« The Professional Education of Advisors in Philanthropy (Notes for Donors and Nonprofit Leaders Working With Advisors and Around Them) | Main | Human Flourishing in the Green Zones »

January 29, 2008

Comments

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

Dave

Thanks for the hat tip. I really do think the nomenclature makes a difference. If we change the way we talk about the donor-recipient relationship then we will see a change in behavior and interaction. With that shift to common stakeholders I think the trust level rises and the need for endless paperwork diminishes.

phil

I agree. I struggle constantly with what word to use when talking about "donors." That word objectifies people. To call them clients objectifies them in another way. To call them constituents is better but sounds like jargon. Stakeholders sort of works. Citizens is best. Fellow citizens. Givers is not bad either, since we are all givers in our own way. But citizen base is a great phrase. (Donor base, client base, customer base - the citizen base includes all those roles and relations.) I had an "aha" reading the Citizen Base Initiative site. I think that way of looking at the "ecosystems" around social benefits and civil society and social ventures is a breakthrough. Thank you for pointing to it. Are you associated with that project?

The comments to this entry are closed.

About

Wealth Bondage Premium Content

  • Castle by the Sea
    Provided as a professional courtesy at no extra charge to those with net worth of $25 million or more and/or family income of $500,000 a year or more, and to their Serving Professionals of all genders.