Where Does the Power Sit? Reflections on Governance, GEDSI and Influence

One unexpected outcome of the Power to Praxis workshops and Practice Circles this year has been the conversations about power. Not power in communities. Not the power dynamics between donors and local organisations. Not colonial power or institutional power, although those conversations are certainly part of it. Our own power.

Again and again, the conversation has come back to the same question: how much influence do GEDSI practitioners actually have within our own organisations? The more I look around the humanitarian and development sector, the more I notice a pattern.

Most organisations have one GEDSI practitioner. Sometimes they’re full-time. Sometimes they’re a consultant. But more often than not, there is one person expected to support an entire organisation, or a multi-million-dollar programme. That one person is expected to influence support, maintain, develop, advance almost every part of the organisation on Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion. More often that not, Diverse SOGIESC is left out entirely.

Programmes seek advice on design and implementation. Communications ask about language, imagery and whose stories are being told. Human Resources looks for guidance on accessibility, reasonable adjustments, recruitment and creating more inclusive workplaces. Safeguarding teams seek input. Monitoring and evaluation teams ask how to measure inclusion. Business development teams want support responding to donor requirements. Leadership asks for strategies. Staff ask questions. Partners ask questions. GEDSI practitioners share that they become advisers across almost every function of the organisation. Yet they rarely lead any of them.

They are rarely part of the executive team. They rarely control budgets. They rarely have authority over the systems they are expected to influence. I am saying rarely, because there has to be an exception to what I am hearing, doesn’t there?

The more I reflect on it, the more I think we’ve designed these roles around a contradiction. We give GEDSI practitioners responsibility for inclusion, but not the authority or resources to deliver it.

As an external consultant, I experience a different version of the same challenge. I’ve written toolkits. I’ve developed frameworks. I’ve facilitated training, undertaken GEDSI assessments, lead research and made countless recommendations. But implementation always sits somewhere else. If I’m honest, I’m not sure how many of my recommendations have ever been implemented. Sometimes it feels like commissioning a toolkit or undertaking a GEDSI assessment becomes the evidence that an organisation is mainstreaming inclusion, rather than the beginning of organisational change.

Real change requires executive leadership, organisational accountability, budgets, systems and culture. Those things can’t be delivered by a consultant. Nor can they be delivered by a single GEDSI adviser, no matter how experienced they are.

At the same time, expectations continue to grow. DFAT expects organisations to mainstream gender equality throughout their programmes. Disability equity and rights are also expected to be integrated across the programme cycle rather than treated as standalone activities. These aren’t optional extras. They’re core expectations of good development practice. Yet in practice, mainstreaming often looks less like a redistribution of power and more like a delegation of responsibility. I think this reflects something deeper about how our work is valued.

The humanitarian sector is going through profound change. Funding cuts following the dismantling of USAID and reductions from other donors have reshaped organisations across the globe. Policies such as the Mexico City Policy, more commonly known as the Global Gag Rule, have also had a significant impact, on the role of GEDSI workers, and the role of GEDSI in organisations. I dare say, even here in Australia, and Australian funded programs. At the same time, the global backlash against gender equality and the rights of women and diverse SOGIESC communities continues to grow. When organisations reduce staffing or restructure, GEDSI functions often seem among the first to be reduced. It makes me question whether organisations truly see inclusion as a core strategic priority, or if it is still treated as something optional that can be reduced or removed when resources are tight.

All of this has left me reflecting on a question I have had mulled over for many years. If I want to influence organisational systems, where does that influence actually sit? Its a question that keeps me up at night, and a question that leads me to do all this blogging. Its also a question that lead me to the LGBTIQA+ Governance Training here in Melbourne.

If executive teams and boards make decisions about organisational strategy, risk, culture, accountability and resource allocation, perhaps this is another place where meaningful influence can happen. Perhaps understanding governance is another way of thinking about systems change.

It was also simply wonderful to spend a day surrounded by local queer people. Much of my work takes place in humanitarian and development settings, often internationally. Spending time connecting with my own Melbourne queer community was a reminder that community matters here too.

Interestingly, after asking a question to one of the panels during the day, they responded (in part) but saying to beware of becoming the token queer person on the board. Find a way to influence inclusion without becoming the token queer. I don’t have the answer to this conundrum yet. But perhaps that’s for another Power to Praxis Practice Circle session.

Power to Praxis has always been about examining power, not simply in the communities we work alongside, but in ourselves, our organisations and the systems we are part of.

This year, those conversations have unexpectedly turned back towards us. It’s not about whether we know enough as GEDSI workers, or skilled enough. But whether we’ve built organisations where the people responsible for inclusion have the authority, resources and leadership support to make it possible.

Perhaps that’s the next conversation we need to have.

If you’ve enjoyed reading this piece, I’d love you to subscribe to Power to Praxis.

Power to Praxis is a reader-supported publication exploring power, participation, decolonial practice and social inclusion in humanitarian and development work. Every article is freely available because I believe these conversations should be accessible to everyone, regardless of where they work or whether they can afford a subscription.

If you’re able to become a paid subscriber, you’ll be helping to keep it that way. Your support makes it possible to continue researching, writing and sharing open-access articles, while also developing new tools, workshops and resources for practitioners.

To find upcoming Power to Praxis Workshops, Practice Circles, free resources and the latest writing, visit the Community Powered Responses website. It will always have the most up-to-date information about what’s coming up and how to get involved.

Whether you subscribe for free, become a paid supporter, join a workshop or simply share an article with someone else, thank you for being part of the conversation.