As Congress debates a $700-billion bailout of troubled Wall Street companies, Diana R. Sieger, president of the Grand Rapids Community Foundation, in Mich., recalls with amusement on her blog how, back in the 1990s, making community foundations run more like businesses was all the rage.

The fever, she writes, started in 1992, in the wake of Fidelity Investments’ creation of its first charitable gift fund, a practice other for-profit companies followed in subsequent years.

For the next several years, Ms. Sieger writes, “the field fought hard and generally with one another. Should we take on the attributes of the giant investment firms that try to accommodate client needs by having their fund statements online 24/7 updated daily to show how their accounts are faring? Should we become more transactional? Ultimately should we focus on high net worth people only who want a charitable financial services arm to help them with their philanthropy?”

She adds, “And this from people who were just coming to terms that we should be actively fund raising! My response then was and still is today— come on, give it up!”

Those battles, she writes, have receded, and community funds like hers are embracing the ways in which they are different from mammoth companies.

“Given the ups and now the downs of the financial-services industry, I’d say sticking to who we are is the way to be and to continue to be strong philanthropic leaders,” Ms. Sieger wrties. “Glad we didn’t succumb to being merely a reflection of an industry that does not fit who we are and frankly one that is struggling with their own misfortunes.”