Galvanizing Philanthropy  

Oleh:

Ditkoff, Susan Wolf ; Colby, Susan J.

Jenis: Article from Bulletin/Magazine - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Harvard Business Review bisa di lihat di link (http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/command/detail?sid=f227f0b4-7315-44a4-a7f7-a7cd8cbad80b%40sessionmgr114&vid=12&hid=105&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&jid=HBR) vol. 87 no. 11 (Nov. 2009), page 108.
Topik: Environment; Economic Change; Philanthropy

Ketersediaan

Perpustakaan Pusat (Semanggi) Nomor Panggil: HH10.40 Non-tandon: 1 (dapat dipinjam: 0) Tandon: tidak ada

Lihat Detail Induk

Isi artikel

Creating lasting environmental, social, and economic change requires discipline—a concept with which many foundations, grant makers, and committed wealthy individuals (well-intentioned as they may be) have traditionally struggled. Exempt from the accountability imposed on business by the markets or on government by voters, philanthropy is free to experiment and take risks. But with few external parties offering candid feedback or calling them to account, philanthropic investors (and their boards) have had insufficient experience objectively assessing their own performance and making hard decisions about programs and people. The consequences of this inability to optimize resources and organizational outcomes are even greater in the current economy: Foundation assets that collectively once topped $680 billion have dropped by 20% to 40% from their highs in 2007. Many philanthropic investors are dissatisfied with how much social change they’ve been able to create; they’re helping fewer children and families than intended, or influencing climate change less than they’d hoped. Most of the 75,000 foundations in the United States (like their counterparts worldwide) know they must change, but they’re not sure how. In our experience, developing a philanthropic strategy is an iterative process, regardless of the economic climate. It requires the internal discipline to ask—and rigorously answer—three fundamental questions: How do we define success? What will it take to make change happen? How can we improve our results over time? We think of this process as getting clear, getting real, and getting better. In the following pages we’ll explore how leaders at the James Irvine Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation have wrestled with these questions, made tough decisions, and dramatically increased the effect they’ve had in their communities and globally. They share a commitment not just to finding promising grantees and declaring victory in their annual reports but also to maximizing their impact. And although they are large, well-established institutions, the lessons they’ve learned apply to any philanthropic investor or organization hoping to create significant, lasting change.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali