How to bridge belonging in your narratives?

Farra Trompeter:: Welcome to the Smart Communications Podcast. This is Farra Trompeter, co-director and worker-owner at Big Duck. Today, we’re going to ask the question: How to bridge belonging in your narratives? And I’m delighted to be joined by Sadé Dozan. I had the pleasure of meeting Sadé officially at the Bridge Conference this past summer, 2025, but we have been in similar circles, connected on LinkedIn for a bit, and really excited for the conversation we’re about to have. Let me tell you a little bit about Sadé. Sadé uses she/her/ella pronouns and is vice president of advancement at Borealis Philanthropy, where she mobilizes transformative resources to grassroots movements, advancing justice and democracy. With 20 years of nonprofit leadership across housing, disability, education, health, and justice reform, she builds strategies to strengthen movements and philanthropic ecosystems. Founder of Melanate, she builds equity-centered ecosystems that reimagine philanthropy as a practice rooted in community and care. Sadé, welcome to the podcast.

Sadé Dozan:: Thank you. I’m really happy to be here. Talking about narratives is my jam, so let’s dig in.

Farra Trompeter:: Let’s get it jamming. Well, speaking of the jam, we’re going to start with the narratives themselves. How do you actually see the differences between narratives and stories? Because I often see and perhaps have often used those interchangeably at times in my career, and I’m curious how you differentiate them, if at all.

Sadé Dozan:: Yeah, we definitely throw those two words around, like they’re the same thing, and you know, they’re really not. But I think that as we build our sort of narrative infrastructure and learning, we’re going to start to see a distinction between the two. So I think about stories as building blocks. Those are the moments, the memories, the lived experiences that help us connect. Stories are what make something real and feel human. Narratives are the greater ecosystem, almost like the container that those stories live within. So narratives are the collective meaning that we assign to all those individual stories. And narrative is what tells us why something matters and what kind of world we’re actually trying to build by sharing that narrative. So the difference is a little subtle, but it’s quite powerful. You can tell a great story about impact or transformation, but if the narrative underneath it hasn’t actually shifted, many people may still move away from the storytelling with the same sort of assumptions that they started with. So yeah, I think in our sector, especially for me, in philanthropy and movement spaces, we sometimes treat storytelling as like an output. Like, “This is the last step. We have done it. We told the story.” But narrative is the full strategy. It’s how we decide what belongs, whose voices lead, what truth gets centered. So both matter, but they’re a little bit different.

Farra Trompeter:: That was really helpful, thank you. I’m going to stick with (I think is correct,) with stories––you’ll tell me in a minute. Over the years, I’ve seen how nonprofits, you know, really try to work on how they talk to grant makers, but oftentimes I see them using passive voice, using a lot of jargon, using long sentences. And they’re so used to talking to grantmakers that way that they often bring it into their day-to-day communications with their wider community. I don’t know if you see that too, but I’m curious if you do see that. And then, more so, how do we train our movement leaders to tell simpler stories and use plain language so we can activate more people?

Sadé Dozan:: Yeah. Oh gosh, so I have been a part of a couple different forms of fundraising and nonprofit work. So this one in particular is really close to my heart. This idea of how do we tell stories that are simple and understood, and not get caught up in the jargon? Philanthropy, at times, can be very academic, right? Like it lots of jargon, lots of SWOT analysis, and things like that. And often, nonprofits in an attempt to sort of appeal to donors will kind of just lean really heavily in, and they get really comfy in that space. What I will say is, you know, I grew up in organizing the first part of my career sat really at the blend between direct intervention and advocacy. So, really like community work and grasstop sort of directive work. So what ended up kind of happening is that I understood really quickly language can either build a bridge or a barrier.

