Then and Now: From Founding to Present

Our journey continues by zooming in on the National Wildlife Federation. We’re looking at the founding of NWF, and considering what elements of the founding culture remain present today.

Speakers

Anita Singh – National Field Educator Manager
Anna Brunner – Director, Equity and Justice
Kaila Drayton – VP of Operations
Nicole Litwiller – Equity and Justice Storytelling Fellow

Note: This episode contains some explicit language.

Transcript

♫ Intro Music ♫

Anna Brunner
Where the country was in 1936 is really different from where we are today. And while there are some structures in NWF's founding, like the affiliate network that tries explicitly to hear from multiple voices who have differing opinions about what conservation should look like and should be, the original structure and the original way we were founded back in 1936... I don't know that anyone would make the argument that it represents what we think of as conservation, ecology, the forefront of environmental issues, specifically the interconnection of people and the environment.

♫ Intro Music ♫

Kaila Drayton
Hello, everyone and welcome to seeds of culture change a podcast where we're discussing the National Wildlife Federation's journey towards equity and justice. I'm Kaila.

Nicole Litwiller
And I'm Nicole.

Kaila Drayton
And we are your co-hosts. Nicole, how are you?

Nicole Litwiller
Oh, you know, it's been kind of a medium day. Do you ever have those days where you're like, just kind of capitalism makes you just feel less than great?

Kaila Drayton
I think most days

Nicole Litwiller
yeah.

Kaila Drayton
As I'm adding shit to my Amazon cart, and I'm like, the world is such a horrible place. And then I make sure that things get delivered on the same day. So that's the line the fine line that I walk.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, yeah. Well, it's just kind of been one of those days for me where the realities of capitalism had been very annoying to me. So feeling that but also spent lots of time sitting outside in the shade while doing my work. So that was a nice way to balance things out. But yeah, how are you?

Kaila Drayton
That sounds really lovely. Look, I'm gonna be honest with you. I'm gonna be honest with our listeners. I'm a little hungover. Yesterday was my birthday. It was also a Tuesday, that meant absolutely nothing to me. And I still celebrated and I am reaping

Nicole Litwiller
As you should.

Kaila Drayton
Reaping the repercussions today. Okay, well, now we turn our attention towards our episode today, which will focus on the founding culture of NWF, our history where we were, where we are and how that influences where we're going and we will hear from Anna Brunner and Anita Singh.

Nicole Litwiller
Let's jump right in.

♫ Transition Music ♫

Nicole Litwiller
Anna and Anita, welcome to seeds of culture change. We are so happy to have you here. And before we dive into some of the content questions, I'm wondering if we could start off with some intros. So if you wouldn't mind sharing your name, pronouns, A little bit about your role at NWF and what your go to coffee order is at a coffee shop. So Anita, can we start with you?

Anita Singh
Sure. My name is Anita. I use the them she her pronouns. I am a part of the education and engagement team at National Wildlife Federation. And I am a field educator, which means that I run an eco-Schools program. I also lead the co-lead the BIPOC ERG

Nicole Litwiller
Hey, editing Nicole here. I just wanted to clarify what BIPOC ERG stands for for anybody who might be confused by that. Anita is referring to here the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color Employee Resource Group. Okay, back to Anita.

Anita Singh
I'm a part of a bunch of other committees in their ERG do a lot of I feel like it's hard to answer that question totally encompassing because I do a lot of other things too here at the organization. I actually don't drink coffee that often because it makes me freak out. And so my go to you in the morning is Earl Grey tea with ginger.

Nicole Litwiller
Ooh, I love a good Earl Grey tea. I have not tried it with ginger though. I will have to do that.

Kaila Drayton
Sounds lovely.

Nicole Litwiller
Thanks, Anita. Anna, would you like to share your answers?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, definitely. So, Anna, I use she her pronouns I'm the equity and justice senior manager. And that means I do a lot of culture change in encouragement and modeling work at the organization. It's sort of a ever evolving role, because there's not a lot that the equity injustice team is directly in control of, but rather sort of relationship building and working with folks to understand opportunities for for growth and change. Yeah, I definitely know what you mean. And Anita about coffee sometimes being too much. I have gotten into the habit of ordering lattes, but I feel like they are too milky and intense. And so I'm trying to find out what the like transitional drink might be that is still caffeine filled, but maybe a little, I don't know, stepped down. And I haven't been able to communicate that well enough to my local barista to have them do anything other than give me sort of a strange look. So to be determined.

