On 22 Mar 2013, at 17:46, Pranesh Prakash <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Ingrid Srinath
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This TED Talk touches on some of the perverse disincentives non-profits face 
>> that hamper scale, innovation, sustainability and impact. They are issues 
>> I've grappled with, sometimes successfully, sometimes not, for 15 years. 
>> Aspects have featured on silk previously. The proposed Indian Direct Tax 
>> Code exacerbates the problem considerably: 
>> http://www.cafindia.org/DTC-NGO.pdf
>> 
>> I would love to know what folks here think on this subject.
>> 
>> http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong.html
> 
> 
> I haven't seen this yet, but you might be interested in this:
> http://www.economist.com/node/21556570
> 
Thanks, Pranesh.

Tax exemption aside, the expectation that an organisation can be viable and 
grow to scale when it's not permitted to: 

accumulate reserves 
incur debt
invest in people, technology, marketing
or take risks

especially when these organisations exist to tackle the nasty, intractable 
problems that both state and market have failed at, seems to me unreasonable.

OTOH, the reductionist overhead:revenue ratio as a metric of 'deservingness' 
is, I believe, as much a consequence of the sector's failure to provide 
plausible alternatives, and its willingness to play the ratio game, as it is of 
the need for a one-size-fits-all comparator.

Is there a good norm, for instance, on remuneration or incentives? Benchmarking 
to private or public sector equivalents, seems to me to, at best, set limits. 
Current practice limits entry to those who can afford it, either because they 
have other sources of income/support or are willing to make some stark 
lifestyle choices for themselves and their families.

The perverse donor logic that success must be penalised by favouring 
organisations that are smaller, less 'savvy' is another bugbear.

Most critically, as regular citizens, how do we propose to sustain an 
independent public sphere - media, civil society, regulation - free from the 
control of state and market and/or dependence on the whims of big philanthropy? 
Especially when it is clear that poor governance is at the root of most, if not 
all, our current crises?

The growing trend towards crowdfunding privileges the short-term, easily 
measured, simply communicated, emotional appeal over the boring, unsexy, 
long-term work that yields systemic or structural change.

Recent developments - media regulation in the UK, the new constraints of 
India's proposed direct tax code, the debate around mandatory CSR, and the 
ongoing battle for freedoms of expression, assembly and association around the 
world - make these questions more urgent than ever.

- Ingrid



Reply via email to