Decolonizing Approaches to Public Trust

Too often, evaluation of First Nations projects is led and designed by non-Aboriginal practitioners who rely heavily on Western frameworks, metrics and timelines. While these approaches may satisfy reporting requirements, they often miss the deeper contextual, cultural and relational layers that define success for our communities. When lived experience is excluded, evaluation becomes something done to communities rather than with them. It fails to capture the reciprocal nature of our work, where relationships, trust, cultural safety, and community-led decision making are not just “soft measures” but core indicators of impact. First Nations evaluation is not just about outputs and outcomes. It is about story, process, connection to Country, and accountability to community, Elders and future generations. Without this, what is being measured is incomplete, and what is reported risks misrepresenting reality. Genuine evaluation in First Nations contexts must centre cultural knowledge, lived experience and relational accountability. It requires shifting power, not just collecting data. If we want evaluations that truly reflect impact, we need to move beyond deficit-based and extractive approaches, and towards co-designed, culturally grounded, community-led evaluation. This is not just good practice. It is ethical practice. #Evaluation #FirstNations #CommunityLed #DecolonisingEvaluation #IndigenousDataSovereignty #CulturalSafety #Impact

What if “best practices” are actually just colonial patterns in disguise? A few years ago, I was brought into a project where the client had done everything “by the book.” - Industry-recognized frameworks - A polished engagement strategy - Multiple planning sessions and risk assessments They were proud of their approach. And honestly? At that stage in my own work, I thought it looked solid too. But something didn’t sit right...Communities weren’t engaged. Trust wasn’t landing. And the outcomes? They looked impressive on paper, but felt empty in practice. It took me time (and some hard truths) to realize what was really going on: - The frameworks weren’t broken. - The plans weren’t poorly designed. - The problem was the assumption that these “best practices” were neutral, but they weren’t. They were just colonial patterns in disguise. Systems that prioritized control over connection. Processes that looked inclusive but operated from a place of extraction. Strategies that valued pace and polish over presence and participation. Since then, I’ve changed how I work, and how I help clients shift, too. Instead of relying on what’s been done before, we co-create what’s needed now. We ground in values, not just metrics. We focus on relationships, not just results. We experiment with ways of knowing and being that reflect Indigenous worldviews - not just colonial legacy systems. And the outcomes? They’re more human. More impactful. More real. If your organization is still stuck in “best practice” thinking, here’s your invitation: What are you willing to question in order to build something better? #Decolonization #IndigenousLeadership #SystemsChange #Reconciliation #RelationalLeadership

Expertise isn’t always wisdom. For too long, Indigenous communities have been handed solutions from the outside, delivered by consultants, firms, and government advisors who may have credentials, but lack lived understanding. They come with systems designed in colonial boardrooms: • Budget models that don’t reflect communal priorities • Housing templates that don’t fit our lands or climates • Governance “toolkits” that ignore kinship, ceremony, and Nationhood They call it “best practice,” but it’s based on someone else’s experience. They call it “neutral,” but it carries the weight of extraction and control. Too often, these voices are trusted over the people who’ve lived through the challenges and carried the solutions quietly, patiently, and powerfully. We know what works because we’ve lived it: • We know how to stretch a budget when the system starves us • We know what makes a home safe for our Elders and future generations • We know what true accountability looks like because we answer to each other, not a line item It’s time to stop outsourcing our solutions. It’s time to listen to: • Housing managers who’ve held it together without support • Knowledge keepers who remember how we built and governed before interference • Young leaders who want to rebuild in a way that’s rooted, not borrowed Indigenous communities hold the wisdom. Our values must shape the structures. Our people are the experts in what works for us. We don’t need more imported “answers.” We need space, trust, and resources to lead. #IndigenousGovernance #ForFirstNationsByFirstNations #HousingJustice #CommunityWisdom #DecolonizeDevelopment #IndigenousExpertise #SelfDetermination #ReclaimTheNarrative #TruthBeforeReconciliation

