In the nonprofit world we use the word impact a lot. I mean a lot, a lot. We talk about wanting to be measured by this and strategically focusing everything we do to have the most of it. We're striving to be high impact at all costs. It's our corollary to businesses who try to generate profit.
I was pretty shocked last week when I heard Jeff Loomis, the Executive Director for Momentum, say he hated the word. His point was why is a word that is associated with a bomb, car crash or many other negative forces the one we want to hold up as the purpose of our sector in nonprofit.
I'm still trying to sort through how I feel about it. However, he does make a great point that I'd never considered before. Do we really want the descriptor of the change we're trying to make to be the same one you would use if you were talking about the change from a nuclear bomb? Again, I'm not sure, there are lots of words that can be interpreted differently pending context. However, on a path to try to intentionally choose the things I say and do, it is definitely worth some thought.