Loading summary
Transcript49 lines
- [00:11]
A
Welcome to Humanitarian Frontiers on the Edge. This is a place to learn about the art of the possible. Using technology in some of the most difficult environments in the world, assisting people in their most vulnerable time. Want to learn more? Let's dive in.
- [00:32]
B
Foreign. Hi, everybody, and welcome back to a new episode of Humanitarian Frontiers on the Edge. I'm your host, Chris Hoffman, and today we've got an amazing panel that's going to be with us to discuss some really important issues around human resources, or what does human resources look like in the future for development organizations, humanitarian organizations, as we move into this age of AI, this age of edge tech, and with the funding crisis that's been plaguing these sectors now since the beginning of 2025. And joining me today are two amazing guests. I've got Kate Wilson, the managing director at Impact Futures Global. Welcome, Kate. Great to have you here.
- [01:18]
C
Welcome, Chris. Thank you for having me.
- [01:21]
B
Yeah, absolutely. And Sean Burke, the strategy lead for health and public service at Nonprofits for Accenture. Welcome, Sean. Great to have you here.
- [01:28]
D
Great to be here. Thank you so much.
- [01:31]
B
Well, thanks, guys, for joining me. You know, this is always a fun conversation to have. Hr. Okay, maybe not, but it is something that I think is super important that doesn't get the play that it needs. And I think today, with that context I was giving funding crisis. You know, we're seeing a lot of hr happening in NGOs, which is a scale down of all of their organizations. I mean, some numbers were given that over 250,000 people lost their job in 2025, just in this sector. So as the dust settles, as things start to come back into the sector, some funding comes back in and things like that. Sean, to you, what should NGOs, nonprofits, civil society organizations, even the UN be thinking about as they embark on this new journey of rethinking themselves, their process, their products, what they're doing, how they're helping people.
- [02:31]
D
Yeah, it's a very tough question. Right. But I'd say even as I just step back and think about the topic of hr, human resources in humanitarian, that's really where I think we all need to focus is on the human side of this. And really considering what that looks like going forward in the context of everything you mentioned, as funding is scarce and kind of disrupted in terms of how financing is coming forward as technology like AI is just disrupting how, how work is done, a lot of this needs to really come down to how are we as humans best enabling and empowering the humans that are on the front lines in Ways that are most effective and efficient as we seek to essentially reinvent how humanitarian services are delivered and how those humans who are behind that are enabled by technologies in new ways. And in that sense, the kind of stepping back around what it means to be human and what that means in the workforce now is both kind of typical concept of keeping the human in the loop on AI as we, as we take steps to start implementing where AI and agents can, can be a part of this workforce and, or the processes that enable us in the humanitarian space and really kind of not just in the loop, but in the lead as we think about it. And then the second piece, before we even get to those humans and the processes that they're following to deliver it, is really stepping back and really rethinking the strategies for how to best deliver those services, the business models and then the operating models so the people, process and technology that needs to be rethought and the systems that need to come together in new ways going forward as we really need to do more with less and do more through the kind of human plus machine collaborations. And then, you know, as I was preparing for this and brought up to my wife what we were going to be talking about, my wife's a therapist and she really encouraged me to think about, look, as we think about ways in which AI is going to be transforming how humanitarian aid is delivered, she really wanted us to focus on and be challenged by thinking about not just the ways in which technology is going to free us up to do more with less and free up humans to do more of the strategic thinking or more of the kind of programmatic work versus the technology, but for human resource professionals and leaders in particular, that it really should be challenging us to think about how HR is going to be more focused on the caring for those people who are doing this important, dangerous and really sometimes traumatic work. Right. And so I'd really kind of want to put that at the forefront as well is how do we both think through how the humanitarian system can be better enabled by the humans really driving it, empowered by the technology, but also in the ways it really challenges the organizational leaders to care for the people that are caring for those in most need in ways that maybe I haven't been thinking about before as part of their role and responsibility.
- [05:28]
B
So I mean, I just to, to, to, to riff on that just for one second. So I used to be the managing director of what's called the Garrison Institute International, which was, we ran what we call cbr Capacity Building for Contemplative Based resilience for humanitarians. So using the contemplative piece to really help humanitarians that have gone through traumatic situations first recover, help them to recover. But on the other side is to prepare them to have the tools already in their toolbox. So when they do get into a traumatic situation or a crisis situation or see things that, you know, no human should really have to see, that they're able to respond internally with that. So that's a great call out to that, and I really appreciate it. Definitely was not the direction I thought we were headed, but I love it, and I think it's absolutely perfect. So that's. No, I love it. It sounds like our wives come from a very similar baseline. Human first. Absolutely. Kate, when we look at something that Sean just mentioned, people process technology. Right. And I think that many. And you brought up another thing, a business model, I think, as well, which is not a common terminology that's used across most of NGOs. Right. We use business model and innovation because we're talking about how do we take something to scale, how can it be replicated and sustainable. But these aren't part of the lexicon. I don't think they talk about people, those people in my past life, Kate, we miss out on the process and the technology, how the three go together. It's kind of like we just got to get the people because we've got a crisis. It's always kind of like working in a crisis mode for humanitarian organizations and not being able to think about that. And if you were to advise an organization or anybody, and they said, okay, look, we're really good at what we do, but we don't know how to bring it all together. Where do you start with organizations? How do you have them revisit potentially their values or their setup or their processes to really be able to be successful in the future?
