.svg){kind=icon}
These are some things you can consider when creating your Ethical Growth Framework for Launchbot.
Tell us about your project / business / impact idea
A few lines about your project, business, initiative, organization, startup or movement. This is to focus your thinking, and doesn't get saved anywhere.
How big do you want it to get?
Local
This can be best for local operators, community-based service providers, grassroots community movements. There are lots of challenges involved with staying local, such as measuring results, finding sustainable sources of revenue and avoiding staff burnout, emotional overload from in-person connections, and longevity. Staying local could mean trading more shallow wide-reaching impacts for fewer deep in-person impacts. Local movements find it easier to maintain integrity, relationships and positive or neutral climate impacts.
Global
This can be best for movements, tide-shifts, and ideas where a lot of people will benefit from growing large. There are lots of challenges with growing global, such as maintaining relationships in differing communities, the climate impacts of global infrastructure, and maintaining integrity, company culture, and your values at scale. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. Growing global could mean a trade-off between fewer deep in-person impacts vs more shallow wide-reaching impacts. Global movements find it easier to gain sustainable revenue, motivating and exciting staff long-term, and find it easier to measure broad impacts.
How fast do you want to grow?
Slow
This can be best for relationship-dependent work, complex behavioral change, and movements requiring deep community trust. There are lots of challenges with slow growth, such as maintaining momentum, securing patient funding, and competing with faster-moving alternatives. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. Growing slowly could mean trading immediate impact for more sustainable, deeply-rooted change. Slow growth initiatives find it easier to positively benefit a small community, maintain quality, build lasting partnerships, and adapt thoughtfully to community feedback.
Fast
This can be best for time-sensitive movements, urgent social problems, and ideas where early momentum creates lasting change. There are lots of challenges with growing fast, such as maintaining quality control, avoiding mission drift, managing cash flow spikes, and preventing team overwhelm. Fast growth could mean trading careful relationship-building for broader immediate reach. Fast-growing initiatives find it easier to capture attention, attract investment, and create disruption before less ethical ideas emerge.
How long do you want the idea to live for?
Short Term Impact (1-5 years)
This can be best for addressing immediate crises, pilot programs, and catalytic interventions designed to spark larger systemic change. There are lots of challenges with short-term thinking, such as limited relationship development, difficulty measuring long-term outcomes, and potential for solutions that don't address root causes. Short-term initiatives could mean trading sustainable change for urgent relief. Time-limited projects find it easier to maintain focus, secure crisis funding, and pivot quickly when learning what doesn't work.
Generational Impact (decades+)
This can be best for systemic change, educational initiatives, and movements addressing deeply embedded social problems. There are lots of challenges with long-term thinking, such as maintaining relevance across changing contexts, securing sustained funding, and keeping teams motivated through slow progress. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. Generational thinking could mean trading immediate visible wins for transformative institutional change. Long-term initiatives find it easier to build deep expertise, weather temporary setbacks, and create lasting cultural shifts.
Do you want to use digital tools to grow?
No
This can be best for trust-dependent work, culturally sensitive initiatives, and movements requiring deep behavioral change. There are lots of challenges with in-person focus, such as geographic limitations, higher costs per person reached, and difficulty scaling personal approaches. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. In-person growth could mean trading broad reach for transformative individual relationships. Face-to-face initiatives find it easier to build lasting trust, navigate cultural nuances, and create accountability through personal connection.
Yes
This can be best for reaching distributed communities, scaling education, and movements where accessibility and cost-effectiveness are priorities. There are lots of challenges with digital tools, such as excluding digitally marginalized communities, creating shallow engagement, and dependence on platform algorithms. Digital growth could mean trading in-person connection depth for broader accessibility. Digital-focused initiatives find it easier to measure engagement, reduce geographic barriers, and scale quickly with lower overhead costs.
How do you want your growth strategy to impact the climate?
