Philanthropy U’s Davos Debut
By: Connor Diemand-Yauman
Tags: Civil Society, Nonprofit, Sdgs, Davos, Philanthropy

This January, like every January for decades, cross-sector leaders jetted to the quaint, bitterly cold streets of Davos, Switzerland, for the World Economic Forum’s hallmark event, a jam-packed and dizzyingly fast-paced week of meetings, panels, and parties. The week combines the gravity of a NATO summit with the overstuffed, vibrating energy of a music festival.

Globalization, the refugee crisis, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution were the hot topics du jour. Global warming was oft-discussed as well, though in a way that felt perfunctory and old hat despite our cerebral understanding of its importance, like learning that Meryl Streep has been nominated for yet another Oscar, or that President Trump just lied to the American public.

Companies threw lavish parties featuring Bono, Matt Damon, and will.i.am. Public sector leaders rolled their eyes at the moral abdication of the U.K. and U.S.A on the world stage. Multiple attendees, choosing stilettos or loafers over rugged boots, slipped on the ice, and a handful broke their arms. It was exciting, fast-paced, and surreal.

But amidst the flurry of handshakes, grand commitments, and side meetings, one event held particular significance for me: for the first time, Philanthropy University, the organization I lead, formally hosted foundation leaders, corporate CEOs, civil society visionaries, and even heads of state to discuss the focus of all our efforts: the monumental challenges and opportunities surrounding the use of technology to upskill and fund local, mission-driven organizations worldwide.

At Philanthropy University, we believe the future of development relies on local actors solving local problems. The evidence is clear: these local organizations address challenges in their communities more effectively and more enduringly than their international counterparts. Raj Shah, former head of the USAID (and current President of the Rockefeller Foundation), said it best: “Local NGOs and local entrepreneurs [are] change agents who have the cultural knowledge and in-country expertise to ensure assistance leads to real local institutions and lasting, durable growth.”

Philanthropy University’s guiding principle is that the most effective way to empower this local layer of development is through capacity building (or any training/resources that enable an organization to deliver on its mission more effectively). And it’s not just a belief or a passing fad: the Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”) explicitly nod to capacity building as the best way to activate this local layer.

I left Davos feeling unbelievably inspired by our attendees and the conversations shared with them. Below, I summarize some of the crucial questions and themes raised by the 20+ cross-sector leaders.

Where is capacity building headed?

During our event, the group discussed current trends and the likely trajectory of traditional capacity building for local organizations. We reflected on the fact that the status quo of capacity building is “high-touch, high cost,” so only a very small percentage of local organizations gain access to the quality capacity building they need to thrive. Capacity-building resources across the sector are also siloed, typically by foundations and international nonprofits around the world driving their own independent capacity-building programs, which results in mass duplication and inefficiency. With these points in mind, we see significant opportunity to unite our efforts in a more standardized, streamlined, and effective way.

We also discussed many of the challenges that local organizations face when attempting to invest in their own capacity building, and how many foundations believe that funding larger organizations (compared to their smaller, local counterparts) is a “safer” bet, resulting in smaller, local organizations getting left out. As one attendee put it, “Whether it’s high-net-worth individuals…or many foundations around the world…people give to the people who were good at asking, not to those who need.” What’s more, even funders progressive enough to fund local organizations often place restrictions on that funding, which hampers the capacity building local organizations need. (Read more about these trends in this great report by Synergos.)

Another reason that funders often overlook local organizations, we were told, is that many give to causes that they can put their name on (universities, for one). This prompted us to reflect on whether the sector could implement similar recognition to help incentivize funders to bring more philanthropic resources to bear on the SDGs and local civil society organizations.

Civil society and the private sector’s role in “filling the void”

One common refrain during our event was the staggering negligence of governments around the world and the commensurate opportunity (and obligation) for civil society actors and the private sector to fill the void. In particular, climate change and income inequality were cited as evidence of this shift, as well as the global eruption of civil unrest.

The corporate leaders in attendance reflected on the importance of the private sector pursuing a multi-stakeholder model and a development model, and they noted the profitability of this focus if executed correctly. A related topic was a shift from typical corporate CSR to a more integrated model of Responsible Social Corporations (“RSCs”) — a shift from being “less bad” to stepping up and having a positive, enduring impact on society.

Capacity building “as an asterisk”

Part of the discussion focused on the fact that capacity building, while ubiquitous in presentations and grant agreements, is often presented as an asterisk — something secondary to the primary focus of the grant or collaboration. This reveals a bit of a disconnect in the sector. While everyone agrees that capacity building is important (and, indeed, features in most collaborations with local civil society), few have focused exclusively on that area for this population.

