Sofia Balderson on how rejection can help you grow as an advocate

Sofia Balderson is the co-founder of Hive, formerly known as Impactful Animal Advocacy, an organisation that aims to improve coordination and collaboration in the farmed animal movement through cultivating impactful, intentional, and serendipitous communities

Many listeners may be on the Impactful Advocacy Slack – a Slack workspace with over 2,000 animal advocates and a great place to connect, learn and share ideas. Today, we spoke with Sofia Balderson, one of the originators of that Slack Channel about lessons in starting new projects, the importance of facing rejection, how much you should listen to philanthropic funders to understand the value of your project and tangible ways to measure whether your work is providing value!

This was a very fun and candid conversation which I really enjoyed, so I’m sure you all will too.

Relevant links to things mentioned throughout the show:

• Our website: joinhive.org 
• Chi from Global Vegan inspiration 
• Hive Slack joining link 
• Hive Newsletter (free biweekly) 
• Hive volunteer moderator role 
• Hive channel lead role (volunteer)
• Hive events 
• Our Theory of Change (general + for each program)
• Our metrics: what we measure (including our OKRs and KPIs)
• Our impact estimates for 2023 and 2024
• Our cost-effectiveness estimates: spreadsheet
• Our Year in Review 2023: insights in our programs and results
• Weighted factor model explanation
• My EA Forum post: Writing about my job: co-founder of an early stage charity
• Sofia’s productivity course (Clariteam)
• Hive Fundraising wiki 
• Rethink Priorities cross cause cost-effectiveness comparison tool
• Leader Lab book  
• Obstacle is the way by Ryan Holiday 
• The Daily Stoic by Ryan Holiday

Chapters
----------------
00:00 // Start
04:25 // History of Hive/Impactful Animal Advocacy
06:43 // Who is the Hive Slack for?
10:24 // Hive's biggest challenges so far
14:19 // Example of projects that didn't work out
18:08 // How important is funder feedback?
26:30

If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating and review us - we would really appreciate it! Likewise, feel free to share it with anyone who you think might enjoy it. You can send us feedback and guest recommendations via Twitter or email us at hello@howilearnedtoloveshrimp.com. Enjoy!

Transcript

Sofia: I think maybe like a learning from here and take-away from here is that there is absolutely no way you can make any impact and be successful in anything without getting rejected a whole lot. So, if you really want to progress and be successful, you just have to get used to it. And getting rejected a lot isn’t necessarily an indicator that you may be just not very good. It actually may be an indicator that you're trying enough. Actually, one tip I have, which has actually worked really well for me, is keeping your rejections list because it really shows you what you've tried, the jobs you applied to and the funding you applied to, and then you can see it and like, wow, it's so impressive. I got rejected from so many things, and then it really shows that you've tried enough. Because if you're never getting rejected, that's actually a horrible sign that you're not trying to shoot for the stars and you're not being ambitious enough. 

Amy: Hi, my name is Amy.

James: And my name is James. 

Amy: And this is How I learned to Love Shrimp, a podcast about promising ways to help animals and build the animal advocacy movement. 

James: Many listeners may be on the Impactful Animal Advocacy Slack, which is a Slack workspace with over 2000 animal advocates and a great place to connect, learn, and share ideas. And today we spoke with Sofia Balderson, who's one of the originators of that Slack space. We also spoke about the importance of facing rejections, the lessons in starting new projects, how much you should listen to flapper funders about the value of your project, also tangible and concrete ways to understand the value of your work. This was a very fun and candid conversation which I really enjoyed, so I hope you all will too. 

Also, Amy and I wanted to take this opportunity to thank the organisations who are very generously funding this podcast, which is Mobius, and the Effective Altruism Animal Welfare Fund. Without their help, we wouldn't be able to run this podcast and pay for our awesome editors, Jason and Tom. So, thank you to Mobius and the EA Welfare Fund for helping make this possible. 

Lastly, I want to share an offering that is being provided for animal advocates by the Mobius team, which is a free online meditation retreat. It's running in English, and it'll be running on Saturday 25th and Sunday 26 May from around 10:00 AM to 06:00 PM Central Time, and you don't have to attend all the sessions to participate. So even if you just want to drop into a few sessions to hear some amazing wisdom and teaching on mindfulness please feel free to do that and you can RSVP using the form below. 

And without further ado, here's our conversation with Sofia. 

James: Hi, everyone. Today we are joined by Sophia Balderson, who is the co-founder of Hive, formerly known as Impactful Animal Advocacy, which is an organization aiming to improve coordination and collaboration in the farmed animal movement through cultivating impactful, intentional, and serendipitous communities. Welcome, Sophia!

Sofia: Thank you so much for having me!

James: Thank you for coming on the show. And yeah, something we like to start everyone off with, is a question about who is someone in the movement that others may not know about, but you find them particularly inspiring. 

Sofia: I would really like to talk about Chi, who is an advocate who's just started a new initiative called Global Vegan Inspiration. She is an advocate from China, and she brings on advocates who are either from China or have some connections with China to talk about their advocacy journey and some interventions that they’ve tried. 

James: That's cool. Okay, we'll definitely link her work below. Is that very new that Chi actually just started this initiative, or how did you hear about her? 

Sofia: Yeah, this is quite new. She – actually, my co-founder Constance, has just spoken on her show, and the show is also mostly in Chinese, so I just checked it out because I quite like Chinese and Chinese culture. 

James: Nice, that's cool! Okay, we'll definitely put a link below for people who are either interested in hearing more about it or want to find out more. So, yeah, that's a cool example. Never heard it before. 

Amy: Yeah, love those. Thank you. 

So, Sophia, you're probably one of the newest entrepreneurs we've had on the podcast. And so, we're really interested in this process of entrepreneurship; going from starting something, unpacking all of the advice that you have for anyone looking to do the same, talking about learnings. So, would you maybe just start with a brief understanding and kind of history of starting Hive and how you got to this point? 

Sofia: I was in between jobs and something I've noticed was that we had a gap in online community building and just like, the absence of an overarching organization that could just help build up the community for farmed animal advocates globally. And I really wanted animal advocates to have the best access to resources and the best connections. And this is why I originally decided to start it. But I really struggled to get funding and eventually I just started it as a volunteer, and then Cameron King joined me as my first co-founder, and the Slack space really took off when we both started working on it. And eventually a community member joined Slack who was just so active, and she was earning to give at that point. Her name is Constance Lee and she was just so active that were like: ‘Wow, please just volunteer for us.’ And when she found out that we were looking for funding, she was like: ‘Hey, I'll just give you a seed fund’ because she could see the value in the community. And then we just offered her a co-founder role because she was so active. So, this is where she got started. 

Amy: I remember James and I running – and Cameron actually – running a retreat in the UK for advocates. And this was something that really came up; a really core kind of action point of that there just didn't seem to be this place where everybody could connect. There was kind of email lists and conferences, of course, but not really that kind of central digital hub where people felt like conversations about specific campaigns or interventions could exist. So yeah, I think it was really great that you took that initiative and started that and just got going. And clearly, it's turned into something that the community really appreciates. 

Sofia: Thank you so much, Amy. I think that if not for you folks hosting that retreat, I'm not sure if Cam and I would have actually got together and workshop the idea and decide to run it. So, thank you so much!

James: And just for context, I think obviously recently you had this re-brand which we can potentially revisit, but people will know you as the Impactful Animal Advocacy slack space, which I think has over 2000 people. But I guess, could you say in a nutshell the key things in terms of what you guys do and who you guys are for? And we can also obviously include links to these because probably our listeners interests overlap pretty strongly with what you guys are doing. 

