Quiet Shift is halfway through an initial assessment of how to solve the systemic issues that keep need and cost high in the U.S. and roadmap for those who believe a systemic effort is needed to move the systemic improvements forward.

 

This section provides background on how the work began, shares the findings that are most relevant to share at this time that demonstrate the reality and progress of the effort, and outlines the next steps for moving forward.

 

The purpose is not to present final conclusions, but to show that the effort is real, structured, and yielding practical insight — evidence that a systemic improvement effort is both possible and the first step is already halfway complete.​

​​​​

​​​​​​​

Situation

 

The U.S. has achieved remarkable success, and many have shared in it — yet there have always been those in need, and efforts by individuals, families, communities, states, and the nation as a whole to address the challenge.

​

Long-standing problem

 

Do you realize virtually all of the populations in need in the U.S. today have existed since the earliest days of the colonies? Do you know that most of these populations also existed in the countries of origin of the colonists?

​

Foundations of our nation

 

The primary motivations for colonization of the New World were economic gain, political and geopolitical power, and religious freedom — though the groups seeking religious freedom were often highly intolerant of other religions. Many came seeking a better life, particularly economic advancement, land ownership, and personal freedom, though often willing to deprive others of these for personal gain.

​

Unprecedented growth

 

From these beginnings, the U.S. achieved economic, population, military, political, and technological growth faster than any society in the history of humanity, eclipsing the colonists’ countries of origin and other civilizations. The U.S. economy surpassed that of England within 100 years of independence.

​

Enormous opportunity for most

 

People in the nation, and those immigrating to it, realized enormous economic and quality-of-life opportunities and gains as they drove the success of the nation. The purchasing power of people in the U.S. surpassed that of England before the end of the colonial period.

​

Others face needs

 

However, some did not achieve the same level of economic or material success, or personal freedom. In many cases, the same forces that drove progress and improved standards of living for some populations created challenges for others. Still others faced need from the natural challenges of human life — injury, illness, and loss — or from broader political, social, and cultural forces.

​

Efforts to address the problem

 

Within this complex mix of factors driving the existence of those in need and at risk, there have always been extensive efforts by individuals, families, communities, organizations, and every level of government to address the problem. Many of these had their roots in the solutions and approaches used to address challenges in the colonists’ countries of origin — most importantly, early on, from Protestant England, and later from Catholic philosophies brought by southern European immigrants.

​

Unique to our nation

 

All of these practices and philosophies from the countries of origin were tailored and developed within the unique regional and local conditions of the United States.

​​​​​

​​​​

Problem

 

Despite significant efforts, needs, costs, issues, and controversy remain high. Why?

 

Needs, costs and conflict persist

 

Despite all this effort, the number of those in need — along with the associated costs, issues, and political and cultural conflict — remains high.

​

Citizen perspectives vary

 

Citizen frustration, outrage, indignation, resignation, hopelessness, denial, discomfort, and embarrassment also remain high. Those called by their faiths to help the poor, the weak, the incarcerated, strangers, widows, and others feel the disquiet of falling short.

​

Significant improvement unlikely

 

Further, if current trajectories continue, significant improvements are unlikely — and the problem will almost certainly worsen due to current policies, chronic shifts in the forces driving need (such as the impact of artificial intelligence on employment), and potential crises such as another financial collapse.

​

Well understood problem

 

None of this is surprising. The issues are well-publicized, measured, reported, and debated.

 

But Quiet Shift reveals surprises

 

However, our analysis has revealed some surprising aspects of the problem:​

​

• Greater in magnitude: The problem is significantly greater, more pervasive, and more serious than currently assessed, reported, or communicated.​​

• Unknown in total: The full scope of the problem is unknown because there is no assessment across populations and the system as a whole—of total prevalence, direct and indirect cost, and impact on the nation, its citizens, and those affected by the problem.​

• Lack of awareness of problem benefits: It is also unknown on a net basis because there is no comprehensive assessment of the significant investment, employment, political and social power, and reinforcement of individual values and beliefs that benefit many individuals, organizations, and communities from the persistence of the problem.​​

• Many ways to avoid the reality of the problem: There are many widely accepted ways of avoiding the problem, including denial, minimization, blaming the victim, blaming others, or judging others based on our own experiences and assumptions about what we would do in their situation.​​

• Impossible to understand without direct experience: A key part of this is the belief among many that they can understand what someone in need experiences without having lived it themselves. Our assessment repeatedly shows this is impossible. For example, those who once believed opioid addiction was simply a lack of willpower often have their views shifted 180° when someone close to them — a son, a father, or themselves — suffers addiction.

