A Call for Coalition Building in Times of Crisis

Why Interpersonal and Interorganizational Repair Must Go Hand in Hand

The United States is in the midst of political and cultural upheaval. Deepening divisions amplify some of our most pressing social justice issues: racial inequality, labor rights, and equitable access to food. While conflict and crisis can breed disengagement or hasty attempts at damage control, they also offer a rare and critical opportunity to come together, repair broken bonds, and build strong coalitions. Nowhere is this more necessary than among organizations striving for equity and fairness, especially within the food movement, where the stakes are high for historically marginalized communities.

Yet, in many large private and nonprofit institutions, we see a common pattern of “anticipatory compliance.” Leaders often try to minimize controversy by adopting only the baseline standards they believe will reduce external scrutiny, rather than addressing the deeper systemic problems. The following examples, adapted from our experiences and those of our peers, highlight why these half-measures can undermine the broader fight for justice, and how embracing true collaboration among institutions offers a more powerful response.

Why Is Coming Together Necessary?

In major nonprofits dedicated to food access, for example, staff experience workplace harassment, discrimination, and hostile treatment. Meanwhile, these same institutions, which ostensibly share common goals, often undercut one another’s efforts, competing for limited grants or hoarding resources and contacts that could benefit the entire movement if shared. At a high level, employees and partner organizations alike have documented:

Repeated Instances of Demeaning or Dismissive Language Employees raising legitimate concerns about their workload, compensation, or program direction sometimes find themselves labeled in ways that undermine their credibility: words like “frustrated” and “ungrateful.” In some cases, disparaging remarks extend to personal factors such as health or “work ethic,” compounding the sense that feedback is unwelcome or intentionally minimized.
Identity-Based Tensions Some employees experience interactions that are racially or culturally charged, leaving them isolated or singled out based on their background. Even where direct bias is denied, the cumulative effect of such remarks, especially in an organization that publicly espouses equity, can create a heightened sense of vulnerability and mistrust.
Inequities in Compensation and Grant Funding Questions about fair pay can go unaddressed for extended periods, despite repeated requests for clarity or equal treatment. Organizations may respond with short-term fixes, like spot bonuses, rather than acknowledging deeper systemic issues. Externally, funders tend to provide the majority of resources to “known” or high-profile nonprofits, often compromising effective or equitable dissemination. This has a ripple effect, marginalizing smaller nonprofits and undermining their access to critical funds.

Erosion of Psychological Safety A pattern of dismissing or penalizing feedback can create an environment where employees constantly fear retaliation. Instead of feeling heard, they may worry that speaking up will prompt negative evaluations or character attacks. This atmosphere undermines trust and cohesion, making it difficult for any team to function effectively or for the larger mission to be realized.
Interorganizational Tensions and Resource Hoarding Beyond internal workplace conflict, nonprofits and advocacy groups in the food space often view one another as competitors for the same grants, donors, or media exposure. Instead of sharing resources, contacts, and strategic insights, they can fall into a scarcity mindset, seeking to protect their own interests at the expense of the larger movement. Promises of collaboration sometimes end in isolated planning or even attempts to discredit potential allies. This “every organization for itself” approach ultimately leaves the entire sector less equipped to tackle systemic issues like food insecurity and racial injustice.

The Broader Implications: Anticipatory Compliance vs. True Coalition Building

Examples like these are unfortunately common, not just within the food movement, but across many sectors guided by social justice missions. Rather than immediately addressing serious allegations and working to repair the harm, both inside their organizations and with partner institutions, too many leaders resort to a form of anticipatory compliance. This means:

Minimizing the issue in hopes that external scrutiny will die down with a basic, short-term policy response (e.g., a quick HR investigation, a mandated “diversity” training, or a standard-issue handbook revision).
Containing potential liability rather than initiating genuine organizational and interorganizational reflection that might lead to structural change, like reevaluating salary benchmarks, leadership pipelines, or building transparency into funding collaborations.

This also includes performative partner meetings with no action steps or accountability: conversations that “check the box,” but lead nowhere.