Sofia: We did start as a Slack space, but then what we realized is we are so much more than that because a Slack space is just a tool that helps to connect people. But what we are doing is creating programs and creating spaces which can connect farmed animal advocates. And as we worked for a year, we actually decided that our main audiences are professional farmed animal advocates. And I guess this also includes semi-professional advocates who perhaps are not in full time work or maybe volunteers, so they can't be a part of those inside groups in animal advocacy. And I think that I really created Hive in mind with these people. 
And I think that Cam and Constance were also really passionate about this; trying to be inclusive and not trying to differentiate because I think it's so important for us to understand that advocates and full-time roles in current non-profits aren't the only people who can bring change for farmed animals. We also need politicians, and we need journalists and biologists and veterinarians. And that's why I'm so happy that we have this Slack space where all these people can connect. 

But we also have other programs. I'm not sure if you want me to go into detail, but we have facilitated connections, which is something that my co-founder Constance and I do. So, we rely on our extensive networks in the movement and especially our global connections to thoughtfully connect people if we believe that they can benefit from either collaborating on something or sharing information. And these are highly contractual and intentional connections that otherwise probably wouldn't happen, or at least wouldn't happen for a while. And this is actually one of our most promising programs. 

As well as Slack, we also have Resources, which is like just a collection of resources for animal advocates in Notion to get people plugged in really fast with what resources are already available to save them time for looking for these resources. And also, we have our biweekly newsletter. And our most perhaps exciting program is AI and Animals, which grew from being more of an educational AI channel on Slack that was started by Constance into an AI coalition, which is a group of 75 advocates, which is hosted on Slack. And it's people intentionally working on projects; they're trying to explore how we can help animals with AI and just this intersection of AI and animals. 

Amy: I think this is the advantage of a project like this where you start off with something that the community are really keen on, and then it can go in so many different directions, right? You can take off in a lot of different places. When it's this sort of hub of community building, you're wanting a lot of people who come from a lot of different organizations, or maybe some are not actually affiliated with an organization. Like you say, there's kind of a lot of people that are just mission-driven all in one place with access to a lot of different areas. Has that been kind of the biggest challenge of Hive so far, or do you feel like it's been something else that stands out? 

Sofia: Yeah, definitely. I think what you're saying has definitely been a challenge, because when I first started, i.e. back in May 2022, I didn't know what was the best thing to do. And I think that what really helped us was just trailing programs and then whatever didn't work, just stopping it very fast. And I think that Slack – I never thought Slack would be so successful, but we just tried it, and it was. And I think that's very much how we approach it. 
But as to the biggest learnings, I think the first one was definitely just how hard it is to start and manage a non-profit, because I think that non-profit leaders just make it look so easy because very few people share just how hard it is. The day to day, but also the big decisions and leading and managing the team. And I think that in the movement, we have a bit of a survivorship bias because not many people talk about the charities that didn't work out, even though I have personally tried a couple of ideas before and they never worked, but no one knows about it. And people just think: ‘Oh, wow, you're so successful.’ And I think that's really worth remembering. 

And I think secondly, a learning has definitely been that it takes a village to build a charity, because on your own, you can come up with a great idea, and that's great. But then actually to really bring something to life and to make it work and to have a chance at making some kind of an impact, you need a really great co-founder, and you need a team of people who are better than you at key skills to just keep innovating and keep bringing ideas together. And I think that something I just love most about entrepreneurship is when people come together and then they share ideas and brainstorm, and you just come up with the most amazing programs and amazing ideas. And this is how it happened with Hive. You know, on my own, the idea, it was just an idea, and it didn't go anywhere, and it didn't get funding. But then when Cam joined after the retreat, this is where things really took off. And when Constance gave us the seed funding and joined as a co-founder, like, this is where people really started taking this seriously. Because when you work together and you braced on together and you have the power of two full-time people and our additional team members with their amazing skills, I think this is what really made Hive work. 

James: And you mentioned there were a bunch of challenges that you faced taking this from an idea to actually where you are now. I'm curious, what are these specific – in non-profit leadership or management or just these getting an idea to a real project stage – the key barriers that you face in that period? 

Sofia: I guess the first one is the uncertainty, because when you start something new, you're literally just staring at a blank piece of paper, and it's just you and your idea, and you're like: ‘Okay, I know that there is a gap here, but how do I solve it?’ And then I showed it to people, and I think most people were probably quite uncertain about it, and I think very few people saw the value in it, which of course affected how I felt about it because I was already uncertain. So even right at the start, before you do something, you still feel like,: ‘Wow, I'm not sure about this.’ And then you think: ‘Okay, well, maybe I'll spend some time figuring out, but I need to pay the bills while I'm doing it.’ And you apply for funding, but seed funding is so incredibly hard to get because the current charities that are already working are also underfunded. So why would people fund experimental projects? And I think that really reduced my confidence at the beginning, and this is why we started hiring later than the original idea came from, because we just couldn't secure our funding. 

Amy: And you spoke about some of the projects that you attempted that you sacked off and didn't end up progressing with. Do you have examples of those where you tried something out and it didn't follow through? 

Sofia: I guess the two things that come to mind is we tried to get people to co-work together on Slack because co-working spaces in person can be so impactful. And they were like: ‘Oh, maybe now we have the Slack space, we could get people to co-work.’ And we started the channel and I used, I think it's called focus mate, and tried to advertise it, but very few people actually used it. And the reason for that was the call problem, which is something that all network organizations deal with. And this is the reason why Slack was so successful; because we managed to overcome this. 
But for this co-working initiative that I thought would be so great to match advocates together, so that they could co-work together for like an hour or 90 minutes and chat and get to know each other and get some productive work done; it didn't work because very few people were interested in it and people didn't really understand how it worked, so it never took off. And I think we killed it after like two months. 

And I think there was, I guess, something else: we really wanted to do in person events, but they're really hard to create and organize. I think that eventually we thought that our focus should be mainly online events, because this is a very clear niche. And it doesn't matter that we will never do offline events because whilst they are quite nice to do, it's perhaps something we won't focus on for quite a bit. 

James: Yeah, I think there's two really interesting lessons there, which is, I think, at least for me, one, the value of just iterations quickly being like: ‘I have a hypothesis that this program is good, let me just try it. Actually, after a month or two, it didn't meet the initial goals we set out for it. Therefore, we will just kill it.’ And I think that's a really useful way to think and stop. Basically, your project, your group ending up running 20 projects, and actually some of them are way more impactful than others, but you just don't want to cut things because there's this fear of just actually dropping stuff. I think that's a really valuable lesson.

The other one is that you don't need to be all things to all people, and often you're less useful when you try to do too many things and your attention is too spread. And actually, you don't provide any kind of competitive advantage or edge over other people. So, I think that's a really good lesson in that I've more and more come to appreciate it. This focus is extremely undervalued and very powerful. 

And then are there any other kind of high-level design principles or strategic principles you try to implement in getting Hive to where it is now? So maybe if one of these is like, iterate and fail fast; one of these is focused. Anything else you think is really valuable for early-stage projects? 

Sofia: Yeah, sure. I think that when we came up with the idea of the Slack, the one word that was constantly in our minds was value. We didn't want to create just another community because there are so many vegan groups where you can share pictures of your meals. And were like: ‘Okay, we want to create something that's productive, that's impactful, and people can get real value.’ And because I'm aware that it can be distracting, I was like: ‘If people come onto the Slack, I want them to get value as fast as possible. So, whenever we made any type of decisions, big or small, we were like: ‘Okay, is this going to bring value?’ And if it's not bringing value, then we just wouldn't do it. And I think it really helped to focus on that, because this is like, people could really see this, and this is, I think, why we spread via word of mouth so fast without having to advertise ourselves too much. 

