全球视野 | 当做技术的女性转行到非营利组织，她们为社会影响力带来怎样的变革？

Tech titans' desire to reshape philanthropy is nothing new. Everyone knows the transition that Melinda Gates made from Microsoft to the Gates Foundation to Pivotal Ventures, a hybrid approach to investing in women-led startups and leveraging philanthropic grant-making to drive advocacy and social progress. Founder of craigslist, Craig Newmark, started Craig Newmark Philanthropies to give back and fight disinformation, protect democracy, and support women in tech, while Eric Schmidt, co-founder of Google, co-founded The Schmidt Family Foundation to support organizations and initiatives to work toward a healthier and more just world. 

科技巨头们想要重塑慈善事业的愿望并不新鲜。每个人都知道梅琳达·盖茨从微软到盖茨基金会再到Pivotal Ventures的转变。这是一家投资于女性领导的初创企业并利用慈善拨款推动宣传和社会进步的混合方法。Craigslist的创始人克雷格·纽马克创办了克雷格·纽马克慈善基金会，以回馈和打击虚假信息，保护民主，并支持科技界的女性。而谷歌的联合创始人埃里克·施密特则与人共同创办了施密特家庭基金会，以支持组织和倡议，努力实现一个更健康和更公正的世界。 

But it isn’t just the tech luminaries making these shifts. A growing number of tech leaders are answering the call to address some of the most pressing issues facing the world, change systems, and help communities by taking their experience into the social impact sector. 

但是，不仅仅是科技界的名人在推动这些转变。越来越多的科技领导者正在响应号召，通过将他们的经验带入社会影响领域，来解决世界所面临的一些最紧迫的问题，改变系统，并帮助社区。 

Smart, savvy, and innovative women, in particular, have made this transition—from Ellen Pao, CEO of the nonprofit Project Include (formerly COO of Reddit), to Ann Mei Chang, CEO of the nonprofit Candid (formerly Senior Engineering Director at Google), and Nabiha Syed, CEO of media nonprofit The Markup (formerly VP and Associate General Counsel at Buzzfeed). 

尤其是聪明、精明和富有创新精神的女性，她们已经完成了这一转变：从非营利组织Project Include的首席执行官Ellen Pao（曾任Reddit的首席运营官），到非营利组织Candid的首席执行官Ann Mei Chang（曾任谷歌高级工程总监），以及媒体非营利组织The Markup的首席执行官Nabiha Syed（曾任Buzzfeed的副总裁和副总顾问）。 

What inspired these powerful people to move out of the tech sector to focus on social impact? Any of them could have easily left Reddit, Google, or Buzzfeed for another tech company or unicorn startup, but they chose to make a career pivot and, as Chang explained, “accelerate the impact and scale of solutions to the world’s most intractable challenges." 

是什么激发了这些强人走出科技领域，专注于社会影响？他们中的任何一个人都可以轻而易举地离开Reddit、谷歌或Buzzfeed，加入另一家科技公司或独角兽创业公司，但她们选择了转折她们的职业生涯，正如Chang解释的那样，“加快了解决世界上最棘手挑战的影响和规模”。 

 

德克萨斯州，奥斯汀，3月13日：2022年3月13日，在德克萨斯州奥斯汀希尔顿酒店举行的2022年SXSW会议和节庆活动期间，Ann Mei Chang在台上发表了《利用数据促进种族平等》的演讲。

(Photo by Jason Bollenbacher/Getty Images for SXSW)GETTY IMAGES FOR SXSW

I spoke to Pao, Chang, and Syed to get some insight into why they transitioned from tech to the nonprofit sector, and the impact they are on a mission to achieve. 

我采访了Pao、Chang和Syed，以了解她们为什么从技术领域过渡到非营利领域，以及她们的使命所想实现的影响。

The tech world feeds into our need as humans for instant gratification: You dream, you iterate, you solve complex problems, often quickly and with some of the smartest teams of people around. You build tangible products. You can rapidly start up projects, even companies, and there can be big financial benefits. You can even fail and get another chance. 

科技世界满足了我们作为人类对即时满足感的需求：你梦想，你迭代，你解决复杂的问题，这通常是快速的，并与周围一些最聪明的团队合作。你制造有形的产品。你可以迅速启动项目，甚至是公司，这可能会带来巨大的经济效益。你甚至可以失败并获得另一次机会。 

So why move into social sector leadership? For Chang, the change was part of a 20 year plan to do good. It was “a responsibility to make the world a better place,” Chang said. She was inspired by Elizabeth Birch who had left Apple to become President of the Human Rights Campaign. 

那么，为什么要进入社会领域的领导层呢？对于Chang来说，这一转变是她20年来的行善计划的一部分。她说这是“使世界变得更美好的责任”。她受到了Elizabeth Birch的启发，Birch离开苹果公司后成为Human Rights Campaign/人权运动的主席。 

Pao saw how companies could use data to be more inclusive and successful. Too many companies were hiring consultants to check a DEI box by doing 45-minute unconscious bias trainings. “It was frustrating to see companies championing progress by doing PR around a single training.” 

