124 research outputs found
Philanthropic Responsiveness: An Informed Governance Model for Decision-making
No full textPresented at the 61st annual Western Social Science Association, (WSSA)
Link to Program: https://www.wssaweb.com/documents/archive/2019_Conference_Abstracts_Official_2019-05-31.pdf
Philanthropic organizations contribute to important work that solves complex problems to strengthen communities. Many of these organizations are moving toward engaging in public policy work, in addition to funding programs. This paper raises questions of legitimacy for organized philanthropy (i.e., philanthropic foundations in a pluralistic democracy. Philanthropic literature has focused on criticism relating to accountability and transparency in relation to the criticisms surrounding philanthropy as a legitimate actor in the public policy arena. Kraeger, in this paper expands the model to shift from accountability to responsiveness and community participation. Communities are defined and expanded beyond grant-recipients. Kraeger argues that organized philanthropy should seek be responsive to communities in developing a public policy agenda that is meaningful for community change. This paper suggests a new paradigm, called philanthropic responsiveness as governance model, which does not suggest shared governance but informed governance in decision-making. The Philanthropic Responsiveness Model can be empirically tested and used as a governance tool
Book Review: Understanding Social Enterprise, 2nd Edition
No full textReviewed Work: Understanding Social Enterprise, 2nd Edition by Rory Ridley-Duff and Mike Bull
Reviewer: Dr. Patsy Kraege
Chp 10: Socioconomers: New Organizational Actors in Hybrid Corporations
No full textNot every actor for social good in structured organizations is seeking to break systems or patterns to create social good. Much of the work of social good has been accepted and institutionalized in the study of social entrepreneurship and microfinance, corporations have incorporated social responsibility as a key component of valve for the firm. In fact, recent scholarship has considered corporate social responsibility, “firms of endearment”, firms which enjoy both social and financial profits (Sisodia et al., Wharton School Publishing, Upper Saddle River, 2003). These organizational forms have led to the conceptualization of private firms with a social benefit overlay. Hybrid organizations will meet the dual needs of profit maximization and social good. Perhaps then there is a need to distinguish these organizational actors from social entrepreneurs. In this article, I consider who are the socially minded business people working and co-creating financial and social returns in today’s economy. They may not be social entrepreneurs. They are not necessarily seeking large-scale social change; agents instead they seek to drive the economic engine while co-producing social good and revenue. We might call these organizational actors “socioconomers” rather than social entrepreneurs. The term “socioconomer” derives from social and economics. It is a hybrid term just like the actors own, operate and work in social enterprise firms. The paper first discusses who is a “socioconomer” and where he or she might work. Specifically, the paper posits that a socioconomer might own, operate or work in a U.S. hybrid corporation (such as a Benefit Corporation or a Low Profit Limited Liability (L3C) company in order to maximize profit as well as personal and societal purpose in the workplace
Chapter 15: Building a healthy community: the Coastal Georgia Indicators Coalition
No full textThe Coastal Georgia Indicators Coalition (CGIC) is a multi-sector and multi-actor community coalition (which includes public, nonprofit and private companies as well as community members and advocates) model for a comprehensive, coordinated approach for community development addressing overall health and well-being while leveraging resources for community initiatives. The CGIC evolved from a community stakeholder initiative interested in community into a stand-alone nonprofit organization responsible for housing the indicator data from the original studies to incorporating expanded data and other initiatives to promote community health, well-being, economic opportunity and quality of life. This chapter examines how theories of participatory community development as a process, action and outcome apply to the CGIC. Background on the City of Savannah and Chatham County (hereafter, “Savannah-Chatham”) is provided for rich context about the area from a geographical, historical and economic context. Finally, the chapter concludes with a section on best practices
State Arts Commissions: Engaging Leaders for the Arts
No full textPresented at the South Eastern Conference for Public Administration (SECoPA)
Link to Program: https://secopa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2018_program.pd
Organization, representation and Collective Action: Notes on the Sweet Briar College Turnaround,
No full textPresented at the 58th Western Social Science Association Conference, (WSSA)
Link to Program: https://www.wssaweb.com/documents/archive/WSSA_2016_Reno_FINAL_for_printer.pd
Philanthropy: A study in Quality of Life and Community Well-Being Outcomes
No full textPresented at the 15th Annual International Society for Quality of Life Studie
Capacity Building as Credible Commitment: A Theory of Nonprofit Budgeting
No full textPresented at the American Society for Public Administrators conferenc
Nonprofits: Nuts and Bolts Third Annual Native Leadership Summit
No full textPaper presented at Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus
- …