Sadé Dozan:: Like I just said, “Grasstops directive work,” so if you don’t know that I’m talking about elected officials and state legislators, like, then that kind of can feel a little isolating. So what I would say is the first step in the sort of plain language journey is proximity. And not the performative kind, where we say that we’re close to an issue and in an effort to kind of buy a street cred, but one where you truly are grounded in what’s, like, real for your community. The language gets simpler and more direct and more human. Because when you’re not trying to impress anyone, and if that’s not the purpose of how you draft something, and if your initial drafting is for connection, then you are already more proximate to closer language that’s plainer.

Sadé Dozan:: So I think we also need to kind of do some unlearning, right? Like, complexity doesn’t equal credibility. If your message only makes sense to a handful of insiders, then it’s not necessarily the full, robust strategy that you need to build that belonging. And sometimes that language can then actually operate as a gatekeeping mechanism. So I believe that plain language is actually quite radical because given the current academic, deep levels of acronyms that we have in the nonprofit sector, that to make an idea accessible to everyone is beautiful and is actually quite hard. But what I like to say is that if your grandma, your 10-year-old, your funder, can all understand your mission in the same sentence, then you’re doing it right. So, try to test with different groups before you put something out publicly, and prioritize that you are looking to develop language and narratives that are serving to connect, not necessarily to impress. And that will also really help.

Sadé Dozan:: I think also, you know, a lot of this is cultural. We have our own sort of culture in the nonprofit ecosystem. Many of us, especially communications folks, we’re trained to think that professionalism really means polishing out our humanity, right? Like to really think about how formal language and formal communication strategies sound. Do we sound good? Then that will kind of elicit more respect, but belonging, when we think about true belonging, that move people and make them connect to your mission, that really lives in the places where people can recognize themselves in what you’re saying. So when I work with movement leaders, I tell them, “You know, when you’re editing, edit for meaning. What did you actually mean here? Not just like fancy words, like what did you really mean? And if you can say it simply, then you can bring more people with you”. And that’s really the goal of narrative work.

Farra Trompeter:: I love that. So, “Instead of impress, try to include” is my big takeaway from that.

Sadé Dozan:: Absolutely.

Farra Trompeter:: Well, let’s stick more with this idea, and I just want to sort of go down a level into the idea of belonging itself. What comes to mind for you when we talk about belonging?

Sadé Dozan:: When I think about belonging, I think about the moment when someone doesn’t have to shrink or translate, either to be understood or to understand someone else. When we can have transparent conversations where someone understands our purpose, our intent, that is really the building block for belonging. We can’t really move people with us or build anything together if it doesn’t feel like we kind of fit with each other. So what belonging does is it asks us for kind of openness and vulnerability in our storytelling. Really like a willingness to be seen honestly, and to also see others quite fully. And that for some folks––I guess I’m talking to like my nonprofit development/ comms, folks like that, those folks really––that really doesn’t mean that we’re performing poverty or exposing trauma is the only legitimate way to move people. I find that we often fall into that pattern, especially in the nonprofit sector, when urgency kind of sets in and we’re trying to prove the worthiness of our work.

Sadé Dozan:: But really, belonging isn’t about proving pain, it’s about revealing connection. So we often confuse inclusion with belonging. Inclusion is being invited into a room that’s already been built, but belonging is when you help to build the room. So that level isn’t just, like, emotional. There’s a level of structural work that’s needed. When we think about the process of when we bring in community. Say, like, early campaigns language. If you are working in a direct service organization and you have youth and families that you’re working with, how many of them were a part of the initial concept for your campaigns? How many of them were a part of even how we name and brand something? So when you think about it again, like building those levels, those bridges of belongings, it has to be embedded in every choice that we make, the language that we use, who gets to tell the story, who appears in it, how we plan our editorial calendars, how we brief our designers, what stories get elevated, all of that. Those are all the sort of decisions that are the architecture of belonging. So yeah, I would say when we treat belonging as infrastructure, we then create the conditions for people to recognize themselves and each other in a story. And, that’s what gets us towards the progress.

