Joy Jackson
Greenbelt, Maryland
Joy Jackson is a Senior Associate with the Institute for Conservation Leadership. She designs and facilitates collaborative processes to help groups find common ground, establish shared goals, and create plans to achieve them. Joy is passionate about coaching, instruction, and capacity building and enjoys analyzing and synthesizing content from group discussions. Joy excels at creatively designing customized meetings that are relevant and timely, and that seek to find creative and dynamic ways to engage all participants. Her work involves strategic planning for regional organizations, helping bring together emerging collaboratives and coalitions, and designing participatory and thought-provoking training opportunities. In a recent engagement, Joy supported senior public officials in collectively applying for and securing Inflation Reduction Act funding through the federal government.
A dedicated public servant, Joy holds a BA in Political Science from Syracuse University and a Master of Public Administration from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Joy has spent 15 years in senior-level administrator and education-related roles at non-profits and universities. She has extensive experience designing and facilitating workshops, most recently as a career development instructor with The Washington Center for Internships and Academic Programs. Her higher education career has included director-level roles at Virginia Tech and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and capacity building/coaching roles with non-profits such as Local Initiatives Support Corporation.
This interview was conducted by Ayana Harscoet on October 10, 2024. Press play to listen, or find the full audio transcript below the audio player.
Ayana Harscoet: Hi, Joy! Welcome to At the Water Table. So excited to have you joining me here.
Joy Jackson: Thank you! Excited to be here.
Ayana: How about just to start us off, if you could introduce yourself and tell us a bit more about your organization and what you are up to there.
Joy: Well, my name is Joy Jackson. I’m a senior associate with the Institute for Conservation Leadership. We are a small but mighty organization of about six staff. We’re about 30 years old, maybe a little bit more than that, now almost 35 years old, and we are a capacity building organization that provides primarily facilitation support and exclusively to the conservation sector. And so most of our work is done facilitating and supporting collaborations of which, as you know, there are many in an environmental conservation, environmental justice world. But we also do a handful of trainings, coaching, leadership development, all basically geared towards helping people, entities, organizations, and collaboratives achieve their goals.
Ayana: And how did you arrive at this facilitation work? Can you tell us a bit more about what you do and about your day to day or the organizations you tend to be involved with?
Joy: My path to conservation was a bit roundabout, but my career has always centered on capacity building. I began working in community development in New York City, a field with operational similarities to conservation. I then pursued a master’s degree in public administration and worked in education, which fueled my passion for training, professional development, and capacity building. While working as an administrator, I also taught evening courses—facilitating a graduate capstone course, teaching technology to senior citizens, and leading career development workshops. Five years ago, when searching for a new role, I prioritized my skills and interests, particularly facilitation and project management. I came across a posting for ICL that requested a workshop design I had facilitated. This unique requirement piqued my interest, and I eagerly shared a design for a career development course I had developed. I’ve been with ICL ever since.
Ayana: I love hearing all the different threads that brought you to this work. I can imagine you’re being invited into so many different spaces at so many different types of organizations and collaboratives. What does it like to step into those spaces? What does it like to show up as a facilitator?
Joy: Yes, when I first started at ICL, it was my first role in conservation. I felt anxious about facilitating conversations among scientists and public officials on environmental topics I wasn’t familiar with. That anxiety is real, and I think it’s relatable. Even when asked to lead a staff meeting or facilitate any discussion, there’s a desire to have all the answers. I struggled with that anxiety for the first six months or so. But once I settled in, I realized that facilitation is more about asking the right questions, guiding the discussion, and being a good active listener. It’s about quickly synthesizing what you’re hearing—or not hearing. Over time, I became more comfortable in those spaces and started facilitating larger and more complex gatherings. I still get nervous, especially at the beginning. I wonder, “Who are these people? How do they work? What kind of facilitation do they need?” Do they need someone to lead and drive the process? Do they need someone to walk alongside them, helping to clarify? Or do they need someone to simply set the table, ask a question, and step back, summarizing key points and encouraging progress? Figuring out what people and the system need is the most nerve-wracking part, but it’s also fun.
Ayana: It sounds like you really need to have a lot of adaptability coming into those situations. I imagine it’s not until you’re in conversation with people that you have a sense of what they expect or hope from you, right?
