A practical and visually navigable response guide to support policy and advocacy teams when confronting resistance to anti-racist and decolonial change.

After multiple rounds of consultation, policy and advocacy professionals across Bond’s network voiced a recurring challenge: when the pushback comes internally or externally what do you say? How do you hold the line on values without losing influence? How do you make the case without burning out?

This FAQ-style tool was developed as a hands-on support document for these conversations. It responds to common arguments against anti-racist and decolonial approaches in the international development space, offering policy teams structured responses grounded in strategy, clarity, and care.

Our task was to take this dense and politically sensitive content and shape it into something teams would actually use: in meetings, during campaign planning, or when preparing internal cases for change.

We entered this project at the point where the writing was complete but the form was not yet alive. Our work focused on visual framing, sensemaking, and publication design. We:

• Structured each section around scannable problem–response flows, reflecting how users engage with FAQs in the real world looking for fast clarity in moments of tension
  
• Introduced a consistent visual hierarchy that made it easier to navigate the document without needing to read every word
  
• Created layouts that work well both digitally and in print whether screen-shared during a strategy call or printed out for a team retreat
  
• Used visual structure to support emotional pacing and help readers stay engaged with the material, even when it becomes personally or politically uncomfortable

This document was designed for high-pressure moments team discussions, advocacy planning sessions, or internal debates where the stakes feel high and the energy gets complicated. The visuals needed to offer clarity, reduce friction, and gently invite reflection.


We approached visual storytelling as a form of quiet facilitation. Instead of leaning on decorative graphics, we used layout, rhythm, and iconography to create a sense of calm and clarity. Section dividers gave breathing room between dense topics. Repeated structures helped readers anticipate what was coming next. Small visual cues like flags for internal strategy prompts or links to external tools made the guide feel intuitive and human.

Illustrations were minimal and purposeful. Every visual element was there to support the emotional weight of the content, not compete with it. The overall tone of the design was steady, warm, and usable meant to help people stay in the conversation rather than opt out when things get difficult.

The Common Arguments FAQ is now a go-to reference for advocacy teams across multiple organisations. It helps teams build confidence in responding to institutional resistance, and supports internal capacity-building by making abstract values feel concrete and actionable.

This toolkit became part of the infrastructure for honest dialogue. The design approach ensured the document could live beyond one training, showing up again and again wherever difficult conversations need grounding and support.