C-Suite Network™

Search
Close this search box.

Author: David Dunworth

Categories
Case Studies Geopolitics News and Politics

The Democratic Republic of Congo: A Humanitarian Crisis Unfolding

The Democratic Republic of Congo: A Humanitarian Crisis Unfolding

Introduction

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is once again at the center of a worsening humanitarian crisis, caught in the throes of escalating armed conflict, political instability, and a sharp decline in international support. The resurgence of the M23 rebel group, backed by foreign interests, has led to the rapid fall of strategic cities like Goma, a critical humanitarian hub (1). The conflict has displaced millions, overwhelmed aid organizations, and left communities struggling for survival in the absence of basic resources (2). At the same time, the abrupt cessation of U.S. foreign aid—historically a lifeline for humanitarian efforts—has compounded an already dire situation (3).

This article examines the intersection of intensified conflict, the collapse of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the cessation of USAID funding. It dissects how these crises feed into each other and what they signal for the future of international aid in the region. By exploring the immediate and long-term humanitarian implications, this analysis sheds light on the evolving challenges in the DRC, the limitations of global response mechanisms, and the prospects for meaningful intervention amid systemic breakdowns.

  1. Escalation of Conflict in Eastern DRC

Resurgence of M23 Rebels

The resurgence of the M23 rebel group has once again plunged eastern DRC into violent turmoil, exacerbating an already fragile security situation. Originally formed by former Congolese soldiers who mutinied in 2012, the M23 rebels have re-emerged as a dominant armed faction, rapidly advancing through strategic regions and capturing key cities, including Goma (4). Despite years of ceasefire negotiations, the group’s latest offensive has showcased a well-coordinated military strategy, leveraging sophisticated weaponry, strategic positioning, and alleged external support from neighboring Rwanda—a claim that Kigali continues to deny despite mounting evidence (5).

The seizure of Goma, a vital economic and humanitarian hub, underscores the extent of the group’s resurgence. The rebel forces quickly overwhelmed the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FARDC) and outmaneuvered UN peacekeepers stationed in the region, leading to accusations of inaction against MONUSCO, the United Nations’ peacekeeping mission in the DRC (6). The loss of Goma has had profound geopolitical implications, forcing Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi to intensify diplomatic efforts to rally regional and international support (7).

Humanitarian Impact

The rapid escalation of violence has triggered a humanitarian catastrophe, displacing over a million civilians and leaving tens of thousands without access to food, clean water, or medical assistance (8). Makeshift camps in and around Goma have been overwhelmed, with aid organizations struggling to provide basic necessities. The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has reported that at least 350,000 displaced individuals remain without shelter following the destruction of temporary camps, forcing many to take refuge in churches, schools, and abandoned buildings (9).

The scale of human suffering is staggering. Mass displacements have led to an increase in gender-based violence, child exploitation, and outbreaks of disease, as overcrowded conditions and inadequate sanitation create breeding grounds for cholera and respiratory infections (10).

III. Collapse of NGOs and Humanitarian Operations

Operational Challenges

The escalating violence in eastern DRC has crippled the ability of humanitarian organizations to operate effectively. Armed conflict, targeted attacks on aid workers, and widespread insecurity have forced many NGOs to either scale down or completely halt their operations (11).

Aid groups have reported growing threats to their personnel, with several humanitarian workers killed, kidnapped, or forcibly displaced (12). In June 2024, two staff members from Tearfund were ambushed and killed in Butembo while transporting supplies, underscoring the dangers faced by those attempting to provide relief (13).

Corruption and Mismanagement

Beyond security challenges, internal corruption and mismanagement have also contributed to the collapse of NGO operations. Investigative reports have revealed widespread fraud within international and local aid agencies, undermining the effectiveness of relief efforts (14).

A 2020 investigation by The New Humanitarian uncovered extensive corruption in aid operations, detailing instances of fraud, bribery, and misallocation of funds (15). In 2024, an investigation into GiveDirectly revealed fraudulent activities that left many recipients in debt and financial distress (16).

  1. Cessation of USAID Funding

The decision by the Trump administration to suspend U.S. foreign aid has dismantled key programs and crippled relief efforts. In early 2025, President Donald Trump ordered a 90-day freeze on USAID funding, halting food assistance programs, medical supply chains, and emergency relief efforts across Africa (17).

Among the most devastating impacts is the collapse of food assistance initiatives, which has left thousands of displaced families without access to sustenance. With aid convoys unable to deliver rations, refugee camps in eastern DRC have faced severe shortages (18).