This narrow focus on short-term self-protection undermines the more profound opportunity for coalition building. In the food movement, for instance, nonprofits, advocacy groups, and philanthropic bodies ultimately seek the same goal: food justice and racial equity. When one institution faces internal strife, particularly involving racial bias or inequity, it can open the door to collective learning and shared strategies that strengthen the movement as a whole.

But if institutions instead fight over resources or throw one another under the bus for perceived errors, any chance of collaborative progress is lost. It’s also crucial to note: no one group or coalition can claim to be “the voice” of the people. There is no monolith when it comes to lived experience or movement strategy.

Opportunities for Repair: Bridging the Interpersonal and Interorganizational

Cross-Organizational Partnerships By reaching out to similarly aligned nonprofits or professional associations, organizations can form coalitions to specifically share best practices on ethical leadership, fair compensation structures, and inclusive workplace cultures. Rather than quietly “fixing” problems behind closed doors, or worse, denying them, this coalition approach acknowledges that systemic patterns affect the entire sector. Opening lines of communication allow organizations to exchange strategies for both workplace culture repair and interorganizational resource-sharing.
Collective Advocacy and Accountability Coalitions can use their combined influence to push for better industry-wide standards, from salary transparency and anti-harassment policies to more equitable resource distribution. Publicly committing to measurable actions, like annual pay audits, board-level diversity metrics, and shared capacity-building initiatives, makes it less likely that any single organization can sidestep true accountability. When pursuing joint grant applications, organizations should also outline clear expectations for how resources will be distributed and create feedback loops to assess how those expectations are being met.
Empowering Employees and Honoring Communities When progressive institutions collaborate, they can create safe spaces for staff to share experiences, both positive and negative, without fear of retaliation or dismissal. This solidarity also models healthy conflict resolution for the communities they serve. In the food movement specifically, an equitable, trusting environment among employees and partner organizations translates into more effective advocacy with food-insecure populations. Addressing conflict and difficult dynamics now makes us better equipped to mobilize within our sector and beyond. People on the ground see that collaboration goes beyond a marketing buzzword, and that it’s built into how these organizations operate and make decisions.

What's Next? Harnessing the Power of Crisis

The current social and political climate in the U.S. has heightened tensions and exposed inequalities in every sector. While it may seem daunting, moments of crisis can serve as catalysts for meaningful change if leaders and organizations choose to build alliances rather than default to damage control.
- Acknowledge the Limits of Solo Problem-Solving No single organization, and no one coalition, can eradicate deeply rooted issues of bias, inequity, or resource scarcity on its own. Recognizing that those who consider themselves part of the food movement as interconnected, and that moral or reputational failures in one nonprofit affect the entire movement, is a crucial step toward mutual accountability.
- Rethink Toxic Workplace Allegations as Opportunities for Cultural and Structural Reform Handling complaints is not just an HR formality, it’s a chance to reexamine workplace culture, communication norms, and operational values. Leaders who actively invite external peer organizations or neutral third parties to review their practices demonstrate transparency and a commitment to transformative action. This also extends to how they collaborate with other groups: sharing data, forging real partnerships, and learning from one another’s mistakes.
- Champion Progressive Thought through Solidarity Progressive future states like racial justice, labor fairness, and community-centered projects thrive where open dialogue, shared decision-making, and genuine collaboration are encouraged. When large institutions and smaller grassroots organizations come together in true partnership, they become stronger forces for social change, better equipped to resist regressive policies and cultural backsliding. Resource-sharing, joint advocacy campaigns, and co-hosted public forums can magnify each group’s impact.

Repair Is Power

Anticipatory compliance might seemingly limit immediate risk, but it also limits the long-term transformative potential of any organization, particularly those seeking to be a part of a movement. By committing to genuine collaboration, sharing knowledge, and holding each other accountable, nonprofits and private institutions alike can turn moments of crisis into the seeds of real, sustained repair.

Now is the time for bold alliances. Whether in the food movement or any other social justice arena, the imperative is clear: work together, learn from internal crises, and create a truly inclusive, equitable environment, both internally and across organizational boundaries. The mission depends on it. And so does the future of progressive thought and action in the nonprofit sector.

You can check out the post and join the conversation on LinkedIn—click the link to read more.