美国企业是极其慷慨的。仅2020一年,就捐出近170亿美元,为解决从社会公平到药物成瘾等各种问题,各大企业可谓殚精竭虑。然而,尽管美国企业的慈善意识有目共睹,这些捐赠的实际成效却有待商榷。要解决当今社会的最大难题,各公司需要一个更好的方案。
美国企业做慈善的方式非常传统。他们过度依赖传统的企业基金会:通过非营利组织向特定对象和边缘群体提供资助,或减免产品和服务费用。这种捐赠虽然重要,但无法为解决包括贫困和经济不平等在内的长期问题,带来其所需要的系统性变革。这些问题只有通过长期创新,而非短期项目,才能得到解决。
因此,各公司应该采取一种新的非营利模式:一家从公司中分离出来的公共慈善机构。它明显区别于传统的企业基金会的同时,在推动系统性变革方面能够拥有更加显著的成效。
笔者机构所采用的这种新型非营利模式,源于以下认知:公共慈善机构比企业基金会拥有更多的灵活性。按照规定,公共慈善机构的大部分捐款应来自非企业渠道,这意味着更多的潜在资源。它们可以自由地对前途无限的创新者进行投资,再利用所得回报进行二次投资来加快进程——而这正是企业基金会所要避免的。同时,公共慈善机构可以利用创始企业的基础设施及其员工的专业知识,获得企业本身的好处。
综合来看,较于企业基金会,公共慈善机构的运营模式更接近于初创公司孵化器或种子投资者的运营。他们可以很顺利地投资那些需要较多资源或较长时限的初创企业和有前景的解决方案。他们也更容易资助那些在传统投资圈籍籍无名的创新者。这种非传统战略对推动社会问题的全面解决至关重要。
各公司如何才能做到这一点呢?首先,成立一家公共慈善机构,作为传统企业基金会的替代或补充。赋予它寻找和资助有前景的创新者和社会变革者的使命,这些人可以从根源上帮助解决社会面临的重大挑战。
接下来,让你的员工参与其运作。他们可以向公共慈善机构贡献自己的时间和专业技能,使其能够更有成效地资助有前途的创新项目。这是公共慈善机构与企业基金会的另一区别,基金会只能捐献企业资金,但无法提供企业员工所具备的专业知识。独立的董事会可以杜绝企业内的自我交易。
下一步,是向企业外部募集捐赠款项——这是成立一家公共慈善机构的必备条件。幸好,慈善家们有充足的理由支持非营利机构。创始公司的资源及其员工的专业知识能为他们的捐款带来增值,使捐赠者的资金发挥更大作用。由于投资能够产生回报并带来二次投资,随着时间的推移,他们的资助还会带来更大的影响力。
综合以上一切,能为我们带来什么?为迫在眉睫的社会问题带来突破性的解决方案。变革者需要资金和商业知识,但往往求助无门,公共慈善机构能够在这方面为他们排忧解难。对于社会创新一直以来的资助匮乏,意味着无数发展胎死腹中。有了这种新型非营利模式,它们终于有机会大展身手。
笔者的机构可能是首个采用公共慈善模式的机构。我们是由Roivant Sciences创立的一家技术驱动的医疗保健公司,致力于利用科技发展提高医疗保健的可及性,改善医疗资源匮乏群体的健康状况。医疗行业相关的企业基金会普遍推广免费或廉价的治疗方法,我们则专注于资助那些能够为推进健康公平作出长期贡献的创新者。
以本机构所资助的Sunflower Therapeutics为例。该公司正在开发一种极具成本效益的方法,用于欠发达国家的本土疫苗生产——这是健康公平的基本问题,也是大流行病后的迫切需求。除了资金,我们还为Sunflower提供商业知识。在我们这样的公共慈善机构的资助下,Sunflower Therapeutics可以为全球疫苗的生产和获得带来根本性的变革,这将为全球卫生保健做出贡献,并将终结长期存在于全球大部分地区的不平等现状。
这种新型非营利模式几乎适用于任何行业。银行可以资助创新型金融科技初创公司,为那些无银行账户或是不依赖银行服务的非银行用户提供金融服务。房屋建筑公司可以资助新型制造工艺,使住房更加经济耐用。科技公司可以扩大消费者对数字货币的使用,风靡全球的数字货币可以为美国少数群体赋权。这些非营利将需要遵守适用的州和联邦慈善法规,并制定健全的筹款计划,以便续获得来自创始公司以外的捐款,从而保持其公共慈善机构身份。
公共慈善机构潜力无限,但如果企业坚持传统的基金会模式,这些潜力将无法得到释放。久经考验的传统体系自有其存在价值,但已不足以应对大型挑战和长期存在的不公平现象。新的模式结合了营利性企业和非营利性公共慈善机构的优点,能够触发系统性的变革。美国企业还在等什么?(财富中文网)
林赛·安德罗斯基是 Raviant Social Ventures 的总裁兼首席执行官,同时担任麻省理工学院的理事。
翻译:刘潇怡
美国企业是极其慷慨的。仅2020一年,就捐出近170亿美元,为解决从社会公平到药物成瘾等各种问题,各大企业可谓殚精竭虑。然而,尽管美国企业的慈善意识有目共睹,这些捐赠的实际成效却有待商榷。要解决当今社会的最大难题,各公司需要一个更好的方案。
美国企业做慈善的方式非常传统。他们过度依赖传统的企业基金会:通过非营利组织向特定对象和边缘群体提供资助,或减免产品和服务费用。这种捐赠虽然重要,但无法为解决包括贫困和经济不平等在内的长期问题,带来其所需要的系统性变革。这些问题只有通过长期创新,而非短期项目,才能得到解决。
