Fourth Level Fishing

Most people want to contribute to society, but there is a responsibility to give to the “best” organization that has the “greatest” impact. With so many voices, so much complexity, and so little clarity, it is hard not to become overwhelmed. All analogies fall short, but the following has been useful for me as a way to categorize and think about different approaches to social impact. It also helps frame the reasoning behind my current venture.

 Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime

This proverb highlights the importance of not just addressing symptoms, but also attacking the root of the problem. Over the last couple years in particular, I have extended this analogy help understand and explain the different avenues to social impact that I see. I categorize these avenues into levels based on their level of abstraction (i.e. distance from the immediate need) not their level of importance. We all have different skills to bring to the table and this problem is big enough to require all of them.

Level 1: Give a man a fish

This level provides immediate relief directly to those in need. It is helping someone get through the day with the hope of a brighter tomorrow, but without directly improving their capabilities or the opportunities available to them. Without a change in those areas, they will need more help the next day (and the next). This level is absolutely critical to save lives in certain circumstances, but often not a complete, long term solution (like a band-aid on a deep wound: necessary but not sufficient).

Level 2: Teach a man to fish

This level has a delayed impact, but it solves the root issue and/or “unlocks” self-sustaining, on-going benefit. Ideally, the individual will also be able to go beyond just supporting themselves to also teaching others and giving from their excess production. This category requires opportunities to be immediately available (i.e. abundant fish in nearby water) which means understanding what education or resources will help long term can be just as hard as providing the education or resources itself, plus there is a risk the situation will change.

Practical job training is of course in this category, but micro-loans could also fit.

Level 3: Work a job that best uses your skills and financially support #1 and #2 (or #4)

Some think of this level as an implicit corollary to the original proverb, but I think it is important to think about it explicitly. Not everyone has the skills or proximity to be directly on the front lines helping people (e.g. fishing teachers, social workers). Instead of directly helping people through their day job or volunteering, they can make the most of the skills they do have (e.g. accounting, programming), live below their means, and give the difference to support #1 and #2 (e.g. purchase fish for distribution and/or the support of full-time fishing teachers). Ultimately, recognizing the scarcity of resources in our world highlights the need for this level. The problem is so big that it requires everyone to contribute, and people who “know how to fish” only have so many hours in the day and still have to support themselves.

This ties into the topic of people from rich countries flying around the world to build homes in poor countries instead of just paying local workers to do it. Sending the money instead of doing it themselves would result in far more homes being built for the same money, plus the local contractors could build their skills and earn money to support their families. Providing money through reliable channels (e.g. honest fishermen or fishing teachers) is much more efficient than having everyone try and do it themselves.

However, the main issue with over-optimizing this avenue is that giving money is abstract enough to not motivate people the same way. One missions trip in high school can produce a lifetime of social consciousness, even if the money is not as efficiently spent in the short term. This highlights the need for a mix of contributions across all levels.

Level 4: Start a fishing school

This level is abstract enough to often not even be recognizable as social impact, but its value should not be discounted. Ethical, self-sustaining organizations that receive enough revenue to cover expenses can operate without requiring scarce donor money to improve lives (which can instead be directed to #1 and #2). Keeping with the analogy, this would be a fishing school that charges tuition or offers payback programs (e.g. loans) in an ethical way that is focused on student benefit. In addition, these organizations can provide an efficient channel for the distribution of #3 funds (e.g. tuition scholarships and free meals for students).

The biggest roadblock to a pure non-profit social impact organization is a lack of seed capital. Sustainable organizations require a lot of upfront capital to reach breakeven and there is considerable risk that it will never happen. This is part of why the concept of a social enterprise exists. Social enterprises are mission oriented with strict governance (at least in theory) to ensure organizational activities are ethical and net positive for society while still providing some kind of return for impact investors. Impact investing is close companion to the social enterprise focused on receiving lower returns on investment in order to have a positive impact (and a partial fit for level 3).

Unethical organizations claiming to be socially conscious give this category a bad name, but there are legitimate ones (i.e. wolves in sheep's clothing may exist, but so do actual sheep). With an informed population, the right laws in place (e.g. social enterprise legal entities), and third party auditing/certifications, frauds can be exposed and legitimate organizations can stay on the right track.

Many educational institutions (e.g. trade schools), credit unions, and co-op food stores are the clearest examples of this category, but organizations in almost any industry can have a positive impact. B Lab, Social Traders, Buy Social Canada, and Social Enterprise Mark have certified thousands of organizations as socially beneficial.

Level 5: Societal shift

If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.

This is the most abstract and I am still exploring its opportunities and potential. Some regions and cultures emphasize charitable giving, education, and long-term thinking differently than others. There are also different attitudes as to whether impact is even possible or if it is just a wasted drop in the ocean to give. Changing the way people view the world (e.g. philosophy, religion, storytelling) and the way societies are organized and collaborate (e.g. politics, business, non-profits, clubs) can result in a considerable change in the need for relief efforts, the magnitude of resources available, and the efficiency of efforts.

Examples in this category would be efforts that raise awareness or make people feel connected to the problem (e.g. mission trips, documentaries, books, movies) and efforts that give people hope and motivation to improve themselves and society. The biggest challenge with this avenue is that diminishing returns and subtle impact can make it hard to quantify. It is abstract enough that it can be hard to differentiate between corrupt, misguided, and actually-beneficial efforts (i.e. it is easier for a wolf to pretend to be a sheep in the fog).

Personal note:

I was leaning towards #1 and #2 in high school with friends and family joining the peace corps and going into socially impactful careers directly helping people every day. However, it was clear that my skills in math, science, and technology could lead to a high earning career, plus I do not have the mental or emotional fortitude to be as good at direct social work as others. I realized that funding is often a bottleneck in level 1 and 2 social impact, not people to do the work. Switching focus to #3 feels selfish, and I often find myself becoming complacent, but I still believe it is a better application of my skills in terms of net impact. While I have not always held firm to the intention of frugality, I have lived below my means and have already been able to contribute to organizations doing good things.

As I got past the insecurity of constantly being a (self-aware) big fish in a small pod (e.g. growing up in South Dakota), I started to think in terms of #4 as I am now more confident in my ability to build a socially impactful organization. Growing my abilities in technology and business served both aims (#3 and #4), and after about 25, the emphasis was on building up my savings, so I could afford to go without salary long enough to start something.

At the end of 2019, while working remote and traveling through less developed countries, I became even more focused on #4 and aware of #5. At the same time, a friend of mine was working on a Master’s in digital transformation with the intent of moving back home to Pakistan to have a positive impact. Over the course of several months, I helped him explore many ideas and the one that stuck was housing finance. I agreed to join as co-founder and chief technology officer with an emphasis on security, stability, and efficiency to increase the chances of the organization reaching a sustainable level.

In order to receive the necessary seed funding, the organization is structured as a social enterprise. If we are successful, investors will receive a return, but only within the framework of the social mission. The organization will only survive if it can do so through ethical, mutually beneficial means, plus governance will prevent drifting towards profiteering. Pakistan is currently working on an official legal structure for social enterprises, so that may become an option to improve governance. More information about the organization and the housing finance gap in Pakistan can be found here: https://trellisfi.com/

There are no guarantees of success, but I am hopeful that, even if we fail to reach sustainability, that we will have an impact. It is also a opportunity for me to learn more about developing countries, entrepreneurialism, and the Islamic world, all of which can help with future efforts. I am not sure how much I will ever contribute towards level 5, but this post is my first attempt at a step down the path.

P.S. I hope in this context, it is obvious that the word "man" is used in the more traditional "mankind" sense to refer to all human beings regardless of sex or gender.