Farra Trompeter:: I love how you really just brought it down a level and made it concrete for folks. I always try to do that in these conversations. That was great. And I’m going to sort of bring us down even another level here, or we’re taking the elevator down, I guess, I don’t know what’s happening. I’ve lost myself in this conversation, but I want to bring it down to the ground floor here. I guess that’s where we’re going, with some real examples of how you’ve seen organizations or people do this well. Have you seen times when people have been able to effectively bridge belonging in their narratives? Because I always find that stories (I should use “stories”!) of people doing this work helps people really wrap their minds around it and imagine how they can do it themselves. So I think you started to do that in your answer to the last question. But again, just sort of with that prompt, I’m curious if there’s any organizations or folks that come to mind that you’ve seen do this well,

Sadé Dozan:: Yeah. And you’re using stories right!

Farra Trompeter:: Okay, good, thank God!,

Sadé Dozan:: The stories, the examples, the moments, the memories. You know, think about stories as like the micro and narrative as like the macro. Like the larger arc.

Farra Trompeter:: Exactly.

Sadé Dozan:: So this kind of narrative work isn’t just about single campaigns or great storytellers, like it’s about the infrastructure underneath. And I define narrative infrastructure as the systems, the networks, the practices, the trusted messengers that actually make this sort of belonging possible. So, putting on my Borealis hat for a second, I will say that we see that across a lot of our grantee partners. So there are organizations like Documented, which has a newsroom that produces multilingual content, and it’s by and for immigrant communities and trains others to launch similar local information hubs. So like that’s the trainer, and then like the training the trainer sort of model, right? Like that’s a really good example of what narrative infrastructure looks like when it’s community-owned.

Sadé Dozan:: And then you’ve got folks like Bold Futures out in New Mexico who think about belonging as a part of public square through culture. This idea of they have these Spanish-language billboards that read like “We celebrate you in all of your decisions.” And that’s like a narrative affirmation where people can actually see themselves reflected in a public space. So sometimes belonging is about visibility, sometimes belonging is about sharing information. You know, there’s also this idea around belonging as a part of across movements, right? Like the bridging. So there’s storytellers like TransLash Media, and then Keri Gray Group, and they actually do things like connect trans safety, disability justice, economic equity across sectors, which remind us that belonging has to be systemic. Like we have to build bridges unto ourselves as well. So, you know, and then beyond Borealis, like there’s like all these like incredible narrative hubs that are doing connective work. We’ve got Frameworks Institute, which grounds messaging in cognitive research, which again, the idea of sharing data and language is really critical as we (1) form belonging connection with ourselves, but also as we think about how to share tools that help us develop stronger practices.

Sadé Dozan:: So there’s also this international database, The Commons has like this narrative change hub, and they do like a collection of practical tools and case studies from movement communications, like all around the world. So part of it is also making sure that we are challenging the idea of localized perspectives only, and thinking about larger global perspectives as a part of our belonging strategies as well. So, you know, through shared data, shared language, shared capacity, those are sort of the narrative infrastructure hubs that need to be resourced far more robustly than they are because they’re the scaffolding that kind of helps all of our stories hold. So yeah.

Farra Trompeter:: That was really helpful, and we’ll link to all of those organizations and resources you mentioned in the transcript of this podcast at bigduck.com/insights. We’ll also link to, shout out to FrameWorks. We had a great conversation with those folks back on episode 168. How can framing inform your strategy? So people should check that out if they haven’t heard that or re-listen to it because I think it’s a nice bridge to this as well as several other conversations we’ve had that we’ll connect in the transcript. So yeah, thanks for all of that. Well, Sadé, before we go, do you have a few tips? One, two, however many come to mind for folks who are listening and want to just start today. Where can they start with putting these ideas into practice, or maybe tomorrow, depending on when they’re listening to this?