因此,各公司应该采取一种新的非营利模式:一家从公司中分离出来的公共慈善机构。它明显区别于传统的企业基金会的同时,在推动系统性变革方面能够拥有更加显著的成效。
笔者机构所采用的这种新型非营利模式,源于以下认知:公共慈善机构比企业基金会拥有更多的灵活性。按照规定,公共慈善机构的大部分捐款应来自非企业渠道,这意味着更多的潜在资源。它们可以自由地对前途无限的创新者进行投资,再利用所得回报进行二次投资来加快进程——而这正是企业基金会所要避免的。同时,公共慈善机构可以利用创始企业的基础设施及其员工的专业知识,获得企业本身的好处。
综合来看,较于企业基金会,公共慈善机构的运营模式更接近于初创公司孵化器或种子投资者的运营。他们可以很顺利地投资那些需要较多资源或较长时限的初创企业和有前景的解决方案。他们也更容易资助那些在传统投资圈籍籍无名的创新者。这种非传统战略对推动社会问题的全面解决至关重要。
各公司如何才能做到这一点呢?首先,成立一家公共慈善机构,作为传统企业基金会的替代或补充。赋予它寻找和资助有前景的创新者和社会变革者的使命,这些人可以从根源上帮助解决社会面临的重大挑战。
接下来,让你的员工参与其运作。他们可以向公共慈善机构贡献自己的时间和专业技能,使其能够更有成效地资助有前途的创新项目。这是公共慈善机构与企业基金会的另一区别,基金会只能捐献企业资金,但无法提供企业员工所具备的专业知识。独立的董事会可以杜绝企业内的自我交易。
下一步,是向企业外部募集捐赠款项——这是成立一家公共慈善机构的必备条件。幸好,慈善家们有充足的理由支持非营利机构。创始公司的资源及其员工的专业知识能为他们的捐款带来增值,使捐赠者的资金发挥更大作用。由于投资能够产生回报并带来二次投资,随着时间的推移,他们的资助还会带来更大的影响力。
综合以上一切,能为我们带来什么?为迫在眉睫的社会问题带来突破性的解决方案。变革者需要资金和商业知识,但往往求助无门,公共慈善机构能够在这方面为他们排忧解难。对于社会创新一直以来的资助匮乏,意味着无数发展胎死腹中。有了这种新型非营利模式,它们终于有机会大展身手。
笔者的机构可能是首个采用公共慈善模式的机构。我们是由Roivant Sciences创立的一家技术驱动的医疗保健公司,致力于利用科技发展提高医疗保健的可及性,改善医疗资源匮乏群体的健康状况。医疗行业相关的企业基金会普遍推广免费或廉价的治疗方法,我们则专注于资助那些能够为推进健康公平作出长期贡献的创新者。
以本机构所资助的Sunflower Therapeutics为例。该公司正在开发一种极具成本效益的方法,用于欠发达国家的本土疫苗生产——这是健康公平的基本问题,也是大流行病后的迫切需求。除了资金,我们还为Sunflower提供商业知识。在我们这样的公共慈善机构的资助下,Sunflower Therapeutics可以为全球疫苗的生产和获得带来根本性的变革,这将为全球卫生保健做出贡献,并将终结长期存在于全球大部分地区的不平等现状。
这种新型非营利模式几乎适用于任何行业。银行可以资助创新型金融科技初创公司,为那些无银行账户或是不依赖银行服务的非银行用户提供金融服务。房屋建筑公司可以资助新型制造工艺,使住房更加经济耐用。科技公司可以扩大消费者对数字货币的使用,风靡全球的数字货币可以为美国少数群体赋权。这些非营利将需要遵守适用的州和联邦慈善法规,并制定健全的筹款计划,以便续获得来自创始公司以外的捐款,从而保持其公共慈善机构身份。
公共慈善机构潜力无限,但如果企业坚持传统的基金会模式,这些潜力将无法得到释放。久经考验的传统体系自有其存在价值,但已不足以应对大型挑战和长期存在的不公平现象。新的模式结合了营利性企业和非营利性公共慈善机构的优点,能够触发系统性的变革。美国企业还在等什么?(财富中文网)
林赛·安德罗斯基是 Raviant Social Ventures 的总裁兼首席执行官,同时担任麻省理工学院的理事。
翻译:刘潇怡
Corporate America is exceedingly generous. With nearly $17 billion in donations in 2020 alone, businesses are working hard to address everything from equity to education to addiction. Yet while it’s undeniable that corporate America is philanthropically minded, it’s highly questionable whether all this giving is truly effective. Businesses need a better way to tackle society’s biggest problems.
