Accountability to crisis affected populations is high on the humanitarian policy agenda. Alex Ross, Avianto Amri and Robert Wambu work with a new accountability project called Talk to Loop. In this conversation with Lars Peter Nissen they explain how their tech platform improves the way the humanitarian sector works with feed back mechanisms and accountability, the disruptive potential of the project and how to position it vis-à-vis the existing humanitarian architecture.

It has been a while since we last published an episode. My day job with ACAPS has kept me extremely busy, but I hope that you have spent the time catching up on old episodes. Now we're back and have interesting conversations lined up for you, the first with TalktoLoop. TalktoLoop is a new project in the accountability space. And my guests, Alex Ross, Avianto Amri and Robert Wambu, together work on providing a tech platform that enable humanitarian actors to collectively work with feedback in a better way. Alex leads the project globally, Avianto in Indonesia and Robert in Somalia. Now, if you ask me whether Talk2Loop is going to disrupt the accountability space and make us more accountable as an industry, the answer is I don't know. I think it's too early to say yet. What I do know is that the project has a really interesting approach and is off to a good start. Ultimately, its impact will depend on the ability to learn and evolve. You'll hear interesting discussions towards the end of the conversation where we talk about the disruptive potential and how to best position a project like Loop within the humanitarian architecture. I should mention that when we recorded, Alex Robert and Avianto were scattered across the globe in Somalia, Indonesia, and the UK and the sound quality is not always the best. I hope that doesn't detract too much from your listening experience. As always, you can help us out by making noise on social media. We like all kinds of feedback, positive and negative. It would also be great if you could recommend the show to your friends and colleagues, but as always, the most important thing is enjoy the conversation.

Alex Ross, Robert Wambu and Avianto Amri. Welcome to Truemanitarian. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Pleasure to be here. Alex, you're in London, Robert, you're in Mogadishu and Avianto, you're in Jakarta and what the three of you have in common is that you work with a new organization called Talk to Loop. And let's begin with that. Alex, what is Talk to Loop? Where did the idea come from and what do you do?

So the problem has been identified since 2005. It's not a new problem about accountability and local people being at the centre of humanitarian response. Many different approaches have been trialed since then, they've been stronger and a growing commitment and interest around accountability, what's now called accountability to affected populations.

So, Loop isn't a new idea and it's not a silver bullet by any stretch of the imagination. But rather it's an opportunity that we've got as a result of the technological revolution. So, five years ago, I don't think we could have used a tool like Loop and then another five years I think we'll be able to do and reach a whole lot further through the technology that's being developed in the private sector that we're then kind of cutting and pasting to be appropriate for helping in humanitarian response but also development in other areas.

And how would you describe that core technology?

Yeah, so what is it? It's designed to cross the language and literacy barriers. So at the moment it's available in 15 different languages and three different scripts, but the core technology is built in a way to have over 100 languages and to cater for every script. It crosses the literacy barriers, so people can input into Loop through a mechanism and on a device that they can already get access to in a way that they're used to. So in Indonesia, for example, lots of people use WhatsApp. So they can input into Loop using WhatsApp. In the Philippines, they like Facebook Messenger, they use the Lo-Fi technology there. They can input. In Somalia, however, obviously, illiteracy is higher and they prefer to use voice. So we've got this interactive voice where they can choose their language that they feel comfortable communicating in and leave voice messages about what's important to them. And then we can close that message back with them with voice in their chosen language. So it kind of integrates across different languages and different input channels to enable people to communicate openly and safely with each other.

So your platform goes to the channel where people already operate, be that WhatsApp or voice or messaging. It's able to do stuff with languages so that we can participate more broadly. But what is it that people do with this platform? What's the use case?