Nicole Litwiller
Very fair, appreciate your honesty.

Kaila Drayton
That's funny. Nothing gives me more anxiety than walking into Starbucks. I every time that I go to not that anybody asked me what my coffee order is, I realized this podcast isn't about me. But I'm gonna tell you anyway. When I go into Starbucks, I get so much anxiety. And the only thing that I'm able to order is the regular pikes place, roast. Because I'm like, Listen, I don't know what macchiato means. I don't actually know what a latte is. I don't know the difference between a latte and a cappuccino. And so I just order coffee. I actually stopped drinking coffee several weeks ago. Anyway, since this podcast isn't about coffee, I will move us towards what we're actually talking about. Start at the very beginning. And so Anna, I'll start with you. And then I'll turn to you Anita for the follow up questions. But can you tell us a little bit about how and why NWF was formed?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, definitely. So I guess just a quick disclaimer, NWF was founded in 1936. And I'm not that old. So what I am able to speak to is a combination of sort of my own experience and impressions as well as various books that I've read from other people who were around at the founding or who have attempted to tell the founding of NWF's story. So just to name that I think sometimes history can get anchored in some sort of official narrative. And I just want to invite a bit of complication into that. So the story that I'd always heard as sort of an NWF staff person was that Ding Darling, who was an editorial cartoonist from Iowa, had brought together people from around the country who were like him really passionate about conservation, and felt that the US government was not doing enough to fund and protect hunting and fishing habitats. But I later learned in trying to do some of this research, that Darling wasn't just an editorial cartoonist, he was for a brief time, the head of the agency that would become the US Fish and Wildlife Service. So there was always sort of this professional entanglement with the federal government, as the federal government was coming to terms with prioritizing, what conservation would look like. And I think that that context makes a lot more sense, at least in my mind than just for imagining a very talented editorial cartoonist bringing folks together to talk about wildlife. This is someone who has a lot of connections to the federal government. The original organizing meeting, that would sort of create the foundation for the National Wildlife Federation, was gathered by President Franklin Roosevelt. So there is already sort of this institutional layer that I want to sort of add into the story because I think it is an important part of how NWF was formed. I guess there are just a few other things I'd call out. Where the country was in 1936 is really different from where we are today. And while there are some structures in NWF's founding, like you affiliate network that tries explicitly to hear from multiple voices, who have differing opinions about what conservation should look like it should be, the original structure and the original way we were founded back in 1936... I don't know that anyone would make the argument that it represents what we think of as conservation, ecology, the forefront of environmental issues, specifically the interconnection of people and the environment, and the way in which people who are most impacted by environmental degradation, also have an important say in what conservation should look like in terms of being successful. And so I just want to call that out not to say there's something fundamentally flawed in our infrastructure, but just to just to name it like a lot has changed, and we have a lot of opportunities to keep changing and growing intentionally. So I think that's where I'd start. But if there are things y'all think I've left out or been too oblique about, I'd be happy to go into more depth.