​​​​​​

We are in the process of building the first total and net problem assessments. Our hypothesis is that when it is complete it will show that the problem is even greater and different than indicated by the assessment so far.  

​

Your perspectives

 

Do you feel we’re doing the right thing — for those in need, for all citizens, and for the nation at every level — in how we’re addressing this problem?​

 

What outcomes do you want the system to achieve?

​

• Do you want to see the numbers of those in need and at risk — and the direct and indirect costs of efforts to aid them, and the constant conflict over the problem — significantly reduced?

• Do you want the system to deliver the performance we need as citizens and as a nation at every level, contributing materially — including economically — to both?

​​

What is your vision for people in the U.S., including those in need and at risk?

​

• Do you want to see every adult in the U.S. living successful, independent lives — including financially — and fulfilling their responsibilities?

• What about those who face fundamental gaps in their ability to do so? Do you want them supported to the fullest extent possible, with any remaining gaps filled by those who care — so they live safely, with their basic life needs met?

• Do you want to see all children emerging from childhood into adulthood able to do so successfully?

• Do you want those who drift from the path of success to be able to recognize problems early, quickly access available resources, stabilize, address root causes, heal any damage, and return to life success sustainably?

​​

What do you think works best to enable people to prevent and overcome need?

​

• Do you believe children are born not wanting to live successful lives?

• Do you believe each person is on earth to play a unique role, with unique capabilities, talents, and potential?

• Do you believe people are most likely to succeed when focused on their unique aspirations and using their unique gifts?

• Which approach do you think will help those in need move from problem to success — and prevent need in the first place?

  • Stigmatizing, looking on them negatively, assuming they’re lazy and must be forced to do what they “should” be doing, treating them without respect, and doing only the minimum to meet their needs temporarily so the problem reoccurs

  • Or treating them with respect and love — believing everyone has potential and ability — and aligning efforts to help them succeed by building on those strengths rather than applying one-size-fits-all solutions

• Do you want to solve the problem?

​​

Are we on track to solving this problem sustainably?

​

• Do you believe we’re on track to solve this problem sustainably, in alignment with what we want as citizens and as a nation at every level?

• Do you believe we can solve the problem — or do you think the challenges are insurmountable?

​

 

Need for systemic approach

 

While the causes of need and system problems are known to be systemic, solution efforts have not been.

 

When we decided to use our expertise to help solve the systemic issues underlying the challenges faced by those in need, we discovered several gaps in previous efforts — gaps that likely contributed to the persistence of the problem — and chose to undertake the systemic effort required to address them.

​

Decision to help address systemic issues

​

Several years ago, we decided to focus our firm, Org-Builders, LLC, on using our expertise in restructuring and building new organizations to help those in need. We did this for five reasons.

​

1. Commitment: We at Quiet Shift have always been concerned with those in need — those who have been less fortunate than we were in having enough to eat, secure shelter, access to good education, opportunities to participate in athletics, and the love, care, and respect of parents and caregivers. We’ve worked hard and endured much, but we know we began from a position far more conducive to success than many.

2. Personal experience: We have experienced many of these needs personally through our own challenges and those of family, friends, and colleagues. Professionally, we have worked with organizations addressing these challenges, particularly in healthcare — which in some way touches virtually every population in need.

3. Concern as citizens: As citizens, we are deeply concerned about how much we spend on these problems and the drag it places on our economy and our future. We question how we can remain competitive economically and geopolitically when 15–20 % of our population at any given time is in need. We believe these costs are putting the nation at risk by reducing our ability to invest in other vital priorities such as education and deficit reduction. We view this as indefensible when there is so much opportunity to improve system performance.

4. Professional expertise: Given our experience in restructuring large and complex organizations facing significant, sustained problems — especially those caused by changes in the major forces that once made them successful — we believed we could help.

5. Sense of responsibility: As parents, we feel a responsibility to solve this problem so we do not pass it on to our children. Our generation has allowed these problems to persist; we do not want that to continue.

 

Therefore, several years ago we decided to dedicate our consulting practice to helping address this problem by providing restructuring consulting services to organizations and leaders working directly to aid those in need and to prevent their challenges. We also decided to conduct independent research on broader systemic opportunities.