New capacity-building frontiers

We also had an intriguing conversation about new frontiers in capacity building and learning, chief among them artificial intelligence and machine learning. One participant remarked on the incredible talent and innovation concentrated within the largest technology firms, and the potential to direct this innovation toward learning and program development. The conversation underscored the importance of technology firms taking advantage of the existing talent and infrastructure within the Global South.

Perhaps most significantly for us, participants also reflected on the incredible opportunity in simply connecting like-minded civil society leaders in different parts of the world. This observation was a prime opportunity to share Philanthropy University’s community technology and programming, in which we convene thousands of changemakers worldwide to share best practices, crowdsource problems, and forge partnerships. (Explore our brand new course and community platform here.)

Capacity building challenges

While participants were bullish on the importance and promise of capacity building, we also candidly discussed the significant challenges ahead. Upskilling leaders in traditional settings is difficult enough; upskilling leaders in the ever-shifting, chaotic, and sometimes even dangerous settings in which many of Philanthropy University’s learners find themselves can at times feel dishearteningly difficult.

There was a related discussion on the possibility of pairing scalable learning technologies with more hands-on, peer-to-peer mentorship and support, as well as localizing content and experience in order to maximize relevance and resonance with learners. All participants agreed that an ideal training modality will be “self-generating and self-replicating at the local level” — one in which people can learn alongside others in their community who share first-hand exposure to the challenges and opportunities in their regions.

Another conversation topic was how to make capacity building “stick.” One leader of a multinational corporation reflected that, despite making significant investments in training journalists worldwide, the newly trained journalists would return to their local communities only to have their bosses reject their new skill set and ideas. It was a reminder that we must be sensitive to the challenges not just of acquiring new skills, but also of applying them. Our upskilling is only as effective as our learners’ ability to incorporate it into their organizations.

Specific capacity building needs

When the conversation turned to the most-needed training areas for local civil society organizations worldwide, we received a number of interesting responses. The first mentioned was project management. (I couldn’t have asked for a better opportunity to plug Philanthropy University’s stellar new Project Management course.) Another participant suggested marketing and sales competencies — specifically, social sector organizations’ ability to “tell their story” and explain the “extraordinary things they’re doing…in simple words.”

Educating funders, not just their grantees, on capacity building

I was so pleased to hear one foundation leader request capacity building for the funders themselves on how to fund capacity building. There seemed to be strong agreement on this point. Many funders, the group admitted, don’t have the context or support to understand what local civil society actors actually need, from funding amounts to the format and content of the capacity-building interventions.

A related discussion focused on how we can excite funders about the value of capacity building, and how we can more effectively bridge the chasms that often exist between local nonprofits and the largest international organizations.

One of my personal highlights was when a foundation leader mentioned that she had seen an increasing number of job-seekers with Philanthropy University credentials on their applications. The group appreciated the value of these types of reliable signals when sifting through hundreds, if not thousands, of applications.

The need for more innovative finance models

One participant stressed that we can’t be too myopic or restricted in our approach to funding the Sustainable Development Goals or local civil society. Related to this point, we discussed the significant investment finance, public funding, and private money being brought together (most often with public or philanthropic dollars catalyzing private investment). As one attendee said, “There’s really a tripartite nexus of philanthropy, private sector, and public sector that is getting lost in the current discussion on blended finance.”

There was also some healthy debate about the focus of philanthropic capital relative to other investment types. While philanthropy can play a crucial role in spurring innovation and taking big bets, the size of this coffer relative to other forms of capital (namely private and public sector investment) is quite small. The group seemed to agree that the solution lies in better understanding the strengths and weaknesses of different sources of capital, and using them in a more integrated and strategic way.

Fixed vs. variable costs

One key part of the discussion hinged on the relationship between fixed and variable costs in the capacity-building space, and how Philanthropy University is exploiting this relationship to differentiate our model.

In short, traditional capacity building involves very high variable costs — individual experts from INGOs sent to work on-site with individual organizations over several days or weeks. In contrast, Philanthropy University’s fixed costs are relatively high — both in terms of capital expenditure to build out our initial platform, and the cost of maintaining and iteratively improving the platform. These low variable costs allow us to scale our resources to organizations across the network. It’s allowed us to launch open, free courses on topics like project management, measurement and evaluation, and fundraising. It’s allowed us to create massive communities with thousands of local actors able to interact with and support one another. And most recently, it’s allowed us to launch a first-of-its-kind grant program that scalably provides unrestricted grants to local organizations, with local organizations voting on who gets the funding.

_______

Hosting such a well-versed, diverse group of cross-sector leaders was a real honor for my team and me. We sincerely thank all participants, as well as the leaders of the World Economic Forum for their support.

See you next year.