Kaila Drayton
Can you maybe talk about, and Anita, please feel free to chime in as well, maybe some of the the overarching themes that, that we see when NWF was formed? So, you know, to give an example, I am expecting that the people who were in the room at the formation of the National Wildlife Federation where a lot of white men and probably older other themes that you feel like influenced at least the formation of NWS, even if we've we've changed those themes, or we're actively working, working against them. Can you go into some detail on that?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, absolutely. So spot on, I would say almost 100% white men, although there were some women's organizations involved. Notably, Carl Shoemaker, who was one of the initial folks involved in the creation of the Federation and would eventually become its first secretary and Conservation Director is specifically quoted as wanting to prevent women's groups, 4H clubs and farmer's interests from having voting power within the Federation. So it was already a point of contention at the founding in 1936, whose voices were salient in what conservation issues were important. I'll also just be very direct that 1936 in the United States was not a safe place for people of color and Black people. Lynchings were happening widely in the country. And so if the organization and its first meeting had involved, folks of color, Indigenous folks, more women, women of color, we would have been a very politically radical sounding organization. And we were not that we were trying to connect up to mainstream power, which at the time, was predominantly wealthier white men who engaged in mostly hunting and fishing for recreational and enjoyment purposes. So I would say a lot of the folks who were in the room were also really focused on how to continue accessing the things they enjoyed, like duck hunting, and knew that conservation and specifically wildlife habitat that would support the wildlife they were interested in continuing to hunt, that that was really their their central focus. And I think that focus around wildlife the debate around the role of sportsmen voices as centered, relative to other voices that might care about conservation of wildlife, I still continue to see some of those conversations play out in the organization today. And then I'll just quickly add, in addition to a sort of a long standing focus on trying to convince the government to do something through collective advocacy, early on in the Federation, a few other things that I think linger, were already in existence. One was an emphasis on education and engagement, recognizing that the next generation of stewards would be important to influence through giving teachers skills and education around conservation. Another point that I'd love to go into later, is non partisanship, that was a huge value of Ding Darling in particular, and probably other folks present that I think should be talked about and complicated. There's already sort of this tension around affiliate voices, the Federation as a whole, who should be involved. And then finally, pretty early on in about the 1940s. We'd already settled on a funding model that included selling things selling merchandise, putting, duck stamps is one of them, but putting our brand on things to make money. We engaged with an advertising executive to help us figure out how how the organization could could make money and I think there's still A legacy of that to this day,

Nicole Litwiller
Thanks for bringing in all of that history. And I feel like some of what you're going into, towards the end of what you're sharing kind of brings me to our next question. And Anita, I'm wondering if you could respond to this? What norms Do you feel like are still present that were also present with the organization's founding?

