Maybe We Are Wrong: Rethinking Our Assumptions

In the midst of my very feeling of being, I often find myself grappling with a profound realization: maybe we are wrong. In the process of getting things done, living, and experiencing, there is a high chance that our first assumptions were fundamentally flawed. This insight is especially crucial when designing solutions for social impact, where the stakes are high, and the potential for unintended consequences is significant. Even when our solutions appear to work, we must consider the possibility that we may have overlooked critical aspects.

The Complexity of Human Behavior

Behavioral psychology teaches us that human behavior is complex and often irrational. Our initial assumptions about what motivates people or what will influence their actions can be way off the mark. For instance, initiatives designed to curb alcoholism by shutting down bars in Kenya may overlook the underlying social and psychological drivers of addiction. The Prohibition era in the United States intended to eliminate alcohol consumption but instead led to an increase in illegal alcohol production and consumption, ultimately failing to address the root causes of addiction.

This complexity extends beyond obvious failures. Even when interventions seem successful, they can have unseen negative impacts. For example, incentivizing school attendance through financial rewards might boost enrollment rates but could unintentionally neglect the quality of education or the wellbeing of students. It is essential to continuously re-evaluate our methods and consider what we might be missing.

The Economics of Life

Economics, particularly behavioral economics , provides a framework for understanding how people make decisions based on incentives and constraints. However, traditional economic models often assume rational behavior, which is rarely the case in real life. When designing social impact solutions, we strive to recognize that people's decisions are influenced by a myriad of factors, including emotions, social norms, and cognitive biases. For instance, the concept of "nudging," popularized by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, shows how subtle changes in the way choices are presented can significantly influence behavior, such as increasing savings rates or improving health outcomes.

Even successful economic interventions must be scrutinized for hidden biases and missed opportunities. A policy that boosts economic activity in urban areas might inadvertently exacerbate rural poverty. This underscores the need for a holistic approach, considering all possible outcomes and continuously questioning our assumptions.

The Role of Trust

In the era of diminished trust, as highlighted by Ambassador Philip Thigo, MBS in his keynote at the SMART GOV SUMMIT 2023, the erosion of trust in institutions complicates efforts to drive social change. The 2022 Edelman Trust Barometer revealed that trust in government and corporate leaders is at an all-time low globally, with only 47% of people trusting their governments. Building trust requires transparency, empathy, and a genuine commitment to addressing the concerns of the people we aim to serve. For instance, the success of New Zealand's response to COVID-19 was largely attributed to the transparent and empathetic communication from Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, which bolstered public trust and compliance with health measures.

However, even in successful trust-building efforts, there is room for doubt. Trust can be fragile, and maintaining it requires constant vigilance and adaptation. We must ask ourselves whether our efforts to build trust are inclusive and sustainable, or if we are merely addressing surface-level concerns.

The Need for Adaptive Solutions

In our quest to design effective solutions, we must embrace adaptability. We need to create systems that can evolve based on feedback and changing circumstances. This approach aligns with the principles of human-centered design, which emphasizes empathy and iteration. Staying close to the ground, listening to the communities, and co-creating solutions with them are essential. For instance, in the healthcare sector, the use of iterative design and feedback loops has been critical in developing user-friendly medical devices that meet the actual needs of patients and healthcare providers.

However, time has taught us that, even adaptive solutions must be periodically re-evaluated. A solution that works well today might become obsolete or even detrimental as circumstances change. Continuous feedback and willingness to pivot are crucial.

Complexity Theory and Social Impact

The theory of complexity underscores the idea that systems are interconnected and interdependent, often leading to unpredictable outcomes. When applying this to social impact design, it becomes clear that our interventions can have far-reaching and unforeseen consequences. For instance, the fight against Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) has seen considerable success through educational campaigns and legal frameworks. However, in some communities, these interventions have led to the practice going underground, making it harder to monitor and support the affected individuals.

Understanding complexity means accepting that our solutions must be flexible and adaptive, able to respond to new information and changing circumstances. It requires a mindset that is open to learning and willing to adjust strategies as needed.

Let's acknowledge that our first assumptions might be wrong and that it's okay to pivot. Let's build trust by being transparent and empathetic. Let's design adaptive solutions that can respond to the evolving needs of the people we aim to serve.

The journey of social impact is fraught with challenges, but it is also incredibly rewarding. By questioning our assumptions, we can create meaningful and lasting change.

Committing to learning, growing, and making a difference, one step at a time.