Climate-Positive Growth
This can be best for environmental organizations, movements modeling sustainable practices, and initiatives where climate leadership enhances credibility. There are lots of challenges with prioritizing climate impact, such as higher operational costs, limited vendor options, and potential trade-offs with other social goals. Climate-positive growth could mean choosing slower expansion for environmental integrity. Climate-conscious initiatives find it easier to attract environmentally-minded supporters, demonstrate values alignment, and contribute to broader sustainability movements.
Climate-Negative Growth
This can be best for organizations focusing resources on fast growth or other social priorities. It can suit crisis response organizations, initiatives where immediate human need outweighs environmental concerns, and movements operating in contexts where climate considerations are secondary to growth. There are lots of challenges with climate-negative approaches, such as contributing to long-term environmental harm, reputational risks among environmentally-conscious supporters, and potential conflict with broader social justice values. Climate-negative growth could mean trading environmental responsibility for immediate scale and cost-effectiveness. High-impact initiatives may find it easier to achieve global impact, maximize immediate beneficiary reach, respond rapidly to urgent needs, and prioritize instant human welfare over long-term environmental considerations.
Do you have strong feelings about using AI for growth?
No AI
This can be best for trust-dependent work, creative problem-solving, and movements where human wisdom and intuition are irreplaceable. There are lots of challenges with avoiding AI, such as competitive disadvantages, higher labor costs, and missing opportunities for beneficial automation. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. Human-centered growth could mean trading efficiency gains for authentic human connection. Human-focused initiatives find it easier to maintain transparency, remain climate-positive, ensure accountable decision-making, and demonstrate commitment to human dignity in an automated world.
Use AI
This can be best for data-heavy initiatives, personalized service delivery, and movements where efficiency gains translate to broader impact. There are lots of challenges with AI integration, such as bias perpetuation, job displacement concerns, lack of transparency in decision-making, environmental impact, privacy concerns, and dependence on corporate AI providers. AI-enabled growth could mean trading human judgment for algorithmic efficiency. AI-integrated initiatives find it easier to personalize at scale, analyze complex patterns, and automate routine tasks to focus human energy on relationship-building. There will be increasing nuance in using AI as more ethical and open-source AI models and tools emerge over time.
Should your growth framework incorporate tools that use low-wage labor?
No
This can be best for movements modeling economic justice, organizations where labor practices affect credibility, and initiatives with sufficient resources to prioritize worker welfare. There are lots of challenges with fair-wage commitments, such as higher operational costs, limited vendor options, and difficulty competing with lower-cost alternatives. Fair-wage growth could mean trading cost savings for values alignment. Living-wage initiatives find it easier to attract ethically-minded supporters, demonstrate integrity, and contribute to broader economic justice movements.
Yes
This can be best for resource-constrained organizations prioritizing direct service delivery over operational ideals. There are lots of challenges with cost-focused approaches, such as potential exploitation of vulnerable workers, reputational risks, and misalignment with social justice values. Cost-conscious growth could mean trading labor justice for broader program reach. Budget-focused initiatives find it easier to maximize direct beneficiary impact, compete with well-funded alternatives, and allocate more resources to core programming.
Do you have strong feelings about using social media giants for growth?
No Social Media
This can be best for movements prioritizing data sovereignty, organizations concerned about platform censorship, and initiatives building long-term community ownership. There are lots of challenges with avoiding major platforms, such as limited reach potential, higher marketing costs, and missing opportunities to meet people where they already spend time. No social media growth could mean trading viral potential for community control. Independent initiatives find it easier to maintain message integrity, protect community data, and build direct relationships without algorithmic interference.
Use Social Media
This can be best for reaching mainstream audiences, movements requiring broad visibility, and organizations with strong content strategies. There are lots of challenges with platform dependence, such as algorithm changes affecting reach, data privacy concerns, and supporting companies whose values may conflict with yours. Platform-leveraged growth could mean trading data control for amplified reach. Social media-savvy initiatives find it easier to achieve viral moments, reach younger demographics, make an impact globally and benefit from sophisticated targeting tools.
How important is your privacy and the privacy of your community?