Citations

  1. wsj.com – Rwanda-Backed Rebels Enter Congo Safe-Haven City, Aid Hub (Jan. 27, 2025)
  2. reuters.com – UN refugee agency says Congo fighting leaves 350,000 with no shelter (Feb. 14, 2025)
  3. reuters.com – Congo humanitarian operations hit hard by Trump aid pause, says UN official (Feb. 11, 2025)
  4. apnews.com – Rwanda-backed rebels take more towns as they expand (Jan. 28, 2025)
  5. reuters.com – Rubio tells Rwandan president that US wants a ceasefire in Congo (Jan. 28, 2025)
  6. au.int – AU Peace and Security Council emergency summit on DRC crisis (Jan. 28, 2025)
  7. cfr.org – America’s Disastrous Foreign Aid Withdrawal (Feb. 5, 2025)
  8. cgdev.org – Which countries are stepping up after US aid cuts? (Feb. 2025)
  9. thenewhumanitarian.org – New Congo aid corruption report (June 11, 2020)
  10. un.org – Women-led Peace Huts Resolve conflicts in Eastern DRC (2025)
  11. who.int – WHO Emergency Update on Disease X in DRC (2024)
  12. cidrap.umn.edu – US Funding Pause Impedes Mpox Response in DR Congo (Jan. 29, 2025)
  13. thinkglobalhealth.org – Preparing for Disease X: Lessons from the DRC (2025)
  14. nypost.com – Mystery Deadly ‘Disease X’ Spreads in Congo as WHO Struggles to Trace Origin (Dec. 9, 2024)
  15. news.mongabay.com – Across the world, conservation projects reel after abrupt US funding cuts (Feb. 2025)
  16. life-peace.org – Life & Peace Institute’s conflict transformation work in the DRC (2025)
  17. tearfund.org – Two aid workers killed in Butembo attack (June 2024)
  18. apnews.com – Congolese religious leaders meet with M23 rebels to discuss peace solutions (Feb. 2025)

 

 

Categories
Best Practices Negotiating Personal Development

Stop Pitching, Start Listening

Stop Pitching, Start Listening

I still remember the moment I realized I wasn’t actually listening.

It was a meeting with a potential donor—someone whose name carried weight in philanthropic circles. I had prepared meticulously, armed with impact reports, success stories, and a well-crafted pitch. I sat across from him, eager to secure his support, and as he spoke, I nodded along, waiting for the perfect moment to insert my points.

At one point, he paused, looking directly at me.

“You’re not really hearing me, are you?” he asked, a slight smirk on his face.

I was stunned. Of course, I was hearing him! I could repeat back everything he had just said. But that wasn’t what he meant.

“I know what you want from me,” he continued, “but do you even know what I want?”

In that instant, I realized my mistake. It was as though I was a child fixated on the candy on the table just out of reach. I had been so focused on presenting my case, so busy thinking about how to guide the conversation toward a commitment, that I had completely missed the opportunity to truly understand his perspective. I had mistaken hearing for listening.

That conversation changed everything for me. It forced me to rethink my approach—not just with donors, but with corporate sponsors, customers, and every relationship I sought to build. I had to stop making conversations about me and start making them about them.

Who Is the Customer, Really?

One of the biggest shifts I had to make was recognizing who my “customer” really was.

For years, I had thought of donors and sponsors as the primary audience—the ones funding the work, the ones writing the checks. But they weren’t the true customers. The people who benefited from the work we did—the families receiving assistance, the students gaining scholarships, the communities being uplifted—they were the true customers.

Donors weren’t paying for a service for themselves; they were paying to create an impact in someone else’s life.

I started asking myself: Am I talking to donors in a way that connects them to the people they want to help? Or am I just treating them as sources of funding?

That realization led me to a crucial question that changed the way I interacted with every donor, sponsor, and customer:

“What does this person actually want?”

Not just what they say they want—but what’s driving them on a deeper level.

Getting Past the Surface: Learning to Listen for What Really Matters

The first thing I had to do was train myself to stop assuming I knew what people wanted. Too often, we hear phrases like:

  • “I want to support a cause that aligns with my company’s values.”
  • “I’m looking for a way to give back.”
  • “We’re interested in corporate sponsorships that fit our brand.”

These sound straightforward. But what do they really mean? I had been taking these statements at face value instead of digging deeper.

So I started asking different kinds of questions:

  • “What led you to take an interest in this cause?”
  • “Can you share a time when giving to an organization felt truly meaningful for you?”
  • “What does a successful partnership look like to you?”

And then—most importantly—I learned to shut up.

I forced myself to listen, not just to the words, but to the tone, the emotion, the pauses. I started paying attention to what people weren’t saying. And in doing so, I discovered the unspoken motivations that drive real action.

For instance, one donor told me she wanted to give because she “believed in education.” But when I listened more carefully, I realized she wasn’t just talking about education in general—she was passionate about first-generation college students because she had been one herself.

By hearing what was beneath her words, I was able to connect her with a specific initiative that resonated with her personal story. That single moment of deep listening led to one of the largest commitments our organization had ever received.

Breaking the Habit of Transactional Listening

Most of us think we’re good listeners. But in reality, we’re just good at waiting for our turn to talk.

Busy, high-achieving people—whether donors, corporate sponsors, or customers—are especially prone to this. Their minds are always moving, always anticipating the next step, always looking for efficiency. And because I, too, had fallen into that habit, I was unintentionally mirroring it in my conversations.

I had to retrain myself to stop thinking about my response while the other person was still talking. Instead, I started focusing entirely on their words, allowing a pause before I responded, and repeating back key points to confirm I had understood them.

I also learned that the best way to show someone I was truly listening was to ask better follow-up questions:

  • “That’s really interesting—can you tell me more about what that experience was like for you?”
  • “You mentioned wanting to make a bigger impact. What does that look like in your mind?”
  • “I hear that visibility is important for you—what kind of audience are you hoping to reach?”