Anita Singh
Yeah, thank you for not asking me the history of this organization question. Because I don't know all of that. I just know, like a brief snippet of it. But I do know that and I'll add to what was said was like, this was the era of like the New Deal and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. So the administration in the country was kind of basically it was coming off of this period of extreme wealth inequality. And that the government realizing that they had to do something to quell basically what was going to become uprisings because of this, like extreme wealth inequality that was happening from like the roaring 20s and times like that. Which I would add that we're kind of entering that period, again, where we're seeing like, really extreme wealth inequalities. So we're kind of like back into that period of like having robber barons, and these really wealthy billionaires, trillionaires, actually, that control a lot of things. And I think one of the issues is that, you know, we still live under capitalism NWF still functions under capitalism. So we have to do what like the money says and where the money is coming from. And I see that personally, like in my programming, and where the funding comes from, is that corporations will give pieces of their corporate social responsibility or other things in order to have some sort of like impact in their image. And they're like PR, but also, they will fund some programming that actually does some good as well. But that funding still dictates like what we have to do, especially coming from a programming side. And that's frustrating, because that doesn't always align with what is actually needed by communities. And more aligns with what the corporation wants, or what the donors want. And it's really all of that money comes from the same place in the end foundation money, Corporation money, it's all coming from people who have really large sums of wealth, which are under capitalism derived from exploitation, either of natural resources, or of labor, or of a combination, there of both. So yeah, that's a hard thing to exist as a nonprofit in that in that sense. So I think that's maybe a similarity to how we got started some of the similarities there in terms of like the era that we are in again. And what might be happening in terms of norms, I know that NWF is kind of under like a big shift and trying to change our culture. I'm a relatively new staff person here, not even two years into the organization. So I think that I don't have necessarily like the historical perspective of what it was like here. But in terms of my experience, with any organization that tries to change, there's a lot of conflict that arises. And so I'm seeing that in terms of, there's like an old guard. And then there's also like this new guard and like new staff coming in and, and I think I am seeing like a lot of culture shifts in some areas of NWF, especially with like the equity team, you know, in terms of like, what we're able to do in our ERGs in terms of really beautiful policies that are coming out like, and resources that are coming out for employee mental health and wellness and things like that. But at the same time, I'm still seeing some of the old things, which is that people are getting promoted, who have been at the organization for a long time, because they've been at the organization for a long time. So on the one hand, I'm seeing that happen, but on the other hand, we're like, still, we're saying that we value these other things in terms of equity and becoming anti racist. So how are we making sure that that is happening across the board and we are such a, such a large organization that I know that change is slow, and we are seeing shifts, but it's kind of like, I'm seeing both sides of that. And then I'm also seeing like, well, other staff who's been around for a long time, like, oh, you wouldn't believe like how it was before Anita, like, you wouldn't believe like, This is amazing. I'm like, Okay, well, it's not amazing. Like, it's okay. Or, like, I'm glad that this is happening. But there's also all of this, that is not okay. That's just my perspective. As someone who doesn't have, you know, years and years of the organization.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, yeah. I really appreciate that. And I think one of the things that kind of was coming up for me as you were sharing as also a newer person to this organization and kind of struggling with trying to figure out how do I understand what some of these earlier cultural things are that we need to like talk about, and what you mentioned about kind of noticing some of those things through the changes and through some of the like hesitancy or the pushback. That's kind of where I feel like I gain an understanding of what some of the past cultural elements are, that still remain at this organization. And so I'd be curious, Anna, if you have other thoughts that you'd like to add on that other remaining cultural pieces that persist at this organization?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, well, I just have a lot of gratitude Anita for how you're characterizing where the organization is, and I feel like it is in this place of transition where there are sort of bursts of the direction that we could be going in, that we are wanting to go in and then sort of regressions into the patterns that we're used to falling into that maybe we've stated and intentionality to change from and haven't yet lived up to that. I think the the one that is really on my mind, is what I mentioned before, which is this non partisanship bipartisanship frame, because it feels to me like it allows for slippery-ness, when it comes to taking a stance on something, I would say equity and justice issues are inherently political, like we're trying to take a stance for involving more people hearing from more voices that in the past have been explicitly excluded. And that's going to mean upending how power has moved historically, and there's going to be pushback and concern and debate and things that I would hope, a robust political democracy could sustain. And I think by leaning in too much to non-partisanship, bi-partisanship, we do ourselves a disservice. And taking a stance on what it is we say, as an organization we want to accomplish, if there are drivers of capitalism that are causing pollution, you know, let me just strike that 'if' - there are drivers of capitalism that cause pollution, that destroy habitat that make it hard for both people and wildlife to thrive. We need to be clear eyed about that as we move into political conversations to try to make change happen. So I guess I don't want to be too naive to think that an organization is going to quickly be able to change when it has claimed so much success from being in the past, a nonpartisan organization. But I also don't think that we're going to be able to accomplish any of the goals that we set out around Wildlife Restoration around thriving communities for people or wildlife, if we don't start to take some political stances that sometimes might be more controversial, because it's clear that there are powerful forces in the world that do not agree that wildlife and people should be thriving. And so I would love for us to explore that more.

♫ Transition Music ♫

Kaila Drayton
I have a two part question. Anna, I want to direct the first part of the question to you. And then the second part to you and Anita. So the first part, you know, staying focused on on the norms of the organization, the norms that formed the organization, and the norms that we have now. What, in your time at NWF, What have you seen change?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, this really gets at I think, the scope of I don't know of equity work generally, right? Like, as you were saying, Anita, people will come along and be like, Oh, but you should have seen what it was like, you know, that I think can be true, but also, you know, that's looking back, what does looking ahead look like? And so yeah, it is good to look back. And I would just say, being able to talk about equity, justice, power, race, class, colonialism, things that in the past, folks would say like, 'oh, that's mission, drift,' or 'we're a wildlife organization' as though somehow we're on like, I don't know, Mars, another, another universe. It feels to me like that has been one of the most substantial shifts that we can actually have conversations and therefore get farther in uncovering how we work together to transform an organization because you know, I'm not I'm interested in coming in and saying, This is what Anna thinks the organization should be and now everyone needs to live up to that. I want there to be a conversation. But in order for us to transform and that way that's more real, we need to be able to talk about issues like race, class, privilege, oppression, and how those intersect with wildlife and people thriving. And so that shift, not that we do it well always not that it happens in every space, but just the the amount of spaces where that has become more accepted and more of a norm. Feels encouraging to me.

Kaila Drayton
Thank you, Anna, Anita. In addition to any norms that you have seen change, are there norms that you still consider to be a barrier to NWF's equity journey.