Joy: Yes, one of the most important skills for a facilitator is curiosity. You have to approach every situation with a genuine desire to learn and understand. I often think of projects as puzzles, and my role is to help put the pieces together. I ask myself: What are the major components? What am I missing? How can I gain a clearer understanding? Being a skilled synthesizer is also crucial. People may need help opening up a conversation, or they may have too much going on and need help narrowing their focus. It’s important to be aware of these dynamics and adapt accordingly. My colleague, Sarah Clark, introduced me to the concept of “lumping” and “splitting” information. A “lumper” synthesizes and brings ideas together, while a “splitter” delves deeper and explores the nuances. Knowing when to lump and when to split is essential for effective facilitation. These skills, even more than subject matter expertise, are critical for success. While context and knowledge are helpful, the ability to ask the right questions, actively listen, and synthesize information are the true cornerstones of effective facilitation.
Ayana: I love that vocabulary, the “lumper” and the visual.
Joy: It was like, that’s totally it. That’s totally it. mean, so well said.
Ayana: You mentioned earlier that one of the most important things you can do is ask the right questions. How do you even know what questions to ask? What’s going through your mind? What sort of framing are you approaching things through to even understand?
Joy: That’s a great question. It’s always helpful to start with a clear goal. When meeting with someone to plan an engagement—because people hire ICL to design engagements for them, whether it’s a one-time workshop or a multi-year project—it’s crucial to understand their objectives. Why are they gathering these particular people? The goal acts as a “bouncer,” as Priya Parker, a leading expert in facilitation, suggests. It guides the conversation and keeps it focused. You also need to consider where you are in the process. Are you just starting? Do the participants know each other? Do they agree on the topic? From there, you can design a process that moves the group towards its intended outcome, whether it’s simply sharing information or collaborating on a project. This helps you determine the right questions to ask. I often use a simple framework called “What, So What, Now What?” which comes from Liberating Structures (they have a great website with meeting resources). Essentially, you discuss what the topic is, why it’s significant, and what the next steps are. It’s a helpful starting point for any meeting.
Ayana: Something that comes to mind too is the context that I ever facilitated in is only online. And I imagine online facilitation and in-person facilitation are quite different. How do things tend to shake out for you? Are you mostly online? Are you traveling a lot in person?
Joy: That’s a great question. The world has changed a lot in five years. When I first joined ICL, it was four or five months before the pandemic started and I think probably 90 to 95 percent in person. We were very on the road. Almost everything was in person. Ayana: thanks for sharing. I think it’s really been just such an exercise in adaptability for so many of us, you know, moving to more online spaces, but It sounds like you’ve got plenty of tools to do the best, make the best of, make the most of it. And then, like the rest of the world, we shifted mostly to online meetings, and we had to adapt our practices. I’ll say the opportunities and challenges for online and in-person facilitation differ in terms of execution. A big thing you’re fighting with online facilitation is multitasking—blatant multitasking, like camera off. I’m in the meeting, but really, I’m working on something for my next meeting. ICL meetings are highly participatory. We specialize in participatory design, which means we talk 20 or 25 percent of the time, and we intend for the group to talk the rest of the time because you’ve brought us in to help you workshop a topic or work together. That’s difficult to do online if people are attending to other things. We had to develop some best practices for ourselves. For example, interactive online meetings should be no more than 90 minutes and include a break so people can get up and move around. Engage people often and early. If the expectation is that people will be on camera and talking, get them on camera and talking at the top of the meeting. This could be as simple as doing scavenger hunts, especially for longer meetings. We want you to get to know one another, so everyone finds something in their house that represents what they did this fall or their favorite fall activity. We put you in breakout groups, and you do show and tell. This is my favorite makeup brush, or I’m excited to dress up for Halloween, or here’s a picture of us canoeing last year and enjoying the fall leaves—whatever the case may be. Those are online challenges. Also, for a participatory meeting, make sure you invite the right people. The level of investment in the conversation is important because you want people who are present, excited, and talking. It’s easy for people to get left behind online, as it takes more comfort and confidence to unmute yourself and speak in front of a large group. So, you have to utilize breakout groups, encourage chat participation, and come up with other modalities for engagement beyond just talking. That’s what we learned about online facilitation. In person, we have a ton of activities to get engagement going. You know, the typical design thinking exercises, like putting things on Post-it notes, putting people in spectrum activities, getting them to line up in response to questions, step forward, step back, stand up, or sit down—really using your whole self, not just your mind, not just your words. We had to adapt our honed and refined participatory meeting practices to the online environment, which, again, as a facilitator, is like solving new puzzles. It was challenging, but it was also fun to figure out how to get everyone focused and moving in the same direction.
Joy: And I think also like that before time, just even talking to folks as a facilitator, right? Because sometimes people like we go to tons of online meetings, like how many online meetings did you have this week?
