WINGS: Table of contents Worldwide Initiatives for Summary 01 Grantmaker Foreword 02 Introduction 04 Support 01 Creating and Conveying Value Summary 09 Value as a journey, not a destination 10 WINGS is a network of 150 Actively engaging stakeholders 10 philanthropy associations, networks, Creating value 12 academic institutions, support Designing responsive member services: Technology to engage 12 organizations, and funders in 50 Shaping the field through knowledge and practice 14 countries around the world whose Driving data solutions for membersand the sector 16 purpose is to strengthen, promote Conveying value 19 and provide leadership on the Communicating a value proposition 20 development of philanthropy and Assessing value of programs and services: The 4Cs 21 social investment. Amplifying Voice Thank you to dissemination partners 02 the United Philanthropy Forum and DAFNE- Donor and Foundations Summary 24 Network in Europe. Advocacy 25 The six-step approach 26 Common challenges 28 Thought leadership 28 What is a thought leader? 29 Priorities, framing and resources 30 03 Mobilizing Collective Impact Summary 33 Taking in the view 34 Landscaping and mapping 35 Cultivating connectivity in networks 36 Functions and practical approaches 37 Publication Author: Fostering collective impact 38 Filiz Bikmen, Constellations for Change Basic, moderate and complex approaches 39 Supervision: Benjamin Bellegy Coordination: Sarah Brown-Campello Conclusion 42 Editing: Resource Guide 44 Andrew Milner, Alliance Magazine WINGS Members Map: Networks & Associations 48 Design: Annex 50 Xouse Studio References 55 Summary One-minute version organizations serve their members or the sector? In reality, this is a false dichotomy, since serving their member or clients ultimately Value. Voice. Collective Impact. Philanthropy networks, their benefits the sector. leaders, members and funders alike, are looking to build a future in which these core elements are reflected in their work. How can There are a number of things to keep in mind in enhancing and networks define and realize new value propositions and amplify conveying value: time, resources and consultation are needed voice in a way that is responsive to members yet also shapes the for any process of change redefining value might require; PSOs field? What role can tech and data solutions play in enhancing should take advantage of technology to create new forms of value, value? What strategies in advocacy and thought leadership can but in pursuing them, they should not lose sight of the sense of elevate the voice and visibility of the sector? How can philanthropy community that is the essential glue of membership and network support networks go beyond focusing solely on organizational organizations; evaluation and communication are complementary impact to creating more collective impact across the sector? This to both enhancing and conveying value and both rely on good data. guide combines thoughtful concepts, frameworks and practical approaches that all philanthropy networks can use to prepare their There are two main ways in which PSOs either give or amplify organizations for the next decade. voice to the sector, advocacy (promoting the demands and benefits of the sector to others) and thought leadership (stimulating the development of philanthropy internally). Advocating a more Five-minute version enabling environment for philanthropy to policy-makers is one of PSOs’ most important roles. It’s important that members or Philanthropy as a whole is facing a rapidly changing environment: supporters recognize this and that it might involve criticism of, problems are more ramified, more global and more urgent. There even confrontation with, governments, which can be uncomfortable is a corresponding and growing recognition of the need for for individual organizations, so agreement should be reached over collective, rather than individual action to tackle them; approaches how and when advocacy efforts should occur and how far they to the provision of social good are increasing and the boundaries should go. Even when they aren’t successful, advocacy efforts are between them blurring (some speak of a continuum along which not wasted. They can help PSOs and members refine and develop philanthropy and social investment are ranged); technology their own positions. has revolutionized the provision of information; and the role of philanthropy is being called into question as governments around There are likely to be equally mixed views on the merits of thought the world seek to curtail the activities of civil society. leadership – some members will be more in favour of it than others. Some will worry that it is at the expense of what they see These challenges are making renewed demands on philanthropy as core member benefits. It’s important, again therefore, that its support organizations (PSOs) to prove themselves in terms of content is presented to members in a way that makes it clear it’s value, voice and collective impact. worth investing time and resources. It’s worth noting that in addition to challenges, some of the above Collective