The Nonprofit Logic Gap
When organizations skip the problem and jump straight
to the solution, even the most elegant language rings hollow.
A few weeks back I got an SOS from a fellow strategist in the brand and communications space. “I’ve spent weeks working on brand language for my client, but they are not satisfied. I have one last chance to save it. Can you please give me some advice?”
I spent a few minutes reading the two short brand documents she sent me. The language was sparkly. It spoke about amplifying leaders and elevating changemakers to even higher echelons of excellence.
Yet… something was off. What exactly was broken and needed fixing? Why should I care that it was broken? I felt like I had been parachuted into the final scene of the movie, where the hero was triumphantly shaking her fists in the air. But I had missed everything in between: the bad guy she was fighting, the various tests of her mettle, how she acquired the powers to prevail. I felt emotionally unattached to the happy ending.
The language was soaring, but I couldn’t find the solid ground underneath.
Many organizations suffer from what I call the “nonprofit logic gap.” They over-rely on their magic solution without doing the hard work of explaining what the problem is and why their approach is the right fit. Sometimes nonprofits skip over stating the problem at all. Other times, they present a problem and solution that simply don't connect, leaving the reader with an inexplicable feeling of huh?. Solutions are only as good as the problems they address. Without an anchor, lofty ideas lack teeth.
Once you are aware of this logic gap, you’ll notice it everywhere. But it especially plagues organizations that work on systems-level change, those often focused on policy, infrastructure, or sector-wide transformation. These organizations are the chronic 'amplifiers’ and ‘advancers' of the nonprofit world. They are the ones “accelerating” and “unlocking” and “catalyzing” and yes, even “transforming”. When your impact is filtered through layers of actors, when outcomes take years—even decades—to materialize, lofty language becomes a convenient cover for what feels difficult or impossible to prove.
Systems-level change is vital. Even when the path to impact is messy, coherence is important. If you want to build trust and credibility around inherently abstract work, you must be able to explain not just what you are doing, but why and how. The more abstract your work, the more explicit your logic model must be.
What does it look like when an organization doesn’t skip the middle? When nonprofits power their strategy, decisions, and storytelling with a coherent logic model? Let’s look at one of the most well-known organizations working on systems-level change: the Ford Foundation.
Ford’s self-appointed mandate is to challenge inequality. By conventional nonprofit standards, this meets the threshold for a decently articulated mission statement. They could have stopped there, but they didn’t.
Not only do they explain the problem as they see it, that “billions of people are excluded from full participation in the political, economic, and cultural systems that shape their lives,” they identify specific structural drivers of inequality and explain how their work addresses those root causes.
Then they put forward their unique intervention: investing in ideas, individuals, and institutions to tackle these root causes and build a more just and equitable future.
I am invested in the solution, because Ford did the work of explaining the problem of inequality and their point of view on it. They took me along on the whole journey, rather than plopping me unceremoniously into the final scene.
It is rare to find organizations that make their logic model so explicit, but the public expression matters less than the internal clarity. As I’ve said before: you don’t always have to say the problem. But you absolutely have to know it. Knowing the logic behind your mission brings crispness and resonance to every decision you make and story you tell.
Why does this gap persist?
Part of the issue is that nonprofit leaders wrongly assume that the problem their organization is working on is abundantly obvious and widely understood. To your inner circle and those swimming in the work day in and day out, maybe. But to everyone else, absolutely not.
Pair this false confidence with a widespread misunderstanding of the asset-based language movement. What started as a necessary antidote to harmful practice of describing people with little regard for their humanity then unfortunately morphed into an allergy towards defining the problem an organization exists to address.
On top of all of this, measuring impact is genuinely hard. Water-tight theories of change resist clean and simple articulation. The challenge can often feel so insurmountable that it discourages leaders from taking a stab at it. A good enough articulation is better than a gaping chasm of logic.
Finally, too many consultants and agencies dress up hot-air as “research” and “strategy”. They deliver a 30-page document of inconsequential findings. Understandably, the sector has developed deep-rooted skepticism towards anything that sniffs of “strategy.”
What becomes possible when logic and language align?
Leaders gain strategic clarity. Closing the logic gap strengthens their decision-making, helps them confidently define who they are and who they are not, and clarifies what to prioritize.
They can explain and defend their mission with conviction, armed with the rationale to explain the first principles of their work.
People from across the organization can connect everyday decisions and big-picture strategy to the “why” and gain a sense of satisfaction and buy-in to the larger work.
Communications flow more easily. Logic provides a clarity of purpose which makes it easy to choose what to talk about and how to talk about it.
Donors understand and buy into the vision, seeing a clear pathway from dollars to impact.
If you’ve spent time and money crafting beautiful language, but it still rings hollow, the problem likely isn’t in the words, it's in the underlying logic. When there is no solid rationale, talking about your work feels like trying to find firm footing on shifting sands.
Strip away all the poetry. The first thing to ask yourself: are you able to distill your work down into a simple equation of problem and solution? Once this fundamental binary is sorted, you can further sharpen: does your articulation of either help audiences see the world differently? Does it illuminate something that was previously hidden or ignored? Do your problem and solution communicate your organization’s unique worldview?
You cannot solve strategic problems with language. Language is a tool for expressing the clarity within. Once the logic is clear, the words not only flow naturally—they acquire more power and meaning than ever.
Curious about clarifying your own logic model and developing powerful supporting brand language? I help mission-driven organizations define their unique value and develop their narrative IP. Reach out to me here.