(Illustration by Stuart McReath)
Over the course of this series, we’ve heard from a range of different philanthropic leaders about where the field is today, and where it might be headed over the coming decade. The authors have highlighted the sense that many traditional systems—from national and global governance to our overarching economic paradigms—feel as if they are now being challenged. And while the status quo is in disequilibrium, there is an opportunity for philanthropy to be more than just another institution under threat; it can be a dynamic part of the solution.
After all, as the only truly flexible capital dedicated to social good, philanthropy is uniquely positioned to respond to these types of challenges. Businesses, governments, and nonprofits alike all have to respond urgently to shorter-term pressures. Funders don’t face these kinds of market, political, and fundraising pressures in the same way. Although this insulation can lead to a lack of accountability at times for philanthropy, it also means that funders are particularly well situated to be thoughtful about their financial and social capital, to take risks, to respond to urgent needs when needed, and at times, to take the long view on creating change.
Yet for any individual funder, the wide range of possibilities can feel both exciting and daunting, especially against a backdrop of turbulence, uncertainty, and dynamism in the world around them.
That’s because there’s no single, “right” answer that will work for every funder. Instead, what’s important is building a better understanding of how the world, and the places, people, and issues that they care about are changing; what’s possible (or newly possible) for their organizations as a result; and what capabilities are then needed to make sound choices and take meaningful action.
So rather than proposing one-size-fits-all solutions, here are a few parting thoughts on what some of those critical capabilities may look like in the coming years, tied to the four “edges” that our research suggests could play an outsized role in the future of philanthropy.
Rethinking Philanthropy’s Role
Most funders think about their strategies and roles from the inside-out. They start with what they can control—their mission, vision, and values—and then project that out onto the world and the changes they want to create. This can provide much needed ballast over the years ahead. But in a world buffeted by constant change, it will also be critical for funders to think about things from the outside-in—to understand how the world is shifting and what that means for both what they do and how they do it.
Developing an outside-in view to go along with a funder’s inside-out convictions, however, requires building a muscle that many funders haven’t developed yet: the capacity to understand and make sense of the trends, forces, and critical uncertainties that could shape their work in the years ahead. No one can accurately predict how things will unfold. But using scenario planning and other futures-thinking tools can help a funder understand a fuller set of possible futures that could emerge—and the proper societal role the organization is best suited to play within them—to ensure that their strategies and approaches are robust and adaptable enough to create impact in an uncertain future.
Balancing Power
A funder’s view of the future is deeply influenced by who holds the power to participate in, design, and make the decisions that will create it. When taking an outside-in view, it’s critical to ensure a diversity of views, experiences, and expertise are taken into account, paying special attention to the wisdom of groups that are closest to (or even a part of) the communities and issues that are being affected. But this is a function that many funders may need to build new capacity to undertake—not to mention building the systems and commitment to ensure that the input can truly influence strategy and practice in an ongoing way.
Some funders are also beginning to go beyond just broadening the perspectives that inform their work to explore ways to actually share or cede power. In some cases, this process may include devolving decision-making away from the funder and toward the communities they are looking to support. In other instances, it can mean transferring significant financial assets to these groups, allowing them to build compounding assets and wealth over time that ensures they have the resources, flexibility, and independence to pursue critical work as they see fit.
Catalyzing Leverage
Most funders acknowledge that, compared to the resources that governments and businesses bring to bear, philanthropy is a small (albeit influential) fish in a big pond. But how a funder should respond and operate in light of that fact isn’t always clear, and the menu of options is still being written.
Some funders are building out much more robust strategic partnership or opportunity development functions to connect with other actors across philanthropy, business, government, and media to explore and co-design impactful collaborations. Others are going beyond internal impact strategies by co-developing broader network or ecosystem strategies where multiple organizations align in a common direction and parse their unique roles in moving toward it.
Regardless of the exact techniques, funders can build the capacity to create leverage that allows them to create impact at scale, to map the network of players that should be involved, to align action, and to build often-new internal capabilities to work as part of a wider ecosystem.
(Re)Designing the Enterprise
Responding to the seven “Big Shifts” we identified in our research will call for greater levels of adaptability for organizations of all stripes, not just philanthropy. The challenge for funders will be to constantly interrogate the default organizational settings of the field, many of which were developed a century ago, to foster the organizational agility that will likely be required for the decade ahead.
Instilling dynamism into a sometimes-static system can take a variety of forms. For example, time-bound initiatives with clear impact goals can allow funders to more regularly refresh their work without undergoing a major strategic overhaul. More fluid, cross-functional teams can allow funders to break down silos and to create and re-create groups best suited to achieve a range of goals. Dedicated innovation and learning groups can help source, develop, and elevate early-stage, game-changing ideas. Whatever a funder’s goals, it will be important to have the capacity to figure out the right organizational design options to achieve them.
We’d like to close by thanking Carmen Rojas, Stephanie Fuerstner-Gillis, Jeff Raikes, Tricia Raikes, Alandra Washington, Andrew Chunilall, and Tulaine Montgomery for sharing their insights about the future of philanthropy over the last several weeks. We hope that their perspectives—combined with our broader findings from the What’s Next for Philanthropy in the 2020s initiative—can stimulate your thinking not only about what’s next for the field but also about what’s next for your own organization.
Support SSIR’s coverage of cross-sector solutions to global challenges.
Help us further the reach of innovative ideas. Donate today.
Read more stories by Gabriel Kasper, Justin Marcoux & Jennifer Holk.