Ayana: Gosh, at least five.
Joy: So many, right? And like in those five, how many did you actively participate?
Ayana: Maybe my one-on-one. That’s about it. I actually went to a training on facilitation earlier in the week, but I did not speak in it.
Joy: See? Exactly! I think, especially now, all of us have gotten used to passively consuming information. There’s another framework for those looking to facilitate a meeting. Many people come to a meeting expecting the relationship to be between them and the leader—like “sage on a stage.” You’re leading the meeting; you’re there to tell me something. And then I get to go back to my desk and complain that the meeting should have been an email. That’s typically what happens. But in participatory meetings, the kind ICL specializes in, the participants primarily interact with one another, and the facilitator holds and guides the space. That’s a very different concept. It takes intentionality to shift that expectation or mindset, which most people bring to most meetings. It’s about getting them ready to be co-drivers of the gathering.
Ayana: I didn’t even realize, but you’re so right. I think that really is the preconception that people come to meetings with.
Joy: A lecture, like a TED Talk. That’s a great model. It works for TED Talks, podcasts, lots of great interactions, going to hear a panel discussion. You can learn and gain a great deal from that. But if we’re looking to collaborate and co-create, a different kind of gathering and mindset is required.
Ayana: I just want to shift gears a little bit because I’m really curious about this Young Professionals of Color program that you’ve mentioned previously. And I just love to hear more about what it has been like working with young folks in that context. Can you tell people a bit more about that program, what it is, and what the goals are?
Joy: Most of what ICL does is work with large and small-scale conservation organizations on environmental challenges. We’re trying to improve a river, access funding for our region, or enhance a regional climate hub. But my colleague, Pri, who is also a senior associate and facilitator here at ICL, and I met at our last job, a place called the Washington Center, which offered career development internships in D.C. We were both career development instructors, so we both have a passion for leadership development, especially for those early in their careers. Through our work with the Delaware River Watershed, we had the opportunity to create a leadership development program for professionals of color. Pri and I are both professionals of color, and we took the skills, tools, and lessons that we developed at the Washington Center—Pri was there much longer than I was—and said, “Hey, let’s create a professional development program for professionals of color,” who are underrepresented in the conservation space. We took it a step further and made it an asset-based program. Priya is a Gallup Strengths certified coach. We realized that many professional development programs, especially for professionals of color, might unconsciously focus on deficiencies. But strengths-based approaches recognize that we’re all great at something. Let’s uncover those strengths, build on them, learn from one another, and create a network we can continue to engage with even after the program ends. That’s what we did. We’re now in our second year of this nine-month program. We have in-person gatherings at the beginning and end. The first gathering sets expectations and lays out the curriculum. We engage people often and early. At our second kickoff, we had participants do elevator pitches to get better at talking about themselves, their strengths, and their interests. Then, we co-created the curriculum. We asked, “What do you want to see less of? What would you like to see us add?” We also included opportunities for participants to lead sessions, sharing their strengths and teaching their peers. It’s a very exciting program. Pri and I were thrilled when our first cohort ended last fall. We gave them the entire final session to design. We co-created the topics, and they divided themselves into three groups to plan 90-minute sessions. They did a phenomenal job. Never in my whole facilitation career at ICL have I tried something like that. Pri and I were passengers that day! We kicked it off, but they took the lead. One participant, who used to work for Upward Bound, led a fantastic icebreaker, tossing a ball to talk about multitasking. Another group set up a speed-dating style networking activity. It was a phenomenal day, and they did such a beautiful job. It was a privilege to be a part of it. We knew they would do well, but it was wonderful to have those stories and pictures to inspire us to do it again. It was a powerful experience. That final day was a testament to the space we created for them to thrive and bring their whole selves to the table. As a facilitator, you’re often appraising events, thinking about what could be done differently. But this time, I was fully present, just enjoying the experience. It was great. That’s beautiful. It speaks to the power of dissolving the top-down framework. And, as you said, we were in the passenger seat. I think that’s really wonderful.
Ayana: Is there anything that has really stuck with you that you learned while you were riding along in the passenger seat?
Joy: I’ll say it’s always tricky to open. Let’s see: three things. One is, if you want people to be engaged in a process—and this is a quote from David Brooks—make them authors, not witnesses, of the experience. Doing that well and intentionally will set you up for deeper engagement throughout and at the end. I worked hard to do that. So that’s one thing that stands out. Facilitators are always looking for tools for their toolkit. The opening activity that one of the participants, who was from Outward Bound, led was masterful. I haven’t been able to duplicate it. Sometimes when you do an icebreaker, people roll their eyes, but this one had everyone engaged. It was a great lesson; the teacher became the student. Even if it’s just about facilitation practices, it was wonderful.