How to Use a SWOT Through a Decolonial and Community-Accountable Lens By SH Chung, PhD Most organizations use SWOT assuming they must become more competitive. But for social justice and Indigenous-centered organizations, competitiveness is the wrong compass. Four Reasons Why Competitiveness Fails Us 1. It assumes scarcity, not relationship. • Built on “not enough.” • Justice work grows through relational abundance. 2. It fractures communities. • Creates winners and losers. • Reinforces colonial hierarchies of worth. 3. It misdefines success. • Growth metrics cannot measure healing, trust, or safety. 4. It centres funders instead of community. • Compliance replaces consent. • Purpose must follow community authority. How to Make SWOT Actually Useful 1. Start with relationship, not strategy. Ask: Whose trust matters most here, and what strengthens or breaks it? 2. Redefine the four quadrants. • Strengths: places where trust is real • Weaknesses: places where harm or misalignment appears • Opportunities: invitations arising from community readiness • Threats: structural forces that limit safety or integrity 3. Look for patterns, not performance. Your goal is to understand relational commitments, not produce a glossy plan. Questions That Transform a SWOT • Where are we most aligned with our values in practice, not on paper? • Where is trust lowest—and why? • What is the community asking for that we have not yet answered? • What structural realities shape our work more than effort or intention? A Simple Example In one Indigenous education team, “Strengths” became: We respond to crises together without blame. “Weaknesses” became: We move too fast when we’re under pressure and forget to co-create decisions. This revealed a truth: the issue wasn’t skill—it was speed as harm. Awareness on Colonial Tools A decolonial SWOT is not about positioning. It is about noticing what relationships need strengthening before strategy begins.

🧠 Decolonizing Our Minds — and the Way We Serve After decades in nonprofit leadership and now as an executive coach, I’ve learned something humbling: Sometimes, the way we serve still carries the very colonial mindsets we’re trying to dismantle. "We can’t liberate what we still internalize". Decolonizing our minds means questioning the stories that shape how we “help”: 👉🏽Who we think holds the power and knowledge. 👉🏽Who gets to make decisions. 👉🏽Who we see as “in need” and who we see as “the helper.” I remember leading a “capacity building” project years ago. We arrived with frameworks and toolkits and little curiosity. One local leader said, “We don’t need you to build our capacity. We need you to trust that we already have it.” That moment changed everything for me. Decolonizing service asks us to move from charity to solidarity, from helping to standing with. It looks like: 👉🏽Co-creating programs with communities, not for them. 👉🏽Valuing lived experience as deeply as academic expertise. 👉🏽Redefining success — not in metrics, but in dignity and shared agency. 👉🏽Sharing power, not just empathy. Dr. Tema Okun reminds us that white supremacy culture shows up in our habits: urgency, control, perfectionism, intellectual dominance. I see it in myself, in boardrooms, and in every organization that equates speed with progress. Decolonization begins with noticing. It’s an inner excavation of our intentions and our impact. As Audre Lorde wrote: “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” So let’s lay those tools down and pick up new ones made from humility, listening, and love. Because true service isn’t about saving anyone. It’s about remembering that liberation is a collective act. 🪞What does decolonizing your service look like for you? How are you reimagining leadership from the inside out? #Leadership #Birthing #Community #Power #Service

