November 20, 2009
What's Wrong With the 'Impatient Optimists'?
Tim Ogden is challenging the thinking of two of the world’s most prominent donors — Bill and Melinda Gates.
As part of an effort to promote foreign aid, the Gateses describe themselves as “impatient optimists” — people who believe global-health programs have been successful, but expect them to do more and be faster at eradicating diseases and such.
But Mr. Ogden, editor in chief of Philanthropy Action, says that if donors are too impatient, they run the risk of becoming cynical about what giving can achieve.
He recommends a “patient optimism” — “a view that combines the belief that change is possible with the belief that any significant transformation takes a great deal of time and effort.”
“Impatient optimists are like investors in subprime mortgages in 2007,” he writes. “They can be so blinded by the upside that they fail to do their due diligence. In the end, their impatience and pursuit of outsized returns fuels waste and disappointment. Patient optimists, by contrast, have lowered their expectations of any particular program or intervention, but not their belief in a better world over the long term.”
What do you think of Mr. Ogden’s analysis? Would you describe yourself as a patient or impatient optimist? Click on the comment button to share your views.
Are Nonprofit Trustees Ready to Handle Today's Difficult Financial Decisions? Plus More: Friday's Roundup
- Gene Takagi a California nonprofit lawyer, asks whether nonprofit boards are prepared to handle the difficult financial decisions they face in the tough economy, on Nonprofit Law Blog.
- The public is debating the motives behind the Goldman Sachs Group’s $500-million philanthropic pledge, but its giving has helped charities in tough times, writes Charles Best, the founder of DonorsChoose.org, which has received support from Goldman. Mr. Best’s views appear on a New York Times blog that is debating the Goldman controversy.
- J.D. Lasica, a social-media consultant to nonprofit groups, explains why charities should emulate the group Bread for the World when they develop social-media policies for their employees on Socialbrite.
November 19, 2009
Goldman Sachs Pledge Not Enough? Plus More: Thursday's Roundup
- Goldman Sachs Group’s $500-million philanthropic pledge will do little to quell public anger about the billions of dollars its employees are paid and its role in last year’s financial crisis, says Mark Gilbert, a columnist for Bloomberg News. Read The Chronicle’s article about the Goldman Sachs commitment.
- In response to a Wall Street Journal editorial, Luis Ubiñas, president of the Ford Foundation, defends his organization’s decision to support a charitable fund created by a teacher’s union, saying teachers are key to improving the nation’s public schools.
- There are too many international aid groups, which leads to confusion among donors and creates an inflated demand for aid workers that then forces charities to spend more on salaries than they should, says Olesya Dmitracova, a writer for Reuters AlertNet, as part of an article about how to improve of foreign aid.
- Garrison Keillor ought to add “where all the charitable donors are extraordinarily generous” to his description of that fictional Minnesota town of Lake Wobegon, writes Beth Kanter, an author and social-media expert, on her blog. Donors in the state gave $14-million for a one-day campaign through the Web site GiveMN, which was recently created to connect Minnesotans with local charities, she says.
- Perhaps more trust between donors and grantees is key to building a functioning philanthropic marketplace in which resources flow to those who could best use them, writes Sean Stannard-Stockton, an advisor to donors and a Chronicle contributor.
November 18, 2009
Oxfam Ad Asks Donors to Give a [Bleep]
Oxfam America is asking you to give a [bleep].
To promote giving during the holiday season, Oxfam America has produced a slightly bawdy, but funny, video. With a nod to the censored word, Oxfam suggests viewers donate $12, which will provide manure to impoverished farmers overseas.
The slick advertisement begins with an earnest mom sitting with her child and saying to the camera: “I never knew how much difference I could make just by giving a [bleep].”
She then extols her dry cleaner, parents at a playground, and others to follow suit. Eventually she is driving around a leafy suburban neighborhood in an ice-cream truck using a loudspeaker to ask strangers to give a … well, you know.
On his blog, which features the video, Jeff Trexler, professor of social entrepreneurship at Pace University, in New York, hails the ad.
“Please, please, please let this replace ‘raising awareness’” as a catch phrase, he writes.
What do you think of the ad?
How Much Should Nonprofit Groups Spend on Marketing?
Nonprofit groups have a reputation for not spending much time telling their stories to potential supporters.
With tight budgets and often lofty ambitions, marketing and communications often takes a back seat to fund raising and service delivery.
But some marketing experts say nonprofit groups would actually raise more money and, in turn, deliver more services, if they spent more of their resources on marketing.
Nancy E. Schwartz, a marketing and communications consultant in New York and author of the blog Getting Attention, told participants at a recent Chronicle online discussion that she recommends groups spend between 10 and 20 percent of their budgets on marketing.
That might seem like a big number to many organizations. But Ms. Schwartz suggests that marketing shouldn’t necessarily be a separate line item in a nonprofit group’s budget. Rather, it should be incorporated into many of its activities.
“I’ve found it far more effective to integrate marketing in program budgets, rather than to create independent marketing budgets,” she writes. “Makes more sense to more people, so the budget is likely to be larger.”
You can read the full discussion here.
What do you think? Should nonprofit groups devote 10 percent or more of their budgets to marketing? Click on the comments link below this post to share your thoughts.
