perception, and our response. ?? When you found yourself in situation that seemed to offer only two bad choices, how did you shift your perspective?

in sustainability, at larger.world we often see companies mistaking paperwork for progress. a research by IBM surveying 5000 c-suite executives confirms that: ?? spending on sustainability reporting exceeds spending on sustainability innovation by 43% ?? many organisations are approaching sustainability as an accounting or reporting exercise rather than a transformation play ?? laders can't "make" a transformation happen, that takes teams who want to see it so - a major part of team empowerment and transformation is skill building, and embracing sustainability as a skill ?? ensure sustainability is addressed within your ecosystem by making it a topic of discussion when other strategic ecosystem elements are decided in our wor(l)ds, there is no sustainability innovation without #unlearning book us for a chat, consultation, or event at [email protected]