I’ve been hearing that word “scale” a lot lately, I think because it sounds exciting and technological. Ten years ago everyone in the community benefit sector — nonprofits and foundations — talked about “replicating” programs. I think that word was popular because it sounded smart.
Either way, it amounts to a similar idea: If you think it through properly, and apply money properly, you can take what works in one context and make it work elsewhere.
"Purple Mushrooms" by Flickr user c.j.b
It’s a reasonable thought and in many cases it’s probably right. But there’s something missing.
To me, the “scale” and “replication” terminology is too mechanistic and doesn’t capture what is at play. It implies that with a big enough brain you can do just about anything.
But good programs grow — organically. Like mushrooms. Instead of going around and try to find them to give them more funding, we perhaps ought to look more at creating the right conditions for them to grow and spread from place to place. In some cases this might be funding, but in other cases (perhaps more cases) it might be leadership training, or some other catalytic intervention.
We’re in danger, in the policy world, of being too clever by half. Indeed, I am growing to fear that we’ll look back on this period as “that time when we were overoptimistic about the power of our plans and technologies.”
