At the core of Indigenous Innovation lies a reflective mindset, which necessitates intentional self-work on an individual level. This challenges us to contemplate how our actions and decisions impact others when striving towards reconciliation. As Elder Jacqui Lavalley, of the Chippewas of Nawash, emphasizes, "True reconciliation begins with sincere self-reflection. You cannot promote reconciliation externally without first achieving it within yourself."

Self-assessment requires individuals to consciously and consistently introspect. Through this practice, they cultivate awareness, enabling them to question how their actions foster inclusion. 

For instance, when analyzing stakeholder survey outcomes, do we pause to ask, "Whose perspectives are represented in this data?" or, "Does our survey data incorporate voices from marginalized communities?" Integrating self-assessment, reflection,  and cultivating habits that prioritize inclusion, should be a focal point in the workplace.

There are numerous frameworks and resources available to help non-Indigenous people understand the ethical procedures for promoting the inclusion of Indigenous people. While these tools are beneficial, they cannot replace the direct engagement with Indigenous people and communities for the most relevant insights. There are no shortcuts to understanding the best ways to engage and collaborate with Indigenous people. It is crucial not to make pan-Indigenous assumptions based on research or resources, regardless of their credibility. Instead, we should go directly to the source—the people and the community within the context of interest, welcoming and accepting the stories shared.

Input from Indigenous communities should be gathered both before, and during, the design of Social Innovation. This input not only signifies the government’s commitment to reconciliation,  but also facilitates the realization of these goals. Indigenous communities must be engaged in the design of, and benefit from, new programs and measures resulting from these recommendations. Particularly in areas such as capacity, skills building, funding, capital access, knowledge sharing, and mobilization (Economic and Social Development Canada, 2018, p.44).

Finally, community input shouldn't be limited to the research phases of work. To ensure that Indigenous perspectives are consistently considered, it is essential to develop strong partnerships and hire Indigenous people within the governing bodies of the Social Innovation ecosystem—those entities that make decisions and policies impacting the entire ecosystem.

The journey toward inclusion cannot be undertaken solely by Indigenous people. It requires allyship—the support of those with more privilege and greater access to advocate for Indigenous interests. As Alexiuk (2013) notes, “Settler allies within governments and industry can help build capacity within these institutions for intercultural understanding. This contributes to the durability and impact of emerging Indigenous innovations.” Allies play a vital role in integrating Traditional Knowledge into standard social innovation practices, policies, and approaches. In addition, incorporating inclusion into visioning strategies ensures it's always considered during strategic decision-making.

Certain aspects of the social innovation process are less compatible with Traditional Knowledge, especially when there aren't enough Indigenous people involved. Social finance is one area in particular that requires greater inclusion. Allyship is most critical in areas lacking Indigenous stakeholders, or where significant change is needed. For example, inclusivity in funding applications and impact evaluations often requires substantial deviations from standard Western methods. Allies must be willing to take risks and provide perspectives that challenge the existing paradigm. They can be the first in their workplaces or working groups to validate Traditional Knowledge and demonstrate openness to change. While this can be a significant personal challenge, advancing inclusion is what defines an ally.

By stepping up and supporting Indigenous perspectives, allies can drive meaningful and lasting change within the social innovation ecosystem.

Here are questions to think about when considering the development of healthy relationships between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous people. These guidelines are intended to inform decision-making when building relationships with partners, and to serve as a catalyst for important conversations. This list aims to support individuals and organizations in taking the initiative to respect Indigenous rights:

• How do you embed cultural safety training and adapt it for business tools?

• How do you ensure employment processes recognizes the impacts of colonization and respect Indigenous rights?

• How do we convey that the burden of these processes shouldn't fall on Indigenous communities?

• How do we compensate people for the consultations we request from them?

Inclusion is nurtured by acknowledging human integrity, respecting Indigenous rights, supporting reconciliation, and treating Traditional Knowledge as valid. When non-Indigenous people respect Indigenous rights and build relationships based on this respect, they create safe spaces for inclusion.

Traditional Knowledge views life quality and impact in a more holistic manner, where success is interconnected across individual, social, and ecological dimensions. It aligns with the social, economic, and environmental conditions of social innovation projects, recognizing the roles of the self, family, and community as agents of change. From the perspective of Traditional Knowledge, social impact encompasses the well-being of the mind, body, and spirit. This broader definition of impact can guide evaluators in understanding and supporting the visions of Indigenous innovators more effectively. Innovations informed by Traditional Knowledge often explore the intricate relationships and processes within their activities, providing value on a holistic level. Evaluations that integrate Traditional Knowledge will better account for these outcomes. Ultimately, a model that reflects Indigenous perspectives while remaining accessible to Western evaluation practices will achieve the most meaningful impact.