Constantly striving to be ethical can be exhausting... Having to weigh up the pros and cons of working with clients and what projects to take on... Doing enough research into businesses and organisations so that you've done your due diligence... Sometimes there just aren't enough hours in the day, and if you're not careful you're a 'busy fool' before you know it and your ethical intentions have become a thing of the past.

So, don't get burnt-out and compromise your ethical values and principles.

What if there was a way to make quicker and better decisions on who to work with, what to take on, and how much to charge for it?

Khandiz Joni, via the Association of Sustainability Practitioners, shared this handy framework for assessing project fit and your capacity to take on paid work, pro bono work and volunteer work - should ethical fit over financial necessity be the main motivating factor, of course. She's even included a scoring system for deciding how you're going to charge for paid work and what your fees should be.

Khandiz says "This decision-making tool helps you assess new ideas, client projects and self-initiated work through a short series of questions. Each one looks at a different part of what makes work sustainable".

Here, she means sustainable in the sense of the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level, or to actually be able to do it, rather than the avoidance of the depletion of natural resources in order to maintain an ecological balance (the importance of this as part of a wider ethical stance not withstanding).

Khandiz continues, saying:

"Use it to check how well the project fits your creative interests, how it contributes to your wider ecosystem of work and whether you have the time, capacity and financial means to take it on."

And:

"You can use it for paid work, unpaid collaborations and personal ideas. It helps you notice patterns, see where your limits are and decide how to resource yourself well before saying yes. Or no, if that's what is best for you."

As such, you can use it to cut through ethical dilemmas and quandaries, analysis paralysis and indecision - and come to a quicker and better decision.

How does the framework operate?

There are three parts:

1. Suitability
2. Impact
3. Resourcing and reward

And you score each question from 0 to 3.

"The total score gives you a clear reading of whether the project is a good fit, needs adjustment or should be put aside."

It's not about judging the work per se. Instead, it's "about choosing with care so that you stay energised, grounded and able to give your best attention to the things that matter" and you can "weight sections more heavily depending on what matters most at the time".

Section 1: Suitability

These questions check and rank creative fit, personal value alignment and regenerative intention. Basically, does it float your boat and align with - or, at least, not compromise - your moral and ethical values.

Section 2: Impact

As the section name suggests, these questions check impact - e.g. the usefulness of the project, ethical impact, and contribution to communities and society in general beyond the immediate project output - as well as will the work or project put you under undue strain and pressure as far as your time goes.

Section 3: Resourcing and Reward

These questions cover and are there to protect your time, money, energy and mental health - essentially, have you got the willingness, capacity and bandwidth to do it, and does the pay/reward make it worthwhile (if no pay, low pay or voluntary, what will you get out of it).

Once you've assessed all that, you decide by totting up the scores from the three sections.

This gives you a simple way to interpret the results, as a traffic light system:

- "45 to 32 Strong green light. This is aligned, nourishing and sustainable."
- "31 to 22 Proceed [but] with conditions. Adjust the scope, timeline or price. Decide what needs to shift to make it sustainable." (i.e. green and amber lights) 
- "21 to 12 Caution. Only take it if there is a compelling long-term value." (i.e. amber)
- "Below 12 No. This will drain you or take you off course." (i.e. red light and warning signals)

You can even use the same system for deciding how you're going to charge for paid work and what your fees should be:

High score (45–32)
"Aligned but potentially demanding. Charge at the upper end of your usual range, but consider other forms of value exchange if appropriate."

Mid score (31–22)
"Charge fully for delivery time plus buffer for the energetic cost."

Low score (21–12)
"Either decline or charge a premium because of the cost to your energy and capacity."

Very low score (<12)
"Decline. No fee can compensate for deep misalignment."

If this would be useful and is of interest to you, we'll share Khandiz's PDF with the full range of assessment questions on it with you. 

It's OK for us to do that, because Khandiz has given full and express permission for other people to publicise and share her PDF document and approach, so no worries there. 

All we ask for in return is the opportunity to share our service offering with you and start a dialogue, so get in touch with us here at Bnode.