- [07:37]
C
So I was smiling, actually, when Sean brought up people process and technology, because I actually wrote a paper for the OECD years ago that was like, going at what do people mean? And I, like, basically ruined my marketing professor, my MBA program, you know, sort of four Ps, and turned it into people process. We use products instead of technology. Right. Because you're fundamentally producing individual products. And then we talked a fair amount about sort of in the course of countries, you know, kind of the procurement or business models that were actually in place. I'm sure if you give me enough time, I'll come up with another P by the end of this episode. But, you know, you sort of asked two questions So I kind of want to pick up on both if I could. I want to go back a little bit to the first question you asked, which is what are the skills that HR professionals need and who are they really identifying? I think Sean did a great job of kind of laying out through their life cycle what they do. But I think there's one piece that we really need to focus on, which is who are you trying to find in the first place and who's going to succeed in a humanitarian or development assistance? And so over the course of hiring people, working with a lot of different HR groups, I would say that overwhelmingly you often try and hire people, at least in my case, for digital skills. But in reality what you're looking for is somebody who both can really get a sense of the policy and the political environment in which they're operating pretty quickly. And that is even more true, I think, in a humanitarian sense, because they really have to understand the country grounding and what's going on right around them at that moment. Because whatever the technology is going to be, in my case, right. It's going to be really driven by that. So the products need to be driven by that. Products also need to be driven. What do the people need, the people on the ground who are going to receive it, people on the ground who are going to implement it. And then how do you develop sort of a long term, you know, planned, integrated, so it isn't just a one off that happens in a refugee camp, but actually can extend beyond that. And then I think if you go like sort of to the process by which you do that development, it's about how you bring those people into the entire system and then develop it. Now, turning to the business model, I think humanitarian and development, humanitarian and development have been a little bit different in the sense that development tends to focus on the overall system where humanitarian is what will work in this context right now. And I think that you're starting to see HR professionals are going to have to think about who's the person who can kind of bridge the gap between it. What does the institution already have, maybe potentially within the country. But it depends what the situation is, right? What you might use in terms of systems. If somebody is in the middle of a massive hurricane or typhoon that have knocked out systems, you want to build on what they already have and help build those back up. That's very different than if you're in a war zone and you're thinking, how am I going to protect and do that? So this goes back to that. You have to have enough political savvy to understand what's going on. And you need to bring that into your product design. But you're constantly thinking about how are you going to make this last long term. So you use the word sustainability. You said many development actors don't think about profit. I don't know, maybe it was my background, but most of the people I knew really thought about it a lot actually. And it wasn't that you weren't, you may be a nonprofit, but you still have a business model. You still absolutely have to bring that into the think. So when I work with organizations, whether they be companies or nonprofits, most of them are nonprofits, it's always about how is what you're going to do actually become a recurring entity or product for that country in that case. So that means you need to think about it as building it with recurring revenue. That could be a financial investment from the government, that could be a company bringing it in. It's hard to say. And if you yourself are developing a new product, you're constantly thinking about your business model and how it's going to sustain lasted. If you aren't, it's not going to last very long. Even if it's an open source product. You've got to think about what your long term business model is for sure.
- [11:45]
B
And Sean, the, the, the, the obvious next piece after we talk about this one for me is retention. Because you know, you're, you're operating in a, in a very large effective organization that curates the top talent, right? Is able to pull the top talent out of universities. I re. I remember when I, okay, it wasn't Accenture when I was in high, when I was in college, it was something else. But you know, but, but it, it was one of those names, right, that we all knew about and that was, you know, we, we knew it was one of the top five. Right, that we wanted to get into. And you guys are able to retain. And I, when I have been speaking, if you look at a humanitarian's resume, very few from start to finish or even have two different organizations that they've worked for. They've got like seven or eight different organizations that they've worked for. And when it comes to tech, this issue is even more acute because of the fact of pay. Right? So firstly, how do what, what are some things to do when we think about the current employee pool that is available, Gen Z, et cetera, that are out there, how do we get them in and how do we retain them? But then the second piece is is how can humanitarian organizations, development organizations, pay for top tier quality tech staff if they are doing the tech themselves? Right. And how do they, how, how can they do that? Because when you hear a lot of organizations, not so much in the United States, I will be fair, the pay scales for NGOs in the US are quite different from the rest of the world. But, but that's a huge problem for European NGOs, so to say is to being able to pay to have tech talent inside the office. But yeah, I'd love to hear your thoughts on, on retention being who you are at Accenture, but then also how are we going to be able to pay for that in this austere time?