 

Review of past efforts revealed unmet needs

​

To determine how we could make the greatest unique contribution, we undertook an assessment of previous efforts and current opportunities to improve system performance. We identified several gaps that likely contributed to why needs, costs, and issues have remained high despite so much effort. Three of the most significant were:

​

• Lack of systemic focus: We found that while it is well known that the root causes of need — and many of the system’s greatest performance problems — are systemic, solution efforts have not been fully systemic or targeted on uncovering and resolving them. The prevailing belief was that a systemic effort, while needed, would be impossible given the system’s enormous size, complexity, number of powerful stakeholders, and the highly sensitive and often controversial nature of the issues involved.

• Operational, organizational, and behavioral gaps: Many solutions faced significant operational, organizational, and behavioral-reinforcement challenges that limited their ability to deliver results at scale within cost and other constraints.

• Highly constrained improvement goals: Solution efforts rarely aimed to achieve significant reductions in need, cost, and other systemic issues. Few worked backward from desired outcomes to restructure the system to achieve them, unconstrained by existing structures or improvement methods.

​​

Also, we found existing organizations did not appear to have the motivation, capabilities, or ability to take a truly fresh approach to structuring the system and leading the systemic improvement effort needed to address these gaps successfully.

 

We undertook the effort needed to address these gaps

​

Since the approaches we and others use are designed to make such challenges manageable, we recognized that it would be impossible to achieve significant, lasting reductions in need and cost without addressing the systemic root causes. Believing that we were uniquely positioned in terms of skills, motivation, and perspective, we undertook the needed systemic, highly operational, and unconstrained improvement effort.

​​​​​​

​

The Quiet Shift approach

 

We are using systemic operational restructuring approaches to assess the core issues, identify opportunities, and build the roadmap to move them forward.

​

Objectives – uncover and solve the most systemic

​

Our objectives are to assess the most foundational root causes for the persistently high levels of need, cost, and other system issues; identify solutions to them; and determine how to deploy them fully. We seek to enable those who care about the problem to accomplish this.

Our first step is an initial unconstrained assessment of the opportunity and roadmap that those who care can use to move the systemic opportunities forward.

​

Scope – systemwide but focused on the systemic

​

Our scope focuses on the systemic issues and opportunities that exist within and across populations, services, and geographies. It also includes the linkages with systems serving the total population and broader community — local, county, state, and national. We continuously adjust the scope to ensure we capture all factors influencing the problem and all that can be brought to bear on the solution.

 

While the scope is broad, it is also highly focused on the most systemic issues and opportunities. It is not “boiling the ocean.”

 

Process – iterative systemic operational assessment using the basics

​

Our approach uses basic systemic operational restructuring processes and frameworks to methodically assess the system structure and operation and improvement approaches. This is done by and across populations, services, and geographies — starting with the full scope at a high level and iteratively increasing the focus and depth of the analysis on the most critical systemic issues and opportunities until the most foundational are uncovered and the roadmap for deploying them developed.

 

We estimate the effort will require five analytical iterations.

 

The heart of the assessment – treat as a capacity-building challenge

​

At its heart, our approach treats the problem as a simple operational capacity-building challenge. While there are problems throughout the system — from high-level policy and strategy to detailed clinical practice — the fundamental problem lies at the operational level: how the system works to enable those in need to move from problem to target outcome, and more importantly, to prevent the problem in the first place.

If the system does not function effectively at this level, no amount of policy, strategy, governance, or organizational work will produce meaningful improvement.

 

Therefore, our approach assesses, for each population:

• the problem,

• the target outcomes needed by and that will materially benefit citizens and the nation at all levels, what those in need aspire to and will work for them — and what is scientifically possible,

• the operational capacity required to enable those in need to move from problem to outcome and to prevent the problem in the first place,

• how to organize the system so end-to-end operations work smoothly, efficiently, and continuously improve, and

• how each solution must fit within the broader total-population and community (local, county, state ands nation) context.

 

The process is to then assess the issues and opportunities across populations, services and geographies to capture potential economies of scale and other system-level benefits.

 

Sources – primarily ad hoc stakeholder and secondary

​

To date, we have used ad hoc interviews with stakeholders and experts, focus groups, and insights from our consulting work. Most of the analysis, however, has been based on secondary sources, working upward from the data they contain without assuming prior conclusions.

Moving forward, we plan to expand structured stakeholder involvement in the assessment, particularly end-to-end operations assessments and stakeholder-management issues.