This approach created something I hadn’t expected: trust.

The more I listened, the more donors, sponsors, and customers opened up. They told me things they hadn’t shared with other organizations because, for once, someone was actually hearing them.

The Follow-Up: Where Real Relationships Are Built

Another hard lesson I learned? Listening doesn’t end when the conversation does.

Early on, I was guilty of having a great first meeting, then following up with a generic email:

“Thanks for your time. Looking forward to working together.”

I might as well have said, “I don’t actually remember anything you said.”

Real listening means closing the loop in a way that proves you heard them.

Now, my follow-ups sound more like this:

“John, I really appreciated our conversation about how corporate partnerships can also serve as employee engagement tools. I took a look at your past CSR initiatives, and I think we could build something that connects with what you’ve already been doing. I’d love to explore that with you—when would be a good time to discuss next steps?”

A follow-up like that shows:

  1. I paid attention.
  2. I understand their priorities.
  3. I’m thinking about how to create something valuable for them.

That kind of listening leads to relationships—not just transactions.

Listening Is the Ultimate Competitive Advantage

Most people in fundraising, sales, or business development spend too much time convincing and not enough time understanding.

What I learned the hard way is that people don’t invest in organizations. They invest in relationships.

And relationships are built on feeling heard, seen, and valued.

If you want to build lasting connections with donors, sponsors, or customers, stop crafting the perfect pitch. Stop trying to be the smartest person in the room. Stop focusing on what you need.

Instead, sit down, ask the right questions, and truly listen.

Because when people feel heard, they don’t just give money or sign deals.

They commit.

 

Categories
Human Resources Leadership Personal Development

Calm in the Chaos – How Smart Leaders Navigate Uncertainty

Calm in the Chaos

How Smart Leaders Navigate Uncertainty

Decision-making under uncertainty is one of the defining tests of effective leadership, where ambiguity reigns, information is incomplete, and circumstances change rapidly. Leaders who excel in this arena demonstrate a rare ability to engage with fluidity, adjusting their plans while remaining anchored by inner confidence. It is in these moments—where every step involves some degree of supposition—that true leadership emerges, marked by the capacity to make decisions without the luxury of certainty.

At the heart of this approach is the recognition that ambiguity is not a barrier but an invitation to lead differently. Leadership often requires engaging with situations where the outcome is unclear and waiting for more information isn’t always an option. Those who thrive under such conditions approach ambiguity as an opportunity for exploration rather than a problem to be solved. Instead of fearing mistakes, they lean into the unknown, trusting their capacity to adapt as new variables come into focus.

This willingness to engage with uncertainty involves developing a mindset that embraces both patience and decisiveness—two qualities that might seem contradictory on the surface. Leaders learn to pause strategically, absorbing what is unfolding without rushing to conclusions. This patient attentiveness, however, is coupled with an ability to pivot quickly once a clearer picture begins to emerge. Here lies the delicate balance: knowing when to wait and when to act, making thoughtful decisions even as circumstances evolve.

Uncertainty also fosters innovation. When no clear path is apparent, leaders have the freedom to explore creative solutions. They are not confined by rigid frameworks or over-reliance on perfect information. Instead, they cultivate an openness to new ideas, welcoming insights from others and reimagining possibilities that might not have been considered in more predictable environments. This capacity for innovation under ambiguity is one of the reasons why leaders with a high tolerance for uncertainty often become pioneers—they venture into unknown territories where others hesitate, charting new courses that inspire progress.

Emotionally intelligent leadership plays a pivotal role in this process. Leaders adept at navigating uncertainty possess a heightened ability to manage their emotions and maintain calm under pressure. They remain composed in the face of confusion, which not only stabilizes their thought process but also instills confidence in their teams. When leaders convey this inner calm, their teams learn to mirror it, fostering a collective resilience that becomes essential during unpredictable situations. As challenges arise, emotionally intelligent leaders respond with curiosity rather than frustration, modeling behavior that encourages exploration rather than retreat.

The ability to make sound decisions without complete information also aligns with personal growth. Every decision made in uncertain conditions becomes a learning opportunity, reinforcing the leader’s capacity to navigate ambiguity with greater ease. This experiential learning, over time, builds confidence and fortitude, allowing leaders to confront increasingly complex challenges with less hesitation. Much like a muscle that strengthens with use, tolerance for ambiguity grows with experience, enabling leaders to approach uncertainty not with fear but with anticipation.

History is rich with examples of leaders who excelled under uncertain circumstances. Think of explorers who set out with only vague maps, entrepreneurs who launched ventures without a guaranteed market, or military leaders who made critical decisions in the fog of war. In each of these cases, success was not achieved by waiting for perfect clarity but by taking decisive action based on the best available information, while remaining open to course correction as new insights emerged. This blend of decisiveness and adaptability is the hallmark of effective decision-making in uncertain times.

The journey toward becoming more comfortable with ambiguity requires deliberate practice. It begins with a mindset shift—embracing uncertainty as an inevitable part of leadership rather than a disruptive force. Leaders must actively seek opportunities to make decisions in dynamic environments, knowing that each experience adds to their repertoire of problem-solving skills. The more they engage with ambiguity, the more resilient and effective they become, eventually developing the capacity to remain unshaken even when the ground beneath them shifts unexpectedly.