- [13:30]
D
Yeah, a lot of layers to those questions and the problems that we're trying to solve there. So starting with retention, I'd say it's a different discussion when you think about how Accenture focuses on retention versus how a lot of these humanitarian organizations need to. In large part because generally speaking, those who are going to be seeking out jobs within the humanitarian sector are driven more, more distinctly by purpose and impact than those coming to a firm like Accenture or company. It's not that there isn't a desire for purpose and impact. That's why I joined my theory of change as a career professional was to drive greater impact through the private sector and the capabilities that we could bring. But that's not always the case. Right. So it's a little easier to attract based on compensation and other things that companies like Accenture can provide. Whereas I think what's often a roadblock or a pitfall for NGOs, especially humanitarian ones, is that purpose is really not enough for long term retention.
- [14:28]
C
Right.
- [14:28]
D
Purpose can attract, but in some cases it's in particular because of the lack of care and of development of individuals at those organizations by the HR teams or others where it's taken for granted. Right. Taken advantage of in some cases. Right. That the mission outweighs the personal needs, both from a professional development standpoint, a compensation standpoint, as well as just the emotional and overall well being. Right. And so I'd say at Accenture, that's also not lost on us. A lot of the retention. I was going to start with things like training and investment in our people, which is significant. A billion dollars a year invested in our people right now it is even more than usual because of the pace of change of technology, et cetera. But it really doesn't just stop there. Right. And compensation is great, but still can always be attracted by somebody else trying to Pull you in with more, especially in the AI space. Right. There's a lot of money being thrown around to attract talent. But what Accenture a great job of because we are a people business. I'd say one of the main reasons I'm still here and what I love most about our company is the degree to which our, our heads of HR are so focused on the people. Because we're a people business. We're about a 800,000 person company, I think the fourth largest employer in the world, last I heard. And that's not just because we train the people. It's not just because they have great opportunities, but because our focus on wellness and our focus on. And this is, you know, I've been here for, I won't say exactly how long, but long enough to see the progression. Right. I was kind of an elder millennial, if you will, expecting and thinking of certain things like purpose, like paternity leave, whatever it may have been. And the company kind of evolved with us, right. And saw that there were greater needs and wellness and mental health that they had a responsibility to steward and to care for of our people. And unfortunately, I'd say that's where a lot of nonprofits and NGOs actually fall quite flat. Right. Because of the ways in which they presume that the mission enough to support and kind of buoy the people that are dedicating their lives and working in oftentimes many more hours than an Accenture strategy consultant and really kind of don't understand the degree to which they need to care for the well being of the individuals that are serving their mission and. Or the professional development. Right. The amount of learning that's going to be required going forward is so significant. Right. I mean, not only do they need to invest more in the kind of technical skills, skills, and not just the technical, but the soft skills that are going to need to be increasingly important as humans and interacting with machines and really that distinctly human kind of capabilities that need to be nurtured and trained. You might have a lot of that as an NGO or a humanitarian professional, but to know how to combine that in this kind of technological world is going to be increasingly tough. So the need to invest in training in those technologies and in what is changing not just, you know, year over year, but month to month at this point is going to be increasingly important to retain the talent, but also to retain them in a way that makes them more effective. And all I'll say there is, I think, the back to the business model, right. I think there's There's a paradigm shift right now in terms of thinking of your workforce not just as your workforce. Right. So this is both for humanitarian, but also for the commercial partners and others that the value chain around humanitarian is not just the humanitarian organizations themselves, but alongside private sector organizations or alongside government and ways in which there needs to be a more kind of holistic view of the workforce and how you can benefit from the workforce of private sector that can come alongside your employees as a humanitarian organization or vice versa. Right. The ways that humanitarian organizations can really support others. So just kind of thinking through not just a staff of X that we can then deploy for a response, but really an ecosystem and a value chain of different partners and how you can benefit from the strengths and the capabilities of the people and the resources of other organizations in ways that actually fill the gap that you won't be able to provide as a resource constrained ngo. Right. So those are a couple thoughts and then the final piece would be in terms of retention, I don't know exactly what this is going to look like going forward even for Accenture, because the workforce is now. And Accenture's head of hr, Fireside Chat, a few months ago at this point said she's not just responsible for hundreds of thousands of people anymore, she's responsible for hundreds of thousands of humans and tens of thousands of agents. Right. And so as humanitarian professionals and HR going to begin to see that themselves, retention is going to require some combination of how you're taking care of those people and you're taking care of them in ways that they're able to also kind of develop and manage some of the agentic things that will come down the road that's not necessarily around the corner for them, but it will be around a couple of corners in the future for sure.
- [19:22]
B
Do you want to comment on that?