Amy: You spoke about not being able to secure funding in those early days or weeks or months, it even felt like, I'm sure. How important do you think that is as a marker of whether funders would suggest this is something worthwhile investing in? And James, maybe even you can speak to this; how much we should be taking in the funders’ perspective. They obviously have a very good read on the movement and where the gaps might be. But I often think when projects aren't funded it's not necessarily a reflection on the quality of the project, it's just not the right fit. How much did you take on board from that rejection as to whether the project should continue or perhaps cease to exist? 

Sofia: Wow, that's a very good question, Amy! I think that I must be very honest with you: to me, the rejection of the funding, that seed funding, it really reduced my, I guess maybe motivation to work on this because at that point I needed to have a salary to pay the bills. And the thing that at that point I also had a job. And I was like: ‘Well, I might as well just do this job because it's just as good of an opportunity.’ And I do think it's incredibly important because when you put the money on the table and you say: ‘I believe in you and I trust in this project, and you can leave your job or at least go part time’, I think that's a very important sign of approval and it's incredibly empowering. I think that for us, that seed funding that Constance provided was just life changing, really. I would never have left my job if I hadn't gotten this money. We also, in January this year, we received our first Open Philanthropy grant. 

Amy: Amazing, congratulations! 

Sofia
Thank you so much! And I mean, it was a really hard grant to get, but it really gave us the confidence that: ‘Wow, a really reputable funder thinks that this is a promising intervention and we are going to do our absolute best to make sure that we give it the biggest chance of success this year.’ 

James: Maybe in answer to your question, Amy: to what extent should people take rejections or even approvals from funders as signs of this project is worth it or not? I think it's really hard, at least because one learning I had since I came into the role, and I think many people miss this, is just funders and grant makers often have incredibly intense trade-offs that people aren't aware of. It's just like there's many good projects, many good possible projects, but actually, if that means changing your funding, that most likely means cutting someone else off or reducing some. And you could be very confident that this group is helping hundreds of thousands of animals. So, it's like: ‘Okay, if I'm going to invest in this new experimental project, how confident am I that it's going to be helpful? Do I want to make this risk?’ Because the last thing you want is to make things worse for animals. I think that's the trade off at least we all face. 

And I think, Sofia, you had a great point, like almost every project in the animal movement is underfunded, as in it could be bigger and it'd be more effective if it was bigger. So, it's really hard, given all this vast need and important work to be done, how you act on that. So, I think there's a tricky thing where in many ways your project could be good and still not get funded. 

And also, because funders can't spend that much time on any one application, they won't know the ins and outs of your projects, how it's going to deliver value, and what your plans for it are. So, it's just this difficulty in how do you basically judge or value someone's project based on like a few hours of engagement, which is really hard. And often you will get things wrong, And it's like, sometimes also people do have their pet projects and things should be funded and it's like if you talk to like ten people, everyone's like ‘no’; it's also worth considering that. So, it is like, yeah, it's multiple sides. 

Sofia: I really agree with this, James. I think maybe I didn't answer the question fully, Amy. I do think that funders are very knowledgeable because as James said, they do have to review a lot of applications and they do have to be very knowledgeable and take a high-level view of the movement. But I think in my case, that particular project wasn't noticed by the funders. And I spoke to a couple of funders about it, and at first, without a minimum viable product, no one was interested in it. So now we are eventually funded and it is successful. Now, I think that as much as I respect funders decision, I can also understand that sometimes your project can be very good and has potential to be successful, but the funders may notice it. 
So I would say that when you are evaluating whether your project is a good idea, the funders are a really good and really strong indicator that something can be successful. But they don't know everything. So, you probably also need to maybe ask someone else who's also knowledgeable or maybe try and experiment with it and see how it goes. Because at the end of the day, we don't know the future. 

Amy: How do you determine in those early days if something is going to be effective? So, you've spoken about the Slack channel being effective. How have you determined that, and how quickly were you able to determine that when it first launched? 

Sofia: I think I need to caveat my answer with the fact that I only have experience with MEL in meta-work, so you may not apply it to all. 

James: And for context, MEL, it means Measurement, Evaluation, Learning. So how you understand the impact of your programs. 

Sofia: At the beginning, as I said, I had no idea how to measure impact. In fact, I actually thought maybe it's immeasurable and that's why no one wants to fund it. But then when we did start the Slack space, what really gave me an indicator is that first we got a lead indicator, and a lead indicator is something that appears first, but may not be so meaningful. So, for example, for us, it was the activity on the Slack because we had 200, 300 weekly active members. So, people who are logging in all the time and commenting, saying to us like: ‘Hey, this is such a useful space, thanks for starting it.’ 

But then this is a lead indicator, and because it's leading, it appears first. So, it's not necessarily something that brings the ultimate impact that you want to see. And it's not impressive in itself, because you can't actually see how it's making an impact. But then we saw our first couple of lag indicators – so they're called lag because they're lagging, and they appear last. But these are the indicators that you really want to see in your interventions to actually say, like: ‘Yes, we're making an impact.’ And we had two lag indicators. The first person who told me that he got, like, a paid, I think, proof-reading gig through the Slack, and he was like: ‘I've never gotten paid work so fast, so easily. This is amazing.’ And I was like: ‘Wow, this is cool.’ And then the co-founders of The Mission Motor met on our Slack. So, Nicoll Peracha was looking for a co-founder, and I encouraged her to post on the Slack. And on the other side of the world, in San Francisco, Constance was having a picnic and met Blake, now the co-founder. And, you know, so randomly, Blake wasn't even looking for a job. And Constance was like: ‘You would be such a good co-founder for Mission Motor.’ and he applied and got the job. And Nicole later told us that she didn't have the next-best candidate who would be such a good co-founder fit. And I was like: ‘Wow, this is so counterfactual.’ This was, like, really hard to make because it was the Slack space. It was the connection that Constance made. And this lag indicator really showed me: ‘Wow, the potential of what we've built’ and this is where I decided that, yeah, I think I should probably leave my job and give this intervention at least eight months to see if we can make more of this impact.

James: That's super cool! And just to kind of hone down a bit there. So, before you mentioned as well, your focus on providing value and I guess you kind of spoke about two different kinds of values. Well, in this case, it was actually people finding jobs, paid opportunities. Like, what is the kind of value you're trying to provide to people through Hives? 

Sofia: We are trying to provide whatever value the advocate is looking for at the moment. So, if someone is looking just to get involved and find a volunteering opportunity, they can find that on the Slack. If someone's looking for a job, they can also join the Slack and get updated about the latest opportunities. And we also collaborate with organizations who also provide jobs so that it's all in one place. We also provide a space for discussion and connection between current farmed animal advocates who just otherwise would never be able to connect. Because if you live outside of the hubs like New York and London, you just don't have a chance to be connected unless someone thinks about it. So, we were like: ‘Let's just create this space where anyone can connect with each other.’ And I think what's quite important is that people can connect not just randomly, but just very purposefully, according to their niche of interest. If someone is interested in fundraising, we have a fundraising channel where people can learn from each other. We have a research channel where researchers update each other on their recent research and have an opportunity to discuss it. 

James: In terms of actual metrics you guys are measuring, are you tracking all that stuff you talking about? Number of found jobs, new connections? How do you actually think about that and what is the impact of success, and also specific programs within that as well?

Sofia: Yeah, we have a really complicated spreadsheet where there are all the metrics that we're measuring, because we really want to demystify the measurement of community building interventions. So, we have, I think at least 20-30 different metrics. And it's like people who say that they feel more connected to the movement, who say that they feel more informed, people who have applied for fundraising opportunities because they saw them on our Slack, or people who applied for jobs or got jobs, people who started new projects. I mean, I can go on. There's quite a lot. If you are interested, I'm happy to make it public to share it because we're quite transparent about it. 

