The Prospect of Impact Transactions Through the Eyes of a 'Backbone' Organization Practitioner

• Date: 01 August 2018

8-2018 NEWS & ANALYSIS 48 ELR 10691

COMMENT

The Prospect of Impact Transactions

Through the Eyes of a “Backbone”

Organization Practitioner

by John R. Ehrmann, Ph.D.

John R. Ehrmann is a Founder and Senior Partner of the Meridian Institute.

First, I want to thank Patience A. Crowder for this

very intere sting and thought-provoking explora-

tion of a new and innovative concept. I believe,

based on her initial exploration, that the concept of

impact transaction merits further work, so I am pleased

to know that she intends to continue her development of

the idea in future papers. I look forward to following her

work as it progresses.

I have spent my entire professional career design-

ing and implementing coll aborative problem-solving

approaches in the sustainability re alm, broadly defined.

My work and that of many, many others has laid the

groundwork for t he conceptua lization of the collec -

tive impact construct, put forth by John Kania and

Mark K ra mer,1 upon which Crowder builds the ca se

for impact transactions. At my organi zation, Meridian

Institute, we have helped diverse parties construct and

implement efforts based on collaborative and collective

impact. These efforts have been focused on areas like

building community resilience in t he face of natural

disasters; developing new legal and regulatory frame-

works on issues such as Superfund cleanups and Toxic

Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform; and address-

ing international issues such as food security, tropical

deforestation, and the elimination of af latoxin food

contamination in sub-Saha ran Africa.

I. The Underlying Premises of the

Impact Transaction Approach

I agree with several of the underlying premises of Pro-

fessor Crowder’s development of the impact transaction

approach. First, collaborative, as opposed to adver-

sarial, proceedings are inherently well suited to address

the complex societal challenges a nd conicts that she is

exploring. is results from several factors: collaborative

processes bring multiple interested parties to the table;

1. John Kania & Mark Kramer, Collective Impact, S. S. I

R, 36 (2011), https://ssir.org/articles/entry/collective_impact.

these proc esses ex plore and strive to understa nd under-

lying interests, rather than focusing on stated positions,

which is at the heart of most adversaria l proceedings;

and they empower the group of involved parties, rather

than an adjudicatory person or body, to make decisions.

I think this la st point is particularly importa nt to con-

sider in the context of the potential benets of the impact

transaction approach.

I also agree very much that a backbone organization

or agency plays a critically importa nt role in convening,

managing, a nd facilitating collective impact eorts. at is

the role that my colleagues and I play on a daily basis—so

I admit to perhaps having some inherent bias—but I do

believe that this role is key to assisting a diverse group of

stakeholders in meeting their collect ive objectives. I will

not spend time here detailing the many administrative

roles that a backbone organization plays, including sched-

uling, meeting planning, logistics support, and mana ge-

ment of nancial resources. I do want to comment on two

additional dimensions of the backbone and facilitation role

that I think are ver y important and merit further explora-

tion by Crowder in her subsequent work. One is the reality

that having an enga ged third party fundamenta lly changes

the problem-solving dynamic. A party c an direct commu-

nications to and through the third party, who can assist

in assuring that t he other parties clearly understand the

content of the communications. In a complex, multiparty

eort, this funct ion plays an extremely important role in

deescalating interpersona l dynamics and historica l ani-

mosities between parties.

Another key dimension of the backbone role is that

the third part y is positioned to help all involved to

develop a common conceptualization of the problems

that they want to address. Of ten, people do not see

the nature of the problems in similar ways; and hence,

the challenges associated with developing strategies to

address them are multiplied. An example of action that

the facilitator/backbone team could take is assisting

in researching the fac t base to help map key elements

of the issues. is can t hen lay the foundation for all

Copyright © 2018 Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from ELR®, http://www.eli.org, 1-800-433-5120.