What to Do About the Problems Philanthropy Creates and Perpetuates
The ability to act responsibly arises from understanding how beneficial effects are created.
Philanthropy is responsible by definition, right? Well, not innately and not necessarily.
The ability to act responsibly arises from understanding how beneficial effects are created. If we are ignorant of how something works—what makes it vital and viable in its context and improves its ability to contribute and evolve—then even though we intend to “do good,” we may do harm. For example, children who receive gold stars whenever they please teachers or parents may lose the ability to recognize and to feel encouraged and inspired by their own achievements. This can happen despite the intention to give children the skills they need to become successful in society and work.
The New Mexico Association of Grantmakers (NMAG) recently embarked on an experiment to change how they fund, based on this understanding of responsibility. Through rigorous reflection, they have discovered that the effects they produce are often not what they intend. One foundation-funded initiative to create new entrepreneurial technology jobs was launched in a region where graduation rates are low and where there is no appropriate skills base. This project angered local communities, even though people living there had been surveyed and were represented on the project team.
This story is repeated far too often in philanthropy communities across the nation. A special group of NMAG members is working collaboratively across diverse arenas to improve funding. They are following five guidelines:
- Consider and fund with an eye to nested, whole systems rather than fixes for specific issues or problems.
- Find “nodes of leverage”—conditions that can be changed with little effort in order to produce big results—rather than shotgun or priority-setting approaches.
- Focus on developing personal agency by supporting the efforts of individuals to take accountability for their own lives, and to exercise entrepreneurship in creating businesses and in serving their communities
- Measure effectiveness by how well systems change, not by the efforts made in pursuit of change.
- Ensure foundations have integrity in all of their activities (for example, by fostering personal agency within their staffs).
These guidelines have led to a radically different way of thinking about funding in northern New Mexico. Foundations work together more often and have fewer limited partnerships; instead, they initiate projects with what is called Story of Place, a proprietary process developed by ReGenesis Group in Santa Fe, NM.
The Story of Place process starts with an “integral assessment of a bio-region” that determines unique patterns that integrate all life systems. These patterns become sources for planning and development, and foster a deep understanding of how the region’s living systems are nested within one another. This allows funders to make better decisions from the start. Funding for all development arenas arises from a shared direction—not from a “vision” that requires compromises, but from a revealed pattern that’s unique to the community and its place. It also allows funders to discover nodes of leverage more easily. The connection to place inspires new hope and alignment.
On a scale of one to five, how is your organization trending on these five guidelines?
Carol Sanford is the author of The Responsible Business: Reimagining Sustainability and Success, published by Jossey Bass and recently named to CNBC’s shortlist for books to read in 2011. Carol is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Jessica’s Love Foundation.
How the Rockefeller Foundation is approaching evaluation with developing country partners.
What the Irvine Foundation has learned over the past six years about performance assessment.
How the Ford Foundation is engaging its global staff in building a shared culture of results.
How the Omidyar Network uses a venture capital model to measure and evaluate effectiveness.
A group of conservationists, former bankers, and management consultants have imported ideas from Wall Street to create a new way to protect large ecosystems.
Proposed new rules by the Treasury Department and the IRS would make it easier for philanthropies to make Program Related Investments.
How do we ensure that philanthropic subsidies in impact investing are put to productive use?
Foundations are shifting the conversation about their work and impact.
COMMENTS
BY Curtis Ogden
ON May 5, 2011 01:42 PM
Thanks for this, Carol. As always, very timely! I appreciate how you lift up the importance of identifying patterns and judging impact based on systems change. Those criteria certainly beg greater collaboration between funders and with others. Not sure if you know about the Interaction Institute’s partnership with the Center for Whole Communities in VT around Whole Measures: Transforming Communities by Measuring What Matters Most. You can find more info here: http://interactioninstitute.org/blog/2011/05/04/steps-to-an-ecology-of-change Woul.d be interested to hear your thoughts, and perhaps catching you on a future visit here in Arlington, MA.
BY Carol Sanford, author of post
ON May 5, 2011 08:14 PM
I like the piece you wrote and the reference. Changing what we measure is so important. A very important thing in doing this is to change WHERE we measure. Organizations tend to measure at the point of where there own work ends, and not the point of where the effects occur. So businesses measure whehter they deliver on time, not whether they delievery system improves the customer’s ability to do well in the world. Foundations do the same. They measure too early and often too small. Did we deliver what we said, and not were people able to create something new in the world. It is a way of thinking about measuring what matters the most at the point where there whole system is affected. I added measures in my book to invite people to look at this in a new way-at a different WHERE and on a different WHAT.
Thanks for the comment and happy to talk in MA