 

Staffing – work to date and moving forward

​

We have completed most of the work ourselves to ensure that no systemic issues are missed. The architecture has now come together enough that we believe we can expand the team and accelerate progress.

 

Funding – personally funded to date, seeking external support

​

We have funded all work personally to date to ensure complete independence in structuring, conducting, and interpreting the assessment. When potential funders initially considered the effort too risky, we continued the analysis ourselves until the results reduced that perceived risk to acceptable levels.

We believe we have reached that point now.

 

Status – the initial assessment is halfway complete. It's manageable.

​

We have completed two and a half of the five analytical iterations we believe will be required.

 

One of the key questions early on was whether our approach would make the magnitude and complexity of the task manageable. To date, it has. While the workload is significant, the consistent frameworks and methods ensure that all factors are captured, linkages identified, and information kept organized. 

 

We've also found that the issues and opportunities are so consistent across all populations and other dimensions of the system that there will almost certainly only be a handful of foundational issues, causing the myriad of symptomatic issues. This will likely make the assessment even more manageable.

​

​​

Findings

 

The most important finding is that the opportunity exists to reduce needs by 80+% and direct costs by 20–30+%.

​​​​

The most important findings to share at this point are:

 

1. The reality: The most foundational cause is the assumption that the system is too enormous, convoluted, has too many powerful organizations and groups resisting real improvement, and involves too many of the most controversial political, cultural, social, faith-based, and other issues to solve the systemic root causes of need and persistently high levels of need and cost.

2. The solution: The solution is for enough people to decide not to accept the assumption and to begin the needed systemic improvement process.

3. The opportunity: The opportunity exists to reduce needs by 80%+ and costs by 20–30%+ by:

A. targeting the system on doing so and on what citizens and the nation at all levels need;

B. restructuring the system from end to end, systemically, so all the parts work together to achieve the population outcomes and gain scale and other benefits across them; and

C. most importantly, organizing the enormous capacity that already exists so it can be brought to bear on solving the systemic problem and fully deploying the needed systemic improvements.

 

1. The reality: the biggest obstacle is belief

 

There are five increasingly foundational causes for the persistence of the problem. The most foundational is the belief that the system is too enormous, too complicated, has too many powerful stakeholders resisting significant improvement, and involves too many highly controversial and often explosive issues to make solving the systemic root causes of need and system performance possible. Consequently, solution efforts have not focused on solving these. Instead, the general approach is to pick a narrow part of the problem or system and focus on solving it, but with little or no linkage to related efforts and often contradicting them.

​

2. The decision: the solution begins when enough people decide not to accept the assumption

 

The first step to achieving significantly greater reductions in needs—while at the same time reducing costs and aligning system performance with the needs of all citizens and local communities, counties, states, and the nation—is for enough people to decide not to accept the assumption and to begin the needed systemic solution effort.

 

The results of each phase of work can then be used to convince enough additional people that a systemic effort is possible, to fund and execute the next phase, and so on.

 

We have already made the decision and are halfway through an initial assessment of the opportunity and, more importantly, a roadmap for how those who care can move the systemic improvements forward.

 

We are at the point where we can divide the work into pieces that can be led by others. Therefore, we are constructing this interim summary to convince enough people to fund and execute an expansion of the effort to accelerate the solution.

​

3. The opportunity: reduce preventable need and cost by retargeting, restructuring systemically, and organizing existing capacity

​

Results to date indicate that the capacity almost certainly exists to reduce the high level of preventable need by 80%+ and direct costs by 20–30%+ through operational restructuring and shifting investment, with reductions from prevention-driven cost avoidance likely even greater. System performance can also be aligned with the needs of citizens and the nation at all levels so they benefit materially, including economically.

This can be accomplished by:

 

A. Retargeting: aim the system at the outcomes we need

​

Targeting the system on outcomes defined based on:

​

1. an explicit, values-based assessment and segmentation of citizen needs, overall life priorities, and how the system can materially contribute to them, including economically;

2. a strategic and tactical assessment to determine what the system needs to do to drive the success of the nation at every level—and ideally contribute materially, in unexpected ways, to that success;

3. what those in need seek to achieve and what will work for them; and

4. what is scientifically possible, informed but not constrained by the needs of providers and other stakeholders.