In the end, leading in uncertainty is not about eliminating ambiguity but learning to live with it skillfully. It is about recognizing that the pursuit of perfect clarity is often futile and that leadership demands the ability to act in its absence. Great leaders understand that decisions made under uncertainty are not about achieving flawless outcomes but about charting the best possible course at each moment. With this approach, they inspire confidence not only in themselves but also in those they lead, demonstrating that even in the face of ambiguity, progress is always possible.

Categories
Geopolitics and History Leadership News and Politics

Leadership Failures of Global Humanitarian Aid

Leadership Failures of Global Humanitarian Aid

Humanitarian leadership stands at the crossroads of crisis and hope, where decisions shape the survival and dignity of millions. Yet, despite the vast networks of international aid, deep fractures remain in the systems meant to alleviate suffering. The gap between intention and impact is often widened by leadership failures that perpetuate inefficiencies, inequities, and missed opportunities. These failures are not simply errors in execution but foundational weaknesses in the very structures governing humanitarian response—shortcomings that result in preventable suffering, misallocation of resources, and the marginalization of those most affected by crises.

At the heart of the problem lies a pattern of systemic neglect, where global leadership frequently prioritizes centralized control over localized solutions, bureaucratic procedures over urgent responsiveness, and political interests over humanitarian imperatives. The result is a landscape where well-funded initiatives falter due to mismanagement, where frontline responders are left unsupported, and where the voices of those in need are drowned out by competing agendas.

IMAGE CREDIT: devex.shorthandstories.com

This analysis examines the cracks in the foundation of humanitarian leadership, identifying the patterns of dysfunction that continue to hinder progress. While the symptoms of these failures are visible in every unfolding crisis, the deeper issues often remain unaddressed. Without confronting these fundamental weaknesses, the humanitarian sector risks perpetuating the very suffering it seeks to alleviate.

  1. Failures of Leadership and Strategic Direction
  • Lack of Vision and Coordination: The humanitarian system appears to be reactive rather than proactive, struggling to articulate its relevance and effectively navigate a fragmented global landscape. The focus on buzzwords like “efficiency” and “value for money” signals a defensive posture rather than a forward-looking strategy.
  • Token Promises without Structural Change: Leadership’s reliance on efficiency drives and anti-bureaucracy rhetoric often fails to translate into meaningful improvements. Promises of reform, such as the Grand Bargain, have repeatedly under-delivered, eroding trust within and outside the sector.
  • Politicization of Aid: Leadership has not effectively addressed the growing politicization of aid funding. Dependence on a narrow donor base, particularly the United States, leaves humanitarian organizations vulnerable to political volatility, such as Trump’s return and the global rise of right-wing, inward-looking administrations.
    1. Imbalanced Power Dynamics
    • Marginalization of Local Actors: Despite rhetoric around “localization,” local humanitarian groups remain underfunded and undervalued, despite evidence of their cost-effectiveness (e.g., 32% more efficient in Ukraine). International agencies often monopolize resources, credibility, and decision-making authority.
    • Token Support for Mutual Aid: While grassroots efforts like Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs) demonstrate success, global agencies often co-opt or tokenize these initiatives rather than providing substantive support. This creates an impression of leveraging grassroots credibility without fostering genuine empowerment or equitable partnerships.
    1. Duty of Care Failures
    • Neglect of Frontline Staff: The humanitarian sector exhibits significant inequities in duty-of-care standards. Local staff and organizations, who bear the brunt of frontline risks, often lack basic protections like evacuation plans and insurance, leading to the perception of their disposability. This double standard underscores a lack of genuine commitment to safeguarding those most exposed to danger.
    • Mental Health and Long-Term Support: The absence of comprehensive mental health support for aid workers reflects a failure to recognize the human cost of humanitarian work. High-profile cases, such as the Steve Dennis lawsuit, highlight systemic gaps in duty of care, yet meaningful change remains slow.
    1. Inadequate Adaptation to Climate and Conflict Challenges
    • Fragmented Approaches: Humanitarian leadership has failed to adequately integrate climate, conflict, and development efforts, perpetuating a siloed approach. Theoretical discussions on the “nexus” between these sectors often lack actionable frameworks and tangible results.
    • Missed Opportunities in Climate Finance: While seeking access to climate funding, humanitarian leaders have not sufficiently demonstrated their unique value or articulated how they can prevent exacerbating local tensions. This undermines trust among donors and local communities alike.
    1. Inequitable and Ineffective Aid Allocation
    • Earmarked Funding and Political Bias: Donor preferences for “favored emergencies” perpetuate inequalities, leaving vulnerable populations in less politically palatable regions underserved. For example, communities governed by authorities estranged from Western donors are routinely overlooked.
    • Disproportionate Cuts to Women and Girls’ Services: Systematic funding cuts disproportionately affect services for women and girls, reflecting a lack of prioritization for gender equity despite its critical role in building resilient communities.
    1. Perpetuation of Systemic Inequities
    • Lip Service to Localization: Localization efforts are undermined by superficial implementation. Global agencies maintain hierarchical power structures, focusing on meeting their operational needs rather than addressing inequities in resource distribution and decision-making power.
    • Lack of Accountability for Donors and Agencies: The humanitarian sector has failed to hold itself or its donors accountable for underperformance, impunity, and double standards in aid delivery. For instance, governments supporting Israel have largely ignored its role in aid worker killings, highlighting a glaring lack of policy consistency.