Pao看到了公司如何利用数据来实现更多的包容性和成功。太多的公司雇用顾问，通过做45分钟的无意识偏见培训来检查DEI（多样性,平等与包容性）的情况。Pao说：“看到公司通过围绕单一的培训进行公关，来倡导进步，这让人感到沮丧。” 

For Syed, the move from Buzzfeed to The Markup was a chance to shift journalism narratives. “I became interested in what it would be like to do news that was integral to democracy and accountability,” Syed said. “A nonprofit gives you the freedom to do that instead of being on track to an IPO.” 

对Syed来说，从Buzzfeed转到The Markup是一个改变新闻叙事的机会。Syed说：“我开始对做与民主和问责制密不可分的新闻会是什么样子感兴趣。非营利组织给了你这样做的自由，而不是走上IPO的轨道。” 

Each of these women sought to build frameworks for lasting change. Their tech experiences made them comfortable with experimentation and risk, traits not often found in the social impact and nonprofit spaces for many reasons. 

这些女性中的每一位都在寻求建立持久变革的框架。她们的技术经验，使她们能够适应实验和风险。而这些特征在社会影响领域和非营利组织中并不常见，原因有很多。

Risk and trust may not be common traits in the nonprofit sector, but they are familiar subjects for nonprofit leaders. Social impact resources are limited and closely watched. Nobody in social impact wants to be seen as the one wasting resources. “People don’t want to take risks because they don’t want to fail,” Chang said. “They are happy to take baby steps.” The thing is, baby steps and a reticence to fail fast means that it can take decades, if not longer, to catalyze the social impact and structural changes that many nonprofits strive for, creating barriers to success. 

风险和信任可能不是非营利组织领域的共同特征，但它们是非营利组织领导人熟悉的话题。社会影响的资源是有限的，并受到密切关注。在社会影响领域，没有人愿意被看作是浪费资源的人。Chang说：“人们不想承担风险，因为他们不想失败。他们偏向于迈小步子。问题是，小步走和不愿快速失败意味着可能需要几十年，甚至更长的时间，来催化许多非营利组织正在努力实现的社会影响和结构性变化，从而为成功制造障碍。” 

“Funders focus on impact,” said Pao. “Startups focus on growth.” The difference between impact and growth creates vastly different cultures, incentives, and metrics. Impact measurement is complicated (and often debated), while growth is simpler and incentivizes risk—sometimes even failure. For better or worse, the successes and failures of impact have human consequences beyond a product or even one’s job. 

Pao说：“资助者关注的是影响。初创企业关注的是增长”。影响和增长之间的差异创造了截然不同的文化、激励和衡量标准。影响的衡量标准很复杂（而且经常有争论），而增长则比较简单，而且激励风险，有时甚至激励失败。无论是好是坏，影响的成功和失败都会给人类带来超越产品甚至工作的后果。 

 

加利福尼亚州，达纳点，2月7日：2019年2月7日在加州达纳点的Monarch Beach 度假酒店举行的2019年MAKERS大会上，Project Include首席执行官兼联合创始人Ellen Pao在台上发言。

(Photo by Vivien Killilea/Getty Images for MAKERS) GETTY IMAGES for MAKERS

Chang, who worked at some of the most innovative companies on the planet (Apple, Google), said she was able to take risks by experimenting and iterating. “Silicon Valley is a pressure cooker of innovation.” This iteration model that Chang is bringing into social impact isn’t always easy for nonprofit leaders who have historically worked in the nonprofit sector. 

曾在地球上一些最具创新性的公司（苹果、谷歌）工作的Chang表示，她能够通过实验和迭代来承担风险。Chang说：“硅谷是一个创新的高压锅。” Chang将这种迭代模式带入社会影响领域。这对于历来在非营利领域工作的非营利组织领导人来说，并不容易。

It’s no secret that there’s power imbalances between nonprofits and the foundations who fund them. And historically, it’s those funders who ultimately control what social issues and programs are championed to the rest of the world. 

非营利组织和资助它们的基金会之间，存在权力不平衡，这已经不是什么秘密了。从历史上看，正是这些资助者最终控制着世界其他地区所倡导的社会问题和项目。 

“We need to trust the nonprofits we invest in. And we need to shift the funder-fundee dynamic, which requires different responsibilities on the part of both funders and nonprofits. Funders need to do their due diligence [before making an investment], then trust that the nonprofits they invest in will do the right thing, and that they are capable of doing so without micromanagement. If every investor micromanaged the companies they invest in, I'm sure they wouldn't be nearly as successful as they are,” said Chang. 

Chang说：“我们需要信任我们投资的非营利组织。我们需要改变资助者和被资助者之间的关系，这需要资助者和非营利组织承担不同的责任。资助者需要（在进行投资前）进行尽职调查，然后相信他们投资的非营利组织会做正确的事情，而且他们有能力在没有微观管理的情况下做到这一点。如果每个投资者都对他们所投资的公司进行微观管理，我确信它们不会像现在这样成功。” 

A move to a trust-based philanthropy model would create space for nonprofits to thrive authentically. 