Incredible volume (Decolonizing Management and Organization Studies-Why, How and What), and open-access (free download) https://lnkd.in/gsRy6TZE (Table of Contents in the comments) This excellent volume offers a rigorous, multi-perspective exploration of: *Why decolonization is necessary* – documenting the persistent overrepresentation of Western voices in management scholarship, the need to “open both eyes” to diverse forms of knowledge, and the importance of inclusive global collaboration to address today’s grand challenges. *How to decolonize* – advocating reflexive and ethical research, centering local lived experiences, and embracing alternative epistemologies and methodologies that respect context and place. *What must change* – from indigenizing curricula (e.g., incorporating Mātauranga Māori), to cross-continental virtual classrooms, to creating journals and fora that amplify underrepresented perspectives. The book closes with an important reminder: decolonization is “an ever beginning” – an ongoing, intergenerational process of rethinking, unlearning, and rebuilding our academic practices. This resonated with me deeply. I recall attending a COVID-era Zoom forum on “Decolonizing Knowledge” hosted by an elite Indian management institution. The irony was hard to miss: while the event’s theme was about dismantling colonial legacies in scholarship, the forum itself included no representation from Indigenous (Adivasi/Tribal) scholars, marginalized caste voices, or other historically excluded groups in India. Instead, the discussion was dominated by 'domestic' elites (Indian or Indian origin diaspora)—academics who, while accomplished, did not appear to have deep engagement with or lived experience of the communities most affected by structural exclusion. That absence spoke volumes. It made clear to me that simply gathering scholars from a particular country or region is not the same as true decolonial inclusion. Representation must go beyond passports and affiliations; it must be about whose perspectives, experiences, and 'knowledges' are being centered. For me, this reinforced a core conviction: decolonization should not be about the nationality of the author, but about their empathy, sensitivity, and reflexivity—their willingness to listen, to be guided by, and to stand alongside those whose voices have too often been silenced. I applaud Dr. Fohim and the contributors for exemplifying these values in both thought and practice. Their work challenges us to question elite gatekeeping, redesign our teaching and publishing structures, and create genuinely inclusive spaces for knowledge co-creation. We are still at the “ever beginning” of this journey. Let’s commit to empathy, openness, and institutional transformation – so that management and organization studies truly reflect, respect, and serve our diverse global community. #Decolonization #ManagementStudies #AcademicResearch #OrganizationalStudies #InclusiveScholarship

💡Decolonial Approaches to Research: A Call for Epistemic Reparations💡 In the realm of academia, research has often been wielded as a tool of colonial violence, extracting knowledge and resources from communities while perpetuating harm and exploitation. This history has left a legacy of deep mistrust among communities affected by colonialism, where the word "research" is often seen as the "dirtiest" word, as poignantly described by Tuhiwai Smith in her seminal work. To move forward, it is imperative that we adopt decolonial approaches to research, acknowledging this mistrust and actively working to repair it. Decolonial research is not merely about diversifying topics or including more voices; it requires a fundamental shift in how we conceive, conduct, and disseminate research. Every aspect of the research process—from selecting topics to deciding on dissemination methods—must be scrutinized through a decolonial ethics lens, guided by the communities involved, rather than solely by institutional frameworks designed to mitigate legal risks. This approach necessitates a focus on what I refer to as epistemic reparations. Epistemic reparations involve recognizing and addressing the historical and ongoing injustices in knowledge production and validation. It means valuing and integrating the epistemologies of marginalized communities, ensuring their guidance and leadership in the research process. Decolonial research ethics must prioritize the following: 1. Community-Centered Research Design: Communities should have a central role in defining research questions, methodologies, and goals. This participatory approach ensures that research addresses the needs & concerns of those most impacted. 2. Transparent & Collaborative Processes: Researchers must engage in open dialogues with communities, building trust through transparency and collaboration. This includes clear communication about the research’s purpose, processes, and potential impacts. 3. Equitable Knowledge Production: Recognize & validate the knowledge systems of marginalized communities. Researchers should aim to learn from and with these communities, rather than imposing external frameworks and interpretations. 4. Ethical Dissemination: Decisions about how, when, and why to share research findings must be made in consultation with the communities involved. This ensures that the dissemination of knowledge does not reinforce existing power imbalances or cause further harm. 5. Accountability & Reflexivity: Researchers must remain accountable to the communities they work with, constantly reflecting on their positionality & the power dynamics at play. This involves being open to critique and willing to adapt methods and goals in response to community feedback. For more insights and to discuss how we can support decolonial research practices, please reach out munaabdi@ma-consultancy.co.uk For

