INSP - ‘Venturesome thinking’ on INSP agenda

The first working group meetings have all focused on defining terms and outlining the programme of work. Working Group 4 agreed that the central purpose of the group should be to encourage more effective and more strategic philanthropy aimed at social change.

This encompasses both attracting new donors and helping active philanthropists to become more effective in their giving. Several possible themes emerged during the session.
Engaging new donors How can new donors be motivated and encouraged? What resources and networks have been effective, in the US and other countries?
Donor learning How do donors learn about strategic giving? What additional resources and materials do they need? What is the role of networks such as RAGs, associations and giving circles, and of legal and financial advisers? While some donors like to attend seminars and workshops, others may prefer less formal ‘peer learning’, or even private, individual learning. Many donors want to be inspired not educated.
Giving vehicles What are the established and emerging vehicles for effective philanthropy? Interesting approaches include community foundations, donor-advised funds, giving circles and venture philanthropy ‘portfolios’.
The role of technology How can technology further the goals of philanthropy? It was agreed that it is important not to focus too narrowly on ‘e-philanthropy’ or the potential of the Internet merely to ‘fundraise’. A broader vision is needed.
Global philanthropy There is a growing interest in supporting global issues and giving internationally. What resources exist for global philanthropists? What are the mechanisms available for international giving? What else is needed?
Venture philanthropy What is included in ‘venture philanthropy’? What is the experience with various models in different countries? Is venture philanthropy really new? It was suggested that traditional and venture philanthropy might be viewed as part of a continuum’, with bad practices at both ends of the spectrum. For instance, venture philanthropy can be too intrusive or donor driven while traditional philanthropy can focus too much on discrete grants rather than real social change. It was pointed out that what the group should look at is venturesome thinking.

Members of this and Working Group 3 both stressed that written material is not enough to produce change. The true benefit of knowledge comes from its application. To effect real change, the INSP will need to actively promote ideas. The work of the whole network will have to be disseminated, not only through publications but also through seminars, presentations at international conferences and ‘peer consulting’.

For more information, visit the website at www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/INSP
To voice comments, criticisms and suggestions, email insp@bertelsmann.de

INSP update
All four working groups have now had their first meeting. The first of these was reported in the December issue of Alliance. Since then:

• Working Group 4, looking at new donors and new directions, met in Toronto, Canada in December. The coordinator is Joe Breiteneicher of The Philanthropic Initiative, Boston.
• Working Group 2, looking at programmes and communications, met in New York in January. The coordinator is Rupert Strachwitz of the Maecenata Institute for Third Sector Studies, Germany.
• Working Group 1, looking at investors in the public good, met in London later in January. Report in the next issue of Alliance.

The first meeting of the whole network will take place in Heidelberg, Germany on 20-22 March 2002. The new INSP website will be presented at this meeting.

Anyone with interesting and challenging texts on strategic approaches to philanthropy for inclusion in the website, please submit them to the INSP management at dirk.eilinghoff@bertelsmann.de

Working Group 3: Programmes and communications
The meeting agreed that the topic should be broken down into four subtopics.
Communications and transparency  Internal and external communication need to be looked at together. Power relations inside a foundation affect communication processes outside the foundation.
Programme design  Programme design is about priority setting within goals. What alternative approaches are there and what are the consequences of each?
Stakeholder interaction  Stakeholder interactions have to do with building social capital. How can they be shaped for the purpose of enabling change in communities?
Evaluation Evaluation can be defined as the systematic use of research to learn about the effects of significant social change activities. It was pointed out that evaluation can lead to risk-averse behaviour.