impact: the merits of collaboration in the face of developments can also be turned to advantage – technology, increasingly complex problems are obvious. So are the challenges for instance, offers different and improved ways in which PSOs to achieving it – it is time- and resource-intensive. Fortunately, can fulfil their roles. Context is critical to the work of PSOs. This since the essence of PSOs is connection and community, they are is one of the reasons why they show great variety in form and predisposed to fostering and engaging in collaborations. function. Another reason is the growth of philanthropy almost everywhere, with different types of PSOs springing up to meet Some key steps PSOs can take to foster collaboration: They can the many different needs emerging among both institutional commission or carry out landscape (the state of the field) and and individual philanthropists. mapping (the actors in the field) studies which are both important to see where and how PSOs and their constituent organizations This variety notwithstanding, they have two things in common: can profitably collaborate. They can take a more deliberate stance promoting the practice of philanthropy and working for a more in fomenting and encouraging connections among like-minded favourable environment for that practice. The question of value members. They can provide a platform on which a smaller interest is often framed as a dilemma – should philanthropy support group can form and base itself. WINGS | Philanthropy Networks: Creating Value, Voice and Collective Impact 01 Foreword Who said net-working means not-working? Why this publication and why now? Few forms of organization and action require as much Through our observation and research of the field, we know thoughtful, work intensive, persevering, adaptive, and well- the strategic value and impact of these players. Yet few resourced effort and labour than networks to be successful. resources are available to help them maximize their impact. While their reward lies in sustainability, impact, trust and We are also aware of some of the stiff challenges they are effectiveness, their establishment and management are facing. The first one is why should we exist and for whom? complex. In philanthropy, it does not always seem natural Are we representing the whole diversity of the sector? How for its players, whether they are foundations, HNWIs, can we remain relevant in a fast-changing environment? families, individual donors, communities or corporations, How can we effectively protect our constituency and sector to see themselves as part of a sector. Networks and other in a hostile political context? Do we stand for clear values? support organizations are a reflection of this sector’s self- Are we focused on achieving the maximum positive impact consciousness… and their accelerator. in society through our mission or are we seeking to thrive as individual organizations? Philanthropy networks exist in many forms and fulfil a broad array of form and function: geographic, thematic, The current landscape urges us to find clear answers. focused on specific types of private donors, member- Everywhere, we see a rising wave of criticism of, and based, informal, providing technical advice, advocacy, skepticism towards, the philanthropic sector both from the practical knowledge, etc. Their common point is that left and right of the political spectrum. On the one hand, they allow for close communication, collective action and there is a narrative about a sector which potentially plays thinking. At WINGS, as a global network of philanthropy against national interests, and on the other, a demand networks, reflecting on their nature and impact is part of for more accountability and transparency from the field, our DNA. We were created 20 years ago by a group of especially where “big philanthropy” is concerned. grantmakers’ associations from all over the world who felt they needed a space to share knowledge and collaborate Although every single foundation and donor has a at the global level. responsibility to respond to these challenges and, when needed, to evolve in its own practices, no individual The two first grantmakers’ associations were started shortly organization can provide an answer and preserve the after World War II, one in Germany in 1948 and the other sector’s ability to contribute to common good. It is one in the US in 1949. Maybe this tells us something about networks that have the agency and legitimacy to do so. how building networked organizations, creating links between those who seek to build more peaceful and just societies is a Taking another lens, let us look at impact. Increasingly, key first step in establishing the societies we want. we see that long-term impact, impact at scale can only be achieved though complex, adaptable and collaborative Of course, networks are not ends in themselves and there processes. By providing the space, tools and connections would be nothing to celebrate about them if it weren’t for for peer-exchange and, sometimes, for collective action, what they allow philanthropic actors to achieve.