Anybody can feed back about what's important to them at any time. And so we can see, for example, in the Philippines, people have been using it in a sudden onset emergency saying something's coming. There's a crisis coming, prepare yourself, then they can use it to say, I'm in this situation, there's 10 people on the house over there, we need help, or thank you for the food that we just got from the shelter, now we need X, Y, and Z on into recovery. They've also been using it for election preparedness discussions. In Somalia, a lot of it is through voice. Thank you for the cash, I thought it was gonna arrive yesterday, we haven't received it yet, asking information that they'll be communicating within the communities anyway and helping to get that to tagging in organizations that can respond to them. So that's people on and off beneficiary lists. Organizations can proactively ask people to use and to feedback through Loop as part of their border M&E or feedback mechanisms. But sometimes we see people also feeding back on Loop because it's independent and they can anonymize themselves with technology. So reporting things like fraud or sexual exploitation, gender-based violence, et cetera. So it's a really, the idea is that it's based around what a local person wants to say, and then how can we get that to people who can help and support them.

So essentially it's a platform that lowers the barriers for recipients of humanitarian aid to speak to the people who provide it and for the people who provide it to respond to them directly.

And for the people who provide it to respond to them directly.

Let's maybe jump to Somalia and Robert, tell us about Talk2Loop in Somalia. How many are you? What do you do? How many people do you engage with?

Well, we got into the actual Loop about two years ago. And at that time, it was essential because we have had this space where we've been working on feedback mechanisms. A lot of them are traditional feedback mechanisms that basically have served their time. And we thought with the new technology, we hadn't upgraded the way we were receiving the feedback from the communities. And as this situation and the humanitarian world became even more aware of trying to ensure that the feedback from the beneficiaries was critical in both supporting the implementation of various projects and ensuring accountability, especially for the actions.

And just like Alex has mentioned them, it goes all the way even to issues on protection. I think therefore then we have always relied on the more traditional kind of ways into getting the feedback from communities. And when you talk of feedback, we are talking of two-way kind of communication. They have to know from our end. Of course, it's not easy like Alex has mentioned because the actualness and mainly the realization of course was always that the traditional mechanisms were not going to serve in the new ways that we were thinking of trying to ensure the feedback from communities.

So when you say we, Robert, who are we? Yeah, we have a consortium of organizations called Nexus specifically.

So we are about two international organizations and seven local organizations. And why we came together as a consortium just to again, interpret another way of delivery of humanitarian aid that we call it the Nexus. And that's basically taking the humanitarian, taking the development and also advancing peace. So linking those three together.

You are seven local organizations, you are two international organizations. You come together, you say, we don't see the difference between working on peace, development and humanitarian. It's the same people we want to work holistically. And the feedback mechanisms we have don't really work. So let's go with Loop. So, I have two questions there. One is what was missing in the other feedback mechanisms and what is it that Loop does that the others didn't?

What was missing is the reach you have in the traditional systems. Basically, the systems will require you to have a face-to-face, you know, what you call, focus group discussion with beneficiaries. You can have a system where you have your suggestion box somewhere outside the organization or within the administrative capital where people can comment. You can have a telephone system, you know, a dedicated phone system where you give out the number and they can always call you and raise and respond and report to you. And so these are the kind of mechanisms that when you look at them, they have always been, they require you to either prompt them or be there physically for them to work. I mean, from face to face, you must be in the field. And basically, there are many, many challenges if you look at it logistically. I've always pointed out that Somalia, if you look at the expanse, the land mass in Somalia is quite, quite huge. If you, I have trouble to look for, I mean to monitor projects. On a single day, 200 kilometers one way.

And I'm not talking of two projects, I'm talking of one project. 200 one way and 200 back.

Thanks Robert. Avianto, if we look at how things are in Indonesia, are you also a consortium of organizations using this software Talk2Loop, or how is it set up there?

Thank you very much Lars. So, Loop in Indonesia is being operated by a social enterprise called Predict, which I am the CEO of. And we have a steering committee which comprises of a number of international and international organizations, consists of UNICEF, WHO, UNFPA, Plan International, the Indonesian Society for Disaster Management, and IOM.

So, basically, Predict is running the platforms and tools, and we promote the use of it among human organizations, as well as inform the communities. But we are in close coordination with our steering board.

And for you, what has been the biggest value add of Talk2Loop? What can you do now that you couldn't do before?

