Transactional Impact is the process of engaging in a simple transaction in order to have, or participate in an attempt at positive impact.
Transformational Impact is the process of changing the way that you do things in to order to have, or participate in an attempt at positive impact. Transactional impact is short term, while Transformational impact is long-term. Transactional impact is easy to bolt onto someone’s life or organisation, while Transformational impact becomes a part of someone’s life or organisation. There is often confusion between regular-transactions and transformation. Transformational impact changes not only what you do, but how you do things. Transactional impact is doing your job and then handing a cheque to an organisation. Regular transactional impact is doing this on a regular or semi-regular basis. Transformational impact is participating in impact through your job and using those same cheques to support that impact, and the transformations of others. In transactional impact you are abdicating the responsibility of the ‘doing good’ to somewhere else, whereas in transformational impact you are becoming an active part of the ‘doing good’. The difficulties in funding, long-term outcome generation and educating people on the real and pervasive causes of disadvantage are amplified by the NFP sectors insistence on promoting transactional impact as the best way for people to help. Understanding the importance of long-term interventions, education regarding the real barriers to equality of opportunity and continuity of engagement are amplified by transformational impact management. Rather than simply telling people that their transaction is changing the world, and that they should hand over the responsibility for improving the lives of others to us. We believe in transforming organisations and individuals into forces for contributing to the ongoing development of equality of opportunity for those in need. Partnerships rather than simple purchases. Don’t let anyone tell you that there is no way to combine the work you do, the skills you have and the resources at your disposal into impact in real time, over the long term. Our transformational impact management strategies mean that the better you are at your job, the more good you can do, and the easier and more rewarding it is to do it in the long term. We think that’s pretty awesome.
In Italy, as of 2016, stealing a small amount of food in a moment of necessity is not a crime.
This came off the back of a case involving a man at a supermarket who paid for breadsticks and attempted to leave with cheese and sausages in his pocket, to the value of €4.07. He was initially sentenced to a €100 fine and 6 months imprisonment. The court found that the food was taken "in the face of the immediate and essential need for nourishment", ruling that in this case "humanity is more important than punishment, that the right to survival prevails over property". The Italian Court of Cassation judgement "reminds everyone that in a civilised country not even the worst of men should starve". In how many other instances can we argue for the right for survival over property? What would be the implications for taking this view further, and would they be positive? Considering this, How might we be able to address the issue of empty investment properties, squatting, unaffordable medications and waiting lists for essential services that are months long? Rather than an adversarial, legislative imperative created in courtrooms, is it possible to create a culture in the community that see's the right to survival as an important right for all of us? If we had a cultural imperative to look after one another, how might we then manage our resources for the good of us all, taking into account the needs, desires and expectations of both property owners and those in need. Given the strength of each person’s sense of self-preservation, is six months in prison and a €100 fine really a deterrent to a starving man? Does the cost of arrest, prosecution and holding this man in remand & prison really justify not simply having mechanisms in place to ensure he never has to steal €4 of food in the first place? Do situations like this encourage us to look for prevention and support systems over and above intervention and punishment systems? 1 in 10 people in Italy are unemployed, if there aren’t enough jobs for 10% of the population to work, should it be the responsibility of the remainder of the employed population to contribute to their upkeep while the economy rallies? We believe that it makes sense, not only morally, but fiscally. By engaging and effectively managing resources, we are able to provide for people in need without it necessarily costing more than prison, courts, policing, hospitalisations or late-stage interventions. Consider even the cost to the supermarket to pursue this man for a crime. If it takes a few moments of their time to answer questions, surely that costs more in wages than the €4 of food in his pocket. Perhaps even the margins on the food he paid for, contributes to the cost of the food he was unable to pay for. At the Just Be Nice Project, we create innovative ways to assist in the management of property and distribution of excess and available resources to those in need. With voluntary contributions and engagement from our partners, we are working towards a day when people in need, get the help they need, when they need it, for as long as they need it. Regardless of how they come into hardship in the first place. We agree. “In a civilised country, not even the worst of men should starve.” References; http://time.com/4317753/homeless-food-theft-italian-court/ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36190557
You don't need to 'pretend' cancer to know it sucks.
So why do we ‘pretend’ homelessness by camping outside or making television shows that put wealthy individuals on the street for a set period of time so that they ‘experience’ homelessness? Homelessness is not simply sleeping on the street, it is the result of complex emotional, socio-economic circumstances. People experience it in a range of different ways, for a range of different reasons, with a range of different attitudes and mental/physical health effects. It isn't camping. It isn’t even scary camping. Part of the stress response that is so pervasive among homeless and at-risk communities is the fact that they do not know when their situation will improve. They aren’t just getting to the end of the night, or the end of the experiment. This experience is their lived experience, every day. If we are indeed, attempting to improve societies understanding of disadvantage, we need to improve the community’s capacity to understand people. If you need to sleep outside at night to realise it is cold outside and concrete is hard to sleep on, then perhaps there are other developmental steps that could be taken to increase your capacity to understand different lived experiences first. People who are homeless, and sleeping rough aren’t the same as people who choose to spend a night on the street. Their experience is not the same. If you wish to do a thought experiment on homelessness with yourself and others, don’t ask yourself Why is this person homeless? Start by understanding that, for this person, being homeless and sleeping rough is their best option right now. Start with the understanding that if there was a better option for them, they would take it. Then ask yourself, what would I have had to go through, for this terrifying, uncomfortable, unsafe option to be my best option in life? Perhaps your thoughts would look like this; I would have to be without familial support, for some reason. I might be avoiding group accommodation because I had an overwhelmingly negative and traumatic experience there, and I would rather risk it on the street than stay in the rooming house that I was offered. I may have had a rough childhood, been developmentally impaired, missed opportunities for education and consider myself unemployable. I may be so over the uncertainty of temporary measures to alleviate my homelessness, rather than solve it, that I prefer the certainty of sleeping rough to avoid the heartache. I may have suffered terribly in my life, and made choices around substance abuse that have spiralled beyond my control and I have nowhere to go to help. Through the lens of your experience, how would you then look to assist the person in need? Would you be keen to invest in the development, over time, of this person? Would you demand that they simply take ‘the room that is offered?’ Would you consider your offer of a sandwich adequate, or would you prefer to lobby government to provide long-term, multi-stage interventions to assist these individuals in great need? You don’t need to pretend to sleep on the street to understand homelessness. You need to take the time to understand that people, the overwhelming majority of people, are living in what they consider to be their best options. What would you have had to experience, to believe that these circumstances are the best you can do? If you are looking to assist with improving equality of opportunity for at-risk and disadvantaged communities everywhere, do not hesitate to get in touch. Keep on learning, keep encouraging understanding and remember, Just Be Nice. |
Just Be NiceA collection of articles relevant to pursuing the effective execution of altruism in the search for equality of opportunity. Archives
February 2020
Topics
All
|