<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

    <channel>
    
    <title>SSIR Articles: Arts, Culture, and Religion</title>
    <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/</link>
    <description>Strategies, Tools, and Ideas for Nonprofits, Foundations, and Socially Responsible Businesses</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <dc:creator>walker_kelsey@gsb.stanford.edu</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Copyright 2008</dc:rights>
    <dc:date>2008-09-02T19:00:01-08:00</dc:date>
    <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.pmachine.com/" />
    

<item>
 <title>Monk E&#45;Business</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/monk_e_business/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/monk_e_business/</guid>
 <description>When dawn breaks over the 500 wooded acres of the Cistercian Abbey of Our Lady of Spring Bank in Sparta, Wisc., the five Roman Catholic monks who live here have already begun their daily rituals of chanting and chores. Their cloistered lifestyle of ora et labora—prayer and work—looks little changed from medieval times. Except for one thing: This nonprofit abbey owns a multimillion&#45;dollar e&#45;commerce business called LaserMonks. Annual sales of more than $4 million from ink&#45;jet cartridges and other office supplies not only sustain the monastery, but also leave plenty to spare for charitable causes. “Monastic orders are the original social entrepreneurs,” says the Rev. Bernard McCoy, the enterprising monk who is also CEO of LaserMonks. “We want to be able to provide not only for our own table, but also for the tables of others.” Making their hybrid business model work has meant identifying a market niche, growing a loyal customer base, and recognizing opportunities for expansion. Although they draw no personal income, the monks make no apologies for their quest for profit; the more money LaserMonks generates, the more good works they can support. But even as&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Social Entrepreneurship</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-10-26T06:00:01-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Research: Help People Do the Right Thing</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/help_people_do_the_right_thing/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/help_people_do_the_right_thing/</guid>
 <description>Take in a Saturday matinee or put in a shift at the soup kitchen? Buy a louder sound system or donate a bigger chunk to charity? Inhale a box of Fruity Pebbles or fletcherize a bowl of bran? The ancient struggle between what we want to do and what we should do besets our species at every turn. And in the clinch, virtue often loses to desire. But researchers Todd Rogers and Max H. Bazerman have discovered one way to help people choose their shoulds over their wants: Don’t make them act now. Instead, let them choose now to act later. “When you give people the opportunity to make binding choices that will go into effect in the future,” says Rogers, “they are much more likely to do what they think they should do, rather than what they want to do.” The researchers call this tendency the “future lock&#45;in effect.” In one study, for example, Rogers and Bazerman asked participants how strongly they supported legislation that would reduce gas consumption— something many people think they should do—by raising gas prices—something few people want to do. Half the participants read that the legislation would take effect in a few years, and&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Nonprofit Management, Philanthropy &amp; Responsible Investing</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-09-02T06:00:01-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Research: Bad &#8216;Hoods, Naughty Kids</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/bad_hoods_naughty_kids/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/bad_hoods_naughty_kids/</guid>
 <description>People’s personalities are quite stable, etched early in life in muscles and minds. But Rutgers University psychologist Daniel Hart and colleagues find that over time, the personalities of children in poor neighborhoods not only change more than do those of wealthier children, but also run a higher risk of taking a turn for the worse. The more rotten the barrel, their findings suggest, the more apples go bad. “I don’t want to demonize these kids,” Hart says. “Most turn out to be very good, no matter their neighborhoods. But some kids will be hurt by these environments, in ways that jeopardize their later development.” Using data from a long&#45;running U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics study, Hart and his colleagues first assessed the personalities of 1,550 children at age 3 or 4. They next reassessed the same children’s personalities two years later, at age 5 or 6. Every two years for the remainder of the children’s elementary schooling, the researchers checked their academic performance (math and reading) and delinquent tendencies (e.g., fighting and shoplifting). Hart and his colleagues then looked at how the economic status of children’s neighborhoods—as measured by the percentage of households living below the federal&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-09-02T06:00:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Research: Catching Charisma</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/catching_charisma/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/catching_charisma/</guid>
 <description>Say what you will about Barack Obama’s campaign strategies or proposed policies, the man has a great smile. A smile that his audiences often can’t help but mirror. And that may be one reason he is so persuasive, suggests University of Florida associate professor Amir Erez and his colleagues. “It’s emotional contagion,” explains Erez. “Charismatic leaders are happier themselves, and they spread their happiness to others.” Because people like feeling happy, they tend to follow leaders who augment their cheer. In other words, “people are influenced by charismatic leaders because charismatic leaders make them feel happy,” says Erez. Yet most of this mutual lovefest unfolds under the radar of awareness. As a result, followers usually cannot even say what they like about a charismatic leader, and charismatic leaders usually do not understand why people flock to them. Erez and his team studied both undergraduates in laboratory experiments and firefighters in the real world. They first find that charismatic leaders both feel and act more joyful than do their less captivating counterparts. “They smile more, they laugh more, they are warmer,” says Erez. The researchers then show that people working with charismatic leaders themselves feel more mirthful. Finally, the team uses&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Nonprofit Management</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-09-02T06:00:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>What&#8217;s Next: Good TV</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/whats_next_good_tv/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/whats_next_good_tv/</guid>