    Recommendations for Leadership and Reform

    • Shift Power Dynamics: Establish equitable partnerships with local actors by decentralizing decision-making and ensuring direct, sustainable funding for local and grassroots organizations.
    • Reinforce Duty of Care: Develop enforceable global standards for protecting and supporting all aid workers, particularly local staff. Integrate mental health support and long-term recovery plans as core elements of humanitarian operations.
    • Rethink Funding Models: Diversify the donor base to reduce reliance on politically volatile funding sources. Advocate for funding mechanisms that prioritize need and equity over political agendas.
    • Integrate Climate, Conflict, and Development Strategies: Move beyond theoretical discussions by implementing coordinated, cross-sectoral programming that addresses the interlinked challenges of climate change, conflict, and development.
    • Foster Accountability and Transparency: Implement stronger accountability mechanisms for both donors and aid agencies. Publicly disclose funding allocations and their alignment with equity goals to rebuild trust.

    By addressing these failures, global humanitarian leadership can realign its mission to better serve the needs of the world’s most vulnerable populations while restoring credibility and relevance in a changing global landscape.

     

Categories
Growth Leadership Strategy

“Empires Don’t Crumble—They Fossilize First”

Part II -From The Myth of Permanence

“Empires Don’t Crumble—They Fossilize First”

It never happens all at once.

No company, no institution, no empire collapses in a single catastrophic event. There is no sudden, dramatic implosion. Instead, there is a quiet decay, a slow hardening of what was once adaptable, fluid, alive. Empires don’t fall like glass shattering on the floor. They fossilize—turning to stone, immovable and brittle—until one day, they break under their own weight.

This is the final act of resistance to change during success. It is not violent. It is not dramatic. It is simply the erosion of motion, the slow, patient burial of an organization’s once-thriving instincts beneath layers of comfort and habit.

The Quiet Death of Adaptation

At first, nothing looks wrong. The numbers still shine green. The leadership team still holds strategy meetings, still claims innovation is a priority. There’s a roadmap—one filled with cautious, incremental improvements, refinements of what already exists.

But no one is pushing boundaries anymore. No one is taking risks that feel uncomfortable. Every decision is made with an eye on preservation, not expansion.

This is how fossilization begins: A slow rejection of movement disguised as discipline.

Soon, the company stops attracting its best talent. The ambitious ones—the ones who would have fought for change—see the writing on the wall. They leave, unwilling to be trapped inside a machine that no longer values reinvention. Those who remain are either comfortable with inertia or too tired to fight it.

Then comes the real danger: The customers, the audience, the market that once seemed so loyal, slowly stop paying attention. Not because they hate the brand. Not because they’ve turned against it. But because something newer, sharper, more relevant has captured their curiosity.

And that is how an empire begins its decline—not through scandal or betrayal or sudden catastrophe, but through the soft indifference of the world moving on.

The Warning Signs of Fossilization

There are always warning signs. Always. But whether a leader sees them depends on whether they are willing to look.

  1. You stop scaring yourself.
    Every great move you ever made in the past came with a moment of fear—a sharp inhale before the plunge. When was the last time your company made a move that terrified you? If you can’t remember, you’ve already started to settle.
  2. Your competitors are trying new things, and you’re critiquing them instead of countering them.
    Dismissing new trends doesn’t make them disappear. It just ensures you won’t be part of them.
  3. The conversations in leadership meetings are about sustaining, not disrupting.
    The moment the company’s energy shifts from What’s next? to Let’s protect what we have, the countdown begins.
  4. Your customer base looks exactly the same as it did five years ago.
    A brand that isn’t attracting new eyes is a brand quietly bleeding out.
  5. Your most talented people aren’t excited anymore.
    If your top minds are simply maintaining the status quo, you’re already a museum piece—polished, respected, and fading into history.

The Last Choice: Evolve or Be Excavated

There is no permanence in business. There is no resting place at the top. You are either moving forward or you are waiting to be replaced.

And the hardest truth?

The companies that make it—the ones that stay relevant across generations—aren’t the ones that defend their past. They are the ones that are willing to destroy what they’ve built in order to build something stronger.

Apple killed the iPod to make way for the iPhone. Netflix obliterated its DVD rental business to embrace streaming. Amazon never stopped treating itself like a startup. These are the companies that survive—not because they were safe, but because they refused to fossilize.

So here is the final question, the one that no one wants to ask when the numbers look good, when the applause is still loud, when the empire still stands:

Are you already becoming a relic? Or do you have the courage to break the stone encasing you before it’s too late?

Categories
Biography and History Leadership Strategy

The Myth of Permanence: Success as a Slow-Acting Poison

The Myth of Permanence

Success as a Slow-Acting Poison

Nothing lasts. Not kingdoms, not companies, not golden eras of innovation. But success has a way of making people believe otherwise. It whispers a dangerous lie: We made it. We figured it out. We cracked the code. Just keep doing what we’re doing, and we’ll stay on top.