Anita Singh
I guess something that I've seen happen during my duration here is just having community agreements being placed into spaces so that even even that alone helps to remind people of the energy and the way that we should be entering spaces to have those conversations with each other. I am grateful for that. And also having been able to help craft that for various teams and groups that I'm a part of, I think we're running into maybe like explicit versus implicit Norton's here, because it's the implicit norms, the ones that are not stated in the organization that like pervade the organization that I still don't even have an understanding of sometimes, of how things run here. So one thing, for example, and I know that this is true of any organization is that you need to know the right people in order to get something done here. And if you're new to the organization, or you don't have a lot of power to begin with, that is a very large task to be able to overcome. So if you want to change something about your programming, or your funding or something that's like happening, I think that that is really difficult. And ideally, we would be able to have a structure in this organization, where people who are at a coordinator level or an entry level job. And I say that with air quotes, could have just as much impact into the organization as somebody who is a senior director on, you know, a VP or something like that, and that kind of get into like hierarchy, things like that. But I think I think those kinds of implicit norms are difficult to change, because they're not named, and we don't even like know them all. And I still don't even know them all, because I'm still learning. Yeah, I would love to maybe be able to even name some of those so that we could begin to change some of those.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, I really appreciate that framing, Anita, of there are a lot of implicit things that we may not know, they are norms, and so we're not aware of how they're showing up, or how it's preventing us from moving forward. And I guess one of the things I'd be curious to hear from you, too, is... Well, to preface this question, I feel like it's really important to be able to name those norms in order to move forward and continue to change. And how do you two feel like we could go about naming those norms?

Anita Singh
Hmm, that's a good question. I think if you ask a lot of staff of color, we could probably give you a list of norms, you know, that are not official norms at this organization, but that we have to navigate just on a, you know, day to day basis here. And I think some of those norms are no like white culture and how this organization was founded and how this organization has run. So, you know, we have started talking about some of those things, but it's just so pervasive, and it's so just like, ingrained into the foundation, and it's gonna take a lot of work to kind of root those out, name them and then begin to change them. But I preface this with saying that we don't need to go to all the folks of color in the organization and ask them to name these implicit norms, because we are already doing so much at the organization. Oftentimes, we take on because of our desire to change as an organization and become anti racist and have certain equity principles here. There is still quite a heavy lift that is placed on the staff of color here. I think that yeah, we have to figure something out there in order to solve that issue too. So that it's not staff that are already doing so much programming, and you know, day to day work, that is related to NWS like missions of conservation. And, yeah, basically that people who are doing their day to day work here at the organization cannot also be doing a significant additional amount of work. That is like culture change related, unless that that is a part of their job description, and they're actually being paid for that or their time is being compensated in some way for that. It's difficult to be able to continue to do some of the equity work that I personally am invested in and want to do, because my schedule is quite overloaded as it is.

Anna Brunner Yeah, I agree with a lot of your brainstorm thinking. And Anita I feel like there is sort of a, there's the both/And of there are some things that are sort of widespread cultural patterns that we can do a better job of practicing and noting around white dominant culture, right, either or thinking, moving into both and thinking, moving away from urgency. That's, that feels to me like a really big one that the organization struggles with. And I see that as a conflation of thinking that urgency allows you to show that you care about something and that you want to ascribe a value to it when in fact, some problems just can't be solved with urgency. They need to be solved with different different tools and pathways, you know, slower relationship building pathways, and I definitely agree as a white staff person, that there's a lot of work that white staff need to do to not just like educate themselves on some of these larger patterns that I'm I'm talking about, but also just be in relationship and listen to their colleagues of color, because I feel like we have been given the back plenty of times that like systems or norms could change and there's a question of who is carrying that labor forward, to try to make those changes happen and be enacted and sharing more of it so that it's not falling only on staff color. And then I'd also lift up what you said about like, labor and compensation because it feels like another point that you made previously that I agree, we're in the process of trying to align more fully and that is if we've stated this intentionality towards equity and justice transformation, and that I don't think we have an intention of ending it with just words, but it needs to start making its way into systems and how things are valued. So like, who is actually doing this labor who is being paid for this labor who is being promoted based on these skills that we say we value and how do we begin to put that into performance reviews and job descriptions? And the sort of formal ways that we show the value and importance of something and I think we have a ways to grow in that regard.

