AXA XL’s Post

"Embracing an ecosystem approach to philanthropy, which focuses on building and respecting relationships to others in the system, is an essential element of creating lasting impact". ICYMI: Nick Tedesco maps out what an ecosystem approach looks like in family philanthropy, featuring insights from our board and Bainum family member, Brooke Bainum. Read it here: https://lnkd.in/euD8XMWy

Interesting article by Nick Tedesco at National Center for Family Philanthropy (NCFP) about the need for bold leadership in family philanthropy. Hope you give it a read!

New Resource: Values-Aligned Philanthropy Board Discussion Guide Your foundation may have anti-hate funding policies in place, but do you have board buy-in? Having the perspective of board leadership can ensure that your policy reflects your organization’s values and has full commitment from key stakeholders. Our discussion guide can help you have frank but inclusive conversations with your board. Members can access this, and our entire collection of Values-Aligned Philanthropy resources, for free!

There are so many tremendous examples of outstanding individual and team leadership/innovation here in Canada. I anticipate we are going to have a VERY difficult task selecting winners!! So let’s get those nominations in folks. #leadership #innovation

In this episode of Philanthropic Masterminds, Karen explores how you can unleash your not-so-secret power in 2024 and garner awesome results! CEOs, Development and Advancement leaders and officers, board members, and volunteer leaders will find this conversation inspiring. https://lnkd.in/gSsTYiRu

As DAF providers consider what DAF grant requests to reject, getting the Board aligned will matter. Donors Trust, National Christian Foundation. Signatary. Catholic Foundations. Baptist Foundations. Jewish Foundations. Islamic Foundations. Community Foundations. Women’s Foundations. LGBTQ+ Foundations. National Gift Funds. Will advisors have to research which DAF provider will reject as hateful which grants to orgs of interest to a particular donor? I think so, and it can be an uncomfortable conversation. Does Planned Parenthood cause harm? Which providers take that position? Is Focus on the Family a hate group? Which providers take that position? Is Daughters of the Confederacy a hate group? Is Steven Miller’s America First Legal a hate group? What about Pacific Legal Foundation? Is Koch funded Stand Together a front for political organizing in service to extractive capitalism? I feel remiss as a philanthropy educator in having ducked such questions. Values based planning is a cultural war zone. And advisors are entering a minefield without preparation.

Can philanthropy competitions be equitable? 🤔 YES 🙌 We believe we provide a rare opportunity for organizations, particularly those with proximate or BIPOC—Black, Indigenous, and people of color—leadership, to compete based on their potential for impact rather than access to a funder’s network. Learn more about our approach in this Inside Philanthropy penned by our CEO: https://lnkd.in/gF5q6At

Friday Thought: There may be no more problematic sentence in all of nonprofit/philanthropic life than, “Boards set strategic direction.” Honestly, the confusion and chaos that one sentence—repeated constantly—has wreaked. I have never worked at or served on the board of a nonprofit/philanthropy where that sentence captured anything close to the truth of how organizations actually set strategy. In staffed organizations with paid executive leadership, boards: - vet proposed changes to existing strategy very carefully (unless you join a start-up, strategy already exists when you get to the board!) - partner with staff leadership to clarify and sharpen the language of strategy - officially adopt strategic shifts - act as passionate ambassadors of strategy But to suggest that boards, as temporary, rotating groups of volunteers, create strategy or decide what it should be, my goodness, the gamesmanship and wasted time/energy on everyone’s part that has yielded. Strategy is so damn important; to get bogged down in this confusion over its development is incalculably costly.

Jeanne Bell nails it with her discussion of strategy, below. With all due respect, and as someone who has served on and advised a lot of boards, nonprofit board members should not be the drivers of strategy. The drivers of strategy should be the "voice of the customer" -- the interests of (1) end users of a nonprofit's work and (2) donors who contribute to a nonprofit in an effort to effectuate some social change -- mediated by the nonprofit's staff, who have dramatically greater awareness of the nonprofit's programs and capacities than a nonprofit's board has. A board has a role -- as some reflection of other stakeholders' interests and as people with diverse skills that would be tapped in furtherance of some potential nonprofit strategic imperatives, and as a formal governance mechanism for adopting the strategic plan -- but it can't be the driver of strategic planning. And while Jeanne may not go this far, I will say additionally that "strategic planning" should not be used as a vehicle for "board engagement" or as a means of preparing boards to fundraise. "Strategy" is far too important to be used as a carrot to get a nonprofit board to pay attention or as a rehearsal of talking points for board calls to donors.

Creating a philanthropic culture requires going beyond slogans. For instance, The Accounting Industry Leadership Council, started by Prager Metis in 2020, comprises 25 firms that collectively commit to ending Alzheimer's based on personal connections and understanding the financial strain of the disease. Ceoworld.biz's latest article, "How Business Leaders Can Inspire Multi-Level Philanthropic Involvement," by Glenn Friedman, dives into how companies can activate values through charity involvement, offer multi-level participation options, showcase tangible change from efforts to inspire more involvement and welcome new initiatives. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/e-MQBUmY #yourworldworthmore