My Photo

Just Tweet It!

    follow me on Twitter

    My Flickr

    • My Flickr
      This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Laurie_P. Make your own badge here.

    Become a Fan

    « E.D./CEO Term Limits? | Main | Function Before Fashion: Design should work! »

    June 27, 2011


    Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

    Laurie, your post really made think about this issue. Part of me agrees with you - that giving represents a gift without an expectation of reciprocity. On the other hand, if these social "investors" want to call what they do "giving," so be it, as long as the charity benefits.

    Hi Elaine - thanks for your comment.

    The problem is - charities are not benefiting. And that's what the study shows. In fact, they are ending up with less money overall.

    Ultimately, charities exist to do good works and donors give because they want to help save lives, the environment, an animal etc. It is the charity's job to do what is best and right for its mission.

    If they label something "giving" that isn't - just to please the donor in the short term, and then end up with less money to achieve their good works... everyone loses.

    It's the job of charities to have a transparent dialogue with donors, investors and everyone else so that everyone is working to achieve the best outcome. If someone cares more about their investment being labelled "giving" than they do the overall ability of the charity to save lives (or achieve their other goals), then perhaps that's someone who ought to find another organization to invest in.

    I think the collective brains of the charitable sector can find a way to communicate this that makes everyone feel good, but doesn't also result in charities losing revenue.

    Thanks again for your comment!

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    • My Naymz Reputation
      Ms. Laurie Pringle


    Related Posts with Thumbnails