Can Do Winners Tackle World Problems

Carla Dearing on Partnerships and Collaboration, reporting from Slate 60 Conference and Philanthropy Series.

In two days packed with a rich variety of content and conversation, I was most struck by the fact that the gathering’s superstars don’t see themselves as philanthropists, donors, or the newest term: "philanthropreneurs." These are folks used to getting things done -- problem solvers who are bringing to the globe’s most deeply-entrenched social problems, many of the same tools they use to address business challenges.

These world-historical figures don't strike me as "folks." Whatever is being settled through a collaboration of these sector-straddling Titans, it is not for the likes of us to do much more than be caught up in the buzz.  Who partners with whom here? Titan with Titan, or country clown with country clown? I think at a visceral level Carla, a success in business who is now a leader is a leader in the nonprofit sector, sees herself, or her ego-ideal, in these Supermen and Superwomen. I fear them and their glibness and their arrogance. They have presided over the problems they now will solve: inequality, instability, and unstainability.  As Clinton and other Uber-Citizens of the World step forward to work things out for us, will power devolve, or will these partnerships be collusive, as one sectoral leader connives with others to ride this wave of mindless enthusiasm for the new philanthropy or whatever they call it. To whom are these people accountable?

 

Comments

[Nonprofiteer]

I reach a similar conclusion from the other end of the political spectrum: please see today's post at nonprofiteer.typepad.com

[Phil]

Reading your comment I assumed you must be a conservative or libertarian. I am, for want of a better description, a Situationist, posing as a glib, self-serving journalist and "philantropreneur." In short, a hack among hacks, writing mainstream hackish prose for an audience of well placed numbskulls who, for lack of a decent education in the liberal arts, can't, despite or because of their MBAs, tell the difference between asinine, preppy writing like in the Wall Street Journal and satire of same. I am pleased to have fooled you, though depressed as well.

I blogged your post. Thanks.

[Daniel F. Bassill]

I'd like to see these leaders using maps and blueprints to guide their actions.

In the Program Locator at http://www.tutormentorconnection.org I use maps of Chicago with demographic overlays to show where poverty and poorly performing schools are most concentrated. These are the neighborhoods where a variety of non-school supports, such as volunteer-based tutoring/mentoring programs are needed. You can search the database, by zip code and age group, to determine which neighborhoods have programs and which do not.

In the Tutor/Mentor Institute and links section of the same site I use charts, as a form of blueprint, to illustrate the variety of tutoring/mentoring activities and volunteers are needed, and the need for this involvement to start early and last until kids are in careers.

Every organization on the map and in the blueprint needs to be consistently funded over many years to achieve the result of kids finishing school and starting careers.

Similar maps and blueprints are needed to end AIDS, end water problems, improve democracy, and address just about any other issue. Without the map we can give leaders lots of visibility, but still not have resources in all the places they need to be. Without the blueprint we only fund part of the solution, meaning we only solve part of the problem.

Building maps and blueprints is only the first major chalenge. Getting millions of people to use these to make decisions on where and how they get involved, or give their money, is an even larger challenge.