How much is enough? Most people can’t answer this question. Based on actions, not words, “more than I have” seems accurate. But “more” is not a finite answer. It’s an elusive objective. The lack of consensus on “How much is enough?” is the biggest source of conflict there is.

Today’s political rancor is but the most current expression of a timeless squabble over the distribution of wealth. It’s left us to worry about our organizations, the people we serve, and society at large. In this time of unknowns, our organizations could soothe themselves with more certainty in answering “How much is enough?” Read on to learn how these two steps can help you do just that.

There’s a calmness and novel perspective that comes from looking at art. Recently, I found both in an email from the Jerald Melberg Gallery. Their “Highlight of the Week” featured the quilts of the women of Gee’s Bend. For generations, these Black women in rural Alabama have used recycled household materials to craft beautiful textiles.

This made me think a lot about scarcity. It’s the center of gravity for many of those we serve. The struggles it creates are unfair and often tragic. But sometimes, its conditions give way to resurgence. As we confront shrinking budgets and heightened pressure, understanding how scarcity affects behavior in these three critical areas can help us better serve others and remain grounded in what matters most.

I never thought of leaving Manhattan until a news anchor announced that the bridges and tunnels were all closed. When we recall major life events, it’s often the frightening times that stand out. September 11th tops the list for me, but that also includes the dot-com crash, the Great Recession, and COVID. Now, joining those vivid mile markers is the chaos created by the current executive branch.

Psychologically, understanding why we’re so shaken in these moments helps us see things more objectively and move through paralysis. So here’s a behavioral economics breakdown that — eventually, I promise — provides a light to walk towards.

Thinking back to childhood, the grocery store looms large. When you’re a kid in a supermarket, time stands still. My mother’s review of the weekly circular and clipped coupons sentenced me to an eternity of shelf scanning and pointless coveting of things she’d never be talked into. The time thievery then culminated in more waiting in the checkout line.

In behavioral economics, friction refers to anything — waiting in line, for example — that makes it harder to take action. Modern retailers hate friction. It’s also the enemy of causes seeking behavioral change. If you take one thing away from this article, let it be this: People don’t fail to change because of a lack of knowledge, but a lack of ease. Like their e-commerce counterparts, savvy user-experience designers have removed friction wherever possible. Learn how and check out these five causes that took big steps to overcome sticky barriers.

Some of our most serious issues have one big thing in common – their consequences usually aren’t immediate. From heart disease to climate change, the impact of our behavior, be it individual or collective, has a long-time horizon. And the long view isn’t where the human brain excels. We’re simply wired to find today a lot more real than an abstract future.

Unfortunately, most cause messaging doesn’t take this into account, or use it to the issue’s advantage. So here are the four framing tactics I see fail most-often, plus a key perspective shift that plays to the brain’s strengths when you’re looking to incite change.

I’ve spoken with so many nonprofit leaders navigating the excruciating consequences of the new administration’s slash-and-burn approach to federal policy. And many are preparing for a near-term future marked by increased competition for private grants and donors.

Operational shifts will be necessary for most. Here are three examples of this kind of counterintuitive pivot.

I’m not handy. I wish it were different, but no amount of renovation-based television programming or YouTube videos seems to change things. I can be stymied by the simplest of repairs, so much so that I’ve found it less awkward to hire someone at the outset rather than engage them after I’ve botched things up on my own. I’ve seen the cause marketing equivalent of my conundrum often enough that I’ve decided to share a few common signals that your endeavor may outstrip your current capabilities.

Any maintenance on an old house is like pulling a loose thread on a hand-knitted sweater. But I know ignoring things will almost always yield a deeper chill. It’s remarkably like the work I do with clients leading public engagement programs — how ongoing refinements are non-negotiable for meaningful impact. But how often these improvements tend to get neglected. So here are three common mindsets that can limit your success and, more importantly, three tactics to overcome them.

It's no surprise that Millennials and Gen Z see the world in a completely different light than their elder counterparts. But why are these distinctions so important for cause leaders? Because even if you aren’t directly serving younger generations, you’ll soon need them to be your donors, volunteers, or advocates. And their innate distrust of institutions includes philanthropic ones. That means you need to think differently about your message AND your messenger. So here are three trusted-messenger strategies to help jump-start your own.

Our hearts beat for those we're trying to help. That’s why last week’s federal fire drill hurt so much. And while the immediate threat of funding interruptions has abated, recent scares hint that this is no time for complacency. Even if you don't rely on federal funding, new shifts could impact a large swath of organizations. So here's a sample five-point plan to help your organization be as prepared as possible.