Strong Privacy Provisions
This can be best for serving vulnerable populations, movements in restrictive political contexts, and organizations where trust depends on confidentiality. There are lots of challenges with privacy prioritization, such as limited data collection for improvement, reduced personalization capabilities, and higher costs for secure infrastructure. Privacy-focused growth could mean relying on open-source tools, or trading data insights for community protection. Privacy-committed initiatives find it easier to serve at-risk populations, maintain trust in sensitive contexts, and demonstrate respect for human dignity.
No Privacy Provisions
This can be best for evidence-based organizations, initiatives requiring personalized interventions, and movements where impact measurement drives funding. There are lots of challenges with data collection, such as privacy risks, potential for misuse, and community concerns about surveillance. Data-leveraged growth could mean trading privacy protection for optimization insights. Data-leveraged initiatives find it easier to demonstrate impact, personalize services, and continuously improve based on user behavior patterns.
How important is it that your growth strategy has a strong ethical framework?
Strong Ethical Provisions
This can be best for movements requiring moral leadership, organizations serving vulnerable populations, and initiatives where credibility depends on integrity. There are lots of challenges with ethical prioritization, such as slower decision-making, higher operational costs, and potential competitive disadvantages. Ethics-first growth could mean trading speed and efficiency for moral consistency. Ethically-grounded initiatives find it easier to maintain long-term trust, attract values-aligned supporters, and weather crises through demonstrated integrity.
No Ethical Provisions
This can be best for urgent crisis response, resource-constrained organizations, and movements where impact outcomes matter more than process purity. There are lots of challenges with pragmatic approaches, such as potential value compromises, reputational risks, and staff moral distress. Results-focused growth could mean trading ethical idealism for immediate impact delivery. Pragmatically-driven initiatives find it easier to adapt quickly, maximize resource efficiency, and prioritize beneficiary outcomes over operational perfection.
Do you prefer open source tools?
What are Open Source tools?
Open source tools are digital tools that share their code with the world. Anyone coder can submit improvements to the code. This means the tools are often built by whole communities, so they are often strongly values-driven. These communities are often voluntary, which makes it hard to receive technical support. Some tools may fail to be maintained after a certain time period as volunteer interest wanes. This can lead to bugs or security vulnerabilities. Other tools receive enough financial support from users to create sustainability, and this assures regular maintenance. If you use open source tools to make money, there's a social expectation that you eventually give back to the tool financially or with code contributions.
Use Only Open Source
This can be best for movements prioritizing transparency, organizations with technical capacity, and initiatives where community ownership enhances mission alignment. There are lots of challenges with open source commitment, such as limited customer support, potential security vulnerabilities, and need for in-house technical expertise. Open source growth could mean trading convenience and polish for transparency and control. Open source-focused initiatives find it easier to customize solutions, avoid vendor lock-in, and demonstrate commitment to collaborative development and shared knowledge.
Open Source Doesn't Matter
This can be best for organizations prioritizing reliability, teams with limited technical resources, and movements where user experience directly affects adoption. There are lots of challenges with proprietary tools, such as vendor dependence, privacy concerns, higher costs, and lack of transparency in how tools function. Using commercial tools over open source tools could mean trading transparency and control for professional support and polished interfaces. Proprietary-focused initiatives find it easier to access comprehensive customer service, benefit from regular updates, and rely on tested, stable platforms.
Do you prefer to work with companies that have strong diversity policies?
Strong Diversity Policies
This can be best for movements modeling inclusive practices, organizations serving diverse communities, and initiatives where representation affects credibility and effectiveness. There are lots of challenges with diversity prioritization, such as limited vendor options, potential higher costs, and difficulty verifying authentic commitment versus performative policies. Diversity-focused growth could mean trading convenience and cost savings for values alignment and representation. Diversity-conscious initiatives find it easier to demonstrate authentic commitment to equity, benefit from diverse perspectives, and build trust with marginalized communities.