From our experience, we had one where we have this volcano eruption that happens a few in early this year. And then we visited the communities and used Loop to ask their stories, what experience that they have, what do they feel, and what... So we gather around 400 stories coming from 400 peoples and what we found is really interesting on how the existing and the current interventions impacting their lives. And the specific that I'm talking about is where they are being relocated from their previous areas into a new complex. And we've seen concerns coming from them, hopes and expectations, etc. And what's unique from coming from Loop is that because it's digitalized, it's easy to record. The people themselves, they can use their own language, they can share their own stories. And then for us, analyzing 400 stories using Loop is really easy, and we can easily analyze and see what types of concerns that the people have, what kind of expectations, and what kind of feedbacks that are coming from the communities.

Now, Alex, we've heard two examples here from Somalia and from Indonesia around how Talk2Loop is used. And you are the director or CEO of Talk2Loop at the global level. How many countries have you deployed the solution to?

So we're in six different countries and it's adapted and contextualized in every country, so different languages, different input channels that different communities within those countries use. It's always hosted by what we call a charitable franchise, so an organization that's already trusted and well embedded and part of the national ecosystem invites Loop to the country and hosts it on behalf of the other actors that are there, both international and national, civil society, government authorities, et cetera. So, they're providing like a global public good for their national context and that looks very, very different in every context. So at the moment in Indonesia, Somalia, the Philippines, Zambia, Ukraine and Poland.

Yeah, they are very different countries, obviously, and faced with very different situations. But what can you see from your position in terms of the similarities and the differences in the way in which the way in which Loop adds value in these contexts?

So we're starting to see different types of... So, the first part is that it looks very different in every context. So you might say, well, Loop is just a technological solution that's cut and copy paste from the top down and that's not really locally owned, accountable, et cetera. But based on the structure that we've set up with it being locally owned and operated, what I hadn't expected when starting out is how different it would look in every country and how that is a positive aspect of being able to be adapted. The other thing that we're seeing is different uses. So host organizations are advertising it differently.

They're getting different types of actors on board and they're hearing different things back. And the other thing is how that changes over time. So in one country, you can start to map the different types of things that are important to different communities over time. So we're still very small scale, but we're starting to see patterns of...patterns of clusters of red flags, for example, around where there's certain issues that are happening, beneficiary list manipulation, or gender-based violence that are coming out that are quite anonymized and at the aggregate level, you can start to pick out a picture that you wouldn't have been able to action on before by an individual piece of feedback. The other thing that we're seeing is stories coming through that aren't necessarily about what the organizations are being, that's not their area of responsibility. So people who are off beneficiary lists, for example, and what their priorities are or on beneficiary lists, but actually wanting something a little bit different to what's being delivered to them. And just as with most feedback, over 65% of it is positive, saying, thank you, this has changed my life, this is great. So it's not all about complaints. You know, negative reports. There are a lot of lovely, very heartwarming stories on there as well.

That is an incredibly important point to remember also, of course.

Maybe I can ask Avianto, now Alex mentioned that sometimes you through Loop see things you did not know. What were some, what are some of the things that have surprised you about the feedback you're getting?

One of the things that is unique as well about Loop is that it's not agency specific. It's more neutral and it's, it's available anytime, anywhere. So meaning that it doesn't have to be specific to when the project is being implemented. So even after the project has been finished, they can still share the stories through Loop. And the interesting things that we come up from the Lumajang response is, I think one of the, the one thing that we usually thought the most challenging things on relocation is about livelihoods and where people are being relocated the concern is how they can make a decent income. But apparently, there's a lot of also interesting stories about concerns about their children's wellbeing. There's some stories saying that, right now my children's school is far away, so I have to pay more to transport them every day for them to go to the same school. And then it's becoming a bit longer days on them. And then also they can they cannot farm again in their newly complex when before they have a more wide space for farming in their gardens. So those things is really interesting for me. And it's not just about the perspective coming from the adults, but also about that children are also being impacted with their locations and that's just one of the sample that we got.

So those are really good examples of insights coming out from Loop. We talk about this being a two-way communication, so of course it's interesting to know what do the organizations then do differently when they get this information? What do they actually do when they're told, oh, you know, I have to pay so much for school transport that I can't afford something else? What's the reaction?