- [19:23]
C
Yeah, yeah, very much so. I could not agree more with your point, Sean, about the, the continuous need to invest in capacity from, you know, and, and I think sometimes it's often set up in training programs as like, here's the early and junior staff or you provide some training budgets or other things. And that, that actually this reinvestment in the workforce and the massive transition being driven by AI is going to require everyone to radically rethink what they do, how they do it, and we all need to do a better job of investing. I do want to challenge though, one part of what you said which I don't think is wrong from the perspective which you're coming from, which is like a company. So I Worked at Microsoft, George, intel, like invested a lot of money in training in people. Like it wasn't even something you thought about, just something like this was a big part of why you went to those companies. Then I worked at a, like a large nonprofit path, then a small nonprofit which I ran out of the UN Foundation. And each time you change that dynamic of what your operating base is, your revenue model, your size, your ability to invest in talent decreases dramatically, you know, when you also when not offset by a for profit business model. So you know, you, you have an ability in a large group to invest. It's not that the smaller groups don't think they need to invest. I absolutely did and prioritized it and funded it. But it could never be to the depth.
- [21:04]
D
Right.
- [21:05]
C
That you would do in a larger company. So, you know, your original question was about sort of that growth path and growth trajectory. I think sometimes people leave not just because they think the mission, it's that they have topped out. When you're in a smaller organization, there's only so far you can go. And then I think in a humanitarian construct, as I had a number of people who had worked in humanitarian, they're like, I'm just burnt out. Like, I can't live at that level of stress. Back to your wife's comment. Like, the PTSD of working in crisis situations is high, it's growing and the tension's only going to be worse, particularly as attacks against humanitarian workers have grown in recent years. There's no longer sort of the security of putting on the Red Cross or ICRC vest and badges and going in and you're going to be protected. You might well lose your life in this situation. And so I think that there's a special nuance and a special care that is required to your head of HR saying that, I mean, she's 1,000% correct.
- [22:10]
D
Right.
- [22:10]
C
You're going to have to care for people in a way that's very different than if you're just battling bad traffic and you have some unpaid bills. And that's a very different situation than what many people are facing in refugees camps, as I said.
- [22:23]
B
Yeah, I mean, for sure. And yeah, I love this because I worked for the UN for many, many years, for 20 years, and then worked for a faith based organization. And to see the difference, not the difference in the drive of the people, but to see that common value that came with a faith based organization. It was world vision. There's a commonality there that everybody can coalesce around and it's different than what Happens in other organizations. So organizations themselves are different even within the sector, not just because of size, but because of where they came from, that purpose driven piece. So I really appreciate that. And as you both were talking, as you both were talking, I was thinking to myself, okay, so it's tough to invest, it's really hard to keep good talent. And then, Sean, you hit the nail on the head for me, which is this ecosystem kind of idea, how you create shared value partnerships with tech companies, with other types of companies. It feels like NGOs have, have gone down a pathway over the last even 30 years, I would say, of not being able to scale down when there's no crisis. It's kind of, it's, it's as if many organizations would add to their mandate. Right. So that you could take, oh, we've got this opportunity for a grant with X donor, let's go for it. We don't really have the expertise, but let's go for it anyway because, you know, we need the money and we need the overhead. And so I feel like the current situation, 2025, the kind of the dismantling of the system in and of itself has offered an opportunity for exactly what you're talking about. This idea of growing an ecosystem, this opportunity of thinking about how we do things differently. And a friend of mine the other day said, everybody's talking about the humanitarian reset, the development reset. She said, no, it's actually more of a humanitarian reckoning. Like, hey, you let it go too far down the road. And now it's really, we can see now that it's impacted millions of people's lives. And so can you talk a little bit more about what, how you view this ecosystem and how, how can it work? How can organizations even staff, you know, they call it public private partnership. You know, person is, that's the ppp, you know, that's going to be there in the staff, but I don't know if that's the right person. They're mostly looking for csr. Right. How do you create the ecosystem? How do you get procurement on board and how do you get the shared value partnerships developed?