James: There's something really interesting there you mentioned, which is, I think, that people have this trap, and I also fell into this trap in Animal Rebellion, where you think: ‘Oh, my work is so hard to measure and it's so complex, which is why we can't get funding for it.’ But actually, it's like if you really drill down hard enough, you probably can get some meaningful metrics, indicators. And I think, yeah, in your case, it's like the quantity of connections, also both the quality of connections and this co-founder partnership is a high-quality connection. So, I think there's definitely ways to demystify the impact of the things that we think are too hard to, I guess, measure properly. So, I think, yeah, that's a really good example of how you've actually done that in practice. And, I mean, if you can share the spreadsheet, I think that would be interesting to people, I think personally, but obviously up to you how much you want to share. 

Sofia: Yeah, absolutely. I think what perhaps I need to mention as well is that we came up with these metrics because we created a theory of change that was like an overall theory of change. And then we also created a theory of change for each program that we're running. And then we looked at the points between theory of change and thinking: ‘Okay, what indicators do we need to see to make us confident that we're moving along this theory of change?’ And this is how we came up with those indicators. So, we didn't just pluck them out of the air. We were thoughtfully measuring, and we're constantly evaluating because we recently had a community survey and we had a lot of data about our community. So now our MEL specialist, Helene and Kevin have thought about how we can improve. I think what I'm saying now is probably not going to be true in, like, a year's time, because we're constantly learning. And as we're getting more lead and lag indicators, we're also learning what is the actual sign of impact and what we should and shouldn't measure. 

Amy: So, I guess to round off this section, Sofia, what's some kind of top advice for new founders in general? Do you have sort of a couple of really great pieces that you wish you'd had when you were starting out? 

Sofia
I think that my biggest piece of advice is not to reinvent the wheel, because when I started Hive originally, I knew nothing and I knew very few people, and I tried to do everything myself. And I think what I learned and what our team learned is that, as I said, it takes a village to create a charity. And I think it's important to be connected to the community and learn what has already been done and what skills and organizations are available to help you do this because this job is so hard. And, like, if you're trying to do everything yourself and never ask for advice, you just will never be able to get through the day. So I definitely advise people not to be shy because people don't mind being asked for help. I think a lot of people are actually flattered. So, I really hope that this is something the listeners will take away, like, to just ask for help. If you see that someone's done something well, just say: ‘Okay, how did you do it? I would love to do that, too.’ 

And maybe my second piece of advice is make sure that you prioritize your well-being, both mental and physical. I mean, it can sound a bit general, but again, I have found the job so incredibly challenging, and every day throws a different challenge at you. And if you're not mentally and physically strong and prepared, and if you're not feeling happy with your life, and if you don't have a good support network, I think it's incredibly hard to do. I actually had – I have still an accountability coach who just went on your podcast as Simon Newstead, and he's the one who's, like, encouraging me to do my workouts every day and to drink enough water. And, like, I tell him all the time, like: ‘Simon, you do realize I would never be able to do this job without you because it's so hard.’ So, definitely try and make sure that you're always in top shape. 

Amy: That's great; that's really interesting! It was actually a recommendation of Simon's to speak with you on the podcast as well. So, he's definitely doing a great job of keeping you accountable, pushing your boundaries, and making sure you're accepting all opportunities that come your way. But, yeah, that's really great to hear and I think it actually segues really neatly into the next section, which is one of the reasons I wanted to speak with you on this podcast. And that's to do with those kind of efforts in that personal development. 

I’ve been following Sofia on LinkedIn, which is where I see the majority of Sofia's kind of personal updates now. And I found that really inspiring, actually, and something that I wished I'd had ten years ago when I was first working in this movement. And that sense of kind of openness and honesty around processes and how to progress in this movement that can be challenging at times. There's been tips on there that I've used in my own work, things like setting accountability for reading. I'm really terrible at prioritizing reading and just little things that you put on as reminders to get these habits in place I found really useful. Was there a particular sort of journey that you've gone on in self-development, maybe particularly towards the starting of Hive that you feel like would be useful to share? When did it kind of all start for you that you wanted to start prioritizing that personal self-development? 

Sofia Yeah, sure. And thank you so much for the kind words! I'm so glad that you're enjoying the LinkedIn post. So, I think that because I'm originally from Belarus and I'm not sure how much you know about Belarus, but it's like a second world country and there's not much going on. And I've always wanted to make an impact on the world and I just knew that as long as I stayed there, I just wouldn't be able to do it. So, I wanted to leave and try and see if I can maybe make more impact in a country like the UK where I ended up moving to. But to get out of Belarus, it's like really hard to do because you need visas. And I think I just always knew ever since I was a teenager that I had to, like, really improve my life. And this meant just read a lot of personal development books and become a better person and maybe start my own business and really prioritize productivity and just being, I guess, just a better version of myself. And I think that it did come true to me because it eventually led to me doing my degree in Mandarin and international relations. And I think it just sort of hooked me on the personal and professional development. And what really helped me was prioritizing management and leadership books and all kinds of courses. Because actually, I found out from Animal Advocacy Careers that leadership and management is a real gap in the movement. And I was like: ‘Okay, right, I'm going to learn everything there is about this.’ And this is how it really helped me understand that I can really make an impact as a charity founder and a charity leader. And to be honest, I feel like there isn't a day where the personal development that I've done, like, all those non-fiction books I've read and courses I've taken haven't helped me. They come so useful when it comes to relationship building and emotional intelligence and resilience. So, I really recommend it. Even if you only read, like, one book or maybe an abstract from a book. 

James: Maybe as a quick aside, if you had to recommend just maybe one book on professional development or one book on personal development, what would you recommend to people? 

Sofia: Well, my professional development book is definitely The Leader Lab, which is a book by my moving colleague and friend, Tanya Luna. And this book is just amazing. It's so easy to read and it's just brilliant for leaders and managers. 

James: I just finish that book like two weeks ago, so I can also confirm that it's a great book. And yeah, I think Tania does amazing work now at Scarlet Spark supporting leaders and managers in the animal movement. So yeah, I think a great book and highly recommend checking them out for their other content as well. 

Sofia: Absolutely; very helpful! And for personal development, I really recommend The obstacle Is The Way by Ryan Holiday. This book actually got me through some of my worst points in my career. I think I read it like seven or eight times at this point. And the point of this book is that challenges in our lives are really something like an opportunity for us to rise up to the challenge and to find a new way of working. And actually, it's absolutely normal and okay to face rejection and face challenges and hiccups along the way. And it doesn't mean that you shouldn't do it or you're not suitable to do it. Because I think people give up quite easily but if you want to be a charity entrepreneur, if you want to change the world in any kind of role, you have to be okay with going through some really tough times. I think that book is just so good for listening to. It just makes you feel so much better about some tough times that you may be going through. 

James: One thing there – I think something you mentioned somewhere else about facing rejection. I guess my thought is, I think, well – I think there's this TED talk where a man asked 100 ridiculous things every day and was trying to get rejected 100 days in a row. He was so afraid of rejection. He's like: ‘This is really holding me back in my life, so I just want to ask for crazy things. Like, I will go ask and deliver the safety announcement on a plane just to get rejected.’ But then he ended up actually doing it. And it also kind of shows you if you ask for things that are obscene, you're going to get them. I kind of feel like you have a similar philosophy on rejection. Was that kind of, right? How do you approach it in terms of – do you kind of strive to be rejected? How do you cope with it and all this kind of stuff? 

Sofia: Yeah. Thanks for sharing that, James. That's a great question. I think that for me, I used to take rejections really personally and I used to think like: ‘Wow, if I'm rejected by this one person who's very respected, that means that they're right, I'm wrong, and I'm never going to be good at doing this.’ And then I was like, wait a minute. I can be rejected ten times, but the 11th time I get a ‘Yes’ and I do my stuff and it's great. And I'm like: ‘Okay, so this means by my actual personal experience that I can get rejected. And it's okay. It's not going to kill me; I'm still alive; I'm still happy; still doing my work.’ And then it's not a rejection. It's not an indicator on your project and, of course, rejection is an information point that sometimes you do have to take seriously. But personally, I haven't exposed myself to rejections on purpose because I just have so many rejections in my actual personal and professional life anyway. So, I don't seek them.

