Amazon Reviews
9 of 10 people found the following review to be helpful:
Must reading for everyone in philanthropy, February 15, 2010
By Mal Warwick
Small Change should be required reading for every foundation board member and program officer, every major donor -- in fact, philanthropists of any description. In this tiny volume, Michael Edwards lays bare the fatal flaws in the philanthropic world in America today and offers a prescription for healing the field that could play a major role in putting our country back on track to leading with its values.
Oddly enough, Edwards did not set out to write a critique of American philanthropy. The book is subtitled Why Business Won't Save the World, and the author's stated objective was to debate the dubious claims of the "philanthrocapitalism" espoused by The Economist's Michael Bishop and others, the "creative capitalism" offered by Bill Gates, the "fortune at the bottom of the pyramid" of C. K. Prahalad, "corporate social responsibility" of the window-dressing variety, and "social enterprise" in virtually all its guises. His goal, in short, was to reject the role of business, business thinking, and the market as solutions for the ills of the nonprofit sector.
Michael Edwards is brilliant, articulate, and extremely knowledgeable about philanthropy, civil society, and social change, all of which are major themes in this book. For nearly ten years, he directed the Ford Foundation's Governance and Civil Society Program, and he has spent a total of three decades in the nonprofit sector. On matters involving business he is less sure-footed. In the course of writing this book, he conducted extensive research on the role of business and business thinking in the not-for-profit world. That research shows clearly in Edwards' eloquent critique of philanthropy that either comes directly from corporate sources or is guided by the metrics-driven methodologies of the business world. He is on shakier ground when writing about social enterprise, which he appears to believe is dominated by profit-seeking companies.
"Social enterprise" is, of course, a fuzzy term, and ultimately its definition lies in the eyes of the beholder. However, there's no disputing the fact that a huge proportion of social change efforts undertaken under that umbrella are, in fact, nonprofits -- many of them engaged in the sort of bottoms-up, grassroots organizing efforts that win Edwards' praise. Thinking otherwise, he dismisses the world-changing work of Ashoka's more than 2,000 social entrepreneurs in over 60 countries around the world. Unlike the true "philanthrocapitalists" who are imposing top-down approaches and burdensome measurement and reporting requirements on so many of the nonprofits they support, Ashoka Fellows are achieving impact not just in the communities where they work but on a nationwide scale, through the many policy changes that have resulted from their efforts.
Edwards believes the authentic role of philanthropy is to foster transformative social change -- change that addresses society's injustices and inequities in fundamental ways. (I agree!) "No lasting change has been successful," he writes, "without large numbers of people acting consciously and collectively around human values of solidarity and social justice, not market values. Markets are a great way to do some things, but not to fashion communities of caring and compassion."
Unfortunately, as Edwards seems to recognize, it's not just the new breed of philanthrocapitalists who are getting in the way of social change. Traditional philanthropists play an even larger role in directing resources not to genuine social change efforts undertaken by what Edwards calls "civil society" but to "safe" charities, often ones that cater to their own personal interests and tastes. (Think already-well-endowed universities, art museums, ballet companies, symphony orchestras, "nonprofit" hospitals -- admirable institutions one and all but in no way related to changing the balance between haves and have-nots in American society.) He believes, as I do, that the proper role of philanthropy is to combat "the realities of injustice, such as racism, sexism, homophobia, and the abuse of human rights -- terms that rarely appear in the strategic plans of any of the new foundations." But putting those buzzwords in strategic plans is far from enough. As Edwards himself points out, just 11 percent of philanthropic resources in the U.S. is channeled to "social justice grant making." And I'll wager that only a tiny fraction of that 11 percent is devoted to community organizing and grassroots advocacy as opposed to plugging holes in the human-service safety net.
So, you can see why most of the people who should read this book undoubtedly won't. Read it yourself, though, if you want to gain a truly insightful perspective on the world of philanthropy today.
(From Mal Warwick's Blog on Books)
4 of 4 people found the following review to be helpful:
Philanthropy and business not a great mix., January 19, 2010
By John Mulcahy-morgan
I found this a wonderful short read on a topic that has interested me for a long time; whether business has too much influence over the not-for-profit and philanthropy foundations in the era of the mega-foundations like Gates'.
Michael Edwards asks whether this is a good or bad thing, or somewhere in beween. He backs up his argument with some clear logic arising from the crucible of many years of experience, and holds one's attention with a lot of interesting stories.
I realized I had a lot of assumptions, and came away with an entirely fresh viewpoint.
I'd definitely recommend this for anyone interested in a philanthropic approach to their world, however large or small.
3 of 3 people found the following review to be helpful:
My number one pick in books on non-profits and philanthropy, January 20, 2010
By Rangerover
I work in a small non-profit agency and first heard about this book from an interview with the author on my local NPR station. I liked what he said about protecting the independence and distinctive values of the work we do so I bought the book from Barnes and Noble to check it out, and whipped through it in a day (it's only about 150 pages and the style makes for easy reading). After feeling confused or under attack for a long time this was the first book that actually helped me to see a clear way ahead, so I'm making it my number one pick for friends and colleagues. You don't have to be a business to be effective.
3 of 3 people found the following review to be helpful:
A Must Read for anyone interested in philanthropy (or our world in general)!, January 19, 2010
By A. you
I find myself very quickly bored and gasping for air reading books filled with corporate gobbledygook, increasingly found in the world of literature on charities. However, this book is immensely palatable, the ideal gift. It blows a breath of fresh air into a world that is in danger of losing its soul. Informative and inspiring all in one. Definitely a must read.
2 of 2 people found the following review to be helpful:
A watershed book, September 1, 2010
By Dr. J
Small Change is part reasoned analysis of the current state of global philanthropy and part smackdown, a decisive defeat of the philanthrocapitalist movement, the organized efforts of those who promote business solutions to social and moral problems. Although one must be impressed with the clarity and concision of his argument, Edwards is most impressive at lifting the curtain on the wizards of philanthrocapitalism and revealing them to be not wizards at all, and certainly not world saviors, but rather usurpers of territory (the nonprofit arena) that others have long cultivated.
Edwards is an adherent of the "social change from the bottom up" view of things. It is little wonder that he would object to the perception of billionaires as world saviors. But he goes beyond carping to offering a devastating critique of the position that business always knows best. The phrase "small change" is emblematic of this critique and expresses Edwards' position. In view of the massive challenges facing the world, and when considered in light of the long history of human betterment brought about by both governments and average citizens, Edwards maintains, the efforts of philanthrocapitalists are "small change," that is, "limited advances in society as it is."
Edwards employs another phrase throughout the book that also helps to understand his position. "The difference that makes the difference." This is not gobbledygook but rather the expression of a view that civil society and the market (what others have called gifts and commerce) operate according to different logics. The one operates on the basis of cooperation, sacrifice, and collective action; the other on competition, self-interest, and individualism. Each is fine in its own area, and both can collaborate with mutual respect, but when one dominates the other, that is, when business metrics dominate civil society, trouble ensues.
Small Change represents a turning point in the conversation about the nature and purpose of contemporary philanthropy. It presents a strong, well-argued challenge to dominantly held beliefs, and as such deserves to be widely read, discussed and debated.
0 items in cart
