T.N.M. Schuyt

From Games to Giving : Social Value Orientation Predicts Donations to Noble Causes

The central purpose of the present research is to examine the ability of social value orientation (i.e., prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientation), as measured with methods rooted in game theory (i.e., decomposed games), to predict real-life prosocial behavior. Consistent with hypotheses, results revealed that individual differences in social value orientation are predictive of various donations. Relative to individualists and competitors, prosocials reported to engage in a greater number of donations, especially donations to organizations aimed at helping the poor and the ill. Results are discussed in terms of theory and methodology regarding the individual differences in social value orientation, as well as in terms of societal implications for enhancing donations to noble causes.

Corporate social performance as a bottom line for consumers

This study replicates Paul, Zalka, Downes, Perry, and Friday’s scale to measure U.S. consumer sensitivity to corporate social performance (CSP) in another sample—namely, that of Dutch consumers. In addition, theories on the effects of sociodemographic variables on environmental concern have been applied to investigate the influence of individual consumer characteristics on the sensitivity to CSP. It was found that the Consumer Sensitivity Scale to CSP is a reliable one, and it also seems applicable to West European countries. For Dutch consumers, CSP serves more as a hygiene factor—it should be at a minimum acceptable level (a bottom line)—than as a motivator to buy a product. Having a left-wing political orientation, a higher level of education, being female, and being older are consumer characteristics that all have a positive influence on sensitivity to CSP. Surprisingly, household income did not influence this.

Rituals and rules: about magic in consultancy

Consultants are called in when managers of corporations and organizations face major changes. Cultural changes and transitions from one stage of development to another are among the subjects studied in cultural anthropology. This article looks at how cultural anthropological insights into trans‐ition rituals can be applied to consultancy practice. It is postulated that one of the roles played by the consultant in this context is that of a magician who guides the transition from the old to the new with not only rituals, but also rules. This approach has so far received little attention in management and consultancy literature. The article is rounded off with some conclusions.

Philanthropy in European welfare states: a challenging promise?

Philanthropy is growing rapidly in Europe and in most of the countries in the industrialized world. A well-known phenomenon from history, philanthropy has made a come-back in recent years and is finding new form and meaning in an emerging ‘civil society’. But how do we define this new ‘modern’ philanthropy? Does it differ from concepts such as ‘charity’ and the ‘third sector’? Has it already earned a place at the table of EC policymakers? Is this ‘old’ but ‘new’ phenomenon awakening scholarly interest? These questions are discussed in this article. Philanthropy is defined by applying theoretical insights on the concept of philanthropy. Scholarly interest is measured by using the attention paid to philanthropy in leading English-language political science journals between 2000 and 2008 as a yardstick. The results show that though philanthropy is a distinct concept, it receives very little scholarly attention in these journals. The article concludes by arguing that the growth of philanthropy today offers a promising challenge for policymakers in welfare states provided that ‘private actions for the public good’ can be incorporated in the welfare-state paradigm. Points for practitioners Philanthropy is playing an increasingly stronger role in welfare states. However, governments and public administrators searching for new ways to fund welfare services have still to fully recognize the potential of philanthropy. In addition to commercialization and the market, a non-profit sector based more on philanthropic revenue could be an interesting option for delivering services. Public administrators will therefore have to rise to the challenging task of creating a legal, economic and cultural framework that will stimulate and enhance philanthropy.

Entrepreneurial Philanthropy: An Exploratory Review

The state and the philanthropy sector both serve the public good. The state offers social services, develops social programs, and funds projects; the philanthropy sector contributes by giving time and money. The market, the business community, being the third actor, frequently will not easily see social issues in line with its own interests and in general will not create any solutions. In the late 20th century, however, a market approach of philanthropy, described here as “entrepreneurial philanthropy,” occurred. It performs under different titles, from “venture philanthropy” to “philanthro-capitalism”. This article offers an introduction to the concept of entrepreneurial philanthropy and its features. Where does it come from, what does it stand for, and what are the motives behind it? For non-profit organizations, there will be a challenge in trusting that entrepreneurial philanthropy will serve them well. Therefore possible consequences of this business appearance within the philanthropic domain will be considered.

What Role for Public policy in Promoting Philanthropy

Abstract This article presents and discusses the findings of a survey conducted among Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in most of the twenty-seven countries within the European Union, which studied the extent and success of fundraising from philanthropic sources for research. Our data demonstrate that success in fundraising is related to institutional privilege (in terms of the universities reputation, wealth and networks) as well as factors relating to the internal organization, activities and cultures of universities (such as the extent of investment in fundraising activities) and factors relating to the external social, economic and political environments (such as national cultural attitudes towards philanthropy and the existence of tax breaks for charitable giving). Our findings identify the existence of a ‘Matthew effect’, such that privilege begets privilege, when it comes to successful fundraising for university research. We argue that, despite the existence of some untapped philanthropic potential, not all universities are equally endowed with the same fundraising capacities. The article concludes by suggesting that policy-makers pay more heed to the structural constraints within which fundraising takes place, to ensure that policies that seek to promote philanthropy are realistic.

Giving in Evidence: Fundraising from Philanthropy in European Universities

This report is a continuation of the themes and ideas explored in two previous European nCommission reports, ‘Giving More for Research’ (2006) and ‘Engaging Philanthropy for nUniversity Research’ (2008). It is the first report to provide data gathered from universities nacross the European Union regarding the efforts made, and successes achieved, in nfundraising from philanthropy for research. An additional output of the research is a new ndatabase of contacts responsible for fundraising in almost 500 European universities. nWe find that philanthropic fundraising is not, on the whole, taken seriously in European nuniversities. Only a very small number of institutions are raising significant sums of money nfrom this source, and even fewer are accessing philanthropic funding to pay for research nand research-related activities. Whilst this may be disappointing for those hoping that nprivate donors can represent an important source of funding for university-based research, nit may also be interpreted in a more positive light as indicative of potentially significant nuntapped potential. nThere are many different types of university, which affects their likelihood of realising nphilanthropic income as a result of investment in fundraising activities. Our data ndemonstrates that success in fundraising is related to institutional privilege (what kind of a nuniversity it is, in terms of wealth, reputation and pre-existing relationships with different ntypes of donors), as well as to the efforts made by universities (what the university does, in nterms of fundraising activities), and environmental factors (where the university is located, nin terms of the geo-political context). For this reason, we suggest that the concept of n‘accumulative advantage’ should be understood as an important factor, alongside ‘efforts’ nand ‘context’ which have so far featured more prominently as key levers in the policymaking literature.