Kaila Drayton
I think something else that I noticed that happens we often look at this changing culture and changing norms as we all have to do it at the same time. We all have to do it the same way. And we all have to be in lockstep, and so sometimes it feels like everyone is just waiting. We're waiting for the Go ahead, or for somebody to say, this is how we're going to do it and to lead the way. And so I'm wondering, and I'm encouraging listeners, what are norms that you're seeing, and how can you as an individual affect those norms, even in the microcosm of your team, or your day to day projects or your day to day interactions? Are there small things that you can change about how you show up? Are there small things that you can change about your interactions? Because I think that those small micro changes could really add up could really push us, you know, in the direction that we want to go and again, we don't all have to go at the same time at the same pace in the same way.

Nicole Litwiller
I think that call to action feels like a really great way to kind of close out our time together. But I want to make sure that our guests can have the final words here today. So maybe Anna, can we start with you? Is there anything else that you would like to add to this conversation before we close things out?

Anna Brunner
Yeah, I just want to I guess underscore the last point, Kaila, I feel like you were just making. we are not, in equity and justice change work, we're not trying to be impose a different kind of controlling hierarchy where there's like one vision of where we're headed. We're trying to transform a system so that we can have greater complexity, belonging, generative disagreements that leads towards something that aren't predicated on patterns of oppression. And that that is a just such a fundamental change that asks us to let go of control or a specific direction and really, I think, hopefully feels like an inviting kind of glimpse at what liberation could be. But like as someone who has a lot of privileged group identities, letting go of trying to feel like I have to be perfect and show up in some sort of perfect way, but leaning into instead of like, a practice of trying to change a practice of trying to listen a practice of trying to think critically a practice of being in relationship and repair and community. To me these things feel expansive and also achievable and exciting in a way that, you know, waiting for someone to tell me what to do, really doesn't feel as inspiring. So I just hope that as you say folks will feel invited in to think about their role and the agency that they have in thinking about how to engage in more equitable being in the world and environmental change in the world.

Nicole Litwiller
Thanks, Anna. Anita how about you.

Anita Singh
I would add that I think it is important, the personal small changes that we do do and definitely lift that up what you said, Kaila. So yes, that's really important. And I think that that can have a ripple effect in the organization. One thing that I think that we can also move in the direction of is moving from just like talking about things to actually doing them to actually being them to actually feeling them because we actually need to embody that change in our in ourselves and with each other in order to shift the culture here at NWF and move towards equity to become anti racist. So we have to move from just things up here in our mind and move them down into like our actual body where we're feeling them and we're enacting them and remembering that those two things actually shouldn't be separated in the first place. Just like wildlife is not separate from humans. And so it's kind of like repairing, repairing our relationship with wildlife is also like kind of mirroring repairing our relationships with ourselves moving from just like our thinking brain to actually like our embodied and feeling brain. And, you know, examples of that are like the ways that we hold relationship with each other. But yeah, I would emphasize that I would like to see more of that happened here that NWF and I think that that could really lead to some incredible transformation within ourselves and within our relationships with each other and therefore within the organization.

♫ Transition Music ♫

Nicole Litwiller
So Kaila, what what did you think of that interview? What were some of your thoughts?

Kaila Drayton
Yeah, I think it's really apparent that there are a lot of norms that exist from our foundation from our surrounding culture that are still prevalent today and ones that are, you know, none of this is a quick fix. None of the act of culture change is ever going to be quick and it's it brings me back to my Peace Corps days. You know, when we arrived in country, they told us, you're going to be working on projects that you're never going to see the end result of you're not going to be here long enough to know how things shape up or the impact of things that happened. And I find that the work that goes into changing an organization's culture is much the same way. And I think some some people look at it as a marathon and I think of it a little bit more as a relay race, where folks come and go and kind of pass the baton to the next generation or the or the next, you know, wave of employees or folks that come into the organization. So I've just been reflecting a lot on how slow culture change can be and how sometimes that's really tough when you want to see results or you want to see change, or you need to see change, and knowing that we've still got a long way to go and it won't be tomorrow. After we were done recording that episode. What was your feeling? What was going through your head?