Decolonizing Monitoring & Evaluation: Changing How We Listen For too long, M&E has relied on surveys, indicators, and reports designed far from the communities we serve. The result? Data that often satisfies donors but misses the realities on the ground. Decolonizing M&E is about shifting the methods we use so that evaluation is not an extractive exercise, but a collaborative process. Imagine a rural community using photovoice: instead of filling out a form, people capture their daily lives through photos, showing what health, safety, or dignity truly mean to them. These images spark dialogue between community members and program staff turning evaluation into storytelling. Or consider community scorecards: neighbors gather to openly discuss the quality of local services, set priorities, and track improvements over time. The process itself builds accountability not just the final report. Even something as simple as developing local indicators changes the dynamic. When a community defines success whether it’s girls walking safely to school or families accessing clean water without debt those measures carry deeper meaning than imported benchmarks ever could. Decolonizing methods like these don’t replace rigor; they expand it. They ensure that evidence reflects lived experiences, not just numbers on a spreadsheet. If we truly want to measure impact, we must ask: Are we listening in the right ways?

Relational Accountability in Practice Across many spaces including in funding, leadership, education, we talk about impact, outcomes, and results. In Indigenous ways of working, we begin somewhere else: with relationship. We are never outside of relationship. How we show up, how we listen, and how we make decisions shape trust, belonging, and the long-term wellbeing of people and communities. Relational accountability invites us to slow down, act with care, and recognize that our work carries responsibility beyond timelines and deliverables—to people, place, and future generations. This perspective has guided my work alongside community organizations, cultural institutions, and educators who are trying to do their work differently. More ethically, more humanly, and more in alignment with the communities they serve. If you’re curious about what this looks like in practice, I invite you to listen to the first episode of Indigenous Insights: An Evaluation Podcast. It’s not just about evaluation, it’s about leadership, learning, and how we make decisions in complex systems without losing our humanity. A question to sit with: What relationships within your organization, project, or community might need more care, attention, or repair right now? 🎧 Start with Episode 1 of the Indigenous Insights: An Evaluation Podcast (Link in comments) #IndigenousEvaluation #RelationalAccountability #DecolonialPractice #CommunityLed #EthicalLeadership #SystemsChange #TrustBasedPhilanthropy #EquitableSystems #ValuesDrivenLeadership

🌿 New Publication: Towards a Decolonial Planning Praxis for Nature-Based Solutions 🌍 I’m excited to share our new paper, published in Environmental Science & Policy led by Janneke den Dekker together with Katinka Wijsman, PhD , where we explore a question that is becoming increasingly urgent in climate adaptation and urban planning: What does it mean to decolonise the planning of nature-based solutions (NBS) in cities? NBS are promoted as win–win solutions for climate resilience, biodiversity, and human well-being. Yet, planning practices often overlook the deeper social, historical, and political dynamics that shape who benefits — and who continues to be marginalised when urban regeneration projects with NBS are formulated. 🔎 What we found:   Through a systematic review of journal articles and books, we examined how decolonial thinking is (or isn’t) integrated into planning for nature, ecosystems, and biodiversity. Our analysis shows that: NBS planning still relies heavily on technical and ecological expertise, often sidelining Indigenous, local, and marginalised knowledges. Colonial legacies continue to shape planning institutions, governance processes, and dominant narratives of nature. Justice-oriented NBS requires more than participation — it requires addressing the root causes of climate vulnerability, including structural inequalities and historical harm. Decolonial approaches offer powerful pathways to rethink human–nature relations, shift power, and co-create more inclusive, context-sensitive, and transformative planning practices. 🌱 Our contribution:   We propose a bridge between inclusive NBS planning and decolonial thought, offering insights into how planners, researchers, and policymakers can meaningfully integrate justice, plurality, and place-based knowledge into NBS design and governance. This work is a step toward reimagining NBS not just as technical interventions, but as opportunities to reshape relationships between people, places, and ecosystems in more equitable ways. 📄 Full citation:   Den Dekker-Arlain, J., Frantzeskaki, N., Wijsman, K., & Rojas-Marchini, F. (2025). Towards a decolonial planning praxis for nature-based solutions: bridging inclusive planning of NBS in cities with decolonial thinking through a systematic literature review. Environmental Science & Policy, 174, 104260, https://lnkd.in/ewTqwM5B.