What’s different about the Global Impact Summit

One of the smartest things about the Global Impact Summit is something deceptively simple: it’s the 20-minute breaks between sessions.

At last year’s event, that’s where many of the most important things happened. Collaborations formed, introductions were made, funders met founders, and not-for-profits from different sectors discovered what they had in common. People had real conversations.

Some conferences and other events still operate in a culture that discourages people from engaging openly: don’t approach funders. Don’t pitch. Don’t ask questions that are too direct. Don’t overstep. Don’t make it awkward.

How exactly are we supposed to grow philanthropy if people doing critical work feel discouraged from having honest conversations with the people capable of funding that work?

I’m not suggesting conferences should become chaotic sales environments, but there is a difference between protecting thoughtful engagement and unintentionally creating exclusivity.

I know some people feel excluded from philanthropy spaces. The young founder attending their first event, the grassroots organisation without polished branding. The not-for-profit leader who isn’t part of elite networks. The person standing awkwardly near the coffee station feeling as though they don’t belong in the room.

The sector talks constantly about equity and inclusion, about power imbalances, but we also need to talk honestly about access.

That’s why the Global Impact Summit is important. It’s an event where good people can meet good people, and conversations can happen naturally. If you’ll be in the room, please come and say hi.

More information

Global Impact Summit, Sydney, August 5–6

This is an abridged version of an article first published on Catherine Brooks’ Substack. You can read the original version here.