Diversity Policies Don't Matter
This can be best for resource-constrained organizations, and movements where vendor diversity is less connected to core mission outcomes. There are lots of challenges with this approach, such as potentially supporting inequitable systems, missing opportunities for meaningful partnership, and misalignment with broader justice values. Using tools without regard to diversity could mean trading diverse leadership for cost-effectiveness. Initiatives that don't regard diversity find it easier to access a wide range of tools, maintain budget discipline, and focus resources on direct program delivery.
Do you prefer working with non-profits and social enterprises over profit-oriented companies?
Only Social Enterprises and Non-Profits
This can be best for movements prioritizing systemic change, organizations where partner choices signal values, and initiatives building collaborative social sector ecosystems. There are lots of challenges with social sector preference, such as limited service options, potential capacity constraints in smaller organizations, and sometimes higher costs than commercial alternatives. Social sector growth could mean trading efficiency and scale for mission alignment and mutual support. Values-aligned initiatives find it easier to build authentic partnerships, contribute to broader social sector strength, and demonstrate commitment to economic alternatives.
Social Enterprises and Non-Profits Doesn't Matter
This can be best for organizations prioritizing service quality, resource-constrained initiatives, and movements where optimal tools directly enhance beneficiary outcomes regardless of provider structure. There are lots of challenges with sector-agnostic approaches, such as potentially supporting profit-maximizing entities, missing opportunities for movement building, and staff concerns about supporting extractive business models. These challenges shouldn't stop us, but they need to be considered. Results-focused growth could mean trading ideological consistency for access to best-in-class solutions and competitive pricing. Performance-prioritized initiatives find it easier to access cutting-edge tools, benefit from market competition, and maximize impact through optimal resource allocation.
If you want to take a shortcut and use the 'Skip' buttons, these are the answers we set for you:
Skip and choose most ethical
Desired scale of growth: Local to my neighborhood / community,
Desired speed of growth: Slow growth,
Lifespan of initiative: 5 years,
Use digital tools for growth: No, only offline or in-person methods (Costly),
Climate impact of growth tools: Climate positive,
Using AI for growth: No AI,
Using growth tools that require low wage labor: No low-wage labor (Costly),
Using social media for growth: No social media (Limited reach),
Privacy protections of growth tools: I want very strong privacy provisions,
Ethics of growth tools: I want very strong ethical provisions,
Prefer open source tools: Only Open Source tools,
Diversity policies of growth tools: I want very strong diversity policies,
Prefer working with nonprofits: Only non-profits and social enterprises
Skip and choose moderate ethics
Desired scale of growth: National,
Desired speed of growth: Moderate growth,
Lifespan of initiative: 10 years,
Use digital tools for growth: Yes, include digital tools (Cheapest),
Climate impact of growth tools: Climate neutral,
Using AI for growth: Use AI as ethically as possible,
Using growth tools that require low wage labor: Cheapest (Use low-wage labor),
Using social media for growth: Use social media as ethically as is practical,
Privacy protections of growth tools: As much privacy as is practical,
Ethics of growth tools: As much ethics as is practical,
Prefer open source tools: Prefer Open Source,
Diversity policies of growth tools: Prefer good diversity policies,
Prefer working with nonprofits: Prefer non-profits and social enterprises
Skip and choose fastest growth
Desired scale of growth: Global,
Desired speed of growth: Fast growth,
Lifespan of initiative: Eternity itself,
Use digital tools for growth: Yes, include digital tools (Cheapest),
Climate impact of growth tools: Doesn't matter / Will change later (Climate negative),
Using AI for growth: Use AI with liberal abandon,
Using growth tools that require low wage labor: Cheapest (Use low-wage labor),
Using social media for growth: Use social media (Most reach),
Privacy protections of growth tools: Doesn't matter (No privacy provisions),
Ethics of growth tools: Doesn't matter (Low or no ethical provisions),
Prefer open source tools: Don't care,
Diversity policies of growth tools: Doesn't matter (Low or no diversity policies),
Prefer working with nonprofits: Don't care