 

Several specific target opportunities include:

​

• Make the goal of the system adult life success and independence

​​

A key part of this will be making the goal of the system that adults at risk and in need are able to live successfully and independently, including financially. Those facing preventable needs are able to achieve this by mitigating potential preventable risks. Those who still face needs are able to detect them early, stabilize the situation, address the root causes, heal any damage, and return to independent life success. Those who face fundamental gaps in their ability to do so still do so to the fullest extent possible and have any gaps in their ability to live safe lives with their basic life needs met filled by support services.

 

An important part of this goal will be ensuring children get what they need to emerge as adults ready to do so—including family life, education, community, health care, and all the ingredients needed for children to grow into successful and independent adults. This includes, particularly, that they receive what they need in the first four years of life to establish the physical, intellectual, emotional, and self-confidence foundations needed for life success. Children of all ages at risk are able to have those risks mitigated, and those who drift from the path of life success are able to quickly return to it.

 

Establishing this target would make moot one of the most controversial conflicts about aiding those in need and would eliminate a large part of the lifetime of need for aid that stems from gaps in childhood development and from needs recurring again and again as they do today because they are not fully and sustainably addressed.

​

• Adults achieve life success by leveraging their unique aspirations, talents, and potential

 

Another part of the target for ensuring adults are able to live successfully and independently, including financially, will be to ensure that they are able to do so by achieving their unique aspirations and leveraging their unique capabilities and potential—and that children have these unique aspirations, talents, and potential developed. This is the most efficient and effective method for enabling people to maximize their value and income. A one-size-fits-all approach will never enable success for all adults in a market-driven economy.

​

• Re-tone the system to be about success vs. fixing a problem

 

Another key part of this will be re-toning the system so that it becomes about success versus dealing with the problem. A negative, problem- and compliance-oriented view of those in need as less than, as failures, and as problems to be dealt with will never lead to an efficient and effective system and will always make it a drain on the nation's resources.
Making it about enabling those in need to be successful—driving the success of all citizens and the nation at all levels—will greatly increase the effectiveness of prevention and mitigation efforts, reduce their costs, and benefit all citizens and the nation at all levels.

​

B. Systemic: restructure the system to achieve these outcomes

​

Work back from these target outcomes using systemic restructuring approaches to restructure operations by population so the parts of the system work together to prevent and mitigate needs for the full population in need within required cost levels, and gain economies of scale in addressing common root causes and solutions.
Do the same for deployment efforts, ensuring that they mitigate fully the most significant barriers and enable full deployment and target outcome achievement within required investment levels.

 

Three specific opportunities in using the systemic approach are:

​

• Operational restructuring and deployment

​​

The levels of mis-targeting, fragmentation, duplication, diseconomies of scale, and other issues with how the system works from end to end, by and across populations, are so high that reductions in preventable need of 80%+ through restructuring and reinvestment of downstream savings in prevention—and in direct costs from operational restructuring alone—are on the high side of what's possible from such efforts (20–30%+), with net reductions in direct and indirect costs from prevention-driven cost avoidance likely even higher.

 

The same is true of deployment efforts, with the level of fragmentation and other problems having an even greater negative impact on deployment because they both greatly increase the barriers to deployment by increasing the complexity, number of stakeholders involved, and competition for scarce visibility and resources, and they reduce the scale, focus, mutual reinforcement, and power of deployment efforts. Consequently, the opportunities from approaching the problem systemically are enormous.

​

• Concentrate on a handful of foundational issues and deployment barriers

 

The pattern of issues and opportunities by and across populations and every dimension of the system is so consistent that it indicates that there are only a handful of fundamental issues causing the myriad of symptomatic and visible problems.
This will make it possible for solution development—and even more importantly, deployment efforts—to be highly concentrated and allow overwhelming force to be focused on addressing them.
It also means that there will be a simple critical path for moving from the current system to the restructured one so that, no matter how small the first steps are (e.g., this effort), as long as they are along the critical path, the momentum will build toward what's required to shift the system.

​

• Opportunities from using a long-term systemic approach

 

Approaching the effort as a long-term systemic restructuring initiative will make it possible for solution efforts to be mutually reinforcing and allow significant degrees of freedom in scoping, pacing, and sequencing them to allow time to address the most difficult values-based and infrastructure issues.
Also, this freedom, the magnitude of the potential savings, and the size and complexity of the system will almost certainly make it possible to structure the deployment effort so it is self-funding.

