Survey of millionaires’ attitude to philanthropy

A new survey from Barclays Wealth ranks attitudes toward philanthropy and giving among millionaires.  Australia ranks near the bottom; whilst the top three are the United States, South Africa and Saudi Arabia (respondents who say philanthropy is one of their top three spending priorities.)

In each of these three cultures philanthropy has a particular cultural significance.  Most of you are familiar with the cultural weight that US Americans place on philanthropy and its origins in its founders,  who wished to start a new society based on Christian principles.  Black South Africans share a philosophy called Ubuntu.  The Zulu say , “umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu (“a person is a person through other persons”).  Archbishop Desmond Tutu, has noted  “You can’t be human all by yourself, and when you have this quality – Ubuntu – you are known for your generosity.”   And for Saudis, charity (Zakat)is one of the five pillars of Islam: "For those who give in charity, men and women, and loan to Allah a Beautiful Loan, it shall be increased manifold ."(Koran 57:18).

What can we do in Australia (and New Zealand) to build similar attitudes?

The Gates and Buffet Show

Who are Bill and Warren targeting?  Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have earned masses of coverage for their recent invitation to Chinese billionaires to be more philanthropic.  They are about to do the same in India.  There has been some lively discussion about the state of philanthropy in China – it exists, it just isn’t an exact replica of the US variety.  The same will be said of India.  So who are Bill and Warren targeting.  All of us I hope.  And I hope we are all thinking of our own giving and how we can make a difference.

Is CSR Theft?

The long standing argument that claim that philanthropic efforts like CSR, corporate philanthropy, and cause-marketing products are tantamount to stealing profits away from company shareholders has re-emerged.

I have a bias in that I train non-profits in both forming business partnerships (and understanding businesses's CSR is one part of that); and also in obtaining major philanthropic gifts from individuals.  The latter, in my view, is by far the most effective mechanism for non-profits to obtain needed resources.  One argument suggests CSR is wasting the money of shareholders who are perfectly capable of giving their share of the corporation's profits to charity if they so choose.

However, the reality is that the majority of business after tax profit flows to institutional investors i.e. other corporations, not individuals.  Fortunately, many of these corporations recognise their corporate social responsibility.  Effective corporate social responsibility recognizes the importance of human and social capital.  It recognises that strong communities in which both customers and employees are safe, healthy and educated make profit and enduring sharholder value possible. In all, I believe the plurality of contribition to creating a better society is to be encouraged and that there are a multitude of examples of how a business in a better society is a better business.

The 21st Century Donor

Amidst all the doom and gloom I happened upon nfp Synergy’s research paper ‘The 21st Century Donor’.  OK it was published before the collapse of the sub prime market and all that has happened since but here are two of the points it makes.  My question is will people have changed since 2007?

“The 21st Century Donor is richer, more engaged, more discerning, and more in control than her 20th Century predecessor. Giving to a cause that they care about passionately will increasingly be as much part of many (rich) people’s lifestyles as mortgages, second homes and holidays. To make this a reality fundraisers and those who ask for donations will need to understand what their donors want, their lifestyles, their worries, their wealth, and their needs. “

“Across just about all our interviewees there was agreement on one issue: big donations are on the rise. The rise of mass affluence and the growing desire for the mass affluent to scramble up Maslow’s hierarchy and reach the self-actualisation summit means that ‘changing the world’ is now high on many rich people’s agenda. “

The Billion Dollar Men

Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and now Lord Sainsbury has joined the billion dollar man league in (philanthropic terms).
Lord Sainsbury of the supermarket family, many others of whom are substantial donors through their various trusts has committed to give £ 1 billion to support scientific research, the arts and mental health and projects in East Africa.  Like Bill and Melinda Gates, Lord Sainsbury  wishes the foundation's funds to be spent during his lifetime, rather than invested to create an endowment for future giving.
The Great Depression of the 1930s saw the emergence some of the most significant endowments of hte 20th Century.  Are we seeing a new pattern of active philanthropy for the 21st?

Where are Australia’s Mega - Philanthropists?

Where are Australia’s mega - philanthropists?   Hard on the heels of Lord   the UK Sunday Times’ Giving List  highlights  top-end philanthropy in the UK, with the 100 most generous philanthropists donating £2.86m in 2008, a near ten per cent increase on the previous year.
Sometime Tory Party Treasurer (and donor to Oz Liberal party) , Lord Ashcroft was the top giver in 2008 after pledging to leave £880m to charity when he dies.  Self-made hedge fund billionaire Christopher Cooper-Hohn gave away nearly half a billion pounds in 2008 alone. His Children’s Investment Fund had originally aimed to distribute £5m per year, but last year increased that to £463m.   Scottish philanthropist, Tom Hunter has also reported he wants to give away £1bn, but his businesses have taken a hit from the economic downturn.

Obama's Online Fundraising

There is much noise in the non profit world about fundraising lessons to be learned from  Obama's presidential campaign - that non profits could raise huge amounts of money online.  One difference is, political campaigns have their “case for support” widely distributed through the media and do not require much relationship-building because they revolve around highly visible candidates.

Australian Asking Skills

Could the fact that while that “millionaires in the US give an average of 3.5 per cent of their income to charity while Canadian millionaires give 3.2 per cent,  Australian millionaires give less than 2 per cent”,  (as told  to the ABC.  Australia by Carolyn Hardy, UNICEF Australia chief executive) be down to the fact that Australian non profits have yet to sharpen their asking skills to match those of their North American counterparts?

After the GCR

I believe that major gifts will continue to be the most significant source of the funding that will make significant differences to individual programmes.

E-giving,Web 3.0 based applications and social networks will grow as a mechanism for fundraising - joining ( and possibly displacing) traditional methods such as street, door-to-door, direct mail and telephone.

Not for profits should continue to invest in the development of their staff and resources - including knowledge.

Corporate partnerships will re-establish after the GCR but will offer more in terms of non-cash resources than direct inco

Australia's Rich Not Big Givers to Charity

Once again the media (Sydney Morning Herald 25 May 2010) draw attention to the gap between the giving of the wealthy of the US and UK and those of Australia.  The good news in the article is that a significant number of company directors volunteer their time to serve on boards of non profits.  Ergo, as non profit managers we are in a position to educate our board members and through them their peers in the value of giving.The value of their time and experience as board members is significant and welcome but it is their philanthropy that will make the real difference.

How do we make our Case to Asia's New Wealthy?

According to the new Merril Lynch Cap Gemini World Wealth Report, China and India harbour the world’s fastest-growing collection of millionaires and billionaires, making them magnets for wealth managers. But how many of us involved in philanthropy are cultivating these potential new donors?  How much do we understand about attitudes to giving amongst these prospects?  How do we make our case to them:  how do we organise our case around their visions and beliefs?

Giving to non-metropolitan arts

A debate in the UK is being waged over the challenge for arts organisations outside the capital to find wealthy patrons.  http://tinyurl.com/39zglt2   Leading non metropolitan institutions argue that, “Experience suggests that most wealthy private donors have chosen to associate themselves with national arts organisations based in the capital, notwithstanding the excellent artistic contribution that organisations such as ours make.”   I wonder whether the truth lies more with the failure of those arts organisations outside the capital to invest in philanthropy than the lack of regional wealthy prospects.