Amy: [Laughing]

Sofia: But I think that with each rejection you do get slightly tougher. And I think, unfortunately, there is no way of grown a thick skin without going through this process. But that's just something that really helped me, just reflecting on my personal experience. 

James: Yeah. Just another bit of related content that maybe I'll share. People who are interested: Noah Kagan is an entrepreneur who wrote a book called the Million Dollar Weekend, and he has a whole big thing on getting rejected. And I think he says whenever he goes to a coffee shop, he'll always ask either for a discount or free drink or something just so we can practice getting rejected more. And he's saying the reason why people often fail in businesses is because they're just not asking enough. They're scared to ask their customers to actually buy their products. And I think there's relevant analogies to non-profits as well. But I kind of tried this out. I went to an airport restaurant and asked for a free banana with my sushi. And they were like: ‘Free banana?’ I was like: ‘Yes, free banana.’ And they're like: ‘No, only if you pay for it.’ And I was like: ‘Oh, yes. My first good rejection feels good.’ And honestly, it's always kind of, like, invigorating. Anyway, I think it's a useful muscle to build up because I think in a way, it can hold us back from asking for things that could be really useful for our work or development or hopefully the world at large. And yeah, it's just a scary thing, but I think it's like a muscle. Like you said, you can kind of train it as well. 

Sofia: I definitely agree with that. I think maybe like a learning from here and take-away from here is that there is absolutely no way you can make any impact and be successful in anything without getting rejected a whole lot. So, if you really want to progress and be successful, you just have to get used to it. And getting rejected a lot isn’t necessarily an indicator that you may be just not very good. It actually may be an indicator that you're trying enough. Actually, one tip I have, which has worked really well for me, is keeping your rejections list because it really shows you what you've tried, the jobs you applied to and the funding you applied to, and then you can see it and like, wow, it's so impressive. I got rejected from so many things, and then it really shows that you've tried enough. Because if you're never getting rejected, that's actually a horrible sign that you're not trying to shoot for the stars and you're not being ambitious enough. 

Amy: For a lot of people, I guess this development journey is very personal and I'm really interested to know what your motivation was for sharing that. You talked previously about openness and transparency at your organization. Is that the kind of main driver for you, that you're just wanting to share your experience to help others? Or is there something else that makes you want to talk about this publicly? 

Sofia: I felt that there wasn't enough transparency and storytelling around what it is like to run charities because I feel like the leadership in the movement, at least for me, it seemed like they tried to seem really strong and lead the teams, but I think when I started the job, I was like: ‘Wow, no one told me about this. This is going to be so challenging.’ And I, yeah, I really want to be transparent and share this and think that it really empowers other people to feel like: ‘Okay, maybe I can also share how I feel.’ 

And maybe linking to this radical candor is something that I really took away. There is a book called Radical Candor that I really recommend, but this is like a culture that we implemented in my team. This is something that helps us a lot because it means that if something is going wrong, we can rely on each other to just tell each other how we feel and what we can improve. And I think that we're seeing a little bit more of that in the movements as well. Like, recently, we had a couple of charities issuing post mortems and talking openly about why the charities didn't work. Yeah, it's incredibly brave and incredibly useful for the movement because we have to learn from their mistakes, but I don't think that's been done enough. So, I'm really hoping that by just being honest about my own journey, I can maybe help accelerate that kind of culture that we have in the movement, and then everyone can benefit. 

Amy: Yeah, absolutely. And I definitely think you are, Sofia. I think that's what I'm definitely seeing at a time, like ten years ago, when I came into the space, you know, like, organization wrap ups were like, what are all of our successes and all of our wins? And let's talk about all the good stuff. And maybe actually when you're in an organization and you're feeling kind of lost or like you've lost direction or what you're working on isn't particularly focused or impactful, then just trying to come up with celebrating the good stuff is really difficult. So, I think from a, you know, personal perspective, just being a bit more realistic and pragmatic about these processes really helps just to open the movement up to feeling like we can talk about these things. And it's not a failure. It's not a reflection from a funding perspective. Actually, when we spoke with Amanda on the podcast, it was like: ‘We want to hear what's not working.’ And I know that feels really counterintuitive. You would think funders want to hear: ‘Yes, it's 100% going well. Please reinstate our funding for next time.’ Actually, what is most encouraging from Amanda was that, you know, they love hearing that you tried something and that it didn't work, and you are no longer pursuing that, and you've moved on. And so, I think a lot of this learning is really starting to really come out in the movement in lots of different ways. And, yeah, thanks for contributing to that on a personal level!

Sofia: Thanks so much!

James: Also, I think you can trust people more if they can talk about their mistakes and what's not happened, because then if they only talk about positive things, it's like, well, then you're clearly hiding something. And the question is, what are you hiding? And it's hard to actually trust someone or a group if they don't talk about their mistakes or what doesn't work. Having this kind of transparency and saying: ‘We try this, it doesn't work.’ It just means at least I personally so feel like: ‘Oh, this is going really well. It must be actually going well because she'd say if it wasn't, at least by her standards.’ So, I think, yeah, that trust element for me is quite important. 

Amy: That's such a good point. And have you found the movement to be all like individuals or leaders or people that you look up to? Have you found kind of this sense of openness? Has that been welcomed? Have you had any kind of criticism about that side that we should be keeping? More of kind of a front? How's that been handled when you have been sharing? 

Sofia: It's actually been pleasantly surprising because when you open up, other people also feel like they can open up. And I think it's incredibly validating to say, like: ‘Hey, I'm going through a really tough time. I can't get funding. I just got this rejection.’ And I think people really open up and think that. I've spoken to a couple of leaders and whenever I did, everyone has always said: ‘Yeah, Sofia, you know what, like, welcome to the job. This is it.’ 

Amy: ‘This is normal.’ 

Sofia: ‘I've been through the same. And you're gonna cope with it.’ And especially when it comes from people who have decades of experience in the movement. You're like: ‘Yeah, I can do this.’ And I think that's why I think it's so incredibly important because it's validating for all parties involved, because most of us work from home now. And I think it can be very hard learning to have to face rejections or face failures. And you can forget sometimes that, hey, people aren't perfect because, you know, no one's posting on Slack or on, I don't know, saying at conferences: ‘Oh, yeah, here's how we failed, and here's how I feel today: horrible. ‘But when I think you have conversations with people one on one, they open up and it's validating for everyone involved. And then we can all do our jobs better because, you know, our work isn't perfect. And we are an incredibly, I would say, new movement. And a lot of the things we're going to try aren't going to grow very well. So, I think that as a movement, we just have to be more resilient. And being able to be open about how we feel and how to move on from that is, I think, going to be absolutely crucial for us. 

Amy: I feel like there's got to be a good Slack channel in there somewhere, right? Like a rejection channel where you encourage people to post all of their rejections. 

Sofia: This could be a good start, I love that, Amy! I think we might just start it. 

James: Has there ever been a specific topic or theme you posted on in terms of a challenge you face and for which you actually found really widespread support, and it was quite surprising how common this challenge was?

Sofia: Yeah, I posted an EA forum post about my job. I think I wrote it quite early, back in autumn 2023. I was pretty new. This was when I went full time at Hive, and I think I just wrote how it was. I was like: ‘Well, this is what my day looks like. And sometimes it seems like an emotional roller coaster in this job.’ And I think that quite a few people commented and said: ‘Yeah, I think that I can resonate with that. Now I feel more prepared.’

