Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 5:20:57 GMT -5
Without a doubt, the ways of seeing and doing work from a Foundation and even more so from a business have changed. Several decades ago the process of working with them was very simple and with a charitable approach in the best sense of the word. They relied on the trust, goodwill, and credibility of the people and civil organizations that requested their support. Resources were assigned to them. There was no other link than sympathy towards the causes or organizations and they had no obligation that required them to report on the use of resources and the transformations they had achieved. The resources were placed via the foundation in social works for very diverse motivations that ranged from support and assistance to the poor, through the needs of helpless children and adults, to even works inspired by the religion professed by the company's directors. Without any nostalgia one can make remembrances and testify that many philanthropists of that time were excellent and generous people who relied on their foundations to support. This has not disappeared today but the needs of the foundation have changed. For example, several decades ago this type of foundation received requests for support in an orderly manner or every time they were sought, and the causes and problems were supported according to the budget they had.
At the end of a cycle, when the foundation Phone Number List had to stop along the way, it reflected on where the resources had gone and then a report was written. There was no obligation to do so but there was a need for the company to point out what had been done in social matters. The first founding reports were aimed at indicating the number of beneficiaries against the resources given in donation as a financial report. But the information was cold. It was seeing something similar to a pile, on the one hand, the positive pole of donations, on the other, the negative pole, that is, the vast majority of problems that were not completely resolved but were at least lessened by the effort of the Foundation. He always entertained the idea of allocating resources to a bottomless barrel. The process of professionalization of business foundations has fortunately evolved from those practices and has turned to more complex elements, but in many cases observed from the perspective of business measurement, “what is not measured, cannot be managed.” We could affirm that from the charitable approach, we moved to the next step, that of informing social action, and to the next step: that of the impact on its cost/benefit ratio and number of people benefiting directly or indirectly.
Now the professional challenge is for the company to ask its foundation to report other elements in addition to the data provided by hard data with criteria of efficiency and effectiveness. Today the reports seek to highlight not only the linear relationship donor-organization-beneficiaries; but to analyze and highlight the global environment, what the company/foundation invested, but also what it received from both the community and the organizations. This concern has been called “Return on investment”. For some managers it has sounded like a consequence of economic investment: “We invested 300 thousand, what did we get back?” Others place it only in the intangibles that build arguments such as “we have achieved a greater corporate reputation; We have more employee loyalty to the company”, which are perceptions (valuable and legitimate) but that escape measurement in numbers but not in degree and there are few studies linked to measuring corporate reputation thanks to founding work. Due to the above, foundational reports are now more than a good document that is entrusted to consultants to write, compile or systematize the information given to them and invest in a very good design to distribute it.
At the end of a cycle, when the foundation Phone Number List had to stop along the way, it reflected on where the resources had gone and then a report was written. There was no obligation to do so but there was a need for the company to point out what had been done in social matters. The first founding reports were aimed at indicating the number of beneficiaries against the resources given in donation as a financial report. But the information was cold. It was seeing something similar to a pile, on the one hand, the positive pole of donations, on the other, the negative pole, that is, the vast majority of problems that were not completely resolved but were at least lessened by the effort of the Foundation. He always entertained the idea of allocating resources to a bottomless barrel. The process of professionalization of business foundations has fortunately evolved from those practices and has turned to more complex elements, but in many cases observed from the perspective of business measurement, “what is not measured, cannot be managed.” We could affirm that from the charitable approach, we moved to the next step, that of informing social action, and to the next step: that of the impact on its cost/benefit ratio and number of people benefiting directly or indirectly.
Now the professional challenge is for the company to ask its foundation to report other elements in addition to the data provided by hard data with criteria of efficiency and effectiveness. Today the reports seek to highlight not only the linear relationship donor-organization-beneficiaries; but to analyze and highlight the global environment, what the company/foundation invested, but also what it received from both the community and the organizations. This concern has been called “Return on investment”. For some managers it has sounded like a consequence of economic investment: “We invested 300 thousand, what did we get back?” Others place it only in the intangibles that build arguments such as “we have achieved a greater corporate reputation; We have more employee loyalty to the company”, which are perceptions (valuable and legitimate) but that escape measurement in numbers but not in degree and there are few studies linked to measuring corporate reputation thanks to founding work. Due to the above, foundational reports are now more than a good document that is entrusted to consultants to write, compile or systematize the information given to them and invest in a very good design to distribute it.