The Missing Conversation Between Government and Nonprofits

Lesson 7 of 25 from podcast conversations with leaders who leave the world better than they found it

Carolyn Kandusi has spent years sitting at the intersection of government, social innovation, and philanthropy. Her work involves connecting people who should be talking but usually aren't.

In our conversation, she said something that reframes how I think about systems change:

Most system failures aren't about bad actors. They're about missing conversations between siloed sectors.

The government official who keeps blocking your program? They're not evil. They're operating with constraints and incentives you don't see.

The nonprofit executive who won't engage with policymakers? They're probably not naive. They're working from past experience where engagement went nowhere.

The philanthropist who funds around government instead of with government? They're probably not arrogant. They're optimizing for speed and flexibility.

These aren't bad people making bad decisions. They're smart people operating in different systems that rarely talk to each other.

And that silence is costly.

The Problem With Sector Silos

I've worked in enough contexts to see this pattern clearly:

Nonprofits design brilliant programs without understanding the policy environment they're operating in. They build models that technically work but are impossible to scale because they conflict with existing regulations.

Government agencies create policies without input from the organizations implementing them on the ground. They design incentive structures that look rational on paper but create perverse outcomes in practice.

Philanthropists fund innovation without coordinating with government investment. They pilot promising approaches that die when grant funding ends because there's no pathway to public funding.

Each sector is doing good work. Each sector is trying to solve real problems. But they're doing it in isolation.

The conversations that would reveal how these efforts could reinforce each other? Those conversations aren't happening.

Why The Conversations Don't Happen

There are real barriers to cross-sector collaboration:

Different timelines. Nonprofits move quickly. Government moves slower. Philanthropy operates on grant cycles. These rhythms don't naturally align.

Different languages. Each sector has its own jargon, its own metrics, its own way of describing problems. Translation is harder than it looks.

Different incentive structures. Nonprofits are incentivized to demonstrate unique value. Government officials are incentivized to avoid risk. Philanthropists are incentivized to show innovation. These incentives can work against collaboration.

Historical baggage. Many nonprofits have tried to engage with government and gotten burned. Many government officials have partnered with nonprofits that over-promised and under-delivered. Trust has to be rebuilt.

So people stay in their silos. It's easier. Less frustrating. More efficient in the short term.

But it's incredibly inefficient in the long term.

What Missing Conversations Cost

Let me give you a concrete example of what happens when sectors don't talk:

A workforce development nonprofit spends years building a successful program that helps people transition out of poverty. They've figured out the model. They have evidence of impact. They're ready to scale.

But scaling requires navigating workforce development policy, benefits cliffs, credential recognition, and a dozen other regulatory challenges. The nonprofit doesn't have relationships with the government agencies that control these levers.

Meanwhile, a government agency is trying to improve workforce outcomes. They have resources. They have mandate. They have power to change policy. But they don't have good models of what actually works on the ground.

These two entities need each other. The nonprofit has the implementation expertise. The government has the policy authority and resources.

But they're not talking.

So the nonprofit stays small, serving hundreds instead of thousands. And the government invests in approaches that look good on paper but don't work in practice.

The missing conversation costs the nonprofit its scale potential. And it costs the government its effectiveness.

Neither sector wins. The people they're trying to serve lose.

What Bridge-Building Actually Looks Like

Carolyn's work involves making those missing connections. Not just introductions—that's easy. But sustained relationships built on genuine curiosity about how other sectors operate.

This isn't networking. It's infrastructure work.

When a nonprofit leader asks "how does government actually make decisions?" instead of assuming government is just bureaucratic and slow—that's bridge-building.

When a government official asks "what makes implementation successful on the ground?" instead of assuming nonprofits just need to follow the regulations—that's bridge-building.

When a philanthropist asks "how could our funding support rather than circumvent government investment?" instead of assuming government is hopeless—that's bridge-building.

Bridge-building starts with curiosity about constraints you don't live with.

The Exercise That Reveals Your Gaps

Here's something practical you can do to understand where your organization might be missing valuable conversations:

Map your external relationships by sector.

Make three columns: Nonprofit, Government, Business/Private Sector.

Under each column, list the relationships your organization has with entities in that sector. Not just formal partnerships—any regular interaction or communication.

Now look at the columns.

If one column is mostly empty, that's information. That's a sector you're not engaging with.

And that missing engagement probably has costs you don't see clearly.

Maybe it's why your programs hit unexpected barriers. Maybe it's why promising pilots don't scale. Maybe it's why you keep bumping into the same frustrations.

The sectors you're not talking to are shaping your reality whether you engage with them or not.

Why Government Specifically Matters

I want to focus on the nonprofit-government relationship specifically because I see nonprofits treating government as either enemy or irrelevance.

Some nonprofits position themselves as nimble alternatives to slow, bureaucratic government. They're doing the work government can't or won't do.

Other nonprofits just ignore government entirely. They do their work, serve their constituents, and assume government is someone else's problem.

Both approaches miss something important: government controls the rules of the game you're playing.

Policy determines who's eligible for services. Regulations determine what approaches are permissible. Funding priorities determine what gets resourced.

You can be brilliant at service delivery and still hit walls if you don't understand—and ideally influence—the policy environment you're operating in.

This doesn't mean becoming a policy advocacy organization. It just means building relationships with the government entities that affect your work.

Before you need something from them. Before there's a crisis. Just genuine relationship-building based on mutual interest in outcomes.

How To Start The Missing Conversation

If government or business relationships are sparse in your organization, here's how to start:

First: Get curious about constraints.

Instead of assuming government is just bureaucratic, ask: what constraints do they operate under that I don't see? What are they trying to optimize for? What would make them successful in their role?

Second: Find the connectors.

There are people who naturally bridge sectors. Find them. Ask them to make introductions. Learn from how they navigate different institutional cultures.

Third: Start small and informal.

You don't need a formal partnership. Start with a coffee conversation. Ask someone in government about their work. Share what you're learning from implementation. Build relationship before you need it.

Fourth: Play the long game.

Cross-sector relationships take time. Government moves slower than nonprofits. That's okay. You're building infrastructure for future collaboration, not trying to solve today's problem.

Fifth: Make it regular.

One coffee doesn't build a bridge. Regular connection does. Quarterly check-ins. Annual convenings. Consistent presence over time.

From Siloes To Systems

Carolyn's insight is that systems change often starts with something simple: a conversation that wasn't happening before.

Not a formal partnership. Not a big initiative. Just two people from different sectors genuinely curious about each other's work.

Those conversations reveal possibilities that weren't visible when working in isolation.

They surface opportunities for coordination. They identify policy barriers that could be addressed. They create trust that enables future collaboration.

Most organizations are missing these conversations.

With government. With business. With sectors they've written off as too difficult or too different.

And those missing conversations are costing them impact they don't realize they could have.

So map your relationships. Notice the gaps. And schedule one coffee this quarter with someone from a sector you usually avoid.

That conversation might reveal possibilities you couldn't see from your silo.

This is lesson 7 in a 25-part series exploring insights from podcast conversations with leaders who leave the world better than they found it.

Subscribe for weekly insights on building bridges that matter.