Read part 1 and part 2 of our interview with Gabriel Kasper.
“What’s Next for Philanthropy?” asks the Monitor Institute, in a report subtitled “Acting Bigger and Adapting Better in a Networked World.” The report identifies ten “next practices” that can help funders have a bigger impact in this crazy, changing world. We spoke recently with co-author Gabriel Kasper, (bio) who will address members of the Washington Regional Association of Grantmakers at our 2010 Annual Meeting on Thursday.
The report raises the issue of competition between funders–that in the quest to lead, too few funders are willing to follow. Can you talk about that?
Competition is a strange thing in philanthropy because it’s not competition for financial rewards or profit; it’s about reputation, credit, and things of that nature. As a result, there are too many people trying to lead and direct others, and too few who are willing to follow. As Sterling Speirn, CEO of the Kellogg Foundation, used to say, “If everyone is acting like a lighthouse, who are the boats?”
We think following is one of the most powerful things that funders can do these days. A great model has been Warren Buffett, who decided not to create his own philanthropy, but to give to Gates in recognition that Gates was already doing good work. We hope that this sort of piggybacking on the good work of others will start to happen more frequently.
Back in March, we brought some philanthropic leaders and observers together to have them interact with some of the report’s ideas in their early form. We did an innovation exercise—what are some things that could help move the field forward? One group came up with the Smart Money Award, which would be given to the best act of followership in philanthropy. The group actually got so excited about the idea that all of the participants reached into their wallets and pooled money so they could get it started and make it real by giving out a first award—$50, I believe—to the Kellogg Foundation, for giving money to the Buffett Early Childhood Initiative instead of starting their own effort. The first formal award later went to the McKnight Foundation for choosing to conduct its environmental grantmaking through intermediaries, believing it could best spend its dollars by trusting and supporting the good work and strategies of established funders rather than needing to invent its own unique approach.
Do you think the ideas in this report are going to catch on?
I think change of any sort is always hard, but that there’s an opening right now, at this particular moment. Lately I’ve been thinking of that great quote by Rahm Emanuel—“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” Most people heard that sound bite, but they never really heard the real point that was behind the line, which I think was really pretty powerful. He was explaining that when things are going well, it’s very hard to make changes. But when you have this kind of crisis, it’s awful, but it also opens up an opportunity to do things that you’ve long needed to do, but haven’t. All of the things you’ve always been able to put off during good times suddenly become more immediate and pressing. So the question is, can funders use this moment as an opportunity to do the things they’ve known they’ve needed to do for a long time?
Dec. 2 @ WG: “Foundation Spend Down: Strategies, Lessons and Options”
Posted by nick geisinger 
