Testing Catalyst’s new vision and mission statements
Findings and insights from talking to people about the words and phrases we are starting to use to describe Catalyst.
Catalyst is midway through its transition from digital infrastructure initiative to tech justice organisation.
At least that’s one way of describing it. You might also say:
Catalyst used to help non-profits build their digital, data and design capacity. Now it helps different communities shape technology through building collective power.
Or perhaps…
“We’re taking our learnings about digital capacity building, networked working and collective decision making forward into a new phase. This new phase is broadly focused on advocating for technology that liberates people.”
This article shares the vision and mission statements we tested, plus some other terms that we think could describe our work. It describes our insights and reflections on what they mean.
The statements we tested
Our refreshed vision statement: Shaping liberatory technology for just and regenerative futures.
We will do this by: Centring community needs in design, digital and data decision making through building collective power (mission).
We also tested these phrases: Liberatory tech; just and regenerative futures; liberation, collective liberation; tech justice; centring community needs; collective power; social justice; systemic change; field catalysing; and communities (5 types).
How we tested them
- We did a literature review, comparing how Catalyst uses these words in its internal documentation, with how the external world uses them.
- We interviewed 7 people from across our network — including some close and some more distant. We read and showed each phrase to each person. We asked them what each phrase meant to them and how it made them feel. Then we synthesised what we heard and wrote some insight statements
- We ran a survey asking similar questions to the interviews, and got 6 responses.
The challenge in finding the right words: balancing precision with accessibility
Here are some unsolicited reflections we heard during the interviews.
“Trying to be precise with the language we use; whilst trying to convince different audiences of the value of the work. It’s the challenge of being insular and using different language to speak to people outside the organisation.”
“I’m not advocating for dumbing down because we believe our communities can’t understand terminology, but rather, making things accessible through making sense.”
“The challenge depends on what communities — finding the mix inbetween the big revolutionary visionary words and the down to earth words”
“Making language accessible, and recognising communities have infinite experience of life and this stuff. Not dumbing down but stretching them.”
“Making it accessible but balancing that with people’s experiences of language, educating and stretching them.”
“The starting point for propositional thinking should be what makes sense to folks.”
Findings
‘Liberatory tech’
This is the first part of our vision statement.
Insights
Most people feel positive and hopeful, but some express confusion.
“It feels and sounds good to me. Sounds impactful.”
“Its not a familiar enough term that I could be sure of what a more general accepted definition of it might be.”
People don’t always understand what it means and there’s a lack of confidence in describing it. But those who do describe it use terms like progressive, movement, equity, justice, innovation, liberation, empowerment.
“Seems positive and future focussed.”
Our reflections
We aren’t confident that this term is accessible to our audience.
‘Just and regenerative futures’
This is the second part of our vision statement.
Insights
People reacted positively overall, but needed processing time and whilst some felt it was clear, others were unclear on what the words mean. Some concerns about accessibility raised, and preferences for simpler terms.
“I like it and i like the fact it kind of encompasses an outcome.”
“I do like just and regenerative futures but it does feel like too much of a mouthful.”
People described it as heralding change over the long-term, including concepts of fairness and equity, and provided definitions which included climate alongside innovative tech. But they also mentioned a preference for shorter terms such as social justice / tech justice.
“I think it’s the same as liberation: futures that have notions of equality written in to them.”
“This doesn’t speak to the lived experience of people.”
Our reflections
We’re confident in the power and impact of this phrase.
We are somewhat confident that the phrase is accessible.
‘Shaping liberatory technology for just and regenerative futures’
This is our vision statement in full.
Insights
Most people find this difficult to understand and describe it as ‘wordy’, too long’ and ‘not accessible’.
“It feels a bit like I understand it but this seems like it’s making it harder for me to understand than it needs to be.”
“Is it the tools, the people who work in tech, the systems of power and wealth and ownership?”
“Liberatory doesn’t feel like an enabling element — it doesn’t feel warm.”
Some people like the word shaping at the beginning but others don’t mention it much.
“You’ll have lost me at liberatory but shaping makes me continue reading.”
Our reflections
We don’t think the vision statement is accessible.
“Just and regenerative futures” is more accessible than “shaping liberatory technology”.
‘Liberation’
Insights
Some people like the word ‘liberation’ and describe it as hopeful and united but others think it doesn’t have everyday meaning.
“I’d use more concrete words like systemic change or thinking about a different future. It doesn’t have meaning in every day conversations, in terms of people’s lived experience.”
People think of freedom when they hear the word ‘liberation’.
“Empowering people, helping people improve, take the next step forward, taking them out of maybe a problem”
Our reflections
We aren’t confident that this word is familiar enough or has enough practical meaning to people.