- [25:01]
D
Yeah, gosh, I was at a dinner last night, great gathering of kind of cross sector partners talking about a similar discussion in the reset and around a particular category of youth in particular this way in which 24, 25 and everything has not just disrupted, but kind of upended and in some ways forgotten certain areas of focus, like the youth development and youth employment was the topic. Right. And so conversations naturally led to things like cross Sector partnering and the need to find new ways of financing, new ways of delivering, et cetera. So across multilateral development banks, INGOs corporations were all at the table. And I guess the, you know, the frustration of some of those conversations is, and I think we might all be able to relate to that, whether it's at UNGA or other kind of side events and conferences where it sounds like we've had the same conversation for a couple of decades. Right. And so the concept of collaboration, the concept of cross sector partnering has always been a good one and a necessary one, has led to incredible impacts and outcomes. But even if the world hadn't been upended in the ways that it has been, that that still wouldn't be enough. Right? Or the way in which it's worked in the past wouldn't necessarily be enough because it hasn't been enough. Right. And then on top of that, and this is kind of the comment I was just making toward the end is that I think with the combination of the funding volatility combined with geopolitical volatility compounded by technological advancement is the game has just completely changed. Changed, or it's completely changing and nobody really knows what the game is going to look like going forward. So therefore the playbooks that we've used are just no longer going to work, even as kind of imperfectually as they have in the past. So it's not necessarily to bring kind of doom and gloom, but it is, I think back to your point, this kind of opportunity to truly step back and kind of take a reckoning mindset of, look, how might we approach this in a truly new way? Not that we even have the answers for that, but to force ourselves to ask the questions of not just. And that's where some of the conversation went. You could kind of tell that some of the conversation was going the same direction of an INGO was hosting it, kind of seeking funding. Right. For certain concepts and seeking partnerships, but ultimately around the self preservation that a lot of these organizations are in right now. Right. Which is just understandably driving behaviors which aren't necessarily focused on truly solving the problem at hand versus trying to solve the problems that they're trying to solve as an organization. So I guess that's what I'd say. Right. If we really step back and think of how ecosystems can work together, it's fundamentally and ruthlessly thinking about what is the problem we're trying to solve. Like what, what is that problem? And. And what are the problems that we're facing as we try to solve it together. And then working to identify where those ecosystems of organizations who have some shared purpose in solving that same problem and the way in which those organizations can partner together in their own distinct ways, but in kind of a breaking of the orthodoxy, ways to really solve it in a new way together. So that's maybe a bit too cerebral to think about. But the point being, it truly seems to be such an inflection point and pivotal kind of paradigm shift on all these different levels that we have to not fall back to whatever playbooks we've tried in the past. And we need to really allow ourselves to think much more open endedly about what this could like going forward in ways in which the blessing in disguise of. Yeah, because it's such an upended model. We have to think of new business models. Right. To fill the gap because the technology is advancing so quickly and so unfathomably. We have to allow ourselves to think even bigger or more creatively about what we could do differently now. Right. So all that is to say, focus on the problems that need solving in a way that bring partners around it with the willingness to kind of put their paradigms aside and really think about the actual problem that needs solving versus what you need to do in order to kind of survive. If that makes sense.
- [29:22]
B
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
- [29:24]
C
Can I want to come in on that if I can. So you know, it's interesting you said this is. Chris, you had mentioned that this is new ways of doing it. There's actually a concept that's been in development for a while that I don't think was ever fully embraced. My organization, we had Digital Impact Alliance. When we were designing our new strategy, we had a speaker come in and talk to us about it, which is really this concept of orchestration and said look, the new world of development, this is like 2016, so it was like a long time ago. The new world is really going to be around who can move actors to work together in concert to achieve a common outcome. And I think what you're really describing, Sean, which I would agree has not been done well, I don't want to break down why has really been about how I think the place for the INGO in the future is actually around this role of orchestration because they have less, they're not the country, they're not a for profit entity. They ultimately, you know, should be working towards a mission and a vision. So I actually think that role of orchestration is one that in this moment in time, people should be embracing more deeply. I would say they've always tried to do it. But I agree that there's often perverse incentives, but then we have to go down into the, okay, why doesn't it work? So I was deal negotiator originally. So it was like there's two things. It's always alignment of interest and alignment of incentives. And I would say, who are you doing this for? When actors, when a for profit company comes in who, let's say, wants to mine data, when a country is trying to serve its citizens with new healthcare, digitally delivered, right. A nonprofit comes in that has a mission, a vision, but does need a grant to survive. Right. And you have local citizens who are like, understand, like, what are you doing with my data? You have very different interests and incentives in the room. And so the trick is going to be how are we all aligning those interests and incentives because that's the only way you ever get a successful deal, right? Everybody's got to give a little bit and take a little bit, but they also need to be transparent about their interests and incentives. And I would say that the opportunity right now is for people to be more transparent about what their interests and incentives are, but also be willing to give and not be so hung up on the power dynamics that often prevented that from happening in the past. Maybe.
- [31:59]
B
Pines Guy, I think there's one word, there's one word that comes to mind around this, which is trust, right. I think this, I think what we've seen is such, such a, such an upheaval around the world in the last 12 months, right? And it's obviously there's always upheaval, but this year seemed to be particularly dramatic as a year, so to say, 2025. And there's different concepts around things like the commons. There's a whole different kind of thinking around commons. There's a whole different thinking around community. I think that. And values, right? And I think that as you say about the give and take, it is the value, it's the trust that sits in the middle. That's the center part of where the decisions are going to be made. And so understanding what you can give, what you ask for, what you can take. So I really appreciate that, Kate, that, that this transparency that you speak of, I think also is about trust and trusting, where you are trusting the people that are around you so that you can be open and transparent and honest about what, what your values are and what you're trying to do. So I really, I really appreciate that, that comment and I think that it's, it's super important. You know, as we, as we Think about tech. And Kate, this is this one I, I'd really like to ask you. And, and because of your work in the digital space, both on the for profit and the nonprofit side,
- [33:25]
C
the.
- [33:26]
B
They're ethical questions that are getting asked.
- [33:28]
C
Right.