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, I think I just felt a lot of the same things that you just named, and maybe more specifically one of the elements that stood out to me and that I've been kind of grappling with and aware of since joining this organization is what Anna talked about when she referenced the bipartisanship or non partisanship, which was definitely a significant part of NWF's founding. And I've just been thinking about that a lot because I think as at the time of recording, I'm 24 years old and I have grown up in a political scene that is so drastically different than the 90s, let alone the 1930s. And I think the era of our political climate means that we have to think about these things and think about bipartisanship in a bit of a different way because it's not the same as it was before. I think there's a lot of power and bringing people along and working across the aisle and I think that's possible and not always and so that was something that stood out to me and that's something that I'm kind of frequently grappling with. And I would be interested in seeing the organization grapple with that a little bit more too because I think it's something that's really hard for us to talk about.

Kaila Drayton
Yeah. And I think to your point, feeling like things get politicized that aren't inherently political, so thinking mostly about racial equity issues somehow becomes this this partisan issue. And so being a nonpartisan organization, sometimes it feels like we won't take a stance on things or we'll take a stance but if anyone says anything, then we deliver this very kind of sugar coated message to make everyone happy and sometimes sometimes it's a little hard to see, especially when the message somehow embodies an identity that you hold, and then realizing that you're kind of justice, this time and a strategy to message certain things.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, and I feel like there's a difference to between the outward messaging and the inward messaging. I think, it seems like as a staff, one thing that I've heard so many people say, as a significant difference now, and I think Anna said this too, versus years ago, is that we can talk about things like we can have conversations about race and racism. And that is not something that always existed at this organization. And I think it's still something we're struggling to navigate externally and figure out how do we message these things that our core values around anti discrimination, anti racism, those are core values that we say we hold but how do we talk about those things more broadly than just internal to staff?

Kaila Drayton
Yeah, absolutely. And I think, to your point, we have done a lot of changing over the past couple of years, and I would say even most recently, it's like in the last three years, we've made a lot of changes. And so that's a really hard truth to hold to when you you know, you're in it every day and it feels very slow or like it's one step forward and five steps back. But being able to look at the changes that we've gone through in aggregate is it's inspiring. It keeps me holding on another day or you know, like trying to fight the good fight, if you will. So it's always I used to be like my eyes are I'm trying to fixate on the horizon, right, like, just trying to stay one step ahead. But

Nicole Litwiller
yeah, and I think that sounds similar to something and Anita said to around like, she's newer, and people have said, like, 'Anita, you don't know how different things are than the way they were, like 5, 10 years ago.' And for them, they're like, 'I hear that and also now it's hard,' and so I think holding that both end is really important. We can acknowledge and celebrate where we've come and hold on to the fact that some people are still really hurting in this organization, and there's still a long way to go.

Kaila Drayton
And I think that it's something that I hold in the back of my mind as someone who has been with the organization for a long time. It and that kind of like relay race analogy is like, at what point have I become so used to the challenges inside this organization that I become complacent, or that I feel like you know what, I don't feel like fighting that battle anymore. Or, you know, like, that's just this battle isn't going to take priority. Like I think something in the back of my mind is I'm always trying to figure out when to get out of the way, right like when to get out of the way for other folks who are new or newer, or have better perspectives or different perspectives. At what point am I not helping anymore? Because I've become so desensitized to the culture of NWF.

Nicole Litwiller
Another thing that was standing out to me towards the end of our conversation was when Anita mentioned this kind of like duality of the conversation that we were having about both implicit and explicit norms. And I wanted to get into that a little bit more because I think that's something that our team on the equity and justice team has grappled with a little bit, and it's really challenging. Because when there are norms that go unnamed, and you can feel that they're there, but it's really hard to articulate what they are, it's that much harder to change them, I think. And so being able to bring them to the surface and name them is really important. And I think that's when a lot of people start to feel uncomfortable, because it's we're like naming something that maybe works really well for some people, but really does that for other people.