I did get some backlash, though, because I wrote that when you start a charity, some of it is actually due to luck, like just being at the right place, right time, asking the right fund at the right time, or getting the right team at the right time. I think people almost didn't like it because I think – and again, this is going back to the survivorship bias – people just really loved the story of: ‘Oh, look at these successful charities and their campaigns, and we're always going to be so successful.’ But actually, no, so many charities have never made it to even one person working in it, like part-time or full-time because of the reasons we discussed before. And I think people didn't like hearing it. But I was like: ‘Well, I'm gonna say it anyway, because this is how I feel, and this is what I think many entrepreneurs also agree with.’ 

Amy: What was the kind of crux? What do you mean, just to clarify there, that they weren't happy with the look piece. I'm not sure I follow. 

Sofia: Yeah. So, I think what I said was, like: ‘Oh, I really think that you can work so hard and you can put the team together, you can have all the funding, and everything can go right, but sometimes things just won't go to plan and your pilot won't work out.’ And I think a lot of it is actually due to luck. I mean, you can call luck however you want, like being at the right place at the right time. But I think it is, unfortunately, the reality of starting charities. And I think, I really hope that by listening to this, people won't be disappointed in charities, but actually think: ‘Wow, we respect the successful charities even more now that we know how hard it is for things to make happen.’ I think that perhaps the person who made the comment just felt that: ‘Oh, you're not treating it seriously enough, because you're saying that it sometimes can be at the flip of a coin.’ But that's not what I'm trying to say. I'm saying that you can do your absolute best job and sometimes things still don't work out. And it's probably no one's fault. It's just perhaps unlucky, if you may. 

James: That definitely gels my experience, because I think, especially on things like finding the right staff and also a co-founder or funding, that stuff is, I think, in my opinion, so reliant on sometimes random personal connections or someone will say: ‘Oh, hey, have you heard of Sofia?’ Or: ‘Hey, you should talk to x.’ And maybe that person will follow up, maybe they won't. Maybe they lost one week at the same time. So, I think that kind of stuff for me is heavily kind of serendipitous or may not happen. So, I totally agree that there's a few aspects where luck plays a huge role. Luck and personal connections. And I think, in a way, the idea of you posting stuff online makes you think this, because the more you get yourself out there, the more you increase your surface area for luck. You're saying: ‘This is what I'm interested in. This is the kind of stuff I do. This is where I want to push, and there's a higher chance that those right people will find you.’ So, I think in a way, you can increase your luck as well. I still agree it's a very important factor. 

Amy: Yeah, definitely. 

Sofia: Absolutely. 

Amy: I think from my experience as well, even project-specific, having done corporate relations, something that people deem to be – you can train yourself as much as you like, but actually going into the meeting and being opposite somebody who just happens to be slightly more animal-friendly, that really is luck, isn't it? Which corporate are you going to be in the room with? Are they going to make that commitment? 

The case study I always use is KFC signing the ECC, BCC, the Better Chicken Commitment. The comms lead in the room was just really favourable and really wanted this. And so, she pushed that and led it through the whole process. 

Amy: So even when we're talking about interventions, even the success of some organizations really will be down to luck as to who was in the room at the time and how that meeting went and whether they got the commitment or not. So, yeah, I think there's a lot of examples where luck does rear its head and play an important part. 

Sofia: Yeah, I totally agree. And I really hope, Amy, what you said is going to be validating for people looking for jobs in the movement but also working in the jobs. And sometimes maybe your job is not going well or maybe you don't like your job or maybe you've tried so hard and it's still not working out. And I really want people to know that, like, this is not the end just because one project, one job, or maybe even a series of jobs didn't work out. Like, as long as you're being really honest with yourself and evaluating your experience, it doesn't mean that the next thing you try won't work out. 
Because of the Slack component, because I have tried a number of things, as I said, and like, this is perhaps my most successful charity, but yeah…and sometimes I did lose faith and I thought maybe I'm not suited for this, but I really don't want animal advocates to think that – I really want them to keep our experience in mind and remember that they can always try again. 

Amy: As an interesting kind of segue, I guess, from that: so, you left your Animal Advocacy Careers position to pursue this project. How difficult was that decision when it's already a project that, you know is having impact and is effective? It's come through the Charity Entrepreneurship incubation program. So, it doesn't have that kind of sense of, you know, just as you were saying, a kind of blank sheet. How difficult was it leaving that role and how did you weigh up the different options at the time in terms of doing the most good between that position and starting Hive from scratch? 

Sofia: Yeah, that was definitely the hardest decision I had to make in my career, hands down, and I had to make a few. I think the options at the time were either to stay at AAC and work there full-time, or to go full-time at IAA, which now Hive. And I think before I got seed funding, I never even considered it because I was like: ‘Well, Hive is not going to pay me any money, so I can't really switch to it.’ So, I just kept working it on the side. But when we got the seed funding, I was like: ‘Okay, now I can weigh up the impact.’ And I think impact was like my best consideration for this that really guided my decision. I think that probably at that point I didn't know how much impact Hive may have. I think now I know more. But then I only had those few lag indicators and I was like: ‘Oh, yeah, that's promising.’ And AAC was also quite impactful. I mean, it's still impactful. And I really loved working with the team and I generally believe in it. I mean, I'm in meta-works so I really believe in that. And I think that I saw them perhaps as equal in impact at that point, maybe with Hive being slightly more uncertain. 

But I think what really pushed the scales was the counterfactuals, because it was like: ‘Okay, if I stay at AAC and never try this intervention that is already showing some impact, it's almost like probably no one else will do because it's so hard to find another co-founder or someone who's as passionate, because, like, I saw it as my baby, and I knew that even if I hired someone, they probably wouldn't be able to do this job. And then I thought, if that never happened, then I would probably regret it for the rest of my life. And one decision-making tool that I love using for career decisions is actually the deathbed. So, if you're on your deathbed when you're like 90 or 100, would I regret this? Not making this decision? And I thought I totally would regret not trying it. 
And I also considered different ways it can go bad. Maybe now I got the seed funding for a year. What if we ran out of the funding? And then I thought: ‘You know what, I wouldn't care because at least I would have tried it.’ And then I probably thought: ‘Well, I'll make a lot of connections anyway, so I'll probably be able to get a job.’ 

And another factor that I considered which may be helpful for people in similar situation is replaceability. So, I thought that at AAC, I had a senior management role, but it still wasn't a co-founder role. And so, it would probably be easier for Lauren to replace me rather than for me to find someone to replace myself. And that really decided it. 

James: Yeah, I totally agree with that. I think some of the most important factors when deciding to start something new is this counterfactual replaceability thing, because there's lots of very talented people who can be senior executives or whatever; leaders in organizations. But to start things often it's a bit more, like you said, more risky; a bit more uncertain; it's a bit stressful. You're bearing a lot of responsibility. So, I think the number of people who are willing to start a new project is less. So, I think, yeah, definitely for those seeking counterfactual impact, starting new projects definitely makes sense. But, yeah, I can imagine that was very tough. And I guess, how are you feeling about the decision now? Like a year and a bit down the line? 

Sofia: Well, I mean, I'm biased, but now we got more funding than the seed funding that we had, and we have conducted the community survey, which shows that our interventions are, even by conservative metrics, probably as cost-effective as other meta charities. These are very early indicators, so I need to get more data to be very confident about it. But I think we got enough of these lag indicators to show us that, yeah, that was the right decision. Whether in a year, I'll tell you, that was the right decision, I don't know, because we'll have another evaluation cycle. But I think overall, it's just been such a fantastic ride and I think working with the team and just learning so much, I'm really grateful that I got the seed fund and I could make that decision. 
I mean, maybe something that I need to caveat because I definitely don't want people to feel like they can just leave their jobs at any point and pursue the project because the funding in the movement, especially seed funding, isn't probably the best as we speak in March 2024. So, I wouldn't leave your job unless you feel like you really comfortably can survive on like your savings or the support of someone else, because it's probably not very wise to hope for funding until you definitely get a decision. 