- [33:29]
B
And there's a ton, I mean, there's a huge gamut of ethics questions on all tech. Right. And data just, we take, you know, let's just talk data. We don't have to talk the AI piece, but if you want to, you're surely available to do that. But just the data piece. Right. And, and there is a huge gap in understanding, especially in the nonprofit sector, where most things are kind of captured on paper or in Excel on 10 different computers and then, you know, they just get passed on year after year. So there's a lot of data, that's a lot of data concerns and there's not a lot of education in that. And so I was wondering, in the other organization that you've worked in, what are some skill sets that you're looking for? The staff you talked about the kind of person that you'd really want to hire. But what skill set is really important when it comes to technology and because of those ethical considerations. So kind of framing around ethics, technology and hiring, what have you been able to do or what kind of tricks to the trade have you ever been able to bring forward to get the right person on board?
- [34:33]
C
Yeah, I think a lot of it depends on. What I would say is I would always kind of look for kind of a tri sector athlete, somebody who first and foremost really understands the technology, where technology is, where it's going, what it could be combined with a set of skills that looks for, that's really curious about what's going to change and constantly passionate about how you could do it better. Technology is moving way faster than any of us can possibly grapple with. And someone who is, who works in a nonprofit or humanitarian group has less access than someone at Microsoft or Accenture to learn new skills through some sort of formal training program. So they're finding their own training programs on their own. Groups such as Datakind, Data.org, i think do a great job of kind of bringing some of that out. And other groups such as Net Hope also do a fair amount of education around data concerns and literacy. So I think that there are probably, I don't think that the nonprofit tech professional is a dire situation as they were, say, like in 2000 when I started. I think it's a lot better than it was then. And so I want to give a lot of credit to them. So I'm looking for strong back to the trisector athlete. Like I'm looking for somebody with really strong tech skills. You mentioned how do you think about the other aspects of it, particularly the ethical concerns. This comes down to there being really a diplomat and really having kind of a strong understanding of the context in which they're being landed. And that comes through a variety of places. It could come from previous work, it could come from diplomacy. Quite frankly, I looked at it more. Who are people I could hire from the countries themselves and it would always be sort of a country first training model because they've lived in the context. So it isn't something that's new and different, as it often would be. If you were hiring somebody from a western country and going in, it took much longer for them to really understand and be grounded in the context. Then tied to that is really the ethics of what you're doing. And we had a colleague who, you know, was really good at running our organization through, in part because she had worked in humanitarian kind of the dark logic model of what we might do. And here's the opportunity and the optimism of tech can help save the world and here's all the ways it can go wrong. And so she really helped their entire organization. And I think I've seen more of that evolve, particularly with the pace of AI really come into place, to really begin to think about what are the ethical concerns and what are all the ways that this could go wrong and kind of working through the alternate side of how this could be reused. So I guess in summary, I would say I'm looking for somebody who is digitally highly competent, somebody who is in essence a diplomat and somebody who is really designing with the user in mind, but also designing to think about what could go wrong.
- [37:55]
B
John,
- [37:58]
D
not much to add or refine to what Kate just said, right. That trisector athlete's key, even within Accenture. I think the mindset that a lot of our people are having to take on right now is, look, being super strong and specialized in one thing is no longer enough, right? And you have to demonstrate that curiosity and that capacity to, to continually learn. Right? So I think that's across industries right now for sure. And, and in particular in the humanitarian sector and NGOs. I'd agree with that entirely. And yeah, I'd say the, the additional kind of factor in, in some of this is around the, you know, we talked about trust and, and values and I think the, the vulnerability that at this point in Time that, that people have to have in a way that isn't a weakness, but really is, is seen. Acknowledging your limitations emotionally when you're on the front lines technologically, when you don't, when you might know this part of a digital element but not the other, and. Or when you're trying to engage and partner with others. Right. Saying this is where we have a gap and we need help here and just really quickly back to the ecosystem pieces. Where there is a limitation inherently in some of these organizations is where I think there is a responsibility of partners, whether it be corporate partners or funders, to understand where those gaps exist to, to provide, whether it's the technical capacity building that I think look as humanitarian organizations are trying to recruit and retain, how might the technology partners that are using, that are selling their technology invest in the training of those people alongside their own? Right. I think that's where there's an opportunity to say, look, we, we as humanitarian organizations might not be able to afford or invest in this amount of training, but if we're using your technology or whatever it might be, how can we benefit from the training programs that your employ? Right. So that's something I know we're working with some our ecosystem partners on. Is that same concept, right. As we deploy ERPs, HCMs, et cetera to these organizations or AI, and we're starting to do the same. Where can the Accenture plus insert technology company here business group, where we jointly invest in solutions and training of our own people, how might that then translate to the sectors that we're supporting is kind of one area, but often that's not enough because we don't necessarily have enough to invest in every area we'd want to. So that's where we're starting to partner more so with funders. Right? To say, look, if we're all trying to solve this problem, back to that kind of statement that we need to operate differently, we need to think more holistically and say, look, if we can't just think of this in pieces and parts, we have to really be mindful of the holistic picture and say we can bring this resource to the table. But funder X, we need you to not just fund the end outcomes you're thinking about, but the capacity building, the technology licenses, whatever that might look like, to go upstream and say, look, if we're going to bring this technology all the way through for this organization, we can't just kind of take a grant over here and a little discount from the technology company over here and provide some pro Bono training over there. We have to think more holistically of that kind of value case, total cost of ownership, et cetera and really co invest and co create these not just technology solutions but the kind of people process technology ecosystem around that and it's not happening overnight. There's some good examples of where that's happening now. But back to some of where this disruption is leading, I think that's, that's where we're committed to being a lot more proactive and, and kind of strategic and, and orchestrating. Right. Kate, to your point, what needs to come together in, in a way that invests in those people, right. There might be those tri sister athletes when they come in but that those skill sets and those capabilities are, are not something that might exist in a specific individual as fully as. And so how can we really invest in the talent and build the talent as well? So some of the conversations might need to lead to the pipeline. Right. And how are back to the universities and, and other educational or non, non kind of academic ways of building those skills is just another part of the conversation here that that's going to be really interesting in the years to come. Right. Is that the, the, the building of those skills and those profiles that, that we want to hire are going to come from a lot of different experiences that I think we also need to be open to. And that was a big conversation last night as well. Right. Four year degrees and university education is not the clearest path now to the types of skills and talent that we need to solve the problems we need to solve. And so I think that just is another part of the conversation I'd be curious your thoughts on as well is kind of how we think about the next generation of talent and where they're going to be be skilled even before they get that job or apply.