Kaila Drayton
Yeah, and I think that you just, I was gonna say you nailed the nail on the head. That is the level that I'm at today, everyone. No, I think you're exactly right. And I think that you really named how insidious white supremacy culture is, because if you can't quite name it, if you can't quite put your finger on what's going on, then it's that much harder to bring it into the light. It's that much harder to change it that much harder to get folks to to pay attention to it.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah. And I think, too, a pattern that I often see is when people try to a) name a norm, bring it up, bring it to light in the first place, and b) challenged it, I noticed a pattern of gaslighting and trying to make the people think that 'no that element of this culture is not the issue. You're the issue for not being able to fit into it well enough.'

Kaila Drayton
100% 100%. So to share kind of a little story to kind of illustrate that. At headquarters, we used to have a conference room called leaders. I say we used to I'm sure it's still there. I haven't been to headquarters in two years.

Nicole Litwiller
It's been COVID, We haven't seen anybody

Kaila Drayton
I hope the building's still there. But you you walk in it's the first conference room you see in headquarters. It's called 'Leaders' and when you walk in, there were all these photos on the wall, and I believe that they were former board members if not board chairs. So it's all it's all white men. So you're sitting in this conference room and the wall - I'm telling you, it was like there wasn't half an inch between these photos. It was like a gallery wall of just white men staring at you as you're trying to have a work conversation. And so I brought this up that I thought it was problematic. And the response that I got was well, the conservation movement is really white and that's just how it is. And I just had an issue with the conference room being called leaders and then really only featuring white men. There was one Black guy and maybe a woman. I don't know. So it was brought up but a number of different times and so eventually we took the photos down. But it was very much, the message that I got was that it was my problem, and that I needed to have my meetings in a different room if I was that uncomfortable with it.

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, and I think that's another factor too is like if you have a problem with it, you're the one who needs to adjust the white supremacist culture that we're all swimming in

Kaila Drayton
Yeah.

Nicole Litwiller
Thank you for sharing that. And that yeah, would definitely make me feel uncomfortable too.

Kaila Drayton
very, very odd. Well, since Nicole and I have shared our reflections on the episode, we would love to know what you all are thinking and we wanted to share some questions with you all that maybe foster some reflection, maybe some team discussion. So Nicole, do you want to talk about team norms?

Nicole Litwiller
Yeah, I think one way to start having this conversation is just kind of exactly like how Kaila and I just did in thinking about what are the norms on our team that are implicit, so unnamed? And what are the norms on our team that are explicit or named? And from there thinking a bit about are there some of these implicit or explicit norms that make certain people feel uncomfortable, feel less safe, feel less able to be their full selves in our spaces? And are there norms that are really wonderful and really contribute to growing a sense of safety and belonging within our team? And I think that's a really great place to start having these conversations.

Kaila Drayton
Yeah. And then if you want to take an even grander view, thinking about the norms that show up for in the organization as a whole and how they impact your teams or your work, whether positively or negatively. We would love to hear people's reflections on the episode, the questions that we've posed, or anything that's come up for you all, so take a look in the show notes and we will have our email address listed there.

Nicole Litwiller
Along with that there are a number of resources that have been included in the show notes as well that can contribute to further growth and learning for you if you want to dive into some of the content from this interview a little bit more. And I'll also say that a lot of the things that we touched on in this episode are things that we're going to dive into deeper throughout the season and norms is a really important part. Investigating norms is a really important part of change work. And so that's really what we're going to a lot of what we're going to talk about throughout the season, so stick with us.

Kaila Drayton
Join us next time when we talk about the domino effect of change and what pushed NWF to take equity and justice seriously. We look forward to having everybody on the next episode and we will talk to you all soon.

Nicole Litwiller
Thanks y'all.

♫ Outro Music ♫

Nicole Litwiller
This podcast is created and hosted by Kaila Drayton, and Nicole Litwiller. It is produced by Nicole Litwiller. Stephen Angelo is our editor and audio engineer. All the music you hear throughout the podcast is composed by Luke Litwiller. Thank you to the equity and justice team and many others within the National Wildlife Federation for your support in the creation of this podcast and for your work towards equity and justice. If you have any reflections or comments you'd like to share with us, please send an email to seedsofculturechange@nwf.org. Please visit www.nwf.org and click the donate button if you would like to financially support the National Wildlife Federation’s work. And don't forget to like, comment and subscribe so that other agents of organizational change can find this podcast. Thanks for listening, now go plants some seeds of change.

♫ Outro Music ♫