James: Very wise words. I agree with that. Yeah, I think it's good to have an emergency fund if you do want to do this kind of stuff. I think your example is really good, Sofia. It's basically running a project on the side and having an MVP and having some validation and then also being able to show this to funders. So, you're able to do both at the same time and know if you want to make the plunge. Yeah, it was a great lesson. 

Amy: You talked a lot about your kind of personal process there and acknowledging your mental health, your physical health. How much of that do you feel like is the responsibility of yourself personally as a development, and how much do you think should be, and maybe how much have you as Hive orchestrated as part of a kind of effective organizational culture? 

Sofia: Productivity really comes to mind here to me because this is something I invested quite a lot in. I actually created a free productivity course for animal advocates, which you can take, and this is something I practiced a lot. But then I realized that I would love all animal advocates to have access to this information, because if you can learn to do like twice the amount of work in the day just because of productivity techniques, or even like 20% over the course of your activism, you can save probably so many more animals. So, I thought it's definitely worth investing in it. It's like a no-brainer to me. And this is something that we also try and implement in the team. 
For example, we bought the paid versions of the AI tools for the team and encouraged them to use it and really try and say: ‘Okay, how can you 80/20 this? How can you do this faster? How about we AI this?’ And I think that's definitely something I recommend all organizations to implement, even if you're not in a leadership position. I think using chat GPT is like a must nowadays.

Amy: Yeah, great. And is there anything else in terms of that, like, effective organization culture that you think fosters particularly good work environments where people can thrive? Is there anything else that comes to mind? 

Sofia: Yeah, something that we actually built our community on is a culture of do-ocracy that I really love talking about. So, do-ocracy is a form of governance where people can just step in and, like, start a new project or do a task, even if no one has asked them to do it. And I think this is very much how we started Hive. No one ever asked us to start this organization. No one gave us the money, but we were like: ‘We think it's needed, am I going to do it anyway.’ And I think people got really inspired by this. And you can see with us, like, people come up with project ideas all the time. 

And this is something that I think, as a movement, we should do more of, like, not waiting for permission, not waiting for funders to say like: ‘Yeah, we should do this.’ If you see a gap and if you see that something should be done, just go and do it. Don't wait for permission. Because I think when I actually first came up with the idea of the newsletter, I was like: ‘Oh, my gosh, am I qualified? Should I ask for permission?’ And then everyone was like: ‘Oh, whatever, we don't care.’ And when I posted it, everyone really liked it. And I really want to see more people just being really proactive and showing the work and not waiting for permission to do it. 
And this is, I think, why Hive has been so successful in that first year. And this is, I think, why we got Open Phil funding; because all of our team, we just have a culture of do-ocracy. My team members, my direct reports, don't have to wait for permission to improve something or start a new project, as long as it meets our strategy. Is it going to drive us further to achieve our lag indicators and achieve our strategic goal? And if yes, just go and do it. Don't ask for permission. And maybe like 3% of the time I can come back and say, maybe not; maybe we can delay it. But then most of the time, we just really welcome this. More people can probably do that. 
Maybe one drawback of do-ocracy is if you don't do it strategically and just everyone starts doing a lot of things at the same time, it can get really messy. And I think that's one mistake we made, because we just had so many ideas at the beginning and we just really stretched ourselves too thin. And now I call it strategic do-ocracy. So, you don't just do everything you want to do, you just think: ‘Okay, do I have time to do it? Is this the best opportunity that I can be spending my time on?’ If so, I just do it. 

James: Nice. Yeah, I think that's a really good lesson both for, like, organizational culture – yeah, like, your job isn't to please your boss or get permission, and it shouldn't be to seek permission. And, like, it's the manager's job to, like, give the context to people, and then they do however they think it is best. And I think you have this idea of just, like, just go and do it; see how it is. Because I think you can – I think in most cases, if you try something, the downside risk is pretty low. It's like, you'll spend a few hours making this newsletter or whatever, and people won't like it, and you go away and that's fine. I just won’t do that again. Obviously, if it's like a risk to your organization, please reconsider. But, yeah, I think in most cases, the risk is pretty minimal and you should just go and try stuff. And that's the best way to actually get information on stuff. 

Amy: It's interesting that you've spoken about productivity there, Sofia, because I'm actually trying to move further away from things like Slack kind of just invading my work day. It's kind of a curse word now, right? Slack. And so, I guess slightly contrary to the work of Hive, how can we best, like, balance the need for this virtual connection, these resource sharing, and this expertise sharing, without reducing that productivity and efficiency in the movement? 

Sofia: I'm so glad that you asked this question, Amy, because I'm so passionate about it. I think that maybe the key to this is creating a culture in the organization and giving yourself permission as a professional to have some scheduled focus time. And I think that, James, you have spoken about this in previous podcast episodes, that you actually spend your morning without checking emails and just working on something. I think that I encourage people – this is something I should say in the productivity course, is that remove all your notifications, like, your computer should not be making any sounds, and your phone should not be in the same room where you work, or at least it should be faced down. And actually, my computer doesn't make any noises or my Slack doesn't send me any notifications. And I think that what I personally do, and I think that's maybe helpful, is just go for these tools when you actually need to use them on actual schedule it. So, say, like, you spend your morning on deep work, and then if you want to, you can go and check Slack and see what's going on there. And I think this comes from a personal discipline, because I think, unfortunately, we live in a society where we do love notifications, and I think that our brains are really susceptible to these pings. So, I think that is just a really big societal problem anyway. So, if you're struggling, you're not alone. 
But I do think that there's stuff you can do personally, like what James was talking about and for Slack, because we always started it from the value-perspective, I always thought: ‘Okay, I want people to get as much benefit from Slack in the least time possible.’ So we have funders who told me that they just come to Slack once every two weeks just to quickly check what's going on. And it takes them maybe half an hour to go through the updates, but then they never check it again. And maybe someone only logs in once to ask one specific question, and when that question is answered, they're like, okay, I probably won't log in again until I have a question. So, we actually have few people who hang out on Slack all the time. I think most people just log in like once a week. And if they are hanging out there a lot, that's their choice. And we're actually trying to reduce notifications to help them to manage their time, maybe a little bit better, but there's little control we have of that. But something we have started doing is we created a slack digest. And this is just a summary of ,subjectively in our opinion, of the best conversations that happened on Slack, and the most useful things so that maybe someone doesn't even have to log in to see what's going on. 

Amy: That's really helpful. Yeah, I think it's that kind of – you start to get that FOMO sense, a fear of missing an opportunity or a connection, or when there's so many notifications, how do I decide which ones to look for and which ones to ignore? So, yeah, I think that is really important and something that, like you say, you can do in best practice, just by setting those allotted times to check it. And yeah, I think that digest sounds like a really great option for those that would rather not be as active on the platform. 

Sofia: Yeah, something you touched upon, Amy, is like being able to only see the things that are relevant to you. And this is something I'm quite excited about. Before, we just used to have general channels and it was easy to check them all the time, but now we have like over 2000 people on Slack and maybe like 400-700 weekly active members. So, it's quite – it gets quite busy and we are actually creating more and more specialized channels to allow people to only check channels that are relevant to them. And we actually educate our users on how to mute channels and say: ‘Look, if you don't like this channel, just unsubscribe from it and only check the channel if you want it and if that's relevant to you.’ And I really see that the future of our communities, that people will have those niche communities where they can geek out on research topics or measurement, learning and evaluation topics, but then they can save a lot of time because they don't feel like they're missing out. 