Well, the interesting thing is this is a government-led project, so in Indonesia, a feedback mechanism for the government is not really that perceptive, but it is a work in progress. We are very pleased that we have Loop and we are able to capture the stories and then we communicate those feedback to the government, especially the central government on that. It is something that we are still advocating, for the particular relocation projects. And also we see these days that in Indonesia, with the number of disasters kept increasing, the government from the local to all the way to the central government, they are now being more receptive or more promoting relocations for people to go to the safer area. But meanwhile, we know that a lot of relocation projects didn't work well. There's a lot of issues, there's a lot of concerns that's not just happening during the education process but also right after even a year, two years after that. So these are an ongoing advocacy and also efforts from us but also we are getting a lot of positive support coming from the non-government side as well. So with this data coming from the Lumajang, we're able to build a group or coalitions of NGOs that have, so we can amplify our forces and raise our concerns to the governments.

In terms of scale, you say you have 400 stories from this volcano operation. How many beneficiaries, no, how many people received assistance for that operation? So in other words, how per thousand recipients, how many stories do you get?

Well, the total families that have been relocated is about 2000 families, and we were able to get that 400 stories. But in terms of scale in Indonesia, there's so many humanitarian actors on the ground, and there’s so many numbers of disasters that kept increasing. What's our concern is now with the increasing number of disasters. There's a lot of new organizations there is a lot of organizations who are formed because of that humanitarian situations or there are organizations who are forced to respond to the humanitarian situation. And these are organizations that may not know about humanitarian standards, the humanitarian principles, etc. So this is our way to reach out, saying to the communities that you have a tool to raise your concerns or your voices and your stories. And also with this new organizations or other organizations to say that you don't need to make their own systems. There are already tools that you can readily use. And then we are here to support you.

And I must say 400 stories out of a group of 2000 families. That's a lot. You must have, I think you have quite a good sample there and must be able to, to have a fairly strong feel for what actually is going on with, with the people who were relocated.

Yes. Well, we're, we're quite convinced with the number of stories that we collected represent the views of the people there. We are also working with the local volunteers as well, in trying to have them to share their stories.

But it is not an easy task to convince local governments, and also with the southern governments. What's interesting as well these days is government these days, I can say for Indonesia, they prefer speed. So,I think the concerns are genuine that they want to help the people, but they really want to have a speedy response, but the quality is sometimes lacking or questionable. So that's our concern.

And when you come and show them feedback that is not all positive, what do you get? You get a sort of defensive pushback or do they go, oh, that's interesting, we didn't know that. How do the local government actually react?

What's interesting is some people in the government are also aware of that, but they do not want to raise that publicly. And I still have a lot of confidence or optimism that people in Indonesia do have good intentions, they want to really help people, but they're being forced to speed up their response, right? So, behind the scenes, they're very happy with us, they're okay, but they cannot show that publicly saying that, oh, we did something wrong. So we are working with them and we try to see how we can make it better. If not for this response, at least for future responses, because in Indonesia, disasters is not a question of if it's a when are you going to have the next disasters.

So at the global level, Alex, what can you see in terms of the way organizations respond to the stories coming from the communities?

So some examples at the country level is that in the Philippines they use the data of people after the cyclone and the needs that they had to pull together a program proposal to get funding to respond to the specific needs and how they changed over time. So that's definitely on a very practical project-to-project level. On an individual to individual level, we see that people are using Loop to get around systems that are failing them. So if they've reported something in, something sensitive in through a route that they knew about and they haven't received a reply, then they've gone around that to an independent actor like Loop and then we've been able to advocate on their behalf or take it to other actors that maybe they couldn't get access to because of language or other barriers for them. But then I think at the global level we're still too early. So it's quite a new concept.

We need to be able to get more data in to be able to show sort of country level or larger systemic wide issues. But because the data is open, the statistics page is there, it's in real time, it's updated, you can filter it. There is potential for that to happen and we can start to see that at the country level like these clusters of stories and different types of changes going along.