It’s a lie that has killed more businesses, movements, and leaders than failure ever could. Failure, at least, forces reinvention. Success sedates. It lulls teams into inertia. The product that once electrified the market becomes an expectation. The edge that made you untouchable dulls. You become predictable. Predictability breeds irrelevance.

And then, irrelevance arrives like winter—slow at first, then all at once.

Look at the ghosts of industries past. Blockbuster, a titan with 9,000 stores, laughed off Netflix’s offer to collaborate. Kodak, a pioneer in photography, literally invented the digital camera and then buried it to protect film sales. Nokia, once the king of mobile phones, mocked the iPhone’s lack of buttons. Their common sin? Believing the summit was a place to build, not a place to climb higher from.

But the greater tragedy is not that they failed. It’s that they refused to change while they were winning.

The Fear of Disruption: Cowardice in the Clothes of Stability

There’s another lie that grips organizations in their prime: Change is risky. It isn’t. Not changing is.

But leadership teams don’t frame it that way. Instead, they disguise fear as logic. “We don’t want to alienate our core customers.” “The numbers are strong—why rock the boat?” “Let’s wait and see what the market does before making a move.” What they’re really saying is: We’re afraid to gamble with comfort.

The irony? The most successful companies, the ones that truly last, are led by people who gamble with comfort constantly. Jeff Bezos banned the words, that’s not how we do things here at Amazon. Apple cannibalized its own iPod business with the iPhone because it knew that if it didn’t, someone else would. Tesla didn’t wait for a crisis in the auto industry to disrupt it.

It’s the ones that move when they don’t have to dictate the future. The ones who wait? They spend their final years scrambling to catch up, desperately trying to buy relevance with budgets that no longer impress.

And so we return to you. To your team. To your company. The numbers are good, maybe even great. But the real question is: Are you already dying, just slowly enough not to feel it yet? Is your current strategy akin to “Silently Running a Going Out of Business Sale?”

Stay tuned for Part II of this article appropriately entitled, “Empires Don’t Crumble—They Fossilize First”

Categories
Best Practices Management Strategy

Keeping the Revenue Bucket Full Through Retention

Keeping the Revenue Bucket Full Through Retention

I remember the days when I was a club manager, and the acquisition of new Members was my main priority. Or so I thought it was my number one responsibility. In my world, Members are customers who not only pay for the right to walk in the door, but if you make a mistake, they still come back the next day. In the rest of the world, distraught customers never return but speak ill of you and your organization across town.

Maintaining a full Member Roster is paramount for a club to not only survive but thrive. Focusing on new ones is counter-productive to growth if you are continually having to replace those who quit.

It’s the same in every business, including nonprofits. Growth and sustainability go hand in hand with retention1. Keeping those involved with your organization is paramount to long-term sustainability and capacity building. To think otherwise is naïve.

Naïve is how you could describe me in my early club management days. My knowledge was limited at the time because I looked at the new initiation fees and growth in the dues, but I ignored a simple truth. Keeping those happy who are already contributing to our profitability cost very little, while acquisition was ten times more expensive. Once I got my thinking straight (I pulled my head out of…)and developed a comprehensive Member retention process, the club prospered.

But that was then, this is now. Generating leads and performing online donor acquisition is how business is performed in the digital age. Everyone with a smartphone or computer searches for goods and services online. They can search by brand, item, cost, you name it. What is being said about the company or the brand online on social media? How is XYZ Company doing against its competitors?

These are the types of evaluations going on routinely, and if businesses wish to stay atop their positions on social media, they had better respond to every comment, good or bad.

But nonprofits might be a bit different than the typical small business. Sure, social media is a valuable tool and should be maximized. New interested parties might seek you out after seeing your postings online frequently and consistently. If there are negative reviews posted, it’s not the end of the world. Responding sincerely to every comment can mitigate negative reviews.

The Revenue Bucket

Like the image above, it doesn’t matter how much revenue you bring in, if it is draining out of your business, what’s the point? The holes in your customer retention program need equal attention, lest you run empty. Should your new acquisition revenues not exceed the losses of inefficiency or poor retention, you will not sustain.

We all know that the value of a customer (or donor, patient, or client) far exceeds that of a new acquisition. If a customer remains loyal for an extended period of time, it is easy to calculate Customer LifeTime Value (CLTV). CLTV equals the length of the average donor, times the average dollar contributions over time, minus the cost of acquisition and fulfillment. This is a simplified version of the formula. You can learn quite a bit more here.

Customer Satisfaction

Service is typically the area of focus for a company to ensure the satisfaction of its stakeholders. We also know that leaving it up to only a single department is nowhere near correct. According to Business Insider3, more than 20% of online reviews are fake. While it is hard to control what a disgruntled employee, hacker, or even a real customer might espouse, a solution is far from out of your control.

Everyone on the team should be involved with good customer satisfaction. Of course that is easy to state, it’s not so easy to initiate and control.

Online Reviews and Your Online Presence

In this digital age, customer retention is built by online reviews. Those critiques shape the opinions of researchers as well as referrals from friends. According to Myles Anderson of BrightLocal on the SearchEngineLand Blog, as many as 88% of customers trust online reviews.