Ayana: That sounds so fun. I want to know what the activity was!
Joy: I wish I could even remember what it was called. Yeah, it was great.
Ayana: This brings me to a bigger question I sometimes hear discussed in the workplace: working across generational divides, or differing expectations and ways people show up. How have you seen that in the groups you facilitate? Have you learned anything from working with these young professionals that has helped you facilitate intergenerational conversations?
Joy: That’s a great question. There’s a big generational shift happening across the workforce, especially in conservation. I was asked to facilitate a workshop on working across generations a couple of years ago. A couple of things that came up were questions around how the generation nearing retirement entered conservation at a time when it was more science-based—focused on water quality, air quality, and environmental health metrics. Conversely, those who have been in conservation for 5, 10, 15, maybe 20 years are more interested in the intersection of conservation and social issues. That’s one tension folks are noticing in the sector. It also influences how problems are solved. Some people are very community-based in their environmental or conservation work, while others are more science-based. You need both, but that difference can create tension in facilitating conversations where everyone feels heard. Another tension is the power dynamic between senior, mid-level, and junior leadership. Senior leaders often have more authority, even in flat hierarchies. Newer folks may feel their voices aren’t heard or that their experience is undervalued. Navigating power dynamics in meetings is crucial. This often raises questions about how to encourage participation. If all questions are directed to the whole group and verbal responses are expected, people may be less willing to speak up. Designing meetings where people feel psychologically safe to participate is important. We also emphasize ground rules, stating that all voices are equal, regardless of position. Sometimes I go further because people often wonder what role they’re expected to play in a meeting. Even if it’s not a toxic environment, junior staff with well-defined roles may wonder how to contribute to broader discussions. Conversely, senior leaders might question why a junior staff member is present for a high-level decision. I use an exercise adapted from Priya Parker where I call people into a circle and acknowledge those who have been with the organization for 15 years or more. I tell them they bring the stories, the institutional knowledge, and the context. That’s valuable for moving forward. I ask those folks to step back and then ask those with 10 years or less, then 5 years or less, to step forward. I acknowledge that they bring fresh eyes, new perspectives, and connections that others might miss. People have shared that this is an empowering way to start intergenerational conversations. It legitimizes everyone’s presence, clarifies roles, and fosters agreement. Awareness and flexibility are crucial. We’ve gone through a flexibility revolution in how we work. It’s important to be intentional about communication styles, preferred tools, and meeting formats. Spending time discussing how we’ll work together—whether we’ll have check-ins, how those will be run—is crucial. Unnamed expectations, especially from senior leaders, can cause trouble. Clearly articulating expectations helps bridge generational gaps.
Ayana: I really love that sort of storytellers and fresh eyes framing too, because it completely changes that dynamic.
Joy: It legitimizes everyone in the room. When I saw a meeting that Priya Parker held, it was like a master class. She used that exercise as an opener, and I’ve used it ever since. We facilitators learn and borrow from others all the time.
Ayana: I also agree that there’s a tension between those with a more scientific approach to environmental work and younger folks coming in with an environmental justice perspective. I’ve seen that; it’s a very real divide. This is a huge topic, but I’m curious to hear your thoughts on navigating those differences. I find it’s one of the fundamental challenges we encounter in conversations about the environment and conservation.
Joy: I wonder if you have an example. I’m curious to hear about your own experience. What’s an example of where that’s shown up in your work?
Ayana: At River Rally—I know you’ve attended in the past—there has been some pushback from people who would like to see more focus on scientific topics. They want to discuss water quality, monitoring strategies, and scientific techniques. Some people might feel that their work doesn’t touch on environmental justice or drinking water; their work is about rivers. Obviously, there’s a deep connection between these ideas, people, and nature. But I think the tension arises around what gets prioritized and who gets to take up space. Maybe some folks who are newer to the environmental justice conversation feel that they don’t see the necessity of the time and energy we’ve invested in these conversations. That’s something I’ve witnessed.