转向基于信任的慈善模式将为非营利组织创造空间，使其真正地茁壮成长。 

Syed spoke about proactively building trust and diversifying power as a way to address risk and create projects that take on systems. “I’d love to see more spaces where you have different people at the table,” Syed says. Trust is challenging but essential to taking risks that innovate. “What does it look like to share power and decision making? Concession requires trust, and that feels unattainable in many spaces. But we need it if we’re going to survive.” 

Syed谈到了积极主动地建立信任和多样化的权力，来作为解决风险和创建可以承担系统项目的一种方式。Syed说：“我希望看到更多的空间，让不同的人坐到桌子旁。”信任是具有挑战性的，但对于承担创新的风险是必不可少的。她说：“分享权力和决策是什么样子的？让步需要信任，而这在许多领域都是遥不可及的。但如果我们想要生存下去，我们就需要它。”

All three nonprofit leaders talked about how surprisingly tough it is to raise money at a nonprofit, and how this directly correlates with risk-taking. They saw how much money is thrown into products on the for-profit side at Google, Apple, Buzzfeed, and Reddit, including products developed with a positive social impact. And yet, most nonprofits don’t see those same returns. 

三位非营利组织领导人都谈到，在非营利组织中筹集资金的艰难令人惊讶，以及这与风险承担是如何直接相关的。她们看到，在谷歌、苹果、Buzzfeed和Reddit等营利性公司，有多少钱被投入到了产品中，包括开发具有积极社会影响的产品。然而，大多数非营利组织并没有看到相应的回报。 

Chang noted that Candid gets 85% of its revenue from earned income, but for most nonprofits, funding comes from grants or individual donations, which “means you need to jump through hoops to keep the lights on,” Chang said. 

Chang指出，Candid组织85%的收入来自自我造血，但大多数非营利组织的资金来自企业或个人捐赠。Chang说：“这意味着你需要跳过重重障碍才能保持组织运行。” 

Pao added that “you don’t have control over the revenue like you do in the for-profit world. You are looking for donations and that’s not something you have a lot of control over.” 

Pao补充说：“你不能像在营利性世界里那样，对收入有控制。你在寻找捐赠，而这并不是你能控制的事情。” 

This feedback loop of funding can control a leader’s vision of what’s possible, and it can foster cynicism over time. Syed noted that while organizations don’t have to answer to shareholders, there are still incentive structures in philanthropy. Syed says that nonprofits are always asking: “Will our stakeholders like this? Is it fundable?” The answers to these questions often don’t get to the heart of what the communities being served actually need, creating vanity projects that cycle right back into that funding feedback loop. 

这种资金的反馈循环可以控制领导者对事情可能性的愿景，而且随着时间的推移，它可以滋养出愤世嫉俗的态度。Syed指出，虽然组织不必对股东负责，但慈善事业中仍然存在激励结构。Syed提到，非营利组织总是在问：“我们的利益相关者会喜欢这个吗？是否可以得到资助？”对这些问题的回答往往没有触及被服务社区的实际需求，从而产生了一些虚荣的项目，这些项目又循环到了资金的反馈循环中。 

Syed hopes that organizations can reframe accountability to overcome these incentive structures by asking the hard questions and answering them with action. She asks, “What does power and accountability mean? Walk the walk. Does your nonprofit organization have paid parental leave? Problems like these are everywhere and the social sector has not solved them.” Social impact leaders aim to shift systems by turning organizations into models of possibility. 

Syed希望各组织能够重新规划问责制，通过提出尖锐的问题并以实际行动予以回答，克服这些激励结构。她问道：“权力和责任意味着什么？一步一个脚印。你的非营利性组织有带薪育儿假吗？像这样的问题随处可见，而社会领域并没有解决这些问题。”社会影响领导者的目标，是通过将组织变成可能性的模型来改变系统。 

 

Nabiha Syed是The Markup的首席执行官，该公司是一家非营利组织，专注于以数据为导向的科技调查以及科技如何影响社会。

NABIHA SYED

Social impact organizations can benefit from the experience and skills of technology leaders. Syed, Chang, and Pao are familiar with complexity, solving problems under pressure, and turning ideas into tangible products. The challenges are unexpected and often frustrating; however, these leaders' deep passion for systemic change motivates them to find new approaches and ways for organizations, communities, governments, and funders to successfully work together to create meaningful shifts in a once-static system. 

社会影响组织可以从技术领导者的经验和技能中受益。Syed、Chang和Pao熟悉复杂性，在压力下解决问题，并将想法变成有形的产品。这些挑战是出乎意料的，而且往往令人沮丧；然而，这些领导人对系统性变革的深切热情，促使她们找到新的方法和途径，让组织、社区、政府和资助者成功合作，在曾经固定的系统中创造有意义的转变。