When it comes to philanthropy, businesses take a traditional approach. They lean heavily on traditional corporate foundations: nonprofits through which they dole out grants to specific causes and marginalized communities, or provide free or reduced-price products and services. While this giving matters, it can’t drive the systemic change that’s needed to address long-standing issues like poverty or economic inequity. Such problems can be solved only by long-term innovation, not short-term programs.
That's why businesses should adopt a new nonprofit model: a public charity spinout from a corporation. It’s significantly different from traditional corporate foundations and exponentially more effective at driving systemic change.
This new nonprofit model, which my organization has adopted, springs from the realization that public charities have more flexibility than corporate foundations. Public charities are required to receive most donations from noncorporate sources, which means potentially greater resources. They are free to invest in promising innovators and reinvest the returns to spur faster progress—something corporate foundations avoid. At the same time, a public charity can draw on the expertise and infrastructure of the founding company and its employees, giving it the benefits of the business itself.
Add it all up, and public charities can operate more like a corporate startup incubator or seed investor than a corporate foundation. They can easily invest in startups and promising solutions that require more resources or a longer time frame. They can also more easily support innovators who are not well-known in traditional investor circles. This outside-the-box strategy is key to driving comprehensive solutions to society-wide problems.
How can a business make this happen? First, establish a public charity, either instead of or in addition to a traditional corporate foundation. Give it a mission of finding and investing in promising innovators and social changemakers who can tackle the root causes of major social challenges.
Next, get your employees involved in its work. They can donate their time and professional expertise to the public charity, empowering it to support promising innovations far more effectively. That’s another difference from a foundation, which doles out corporate money but not the subject mastery of a corporate workforce. An independent board can ensure there’s no corporate self-dealing.
The next step is to solicit donations from outside the business—a requirement for a public charity. Fortunately, philanthropists have a good reason to support this nonprofit. Their donations are amplified by the founding company’s resources and employee expertise, exceeding the impact that donor dollars would otherwise make. They can also watch their support grow more powerful over time, as investments generate returns and get reinvested.
Add it all up, and what do you get? Groundbreaking solutions to pressing social problems. The public charity gives changemakers the funding they need but often can’t find, as well as the business expertise they want but often don’t have. Historic lack of support for social innovation means that countless advances have never seen the light of day. With this new nonprofit model, they finally have the chance to shine.
My organization is potentially the first to adopt the public charity model. We were stood up by Roivant Sciences, a technology-driven health care company, and our mission is to use technological advances to expand health care access and improve health outcomes for underserved groups. While typical health care–related corporate foundations facilitate free or cheap therapeutics, we focus on supporting innovators who can advance health equity over the long run.
Consider Sunflower Therapeutics, which my organization supports. It is developing a cost-effective means of manufacturing vaccines locally in less developed countries—a basic matter of health equity and an urgent need coming out of the pandemic. In addition to funding, my organization provides Sunflower with corporate expertise. With a public charity like ours supporting it, Sunflower Therapeutics could fundamentally change how the world makes and gets vaccinations, which will protect health globally and end long-standing inequities in large parts of the world.
This new nonprofit model could be applied to virtually any industry. A bank could support innovative fintech startups that expand access to the financial system for the unbanked or underbanked. A homebuilding business could invest in new manufacturing processes that make homes more affordable or more durable. Tech companies could expand consumer access to digital currency, which is being embraced globally and can empower minority communities in America too. Such nonprofits will need to comply with applicable state and federal charitable rules, and also develop a robust fundraising plan for substantial, ongoing donations beyond their founding companies, in order to maintain public charity status.
The possibilities are vast, yet they won’t be unleashed if companies stick with the traditional corporate foundation model. That tried-and-true system has its purposes, but it’s insufficient for tackling massive problems and ending long-standing injustice. A new model can spark systemic change, one that combines the best of for-profit businesses with the benefits of nonprofit public charities. What is corporate America waiting for?
Lindsay Androski is president and CEO of Roivant Social Ventures and a trustee of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.