Joy: That’s a great example. It’s all about the general orientation of the conversations we’re having. This goes back to our earlier discussion about goals, who’s at the table, and their needs. When planning a gathering or series of meetings, thinking about those questions and making decisions about what gets priority—while also balancing multiple people’s needs—is difficult. You have to facilitate early conversations to reach an agreement around the what and the why. You can’t do everything, and sometimes hard decisions have to be made. But ensuring a transparent and participatory process is crucial so that everyone at the table feels heard and their needs are met. You don’t have to talk about water quality at the expense of environmental justice, and vice versa. You don’t have to discuss environmental justice at the expense of water quality. Perhaps there could be some bridging conversations. This is an ongoing challenge, and some tension will likely persist as the field expands to include perspectives and work that were not traditionally central. But I think that’s a positive sign of growth and change. In our facilitation training, we often discuss how groups go through stages of evolution. Tuckman, a scholar, identified these stages: forming, storming, norming, and performing. This generational shift is taking the whole sector through a new evolutionary process. We’re forming, storming a bit—there’s a healthy push and pull of ideas—until we reach a new balance and start performing. We’ll probably go through this again in 10, 15, maybe 20 years. It’s not inherently wrong; it’s a sign of a healthy system. But don’t stop at storming. Don’t shut people down during that phase. You have to find your way through it.
Ayana: It’s funny, I was introduced to this framing in a fellowship several years ago, except it was forming, storming, norming, and transforming. That’s what I’m hearing—the growing pains of getting to the next stage, transforming into the future.
Joy: I like “transforming.” I might adopt that. I’m always learning. I love that framing because people often see conflict as a sign to stop. But it’s not. It’s a sign of healthy energy and investment. If you can change your perspective around those inevitable push-pulls, you can create something new, beautiful, and inclusive. So keep going.
Ayana: Exactly. I was going to ask you about advice for those looking to build their facilitation skills, but you’ve already touched on that throughout our conversation. Is there anything you’d like to add?
Joy: Facilitation is a practice, so find every opportunity to practice your facilitation skills. Maybe it’s your participatory facilitation skills—how do you convene a group where people are engaged and generative? How do you hold that kind of space? Perhaps that means serving on your homeowners’ association board, or, if you’re involved in a faith institution, leading a group. It doesn’t have to be a formal facilitator role. A lot of the experience I relied on to build my skills came from things outside of work, things I did outside of my nine-to-five job. I encourage you, if you have the opportunity at work to lead a meeting, to step up and lead it, even if it’s small. Take a chance and try a method from Liberating Structures, or watch a Priya Parker documentary, or look up participatory facilitation methods online. Use one in your next meeting. If you want to have a discussion—and “discussion” is kind of a catch-all term for wanting to get people together to talk—if you want to have a gathering where people participate, try it out in low-stakes settings until you feel more comfortable leading larger gatherings. Eventually, you’ll gain confidence and be less stressed. Sometimes we’re in rooms with important people, and it can be nerve-wracking, but if you’re confident in your practice, you’ll get better at reading the room and figuring out your strengths and areas for growth. So don’t be afraid to try; you’ll get better with practice.
Ayana: Yes, of course. Everything takes practice, and I think you’re absolutely right. There’s one question I’d like to start asking people because it’s something I think about a lot, and I think we all do in many ways. I’m asking you this as a facilitator because I feel like it’s a different perspective than some of the people who have asked this before. But in the communities you’re working with, and in your community and beyond, what do you think an environmentally just future looks like? Where are we going, and what will it take to get there?
Joy: It’s a huge question. Let me see if I can talk my way through it. I’m an extrovert. Something that stands out to me about environmental and conservation matters is that they touch everyone’s life, but we sometimes talk about them in a way that makes them seem removed from our lives. That disconnect stood out to me significantly. When people ask me what I do, I tell them I work in environment and conservation. They’re often surprised, saying, “Really? Even here?” And I explain, “Well, when it rains a lot here, and your roads get overrun, and you have to drive through deep water, that’s an environmental issue.” It shows that we might be having water and sewer issues, overrunning the system, causing backups, and potentially polluting our waterways. You’re feeling that impact as you risk damage to your car. To me, a just future is one where people see, feel, and understand how the environment intersects with their overall quality of life. They feel informed and empowered to have a say and be involved in addressing these issues in their communities. I wish more people understood that this isn’t some far-off “save the spotted owl” campaign, though those are important, too. These are real-life matters affecting our lives, well-being, jobs, and health. Everyone has a seat at the table to have a say in what happens. That’s what a just environmental future looks like to me. I appreciate that; you’re right. Not everyone consciously thinks about how they are a part of the environment.
Ayana: Thank you so much, Joy. This has been such a wonderful conversation and I’m really glad we’ve had the chance to speak.
Joy: Yeah, likewise. Thank you for all of your thoughtful questions, especially that last one and I appreciated the opportunity. Thank you!