​

C. Organize: bring the existing capacity to bear on solving the systemic problem

 

However, the most powerful driver of success will be organizing the enormous capacity that already exists—within and in related areas outside the system—so it can be brought to bear on solving the systemic problem.
This includes enabling those who want to solve the problem to build the governance, leadership, organization, process, and infrastructure required to bring the capacity to bear within how the system is already structured and operates.
One advantage of this approach is that it aligns the solution effort with the highly decentralized structure of the U.S. and turns the problems of complexity and the number of stakeholders involved into a source of strength for addressing these challenges.

​

​

Moving Forward

 

The focus now is on accelerating completion of the initial assessment and roadmap.

 

The next phase of work focuses on three coordinated workstreams that will complete the assessment and roadmap, establish the structure needed to expand the effort, and manage the risks of moving forward responsibly.

Together they ensure that the solution architecture is stable, leadership and stakeholder issues are well-understood, and the foundation for large-scale progress is secure.

​

Workstream 1 — complete the initial assessment and roadmap

​

This stream concentrates the core analytical work.
Its goal is to continue building and validating the solution until the architecture is stable, the roadmap is clear, and the risks of expansion—especially those related to leadership and stakeholder engagement—are effectively mitigated.

 

It includes three major parts:

​

• Iterative population assessments – Continue successive rounds of analysis across populations, services, and geographies to identify and confirm the most foundational systemic issues and opportunities. Consolidate results from earlier cycles—which vary in depth given the exploratory nature of the work—into a consistent, fact-based structure.

​

• Cross-cutting analysis – Deepen understanding of the total problem across populations, complete the citizen-needs assessment and segmentation, and conduct strategic analysis of national, state, and county priorities to clarify interdependencies and performance gaps.

​

• Roadmap development – Build the roadmap for moving forward with risks mitigated. This includes a comprehensive leadership and stakeholder assessment and engagement plan designed to ensure that the next-phase structure is sound, the approach coordinated, and expansion can proceed with confidence.

​

Workstream 2 — organize and expand the effort

​

This stream establishes the organizational and operational foundation needed to sustain and accelerate the work.

Key steps include:

​

• Forming the dedicated organization (e.g., 501(c)(3)) to provide a formal, independent base

• Establishing leadership, governance, and accountability structures that bring the effort to life

• Expanding the team and operational capacity to handle larger-scale coordination

• Securing funding to complete the current phase and launch the next

​​

Workstream 3 — expand leadership and stakeholder engagement

​

This stream builds the understanding, trust, and participation required for long-term success.
It will begin on a limited scale and expand as the architecture stabilizes and readiness increases.

The focus is on:

​

• Deepening relationships with leaders, experts, and citizens who care about solving the problem

• Sharing progress and insights in clear, actionable ways

• Developing a durable network of contributors and partners positioned to carry elements of the roadmap forward

​

​

Accelerate the Solution

​

You can help accelerate the solution by contributing your expertise, leadership, and resources to any of the major work streams.

 

Workstream leadership and working team participation

​

The work required to complete this phase is simple but voluminous. It has progressed to the point where we can expand the team without compromising the need for synthesis or missing subtle indicators of additional systemic issues and opportunities.

​

Those who believe a systemic effort is needed — and find Quiet Shift compelling — can accelerate the work by contributing their commitment, expertise, experience, time, and financial resources. There are opportunities to contribute across all three workstreams:

​

• Workstream 1: Lead or participate in population, service, and geographic assessments; in-depth analysis of cross-cutting issues such as the total problem, citizen needs, and national or local priorities; and stakeholder and leadership assessments

• Workstream 2: Provide leadership or participate in establishing the dedicated organization (e.g., 501(c)(3)), shaping governance and management, expanding the team, and leading or supporting fundraising efforts

• Workstream 3: Lead or participate in the expanded leadership, stakeholder engagement, and communication work as the effort grows

​​

Network membership

​

In addition to direct participation, individuals can also contribute by joining the network of people aware of the effort — sharing information with others, providing ad hoc input or expertise, and helping refine the work as it progresses.

 

The Quiet Shift website serves as the starting point for this process, offering opportunities to sign up for updates, review work in progress, and share reactions or feedback. Our goal is not to prove that we are right, but to develop a solution that works. All input is welcome.

 

Embed in ongoing efforts

​

Finally, those working outside the Quiet Shift effort can contribute by aligning their current activities with the goal of building systemic solutions — for example, ensuring that the organizations they are part of integrate systemic perspectives into their plans and activities to help reduce need and strengthen performance across the nation.