Conversely, the same holds. Negative reviews can kill sales, sales momentum, and productivity of a company, eventually wearing down its customer base by having to trim expenses to meet revenues. It’s a downward spiral to the bottom.

Reviews Tied to Individual Performance

Each time an employer is performing an evaluation with an employee, there are chances that the most recent actions influence the report. It’s human nature, almost unavoidable unless there are excellent records of employees interacting with customers, etc.

Now there is. Customer satisfaction reviews, and online surveys that are aligned with the business and those operating it can be tied directly to individual performance. This is a terrific tool by which to evaluate periods when you do not oversee employee actions, but from the customer’s perspective, the review says it all.

 

The Author

David J Dunworth is an international best-selling author, speaker, and direct response marketing, copywriter. He has been a consistent supporter of servant leadership dating back to 1970, having managed Officer’s and Non-Commissioned Officer’s Clubs internationally for eight years.

Dunworth has served on many boards of nonprofits, including Chambers of Commerce, Restaurant Associations, Mental Health Centers, and the current Board of Directors Chair for SynerVision.

 

Keywords: Customer Retention, Loyalty programs, revenue bucket, online reviews

Links:

1 https://se-partners.com/customer-loyalty-problem-solving/

2 https://blog.hubspot.com/service/how-to-calculate-customer-lifetime-value

3 https://www.businessinsider.com/20-percent-of-yelp-reviews-fake-2013-9

4 https://searchengineland.com/88-consumers-trust-online-reviews-much-personal-recommendations-195803

 

Categories
Geopolitics Geopolitics and History Leadership

“Lip Service to Localization: The Real Story of Inequity in Aid Systems”

“Lip Service to Localization”

The Real Story of Inequity in Aid Systems

This analysis identifies critical failures and shortcomings in global humanitarian leadership and the lack of support for local aid systems based on the content provided. The focus is on examining systemic issues, leadership gaps, and inequities in humanitarian practices.

  1. Failures of Leadership and Strategic Direction
  • Lack of Vision and Coordination: The humanitarian system appears to be reactive rather than proactive, struggling to articulate its relevance and effectively navigate a fragmented global landscape. The focus on buzzwords like “efficiency” and “value for money” signals a defensive posture rather than a forward-looking strategy.
  • Token Promises without Structural Change: Leadership’s reliance on efficiency drives and anti-bureaucracy rhetoric often fails to translate into meaningful improvements. Promises of reform, such as the Grand Bargain, have repeatedly under-delivered, eroding trust within and outside the sector.
  • Politicization of Aid: Leadership has not effectively addressed the growing politicization of aid funding. Dependence on a narrow donor base, particularly in the United States, leaves humanitarian organizations vulnerable to political volatility, such as Trump’s return and the global rise of right-wing, inward-looking administrations.
  1. Imbalanced Power Dynamics
  • Marginalization of Local Actors: Despite the rhetoric around “localization,” local humanitarian groups remain underfunded and undervalued, despite evidence of their cost-effectiveness (e.g., 32% more efficient in Ukraine). International agencies often monopolize resources, credibility, and decision-making authority.
  • Token Support for Mutual Aid: While grassroots efforts like Sudan’s Emergency Response Rooms (ERRs) demonstrate success, global agencies often co-opt or tokenize these initiatives rather than providing substantive support. This creates an impression of leveraging grassroots credibility without fostering genuine empowerment or equitable partnerships.
  1. Duty of Care Failures
  • Neglect of Frontline Staff: The humanitarian sector exhibits significant inequities in duty-of-care standards. Local staff and organizations, who bear the brunt of frontline risks, often lack basic protections like evacuation plans and insurance, leading to the perception of their disposability. This double standard underscores a lack of genuine commitment to safeguarding those most exposed to danger.
  • Mental Health and Long-Term Support: The absence of comprehensive mental health support for aid workers reflects a failure to recognize the human cost of humanitarian work. High-profile cases, such as the Steve Dennis lawsuit, highlight systemic gaps in duty of care, yet meaningful change remains slow.
  1. Inadequate Adaptation to Climate and Conflict Challenges
  • Fragmented Approaches: Humanitarian leadership has failed to adequately integrate climate, conflict, and development efforts, perpetuating a siloed approach. Theoretical discussions on the “nexus” between these sectors often lack actionable frameworks and tangible results.
  • Missed Opportunities in Climate Finance: While seeking access to climate funding, humanitarian leaders have not sufficiently demonstrated their unique value or articulated how they can prevent exacerbating local tensions. This undermines trust among donors and local communities alike.
  1. Inequitable and Ineffective Aid Allocation
  • Earmarked Funding and Political Bias: Donor preferences for “favored emergencies” perpetuate inequalities, leaving vulnerable populations in less politically palatable regions underserved. For example, communities governed by authorities estranged from Western donors are routinely overlooked.
  • Disproportionate Cuts to Women and Girls’ Services: Systematic funding cuts disproportionately affect services for women and girls, reflecting a lack of prioritization for gender equity despite its critical role in building resilient communities.
  1. Perpetuation of Systemic Inequities
  • Lip Service to Localization: Localization efforts are undermined by superficial implementation. Global agencies maintain hierarchical power structures, focusing on meeting their operational needs rather than addressing inequities in resource distribution and decision-making power.
  • Lack of Accountability for Donors and Agencies: The humanitarian sector has failed to hold itself or its donors accountable for underperformance, impunity, and double standards in aid delivery. For instance, governments supporting Israel have largely ignored its role in aid worker killings, highlighting a glaring lack of policy consistency.