Sadé Dozan:: Yeah, I have, I have so many tips. Let me try to narrow it down. First. I would say: Start with a language audit, right? Like, how do you know what stories you’re telling and how they’re building into the narrative arcs? If you don’t actually like, pull up your website, pull up your last email blast. Ask yourself, who is this written for? Who might feel left out? If it sounds like it’s written for a funder or policy audience, try rewriting it in different voices. Try rewriting it for the people that you are actually serving, the people that those policies are surrounding. Belonging, really, to start with, like words that people can find themselves in. So start with an audit.

Sadé Dozan:: And then I would really say, you know, belonging is iterative. I think that that’s something that we need to accept, that you will not get it perfect, and you don’t have to. But when you communicate honestly about what you’re learning, people then feel permission to grow with you. John Powell teaches that through The Othering and Belonging Institute, belonging isn’t passive; it’s active. It asks us to expand who we are. Like, “Who is the we?” So part of this work is also stretching your audience. You build trust, you build the sort of like access to insight, and then you kind of gently pull them towards a deeper horizon of understanding, while staying rooted in care and the truth. So you start with where you are, through that audit. You stay rooted by centering people that are proximate to the work and making sure that the language invites them into the work. And then you are always going to keep reaching for that wider “we”. This idea of like, we build belonging, kind of like each sentence, each story at a time, and invite more folks in.

Farra Trompeter:: I really like that. And I’m thinking with the language audit, you know, go a step further and look at images too. I think you’re right to start with words, and that might be the easier place to start. But I would also look at the images that you’re using when you’re looking at your website or those email blasts or anything you’re examining, and also saying, “Who’s being depicted here? Did they give consent for all the uses we’re using? Do they look like they’re coming from a place of dignity and pride? Or as you said earlier, are we depicting folks from a place of negativity and trauma?” So that’s also part of I think what folks can do as they’re taking steps in this place.

Sadé Dozan:: Absolutely. When I think about words, I think about them from like clarity, tone, and jargon, right? Like clarity, tone, jargon, voice accessibility, like those are kind of the things I think about. And then in visuals, I think about definitely representation. I even think about authorship, like “Who took these photos and for what purpose? Like, were the subjects informed? Were they consenting?” Like those type of things are also really important. And then also the context of the photos. Are your visuals reinforcing stereotypes? So I think about those as, as kind of, yeah, like the audit and how the words and the images kind of intersect. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Farra Trompeter:: Yeah. We’re thinking about it all together here. Well, if you’ve been intrigued by this conversation, as I hope you have, and you’d like to learn more about Sadé’s work, visit BorealisPhilanthropy.org. You can also follow her on LinkedIn and learn more about the organization she founded at Melanate.org. Sadé, any last thoughts you’d like to share before we wrap things up?

Sadé Dozan:: Yeah, I mean, definitely follow and engage with me on LinkedIn. It’s definitely my little like, micro ecosystem of narrative work and belonging in real life. I laugh because I really want to use the word pedagogy. Like “I strive to model the pedagogy of my practice.” Really, I’m saying like “I live the talk”. Like I say things plainly, and if people don’t understand, I say it in four different ways. Because it’s on me to make sure that I’m effectively communicating so that people feel brought into the greater “we” that I’m building. So yeah, and I’m around. DM me. Like, I believe in shared conversations and open spaces. I believe that we need to carry these conversations into our teams and our campaigns, and even our family group chats. Like, we need to really integrate this plain language that builds belonging into a culture where we’re having courageous conversations where people can truly engage. So, thank you so much.

Farra Trompeter:: You really have lived the talk, and I would say you live the talk. I did connect with you on LinkedIn. I follow your posts. I mean, this is all true. You really do live it, and I love that. So thank you for doing that, living by example and giving us so many clear, simple things to think about in this conversation.

Sadé Dozan:: Thank you.

Farra Trompeter:: Alright, everyone, get out there and make that language and those images and everything more accessible and more connective and center belonging. Take care.