So Robert said his system's down, he's coming back.

So Alex, you mentioned earlier that for the past 15, 20 years, there's been a lot of focus on accountability, on a more active feedback Loop, and there's been a number of different initiatives. I know a number of different organizations who work in this space, who ground to solutions, CDAC, Internews, yourselves. I'm sure there's some I forget. BBC Media Action, you could argue, is somehow also involved in this space. How do you fit in?

So I see Loop as complementary. There's a lot of this talk and commitment because we're not getting enough accountability, enough voices up at the right levels, at the right times to inform humanitarian action and to keep people safe and to be accountable to the people we're here to serve. So I would like to see a day when all of these systems are working together to ensure that outcome. So for example, Ground Truth Solutions, at the end of their focus group discussions could be letting people know if you've got anything else that you want to say that wasn't discussed or that you didn't feel safe discussing in this forum, you can feedback to us directly through Loop or we can get it to the other actors through Loop or reach in their surveys or on the BBC Media Actions radio conversations or any sort of public broadcasts, it can be added on as an additional– This is a common collective service. It's a tool that anybody can use to do their work better and to reach further. And then we'll try to respond to that and use that collective data to inform decisions. You can go back and see the qualitative actual stories, which makes advocacy policy influencing a lot stronger. Because it's independent, you know, the data is just sitting there and can be used to inform things. So, this is something that can help organisations who are so committed to this already, just to reach further across barriers. So say for example, some organisations which are well committed, have already built their own systems. Maybe they don't have it in a certain language that we do. Maybe they have it for people who are connected to the internet, but not people who are using voice. And we can help them just to extend further and gather that data and integrate it into their existing systems already. Or maybe people don't feel safe to feedback directly to them about something sensitive, or they've got feedback about another actor that's not directly linked to their programs or their activities, etc.

And so far, how far have you gotten in terms of building these collaborative partnerships with the other actors in the space? Do you meet on a regular basis? How does that play out concretely?

Yeah, I think at the moment a lot of it's about discussions, about awareness, understanding each other's work, trying to find opportunities. Where we're in the same country trying to reach further. We've got Tanya from the Core Humanitarian Standards. She's on our advisory board. So we're looking at how can we link that into the self-verification processes. Yeah, I think there's a long, long way to go of all of us being better connected and providing a more cohesive service and hopefully we can be a strong part of that.

And what is it you can use the others for? How can their data be useful and productive for Loop? Because what you mentioned is how they can use Loop for different things, but what can you use them for?

So I think those examples is about they can help to promote Loop and the data that they're getting in, they can use to inform the different things that they're talking about. So for example, if you're talking about the radio, so Internews for example might be doing a broadcast or might be talking about a specific issue and can ask people to feedback through Loop, then you can analyze that data or you can already get onto Loop statistics page and see what are the types of things that people are asking, what are some common questions or misinformation or queries or concerns that people and then design a program specifically around that to respond to those. I think it's definitely a two-way in all cases. Loop isn't delivering a service, it's not providing assistance, we're just there to help be a tool for others to use and build off that data.

So, Robert, could you give us an example from Somalia of how the organizations working with Loop have taken the information you get from the people feeding in the information and change something about what they do.

That's interesting because like Alex mentioned some time ago, there has been a lot of information that basically comes from the field and comes from the beneficiary. Some of it of course might not be what you're really into. But again, a lot of it into what you're really into. I think one good example is of course the way Somalia now is experiencing its fifth season of rain failure. And the challenge that has come with that is that it is completely unprecedented. And we could be headed for famine as they say by next year. Now once we look at the information that we are receiving from the field, you can be able to quantify, like Avianto also, I noted what Avianto said, the stories coming in will directly, probably to what you think are the needs-based, you know, the kind of needs-based response. Because then the people are very clear on what it is that they are facing. A lot of Somalis, of course, it's a pastoralist economy. So, you will have water, water is a major issue because of livestock. And a lot of displacements, of course, because of the drought. And we have had what we are calling triple nexus. When you look back from 2020, we had the COVID and over to what you say the desert locusts. For the first time, the desert locusts invaded the country. For almost like 25 years, we haven't had desert locusts. And then immediately after that, now we have got this prolonged drought, which is now turning into a famine.