Recommendations for Leadership and Reform

  • Shift Power Dynamics: Establish equitable partnerships with local actors by decentralizing decision-making and ensuring direct, sustainable funding for local and grassroots organizations.
  • Reinforce Duty of Care: Develop enforceable global standards for protecting and supporting all aid workers, particularly local staff. Integrate mental health support and long-term recovery plans as core elements of humanitarian operations.
  • Rethink Funding Models: Diversify the donor base to reduce reliance on politically volatile funding sources. Advocate for funding mechanisms that prioritize need and equity over political agendas.
  • Integrate Climate, Conflict, and Development Strategies: Move beyond theoretical discussions by implementing coordinated, cross-sectoral programming that addresses the interlinked challenges of climate change, conflict, and development.
  • Foster Accountability and Transparency: Implement stronger accountability mechanisms for both donors and aid agencies. Publicly disclose funding allocations and their alignment with equity goals to rebuild trust.

By addressing these failures, global humanitarian leadership can realign its mission to better serve the needs of the world’s most vulnerable populations while restoring credibility and relevance in a changing global landscape.

 

Categories
Accounting Best Practices Growth

“Outpace, Outperform, Outlast” Unleash the Power of a Bold and Transformative Q1 Plan

“Outpace, Outperform, Outlast”

Unleash the Power of a Bold and Transformative Q1 Plan

For a Complete PDF of this IMPORTANT INFO:

go to: Outpace Outperform Outlast.pdf

Beginning the year with an aggressive first-quarter business plan is not merely a recommendation but a fundamental approach to ensuring financial growth, operational alignment, and market positioning. It signifies a decisive commitment to seizing opportunities when others may be sluggish, allowing you to gain an edge that reverberates throughout the year. The first quarter is not just a financial period—it’s a psychological advantage, setting the tone for what is to come. It conveys boldness, direction, and confidence, critical elements for fostering success.

The financial implications of this approach cannot be overstated. Starting with vigor establishes immediate momentum in revenue generation, mitigating the impact of slower quarters later. Businesses that lean into Q1 aggression strategically position themselves to meet or exceed annual targets by creating a financial buffer early in the year. This approach allows organizations to leverage a compounding effect: early successes breed opportunities for reinvestment, talent acquisition, and market expansion. In contrast, a tepid start risks misaligned resources, a lack of clarity in execution, and missed opportunities, setting off a domino effect of underperformance.

Operationally, an aggressive first quarter demonstrates clarity in vision and a commitment to execution. When teams know that leadership is driving hard for results from day one, it fosters a culture of accountability and achievement. Such an environment prioritizes measurable outcomes over vague intentions, which is vital for organizations striving to compete in an ever-changing marketplace. Tactical strategies in this period should emphasize efficient resource utilization, rapid decision-making, and a readiness to adapt. However, adaptation does not mean hesitation—aggressiveness implies calculated boldness rather than recklessness.

THIS IS JUST THE INTRODUCTION!

For a No Sign-Up

FREE DOWNLOAD

Special Report

Go to: Outpace Outperform Outlast.pdf

Categories
Growth Health and Wellness Personal Development

The Power of Divine Order

The Power of Divine Order

Love’s Role in Change and Growth

I’ve come to see that there is a profound distinction between Divine Order and the ways we humans often try to impose order. Divine Order feels expansive, transformative, and far-reaching, while human order tends to be constrained by our limited understanding and desire for control.

At the heart of Divine Order is Love—a fundamental force that shapes and sustains everything. This Love is not a fleeting emotion or sentimental attachment but an abiding power that creates harmony and wholeness. It permeates all aspects of existence, from the vastness of the universe to the intricate details of our personal lives. Love is the why behind everything.

I observe this force in the cycles of nature: the turning of seasons, the warmth of the sun, and the life-giving rain. Yet, this same force is present in what we often perceive as destruction: volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, wildfires, and other upheavals. This is not an easy truth to accept. How can something so seemingly destructive be an expression of Love? The answer seems to lie in the transformative nature of these events. They clear, renew, and make space for growth.

Suffering and death also hold this paradox. They remind us of the finite nature of life, urging us to cherish the time we have and to love more deeply. Death, painful as it is, often pushes us to seek meaning, prioritize, and connect in ways we might otherwise take for granted. Yet, when I witness the suffering of innocents or endure losses that seem incomprehensible, I find myself still searching for answers. This mystery remains one of the greatest challenges of faith.

On the spiritual plane, I see Love working through relationships, moments of connection, and the nurturing we offer each other. But it also operates through challenges—anger, conflict, and the breaking down of what no longer serves. These experiences, though difficult, have a way of refining us, stripping away what holds us back, and preparing us for renewal. It is not always easy to recognize these moments as acts of Love, but with reflection, I see how they lead to transformation.