- [42:48]
C
Yeah. Can I just, I want to pick up on something you said there Sean, because I think there's one other thing that we haven't probably talked about enough. I mentioned it but I want to bring it back to card on the forefront which is who are we finding to put in these jobs in the first place to be a successful orchestrator and let's say Tanzania or Ethiopia, it is probably not somebody who looks like Sean or I. We can do elements of it, we can coach people to do it, but it is most likely someone from that country themselves. I started and ran quite a large project in Tanzania many years ago and we had to go get sign off to orchestrate this entire project across many different departments and groups. From the present. And we were flying, and my colleague who ran our office there was, you know, who was one of my most trusted lieutenants and mentees. And he's like, you're not going. And I was like, no, they don't need to see me. They need to seek you because they're going to buy into you and I can help you put together how to do this. So I think it's also leadership, being really comfortable with being kind of behind the scenes instead of this hero as leader idea that had often been perpetuated as myth that only I, the top person, can do it. It's often going to be, particularly when you're orchestrating something, somebody who is just really good at getting everybody around the table. And I think that that profile of person looks a bit different than what we have traditionally hired for in the past. We still need the heroes. I'm not dismissing that. They just don't necessarily always have to be the ones who are orchestrating everyone to come together.
- [44:42]
B
Yeah. I mean, so when. A funny story, when we started, when I started Humanity Link, it was to create the ecosystems. So the goal was, was that I could speak on the tech side and speak on the NGO side. So bring me your problem, and then we're going to try and figure out which partnerships you need to address that problem. And so that was really. Our ethos is starting out at Humanity Link. It shifted now. It's kind of shifting a different direction, but it shifted with COVID because it was really, you know, it was a strange time. But I do really appreciate that conversation. And on the orchestration, you know, if we dial back what the UN was supposed to be, right. When we talk about the programs and the funds and everything, that's really just was the job was to be orchestrators. Right. Work through implementing partners. People think UNHCR does a lot of work on the ground. They have a lot of staff, but what they're actually doing is managing all the partners that are on the ground. So, you know, I think. I think there's always a misconception sometimes not from this group of people I'm speaking to, but you know, on the outside that somehow, you know, UNHCR goes in with 30,000 staff to do something in a refugee camp, and it's just not the case. Right. But they. And they were in many ways good orchestrators. But orchestration costs a lot of money, too. And I think that there's something to be said about that.
- [45:54]
C
It costs money and it doesn't show a direct outcome that can be Measured in a grant. And that is something. A colleague was sharing this with me, like the facilitation is more essential than ever and less funded.
- [46:11]
B
Yep. Yeah.
- [46:12]
C
And when there is less money in the system, the pressure is constantly on more outputs and the sustainability focus, which I think healthfully had been emphasized for the last 20 years goes into decline. And that's what makes me nervous. And when it comes to technology or mining people's data, that becomes even more essential to consider how you're going to, you know, manage it. It's very dangerous.
- [46:46]
B
Yeah, it's, it is a, it's a crazy time, but I'm still excited. I think there's the art of the possible here. We're going to be able to see over the hedge 2026, 2027, and really start to see what I think, I hope what the potential good can be done with the pain that so many people that were in vulnerable situations who've been impacted by 2025, but also the organizations themselves that were trying to assist those people and how they've been impacted. So I'm hopeful, I'm really hopeful. And with that, we usually do a last question at the end of each podcast and I don't usually tell anybody that I'm going to ask the question because I want it to be something good, but it is your wish, right? And just what is your wish for 2026 and the future of this space in humanitarian action? And what's a low hanging fruit? What's something that you think organizations need to know now that, that they can, they can start to implement themselves? You know, and I don't want to couch it in anything else, but it is just a wish and, and a low hanging fruit that you think it would be really important for our listeners to start with. And so I flipped a coin at the beginning of the show and it was heads. So Sean, you're first.