Yeah, I think that what you describe here is a very different use case as compared to listening to feedback from people who have received assistance saying, this was good, this was not so good. The issue of how you actually determine people's preferences, quantify that, and how that then feeds into an institutional response from the humanitarian community.

For me, that's a very different use case. So, assessment is different from listening to feedback. And I would, when I look at your solution, I'm maybe a bit skeptical. And maybe it's because I've worked with ACAPS where we are very focused on assessment and stuff like that, but where I can understand the value added on the feedback side of things, I think the assessment and actually understanding whether what you get is representative and how it links to other factors and other sorts of data. That's a very big and very complex piece. And I would probably want to dig into that a little bit more before I'm convinced that Talk2Loop has its strength in that area.

But maybe I'm too critical.

If I may, from my perspective, I think it's just an indicator. So it's giving direction that can then be looked into further with representative data that's collected specifically for that purpose and has some strengths.

So it's, it is, there are biases in who is feeding back or knows about it, et cetera. And do you get the sufficient numbers, but it can definitely be used to give some direction.

Yeah, that I agree with, right? I think you can use it for something. I think you can use it to flag things that have been overlooked. I think you can maybe use it for some kind of trend, but it's, it's mainly red flags and maybe trends. I think that you will be able to see. I just think we have to be very careful because, for me, one of the, for me, one of the downsides of these tech platforms is they look so clean, they look so perfect, but sometimes if the data is not representative, they can be very deceptive. Maybe I can jump back to you, Alex. So you've been working with Loop for a couple of years. You have deployed in six locations now. What does the future look like? Are you trying to scale globally? Are you trying to deepen your commitment where you are? What's the thinking?

So while we've been designing it for two years, it's been deployed in Zambia and the Philippines for one year, in Somalia only for a few months. So we're really, it's quite early days yet. We really want to go deeper and broader in every context that we're in, to get that broader buy-in, to use the data at scale and how that can have an impact. We're looking for impact at the individual exchanges to keep people safe, get what they need, greater accountability. The impact at projects and program level to make sure that as a sector we're accountable in delivering what people need and require in the most effective and efficient way, and system-wide trends and analysis to help inform some of these really broad sector-wide discussions and debates that are going on. But we're a long way away from that and it's not a silver bullet on its own. So first we want to go deep and broad in the context and then see where there's other organizations that invite us to come to their countries to work within the ecosystem that's already there to use that impact elsewhere. We've built the technology so that it can grow significantly and be a sort of sector-wide global good that can help to cut across many different areas, both sudden onset and then once we're in a country, we like to, the idea is to stay and be a permanent part of that ecosystem.

And so if we look five years down the road, what does success look like for Loop?

Success looks like Loop is integrated into every humanitarian, large-scale humanitarian response. The voices of local people are being used at the planning stages, in cluster meetings to inform priorities and decisions going forward. People, the SEA, reports are significantly larger, sexual exploitation and abuse, so people know that that's a safe way. And we can use that to prevent further violence and abuse and exploitation of local people while it's happening, rather than hear about it two years later and do something as a sector to come in and address those issues. The idea is to be integrated.

Avianto, what's next for you in Indonesia? What are you going to do with Loop in the coming two years?

0041:16 Avianto Amri

Well, we hope that Look can be one of the preferred ways of feedback mechanisms. We are not aiming for single tools or single mechanisms for feedback, but we want to have Look as a preferred one. We've seen that digital technology has been quite popular these days, not just among the young but also with the rest of the community. So we hope that we can reach more. We hope that organizations can accept and use Loop so that they can improve their programming. They see it as not a threatening tools where they see a feedback mechanism, but as a way to improve their programs. They see that failure can do happen or challenges do exist, but then there are ways to improve programs. And the last is also having feedback on the response operations also recognize that maybe there will not be one single agency that can solve everything so that this feedback can encourage organizations to look to with the other organizations to foster more partnerships, open up more collaborations and then see how they can work together or how we can work together to solve the issues in the field.

