Philanthropy's Structures & Relationships

Ba-boomp. Ba-boomp. Our hearts beat thanks to a rather elegant structure roughly the size of a closed fist. Divided into four-chambers, the left and right atria fill with blood returning to the heart from the body and lungs, while the left and right ventricles pump blood to the lungs and body. Each of the parts of the heart works in unison, and as part of an intricately connected web of arteries, capillaries and veins that pick-up waste (carbon dioxide) and deliver nutrients (oxygen and hormones) to all parts of our body.

Together, the heart, capillaries, arteries, and veins make-up the cardiovascular system, which functions, round the clock, to maintain the body’s delicate temperature and fluid balance.

We can think of structure, then, as one building block of systems. In a system, structures are connected via relationships, and perform to an underlying logic or purpose. The form that structure takes is related to its function, to what it’s meant to do and achieve. Architect Frank Lloyd Wright, one of the West’s most eminent innovators of structure, notes that, “Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union."

Instead of four chambers, philanthropy is made-up of elements: policies, practices, and resource flows.

The structural layer of systems include policies, practices, and resource flows, elements that are connected to systems outside philanthropy.

Let's consider these four overlapping sectors that interact directly with philanthropy, influencing philanthropy's structure.

One way to look at philanthropy's structural relationships is as follows.

Organizations who subscribe to the definition of charitable activities receive recognition & legitimacy from the state, in exchange for issuing tax receipts.

Donors receive tax subsidies from the state in exchange for giving dollars to registered charities; they can choose to control where their dollars go. They may also receive public recognition from the charity for their gifts, which might result in a positive externality (a good reputation).

Individuals can receive material resources from charitable organizations, if they ask for or accept help, which might result in a positive externality (feeling seen) and/or a negative externality (shame). Informal support initiatives and social movements lack legitimacy from the state, in exchange for less regulation and the opportunity for greater political engagement.

When mapping resource flows, there are multiple currencies to consider.

• 
  Legitimacy: gaining status in the eyes of the law
• 
  Resources: giving and/or receiving money, services, space, or other goods
• 
  Control: setting and/or following terms & conditions to receive legitimacy and resources

Unplanned side effects or consequences of these resource flows can also be significant.

• 
  Reputation: being perceived positively or negatively, as generous or miserly, etc.
• 
  Recognition: feeling seen, heard, respected
• 
  Influence: indirectly or directly shaping decisions
• 
  Shame: feeling inadequate or less than

• 
  Philanthropy has a structure

  The structure is the most visible part of a system: policies, practices, and resource flows
  
  
• 
  Form & function align to achieve purpose

  So learning about philanthropy's form (structure) can help us see how well it is set-up to achieve different purposes
  

  
  
• 
  Structures connect complex elements

  The structure of philanthropy connects it to the voluntary sector, the state, the financial market, and families and individuals
  

  
  
• 
  Structures allow for exchange

  Philanthropic structures are designed to exchange legitimacy, resources, and control
  

  
  
• 
  All activities have externalities

  Externalities are the unplanned side effects and consequences of such changes to reputation or feelings of shame. They can be positive or negative.

  
  

Experiences & Observations

How might you map your relationship(s) to philanthropy? Which structures do you engage with, in what ways, and how do you benefit, or not?

Reactions & Impressions

What do you find jumps out at you when you see philanthropy mapped in this way? What would you like to add or question?

Questions & Hunches to test

Thinking of a philanthropic foundation you are close to, which structural elements are considered fixed, and which are considered changeable?