- [48:03]
D
All right. My, let me just make sure I'm getting it. So my, my wish. And what was the second part?
- [48:09]
B
Hanging fruit. Lo Life.
- [48:11]
D
Yeah. So my, my, my wish is that I would say we approach the problems that need solving rather than with despair, but with, with hope. Right. I'm really glad you used that word, Chris. I think the last time we were together in, in our office in New York for the UN General assembly, right. We were, we were hosting a, a similar group of professionals. Right. And, and I was really trying to, to focus on, on a message, approach, cope.
- [48:37]
C
Right.
- [48:37]
D
That there is a lot to despair about. But I'd say in our experience as much as we've talked about the limitations of partnering in the past, et cetera, but when passionate, purpose driven people gather around a shared problem to solve together, and it shifts from the question of what if funding falls through or what if technology takes my job, or what if we're unable to meet the needs of these people. Once you, you bring that problem to others with a shared purpose and desire to solve it, the question shifts from what if to how might we? Right. And with how might we. I'd say that's where hope can begin to come through. Right. A problem tackled alone, forget what the exact quote is. Right. But it leaves you feeling a little empty and scared. But a problem faced together, you know, does bring hope and more possibility. Right. So I wish that there is more of that collective sense of hope by tackling problems together. And I'd say the low hanging fruit is maybe this is a bit aspirational. I think it'd be that low hanging and quick. But it is really just the opportunity to be vulnerable and kind of approach that in a way which kind of seeks the collaboration around a small problem together and kind of takes what may have felt like something that you would have to go it alone for a funder or whatever that might be and come together with others. There's three INGOs that the CEOs came together, they were dealing with this massive question back in the spring and they've formed some pretty, pretty exciting ways of collaborating as three of the largest INGOs in ways that will truly have a pretty great impact. So I think the low hanging fruit is that vulnerability to just step out there and say, I can't do this alone. I can't do this in the ways that I used to try to not do it alone. So here's what I need, here's what I can bring to the table and what can we bring together and start small. Don't try to, to tackle it all at once, but really say this is a small area, call it in technology or hiring or whatever and bring a couple other people, help solve that problem together with you and see what happens
- [50:40]
B
when competitors become friends. Yes, I know those three. And it is pretty amazing to see that change with those three organizations and how they're working together, co procurement and everything. So I love that. That's really great. Yep. Absolutely. Thanks, Sean. Okay. Kate. Kate, your turn.
- [50:57]
C
Yeah, I got a little bit of extra time, so I appreciate that. So given my background, I'm going to come at this from sort of a digital angle. Right. My wish is that as funding has decreased, that we really take the opportunity, we being sort of a global and national ecosystem of countries to really invest in the promise of digital public infrastructure and using that data and AI. Right because. And we stop funding these individual siloed systems that have prevented countries scaling as quickly as possible. And I see that really being possible because countries are saying I'm not taking this anymore, I'm not sweeping suaded by it. And there's huge coalition around that. And so I'm very excited and hopeful. But that's my wish is that everyone kind of gets religion around that, as it were. The low hanging fruit I think is to either stop arguing that AI is everything or that AI is doom and really focus instead on use cases that practically sit in front of you and figure out if it is appropriate. And so I think that in many cases AI doesn't solves huge challenges that we have struggled with for decades. The ability to rapidly translate agentic AI at the frontline health worker, the ability to solve problems like gaps in medical training that haven't, you know, been solved. That's a group that I started with, that I work with does that, you know, there's, there's a huge opportunity to take this and do it, but it needs to be really grounded in very specific use cases that are driven behind national demand for problems they want to solve. And groups should stop pontificating or opining on it and just focus on those use cases and that's their low hanging framework and get it done.
- [53:17]
B
Couldn't agree more. I love it. Thank you both. Those were great wishes, great low hanging fruits. I think that people can take home and think about and start to look in their organizations. Our listeners are really from the humanitarian development world and it's always good to hear from people like you. Kate. I can't thank you enough for joining us, Sean. It's been such a pleasure for having you on here as well. And so. So you know, Humanitarian Frontiers on the Edge everyone, this has been a great episode and thanks a lot for joining us.
- [53:49]
C
Thank you.
- [53:49]
D
Thanks Russ.
- [54:01]
A
Thanks for joining us on Humanitarian Frontiers on the Edge. If today's conversation sparked new ideas, new questions or new ways of thinking about what's possible, then we've done our job. This podcast is brought to you by HumanityLink. Working at the intersection of technology and humanity to help deliver aid faster, smarter and with greater accountability. Until next time, stay curious, stay grounded and keep pushing the frontier.
- [54:32]
B
Sam.