 <description>Has the American TV audience finally had it with reality shows’ bad eggs, and will it instead tune in to people doing good? ABC banked on that pendulum swing last March with Oprah Winfrey’s Oprah’s Big Give, wherein 10 fledgling philanthropists vied to change the lives of complete strangers by giving out cash in the most effective and outlandish ways (the premiere attracted some 15.6 million viewers). And Discovery Communications’ Planet Green, an environment&#45;themed digital and satellite cable channel that debuted last June, currently features such fare as Greensburg, a show that tracks the green restoration of a Kansas town destroyed by a tornado. One of the most ambitious efforts to bring philanthropy to the mass media will launch next year. The newly formed San Francisco&#45;based Generocity Media, still in its funding stage, will offer programming focused on giving through satellite and cable stations as well as a Web portal. It will use a variety of formats—reality TV, news magazine, talk show, and drama—and will target specific audiences. The millennial generation, for instance, might be enticed by programming in broadband or mobile. Higher&#45;income viewers loyal to PBS might tune in to Generocity shows about family giving on satellite or cable.&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Philanthropy &amp; Responsible Investing</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-09-02T06:00:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Don&#8217;t Save; Be Saved</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/dont_save_be_saved/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/dont_save_be_saved/</guid>
 <description>Lisa Keister was born poor. “I cleaned houses when I was 10 years old,” she says. Now a professor of sociology at Duke University, she’s trying to understand what leads people not to build wealth. Her answer? Their religious beliefs—at least in part. In a recent study, she finds that both black and white conservative Protestants are among the poorest Americans because they believe that their money belongs to God. As a result, “they tend to seek divine guidance in making important decisions, avoid excess accumulation, and favor using money to support religion,” she writes in the March 2008 American Journal of Sociology. Using two large national studies, Keister first replicates the decades&#45;old finding that conservative Protestants have less wealth than other religious groups—partly because they have less education, more children whom they bear at younger ages, and fewer women in the workforce. She then adds a new twist, documenting that conservative Protestants more strongly endorse statements such as “The purpose of church is to give money back to God,” “Money is the root of all evil,” and “I think a great deal about the connection between religion and personal finances.” Compared to people of other faiths, they give the&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Philanthropy &amp; Responsible Investing</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-05-29T14:00:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Praise the Lord, but Dim the Lights</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/praise_the_lord_but_dim_the_lights/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/praise_the_lord_but_dim_the_lights/</guid>
 <description>When the Rev. Sally Bingham speaks from the pulpit of Grace Cathedral, a landmark Episcopal church atop San Francisco’s Nob Hill, she’s more likely to preach about saving the Earth than saving souls. Global warming is a moral issue, she tells the faithful: “If you profess a love for God, then you have a responsibility to be a steward of creation.” It’s a lofty message. But it turns out that doing the right thing, spiritually speaking, can be as easy as changing a lightbulb. Congregants at Grace Cathedral and thousands of other houses of worship are putting their good stewardship into practice by monitoring their energy use, installing energy&#45;saving appliances, and even placing solar panels near their steeples. Bingham and her nonprofit organization, the Regeneration Project, have launched the Interfaith Power and Light Campaign, which is gaining converts across the United States – and garnering attention everywhere from Capitol Hill to CNN. The campaign includes 4,000 congregations in 23 state chapters. Starting with their places of worship, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and Christians of all denominations are taking deliberate steps to reduce their carbon footprint. “This kind of effort helps us celebrate our common ground,” says Dr.&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Environment, Arts, Culture, and Religion, Government</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-05-02T06:00:01-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>With Love Comes War</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/with_love_comes_war/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/with_love_comes_war/</guid>
 <description>Being a hominid in the late Pleistocene era (125,000 to 10,000 years ago) was a rough gig. In addition to hunting, gathering, and evolving, our ancestors had to deal with a fickle climate. The planet’s mean temperature varied over a range of about 46 degrees Fahrenheit, forcing hominid groups to wander far and wide in search of kinder climes and better grub. As these groups spread over the face of the Earth, they often bumped into each other – to violent effect: Conflicts between early human groups claimed up to 10 times more lives (as a percentage of all deaths) than did the European wars of the 20th century. Yet groups whose members managed to coordinate among themselves to aggress against outsiders at least won more food and territory, suggest economists Jung&#45;Kyoo Choi and Samuel Bowles in the Oct. 26, 2007, issue of Science. Having more food and territory, in turn, meant birthing more hominids with the same cooperative, yet xenophobic ways. And so over time, altruism – benefiting fellow group members at a personal cost – and parochialism – harboring hostilities toward members of other groups – evolved alongside each other, “with war as both the engine&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion, Government</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-03-11T06:00:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Old Dogs, New Opinions</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/old_dogs_new_opinions/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/old_dogs_new_opinions/</guid>
 <description>A stroll through the greeting card aisle of many dime stores reveals Americans’ beliefs about aging. The cards clearly convey the widely held belief that as the years tick by, people not only get weaker and slower, they also get crankier and more close&#45;minded. In short, “[Americans] think that old people get as rigid as their arteries,” says Nicholas L. Danigelis, a sociologist at the University of Vermont. Yet in a recent study published in the October 2007 American Sociological Review, Danigelis shows the opposite to be true: As people age, their political attitudes grow more liberal and flexible. “We found no support for the bogeyman of gerontology, which is that the older you get, the more conservative and rigid you become,” he says. Using data from the National Opinion Research Center’s General Social Surveys, the authors examined the political attitudes of 46,510 American adults from the years 1972 to 2004. They analyzed people’s attitudes toward women and blacks; their support of civil rights for such unpopular groups as communists, racists, and atheists; and their opinions about such personal issues as divorce, extramarital sex, and the right to die. They were particularly interested in how the attitudes of people age&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Arts, Culture, and Religion</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-03-02T20:53:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