And if we think in terms of volume, what's your dream scenario in terms of how many messages you receive every month and how many messages organizations send back to beneficiaries? Is it two times what you have today? Is it five times? Or are you actually pretty close to where you are?

0043:10 Avianto Amri

I don't see it as... Maybe I'm a bit different. So, I don't see the number of stories as the targets, but I see that in Indonesia we need to have mechanisms where we can scale up easily, and also maybe scaling down as well as needed, because we have lots of small-scale emergencies and also many big ones as well. So in times of like for this earthquake response, if there are a lot of stories coming in then we can expand and we can recruit volunteers and moderators to moderate the stories and then when things come down we can also scale back and adjust. So I think it's more of an adaptable model compared to targeting numbers.

Robert, if we think about Somalia, what's next for you and Loop? What will you focus on for the next two years? Interesting. I'm in agreement, obviously, with what Alex and Avianto have said. But just to add on to the fact that Somalia is in a very unique scenario because it's the only country that is transitioning, in this case, from conflict to stabilization. And obviously the power balance is constantly changing in this scenario because previously the strong clans, Somalia operates on a clan basis, and the strong clans always have the say when it comes to resource sharing and that impacted very negatively on the majority of the minorities. And this is actually a case where the minorities at times might be even the majority in some locations.

But because they nationally they are the minorities, then they will be, they will again be consigned to, you know, being the kind of second-class citizens in this scenario. So this is a tool then that causes an imbalance or provides an opportunity for the minorities, the marginalized, to put their voices, because they have the tool. They cannot be invited to meetings and critical decisions making meetings where the powerful clans reside, but they can use their tool to project their voice into the platform that informs the broader decision.

So I think, Robert, you spoke very powerfully about disruption and how we need to change the drive power towards the people we serve and fundamentally reshape the way we do business. Now, in my experience, no matter how good your tool is, that doesn't just auto-generate. I think that is a struggle. And so I think Alex, the million-dollar question to you is, you outlined your vision for what Talk2Loop should be in the future. What's your strategy for actually achieving that? How are you going to be a disruptor at the global level?

I don't think– Loop is a tool that can be used by actors who want to disrupt a system or who want to raise the voices of local people to give them greater impact. It's not about Loop doing its own thing. And that's why we've got the structure that we've got. And that's why we're trying to raise the voices of local people, what's important to them. And so, I mean, the real question is, the system, does it want to be accountable? And how will it respond to those voices?

I will push you a bit on that because I think we have many people within the system who do genuinely want to be more accountable. I also think we operate under a perverse incentive structure. That means that a lot of the institutions in the business find it difficult to change their behavior to become more accountable. So my question is how will you position Talk2Loop so that you maximize the disruptive potential of the platform?

I think the way we've positioned it is within a collective. So it's not about Loop disrupting something and therefore putting itself at risk. It's about Loop being available to be at wherever the system or the actors or the local population are and how they can use that to get to the next place and the next step.

And in one country, that will be one type of approach. Avianto was talking about government-run systems and structures. Robert was talking about the political changes and the humanitarian system. And in Zambia, it's very different. A lot of it's about gender-based violence and how is it used there. To me, it's not about Loop. Loop is a tool that can be used by a collective to take things and disrupt things at the next level. And you can only do that if you have an independent structure. And if you are open, use open data and everything that is shared and open and available that people can use it in the way that's relevant for them to disrupt the areas that they're working on and as that changes for that to evolve.

I think that's an excellent answer to a very difficult question. I also think it's a good place to end our conversation today. I would like to thank you, Alex. And Avianto and Robert for your insights and for your work with Talk2Loop.

One of the things that really annoys me is that often when we talk about innovation, I feel like it's a tool with a humanitarian. Here I get a strong sense of three humanitarians with a tool that you are trying to adapt into different contexts and really make as powerful in those contexts as you can. And I look forward to seeing what will happen with Loop in the coming years. And I'd like to wish you all of the best of luck with your future work.