‘Collective liberation’
Insights
Some people relate positively to collective liberation but most don’t. They see it as inaccessible, unempathic and inward looking.
“Something we aspire to, but the word liberation’s not accessible to everyone.”
People see collective liberation as being about intersectionality, us all together but they aren’t sure about what we are being liberated from.
“Doesnt mean anything to me. No empathy. Collective liberation for what? Why?”
Our reflections
Liberation is still not an easy term for people to relate to.
Tech justice
This is likely to be a key strand of our work. We commissioned a report on it in 2023.
Insights
People prefer tech justice to liberatory tech — a more accessible term.
“Ooo interesting. Yes very drawn to this.”
People find tech justice to be a straightforward, more easily understandable term. Some people like it and think it feels inclusive. Others don’t have an opinion on it
“Feels straight forward and accessible. Just wondering if technology needs more definition.”
People interpreted tech justice in lots of different ways.
“Speaks more to the human aspects of tech.”
“The antidote to surveillance capitalism — that’s what I get from it.”
Our reflections
We’re confident that people either understand or can imagine accurately what this means.
“What I find myself being drawn back to again and again, is the difference between tech justice and liberatory tech. Do they mean the same thing?”
Collective power
This is part of our mission statement. Its about how we help people build and wield their power to change.
Insights
People liked collective power. It felt positive and uplifting.
“It’s really bold and gives me a sense of uplift.”
People think that this term is about strength in numbers, and the power of group action.
“For me, this speaks to combining forces, working together and collaboration in terms of power.”
Some people think that there is something missing from this term. It raised questions for them.
“Whose collective power?”
Our reflections
This is accessible but it needs context and some explanation.
Centring community needs
This is part of our mission statement.
Insights
People really like the term ‘centring community needs’. They find it clear and aligned with their values.
“It makes me feel like yeah i am 200% for that”
People share a broadly similar understanding of what ‘centring community needs’ means to them. They use words like ‘power’, ‘heart’, ‘responsive’ ‘genuine codesign’ and ‘forefront’.
“It makes me think of inclusive design, accessibility and lived experience”
One person asked why we need to include the word ‘needs’. “If you centre communities they should be part of your work right from the beginning”.
Our reflections
This resonates well and is accessible to people.
Centring community needs in design, digital and data decision making through building collective power
This is our full mission statement.
Insights
People liked this and find it easy to understand
“Its clear about who is going to be involved and how it is going to be done and what it is you are focusing on.”
“Comes together in a way that doesn’t feel too abstract.”
People weren’t sure about including community needs.
“Again though, I’d question needs. It’s more than a community’s needs. It’s their experiences. It’s about their lived experiences and if they were working with you, you wouldn’t need to know their needs.”
Our reflections
This is generally accessible to people and resonates with their values. It might need refining to include more than needs.
More people found it memorable than any other phrase:
“I liked the full phrase centring community needs — i can remember bits of it and it sounded clear. It resonates with my values too.”
Social justice
This is what a lot of our work is trying to achieve.
Insights
People are familiar with the term and find it accessible.
“Speaks out to a broader audience.”
“Its more recognisable than regenerative futures but probably isn’t as specific.”
People describe it similarly: about equity, inclusion, a common node, addressing oppression.
“I like this because it is inclusive to me.”
Our reflections
This term is well known and accessible to people.
Systemic change
We see this as necessary to create social justice.
Insights
People are familiar and comfortable with the phrase.
“Much more descriptive for me and much more accessible”
People describe it similarly as redesigning a system collectively and large scale radical change.
“Opposite to individualism approach”
“Makes me think of having a bird’s eye view of a system and thinking about the different ways it could be influenced or changed over time.”
Our reflections
We are confident that this phrase is accessible.
Communities of…
We talk about communities, but what do we mean? We see 5 types to consider: communities of action, practice, place, interest and circumstance.
Insights
Communities of action is a lesser known / understood phrase, overall there was a perception this was more activist / movement led term. But it was accepted that it is people connected by a common cause.
Communities of practice is more widely understood than action, thought to be people who share a common goal or profession, who are skill sharing, learning from one another and figuring out what good looks like.
Communities of place was described by all as having links to a place, shared identity, shared geographical location. It was understood.
Communities of interest was easily understood by all to mean shared interests, endeavours, passions, or coming together to solve a problem collectively.
Communities of circumstance had mixed reactions. Negative reactions spoke of it alluding to people having misfortune, or historical experiences, and that it could be more explicit about referencing lived experiences. Others spoke of shared experiences being binding.
What we are doing next
This research is one step in the process of creating a new content strategy and commissioning content to describe these terms in ways people can understand. The content strategy work is fun and intersesting. I’ll write about it in July.