<item>
 <title>Equal Partners</title>
 <link>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/equal_partners/</link>
 <guid>http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/equal_partners/</guid>
 <description>At dawn, a handful of tourists sit in watchful silence on a floating platform, hoping to spot one of the giant river otters that live in this Amazonian oxbow lake. Their Peruvian guide peers through her binoculars. She directs their gaze to a macaw whose call descends from the rain forest canopy. Back at the lodge, the tourists relax in thatched&#45;roof open&#45;air buildings constructed from sustainable forest materials. At dinner, they enjoy a buffet of traditional Peruvian foods, some grown by local farmers. All of the kitchen and cleaning staff, the drivers, and many of the multilingual guides come from the local community. The tourists are guests at Posada Amazonas, an ecologically friendly lodge in southeastern Peru that operates as a partnership between the Lima&#45;based for&#45;profit company Rainforest Expeditions and the community of Infierno, which includes the native Ese’eja people and more recent settlers. “Tourism operators often strive for buy&#45;in from the local community, but Posada Amazonas goes further,” says Amanda Stronza, an assistant professor of anthropology at Texas A&amp;amp;M University. The partnership engages the local people as owners and decision makers, she says. As a result, the business gains valuable local knowledge and labor and the locals gain valuable&#8230;</description>
 <dc:subject>Environment, Economic Development, Arts, Culture, and Religion, Corporate Social Responsiblity</dc:subject>
 <content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
 <dc:date>2008-02-08T22:21:00-08:00</dc:date>
</item>

    
    </channel>
</rss>