Amy: Yeah, that was like my worst nightmare when it was launched, thinking, I'm just going to get a notification about someone having a picnic in New York and will anyone do a potluck? And I'm like, it's absolutely not relevant to any part of my day. So yeah, I think that segmentation is really important, like seeing those channels that are relevant to you and having those discussions in those really controlled environments. And I think that's the other thing, actually having you as like moderators of the space. It could be really easy for a Slack space like this to exist but without that kind of constant moderation, it does kind of get out of hand. It's like the dreaded reply-all on like email lists and stuff. So, yeah, I think that sense of control is really important to make sure that it's not as invasive as it could be. 

Sofia: For sure. I think that before I thought: ‘Oh, like, it's easy to run the Slack space. Maybe we can do this as volunteers on the side.’ But then as it became so active, I was like, wow, I don't want picnics at channelling everyone and giving notifications. I really wanted to be a productive community. And that's why we actually have full-time people; we have four full-time people who are currently monitoring these channels, I think, most hours of the day. And I think that we currently remove about maybe one post a day and ask people to edit their posts to keep them relevant to the channels. And this is something that people don't see because like it's, when it's running so well, people think: ‘Oh, wow, that's so easy.’ But actually, if anyone wants to start their own Slack space because they get inspired by us, like, you need full time people to really run a good Slack space that's productive and that's making impact. 

James: In terms of the moderation, is it mostly just kind of unrelated stuff to the channel or what's all that moderation required for? 

Sofia: Yeah, so maybe what I should caveat here as well is that our four full time people are currently – it's not the only thing that we do. So, I think that maybe moderation just takes, I don't know, maybe like an hour a day total for people just to keep an eye on things and read things. So, what we do is just, we generally have rules about each channel and we publish them on our community guidelines. They're available for everyone to see. And we always try and think: ‘Okay, is this post bringing value to people?’ And then does it follow the theme of this channel? And if it's not, then we just very gently ask the person to either rephrase it or remove it or post in a different channel. And, you know, sometimes it can be tough. Moderating can be very tough. So I have huge respect for my team, Kevin, Constance and Alison, who work really hard and sometimes have to resolve tough moderating situations. But overall, it really helps us to keep this space productive and focused and to minimize that overwhelm. 

Amy: So, moving on to the new name, the new branding: Hive. I'm slightly biased here, I will caveat, that our organization led the branding process from Impactful Animal Advocacy to Hive. But yeah, to you, Sofia, would you like to kind of officially talk about that and the service that you are now looking to provide and maybe what's in store for the future of Hive going forward? 

Sofia: Yeah, sure. Thank you so much, Amy, as well for the rebrand. I think it's beautiful. I mean, I'm biased as well, but I really love it. So, our new name is Hive, as in beehive. That's how it's spelled. It doesn't stand for anything. It's just Hive. And we chose it because it's much shorter than our current name. It's easier to remember and pronounce and it has a subtle animal element to it. And what's quite important to us is that it signifies unity and collaboration, working together for the common goal. Because we now see Hive as like a workspace where animal advocates come together to collaborate and discuss and strategize together. And our mission is to improve collaboration and coordination in the farmed animal movement through creating intentional and serendipitous connections. And yeah, I'm really excited about this re-brand. I think it hasn't changed much for the organization, but I really hope that it will help people to find us better because we are largely word of mouth promotion and I think it's much easier for people to remember and how to find us. Our website is actually very easy now, much easier to spell. It's just joinhive.org. 

James: Nice! So, I know we've covered lots of very interesting topics, ranging from community building to personal development and rejection, and bringing yourself out there and everything, and starting new projects. I think this has been super exciting on many different levels and I personally enjoyed it, which is, I think, generally a good sign of a conversation. And there's a few closing questions I always like to ask. I guess, first, what's one bit of news that you are grateful to hear or excited about recently? 

Sofia: I think for me at the moment is the efforts to bring more funding into the movement, because from the experience that I had at Hive and just generally in the movement, it seems like so many great projects can happen and we're currently more funding constrained than talent constrained. I do really see that the movement is making a lot of effort to increase the funding, and some of these include new funders coming into the movement. For example, the Navigation Fund that's going to start accept applications this year. We also have various initiatives like the initiatives by Ambitious Impact (AIM), for example, Founding to Give and yeah, Effective Giving. And Giving for Animals is the program of Animal Advocacy Careers, which is encouraging people to give money if they can't get a job or don't want to work in the movement. 
I also think that research such as the cross-cause comparison of cost-effectivenes by Rethink Priorities to show that actually farmed animal interventions can be just as cost effective, if not more than the global health initiatives. I'm really hoping that it would transfer into more promotion to people who want to improve the world and who want to reduce suffering but don't know where to give. Because I think a lot of people who have money sometimes just give to, well, because it's the most famous place to give. But I really hope that in a couple of years it will change because of all these wonderful initiatives. 

Amy: And you have given some recommendations as we've progressed. And actually, I feel like you probably have a whole list, so even if you don't mention them now, but there's more that you want to refer to, we can for sure put them in the show notes. But is there anything that stands out? Maybe just one more kind of reference point that you think has been particularly poignant in your journey? 

Sofia: Sure. One book that I really got into in the past six months is The Daily Stoic. You may know about this. This is also a book by Ryan Holiday. I mean, you can see that I'm very much into stoic philosophy. I definitely think that stoic philosophy is incredibly useful for dealing with the stresses of the lives of farmed animal advocates. And many leaders in the movement actually recommend this literature. So Daily Stoic is a book that contains one very short lesson about life and just how to cope with the challenges of life that you can read every day or you can read them all in one go, which is something I'm doing. I'm just re-reading them all the time and it's helping me a lot, so I definitely recommend you checking it out. 

James: And finally, how can people get more involved in your work? Are you hiring volunteers and how can people engage in Hive's various offerings? 

Sofia: Yeah, sure. Thanks so much for asking. So, as I mentioned, we have do-ocracy in our communities, so you don't need to ask permission to start a new initiative on Slack. If you have an idea or if you want feedback on something you've been working on, please feel free to come and post in our help request channel. And if you just want to suggest running something and find collaborators, just go for it. I'm sure that many community members have done it, so feel free to do that. That's the best way to get involved. 

As to volunteering, for us, we are actually looking for two roles. So, the first role, and it's a role that I really love, it's the Channel Leader role. So currently, as I was talking about, specialized channels that we have, they thrive because we have people volunteering very part-time on these channels to make them really high-quality. For example, The Mission Motor really make the Measurement, Evaluation and Learning channel thrive. And they run office hours there and answer people's questions. So, if you are passionate about a specific topic, feel free to check our channels and see if maybe you would like also to be a channel leader and post things there and maybe try and get some engagement that's valuable for the community members. For example, we have a mental health channel that's really thriving and such channels are the most valuable.

And we're also looking for volunteer moderators. So as I said, it can be challenging moderating because it's almost not the time that's challenging, but the fact that you have to keep an eye on it quite a lot. And sometimes we go to conferences or most of the time our team is doing other work rather than moderating. So, if you do actually like hanging out on Slack, maybe checking it once a day or twice a day anyway, then maybe a volunteer moderator role is for you. And it's a lot of fun to do and you learn a lot. And also, you get a lot of exposure to the community. And this is true for channel leaders and volunteer moderators. Your name will be out there, and you'll get known for your work in the moment. So, if there's something you want to do, please do contact us and I can put their application form in the notes as well. 

Amy: Well, thanks so much, Sofia! As James said, it's been a really insightful episode! You're sharing personal experiences, but also the professional journey of starting Hive. Best of luck with the launch of the re-brand; I'm certainly looking forward to having to say Hive and not Impactful Animal Advocacy, which I fumble upon every time. So, it's certainly a welcome change for me. So yeah, best of luck and we really look forward to seeing what you do with Hive and how it progresses in the months to come. 

Sofia: Thank you so much, I really enjoyed this!