I read an interesting and thoughtful post today about embracing some of philanthropy's current "micro" trends. Author David Henderson of Full Contact Philanthropy makes the important point that focusing small gifts of time, talent or treasure on social issues actually "distracts us from pursuing real solutions that help people."
From a foundation perspective, I'm inclined to agree; giving people the impression that a $5.00 text to Haiti or 10 minutes of "micro-volunteering" from an iPhone is "doing their part" to solve a social ill seems extremely unbalanced. It delivers a great feel-good opportunity for an interaction that's tangential at best, and ultimately forgettable as the next micro-cause moves onto the screen, and not very effective for the bulk of those who need help.
Think of it this way: If you lived at the foot of the Hoover Dam and it began to sprout thousands of little leaks, would you rather have thousands of volunteers sticking their fingers in the holes, or an experienced engineering firm to rectify the underlying structural flaws?
Maybe you need both. Big picture social problems are complex, and they require long-term, sustained effort. You also need some way to reach out to attract new supporters, like that $5.00 text, but you also need to sustain that relationship for the long term.
Unfortunately for foundations, the long-term work is much harder to explain and rally supporters around. And I agree with Henderson that the new trend toward micro-engagement won't be enough to sustain macro solutions.
From a foundation perspective, I'm inclined to agree; giving people the impression that a $5.00 text to Haiti or 10 minutes of "micro-volunteering" from an iPhone is "doing their part" to solve a social ill seems extremely unbalanced. It delivers a great feel-good opportunity for an interaction that's tangential at best, and ultimately forgettable as the next micro-cause moves onto the screen, and not very effective for the bulk of those who need help.
Think of it this way: If you lived at the foot of the Hoover Dam and it began to sprout thousands of little leaks, would you rather have thousands of volunteers sticking their fingers in the holes, or an experienced engineering firm to rectify the underlying structural flaws?
Maybe you need both. Big picture social problems are complex, and they require long-term, sustained effort. You also need some way to reach out to attract new supporters, like that $5.00 text, but you also need to sustain that relationship for the long term.
Unfortunately for foundations, the long-term work is much harder to explain and rally supporters around. And I agree with Henderson that the new trend toward micro-engagement won't be enough to sustain macro solutions.
Powered by Compendium Blogware
Comments for The Micro-Macro Argument