Triangle Community Foundation
The new mission of Triangle Community Foundation places emphasis on collecting philanthropic assets and using these to help communities. The mission would be effective if it benefits the poor populations and satisfies their needs. Basically, non profit organizations such as these aim at improving the holistic wellbeing of disadvantaged populations. The change of the mission has brought in light the needs of philanthropic donors who also play an important role in sustaining poor communities. This change is however unlikely to bear beneficial results because of its undue emphasis on the philanthropic donors at the expanse of non profit organizations and the need populations. These trio share intricate relations and al their needs should be addressed to attain optimal results. The members of the staff were opposed to the changes because they felt that important stakeholders were being omitted. Although the process of redefinition was all inclusive, it had the ability to strain relationships and is therefore not sustainable.
Keywords: Triangle Community Foundation, Philanthropists, donors, stakeholders
Triangle Community Foundation
Unlike the previous mission of Triangle Community Foundation that placed emphasis on extending help to the affected communities, the current new mission focuses on collecting philanthropic assets and ensuring effective use of the assets to benefit the target communities. To attain this, the new mission prioritizes the needs of philanthropists whose actions were geared towards making a meaningful impact on the populations. This was arrived at after the redefinition of the concept of philanthropy indicated that no all donors were philanthropists. This mission would be improved by underscoring the role of the communities that would benefit from the resources.
In their review, Payton and Moody (2008) indicate that needy populations are always at the center stage of the missions and visions of non profit making organizations. The fundamental goal of such organizations is generally to improve the wellbeing of the disadvantaged populations. In order to enhance sustainability, the role of non profit organizations or disadvantaged populations that are likely to benefit from the grants also needs to the captured in the mission statement. In essence, the mission of the organization should reflect the commitment of the foundation to the donors whose philanthropic assets have a great impact on one hand and to the satisfaction of the diverse needs of poor populations on the other hand.
The long term goal for this change was to strategically collect philanthropic assets and effectively employ them in attaining the highest degree of impact on the society. Seemingly, the change realigned the focus of the organization from needy populations to philanthropy donors. The redefinition of philanthropy categorized some of the donors as not being philanthropic. For this reason, they did not qualify as organizational client and therefore would not greatly influence organizational activities. This has diverse impacts on their wellbeing especially considering that they also contribute in different ways to the welfare of the foundation.
From a corporate point of view, emphasis on the needs of the consumers is of paramount importance in enhancing organizational functioning (Friedman & McGarvie, 2004). Basically, the processes, practices and activities of a given organization need to be aligned to consumer needs and expectations. In light of the Triangle Community Foundation, the consumer base is quite complex and diversified. Both the donors from different backgrounds and beneficiaries of the philanthropic assets have a direct influence in the operation of this organization. Thus in order for the change to be sustainable, the definition of consumers should be all inclusive and incorporate the diverse needs of the aforementioned populations.
This change is unlikely to succeed in the long term because of various reasons. To begin with, the changes imply that not all donors would be prioritized during the execution of major organizational duties. In this regard, it is worth appreciating that the entire non profit making fraternity share intricate and augmenting relationships that require varied forms of contributions. Just as donors play an important role in providing grants, non profit organizations are instrumental in ensuring that the respective grants are used in an effective manner.
Foundations such as the Triangle Community Foundation on the other hand ensure the availability of grants and act as mediators between the donors and the non profit making organizations, target populations and the donors. They ensure that the grants provided by donors reach non profit organizations or target populations in a timely manner. Certainly, the trio share close relations and non can perform optimally without the others.
In this consideration, it should be appreciated that all types of donors impact on the welfare of needy populations. This is regardless of the nature of the contributions that they make on the affected populations. According to Powell and Steinberg (2006), respective contributions have positive impacts on the welfare of the affected populations and help in nurturance of viable relationships amongst key stakeholders.
The staff members were opposed to these changes because of the diverse impacts that the changes had on their internal and external relationships. From the case study, it is certain that the staff of the foundation understood that the role of the organization was to maintain viable relations between major stakeholders. For instance, the philanthropic officer believed that the clients of the foundation included both the donors and non profit organizations. Previously, these had worked closely and had established close relationships that enabled them to attain different goals and objectives. Arguably, there were ongoing projects being pursued jointly by the non profit making organizations and the foundation’s staff.
Redefinition of the clients had diverse impacts on the holistic wellbeing of such developments. In essence, it implied that the established programs would be dissolved or discontinued. This could not only undermine viable relations but also had the potential to frustrate the established initiatives. The procedure entailed an entire review of the processes and activities of the organization. Although it would be assumed in the long run, the change would be unsuccessful because of the threats that it posed on the current relationships among major key players.
Friedman, L. & McGarvie, M. (2004). Charity, philanthropy and civility in American history. Cambridge: University Press.
Payton, R. & Moody, M. (2008). Understanding philanthropy: Its meaning and mission. Indiana: University Press.
Powell, W. & Steinberg, P. (2006). The non profit sector: A research handbook. Yale: University Press.