An Appeal to Fix a 'Broken' USAID, Plus More: Wednesday's Roundup
- As the nominee to lead the U.S. Agency for International Development, Rajiv Shah needs to make big changes in the “broken” organization, including having it work more closely with charities, corporations, and foundations, writes Carol Adelman, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Global Prosperity, on the group’s blog.
- Allison Fine, a social-media expert and a Chronicle contributor, says she is concerned about the implications of charities ditching MySpace — whose users tend to be less wealthy and less educated than those on Facebook — in favor of the latter social-networking site. “Social change needs to happen everywhere,” says Ms. Fine.
- As Baby Boomers and younger adults spar over nonprofit leadership roles, Rosetta Thurman, a charity consultant, examines on her blog how each generation stereotypes the other.
- Congress should increase government support for the Legal Services Corporation, which provides legal aid to poor people, says an editorial in The Washington Post. The newspaper also calls for removing the restrictions that prevent the agency from starting class-action lawsuits.
- Americans are increasingly using media and technology to raise money and awareness for charities with which they are not affiliated, a phenomenon Scott Henderson calls “creative philanthropy.” Mr. Henderson is a marketing consultant who leads Rally the Cause Productions.
November 17, 2009
Share Your Thoughts on the Nonprofit World's Top Trends
What are the most pressing issues and trends that will confront the nonprofit world in 2010?
As part of its year-end issue in December, The Chronicle will present its list of the top 10 trends, along with analysis of why and how these trends are important to those who care about the nonprofit world.
And we’re relying on you to help us formulate our list.
We recently asked our followers on Twitter to offer their top trends.
So far, more than 100 people have shared their thoughts. We’ve added the hashtag #nonprofit2010 to the conversation, a move that makes it easier for people to see how others have responded.
We invite you to share your thoughts on the most significant trends facing the nonprofit world in 2010 by posting a comment below. We also encourage you to jump into the conversation that is unfolding on Twitter. Your insights will help us as we put together a list that reflects the state of the nonprofit world as it heads into a new year.
A Lack of Marketing Expertise, Plus More: Tuesday's Roundup
- On eJewish Philanthropy, the writer Gail Hyman says Jewish charities have done a notoriously poor job of hiring people with marketing expertise.
- While corporate philanthropy is important, companies should do more to improve their practices and products to benefit the environment and offer sustainable jobs with good benefits, says Seth Goodman, the co-founder of Honest Tea, a beverage company. Mr. Goodman’s views appear on a Washington Post blog that asks whether corporate philanthropy remains relevant.
- Holden Karnofsky writes on The GiveWell blog that it’s not yet time to put to bed the controversy over how the microlending charity Kiva collects donations.
- The phrase “social impact” is overused jargon and needs to be replaced with a better expression, writes Elizabeth Clawson, a nonprofit communications worker, on her blog.
November 16, 2009
Criticism of Gates Foundation Headquarters
Does the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation need a $500-million headquarters?
Robert Frank, who writes The Wealth Report, a Wall Street Journal blog, raises this question, pointing out that comparable Seattle businesses have spent far less.
The price tag for the new Gates headquarters “is more than three times what nearby Russell Investments paid for its 42-story headquarters tower to house its staff of 900 and manage more than $200-billion in assets.”
He says that Mr. Gates is the greatest American philanthropist since John D. Rockefeller Jr. and notes that the Gateses recently donated $350-million to pay for the facility. But still he wonders if the money wouldn’t be better spent on charitable programs.
The blog post has generated several online comments, both for and against the construction project.
One person attacks Mr. Gates, asking how many people could be fed with $500-million. Another commenter defends the billionaire and his wife: “This is not our business. They are giving away their money, not ours.”
What do you think? Is the new headquarters a worthwhile expense or a vanity project?
Downplaying the Estate Tax's Impact on Charitable Giving, Plus More: Monday's Roundup
- National nonprofit associations are misguided in their attempt to get Congress to change the federal estate tax because the tax is not a major factor in charitable giving, argues Bill Beach, the director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, on the Washington think tank’s blog. The estate tax will decline to zero in 2010, which many charities say will hamper bequests.
- Most donors don’t give money to needy people on the street because they feel that it’s more effective to contribute to “knowledgeable intermediaries” such as homeless shelters, writes Timothy Ogden, editor in chief of the online publication Philanthropy Action. So why are so many people drawn to the idea of establishing a “connection” with small business owners overseas through a Web site like Kiva, instead of contributing to a knowledgeable intermediary like a microfinance institution, Mr. Ogden asks.
- Beth Kanter, the author and speaker, shows how Wildlife Direct, an organization based in Kenya, is using social-media tools to raise money, on Beth’s Blog.
- With help from Heifer International and other charities, Tererai Trent, a woman from impoverished rural Zimbabwe, will receive her Ph.D. next month, a sign that aid efforts in Africa have led to amazing success stories, writes Nicholas D. Kristof, a columnist with The New York Times.
- The White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships has started a new blog to discuss its work and the work of charities across the country.
- “Foundations need to wake up to the needs and potential of rural America and invest more time and attention to building its philanthropic capacity,” writes Todd Cohen, editor of Philanthropy Journal, on the Stanford Social Innovation Review Web site.