I'm confused. I'm confused because I don't seem to understand the meaning of anything anymore. In our space, terms get tossed around like baseballs at a little league game. Heck, we're not even sure what to call charities anymore. Are they charities? Registered charities? Non-profits? Not-for-profit organizations (NPOs)? Voluntary sector organizations? Or, my favourite, qualified donees? You get the picture. When we use different terms to describe the same thing, we might actually not even be speaking the same language. Using shared language creates a strong foundation for rich discussion. We face an even greater challenge in our world, where terms are often used interchangeably and sometimes mean very different things. Is community investment the same as corporate giving? How does corporate philanthropy differ from corporate citizenship? What about CSR, ESG, and NSYNC? (Wanted to see if you're paying attention). Do they all mean the same thing, or are we conflating one with the other? Does it matter, as long as the company is doing good and not causing harm? And then there's purpose, perhaps the most misunderstood word of all. Purpose-led, purpose-driven, purpose, purpose, purpose. What's the deal with purpose? We know that companies with a true social purpose have defined the very reason why they exist. A social purpose serves as a guiding light, informing business strategy and foundational decisions. But if a company doesn't have a social purpose, or is conflating purpose with other CSR-like activities, are we to dismiss them, or scoff at their intentions? The answer? Absolutely not. Movements have all kinds of members and the social purpose movement is no exception. At the top, a movement has its founders, zealots, and die-hard adherents. It also has strong believers who can serve as ambassadors or advocates. But I think that, with most movements, the majority of supporters are those who are neither die-hard nor overly zealous. They are interested, supportive, and ideologically aligned. They want to learn more. And in my view, a truly strong and sustainable movement does not require its members to abide strictly by its fundamental principles. In the purpose world, this means that its strongest adherents can serve as a beacon for those who want to learn and improve. It also means that its newer (and perhaps lesser) supporters can influence and shape the movement as it grows. Maybe that's the point. We spend so much time debating labels that we sometimes forget to bring more people into the conversation. I wonder if anyone is reading this. Do people read freeform articles anymore? Send me your World Series predictions at brad@greaterpurpose.inc . Will the Jays make it back in?

Brad noted in his opening remarks that conferences are strange and ephemeral. You pour your heart and soul into something for months, it happens, and then it's over, leaving behind a few hundred people changed in ways you can't fully account for, as well as a void. I've attended conferences over the years, but producing one is another thing entirely. The months leading up to Greater Purpose Conference West meant searching for speakers who represent genuinely diverse voices and experiences — not a box-checking exercise, but an actual attempt to put people on a stage who reflect the breadth of what purpose-driven work looks like (and we know we have more work to do here). You make calls, send emails, and you don't always know until the day of how it's going to come together. That uncertainty doesn't leave you, even when the agenda is set and you open the doors. Then you kind of disappear into it. Dashing to the bathroom between sessions. Mic check. Making sure speakers are present and ready. Grabbing half a meal standing up. I squeezed conversations in wherever I could and there were many missed connections. Producing this conference taught me something I suspect is true of most purpose-driven work: you don't always get to be fully present for the thing you're building. You catch it in glimpses. The change we're working toward rarely arrives on a visible timeline — you plant seeds in conversations, decisions, relationships, and trust they're taking root somewhere you can't yet see. As Rose Marcario said during our conversation: "you might not see the benefit of your labour, but you will be glad you laboured." Reading the messages that came in afterward — the LinkedIn posts, the survey responses, the notes from people who found the person they needed to meet — has been really gratifying. The top words from our attendee survey: Inspired and Connected. We hope you carry both forward and that we see you in Toronto in October, where the conversation will continue. P.S. The purpose economy movement is growing—and it needs your voice. If you haven't already, consider adding your name to A Call to Purpose —a commitment by Canadian business leaders to build a purpose economy. We also invite you to explore the Social Purpose Professional resource to learn steps for senior leaders to show up as social purpose amplifiers.

I'm sitting in a McDonald's drinking coffee, reflecting on the idea of business as a force for good. Is business inherently a negative force or a positive one? I can't decide, so like many tired coffee drinkers, I struggle to make a decision. I decide that it's neither. And the more that I think about it, the more I'm convinced that I'm right. Business can do harm. There are too many examples to argue otherwise. Who can forget the story of Enron and how its fraudulent practices left everyone who touched it – employees, suppliers, shareholders and customers – wondering how it could do such harm to so many. Business can also do good, as we've also seen. Think of Patagonia, a business that made a deliberate decision to become a force for good, not because it was required to, but because its leaders decided that was who they wanted to be. That choice didn't come from a board mandate or a shareholder resolution. It came from the top. And it changed everything about how that company showed up in the world. The question for me is a fundamental one. What causes a business to head in one direction or another? And what causes a business to languish somewhere in the murky middle, neither good nor bad, committing acts that both benefit and harm society. What is the force that drives the actions of a business? Businesses are, at their core, organizations. Large ones. Small ones. They come with structure — boards, C-suites, managers, line employees — and that structure grows more complex the bigger they get. But complexity isn't the point. The point is that every business, regardless of size or sector, is guided by leaders. And those leaders make decisions that determine its direction, its purpose, and how it shows up in the world. It's not the shareholders. It's often not the employees (although many businesses give their employees a stake in decision-making, often a good sign). In the case of Enron, the vast majority of shareholders and employees had no idea what was going on until it was too late. I have been in a leadership role in a large, public company and it's still my experience that most business decisions are myopic, rooted in self-interest and in the best interests of a small slice of stakeholders (generally senior executives and large shareholders). So how can this change? It starts at the top, when enlightened leaders recognize that their business exists to serve society, and that its own betterment is deeply tied into its commitment to becoming a force for good. Where I struggle, and where most purpose advocates frankly struggle, is the convincing part. How do we convince a business leader who believes that a social purpose need not be at the core of business? A leader who is comfortable making decisions that provide short-term financial gain at the expense of its employees, suppliers and community. Is this business leopard capable of changing its spots? In short, some are. But most likely, most are not. What we need is a new generation of values-based business leaders who understand that purpose drives profit, and does not undermine it. Leaders who understand that a healthy, just and robust society relies on its organizations and institutions (I'm obviously including government in this) to drive this forward.  Business as a force for good isn't just a nice concept. It is the foundation of a healthy society committed to positive outcomes for all who live within it.