While I agree with Eikenberry that there are definite drawbacks to an increasingly consumer/customer-oriented society, I still believe that coupling with for-profit firms can greatly extend a nonprofit organization's impact.
Notably, I think that the American Red Cross and its partnership with cell-phone carrier is an invaluable example of how effective a nonprofit and for-profit partnership can be. Indeed, the Red Cross raised a staggering $32 million by partnering with various cell-phone plans. And although, I am still skeptical of large corporations and their self-interested motives, I believe it is necessary, as Crutchfield & MacLeod Grant advocate, to "leverage" the status quo in an effort to change societal culture toward pursuing a collective or public interest rather than self-interest.
I find Eikenberry's argument to be a very informative and accurate representation of American culture presently, but I do not believe that acknowledging this representation of our culture should discourage nonprofits or individuals from partnering with market-oriented firms in an effort to change cultural attitudes about a collective good. Personally, I think that dwindling resources and soaring populations will necessitate a greater collective consciousness in America and the world, and I hope that nonprofits can instigate this change. Otherwise, as we have seen in various parts of the world recently, there might be an uprising of the have-nots (masses) against those that have gained a vast amounts of resources through our current "market" and "self-interested" culture.
Dan,
ReplyDeleteI agree wholeheartedly with your post. I also agree with Eikenberry about the drawbacks to market-based practices, but that there are many opportunities, as well. I know some people who are particularly "skeptical of large corporations and their self-interested motives," as you are; however, I'm not so sure that they would agree with you and I that certain corporations (specifically Wal-Mart) should be associated with nonprofit organizations, for the reason that the "few" good things that these corporations do will make them out to be a better and more positive force in the lives of people than they "actually" are. The reason I'm raising this point is because I find it interesting that people who would like to see similar ends (in terms of offering services for the public) can have much different ideas about the best ways to go about achieving those ends. I wonder what you or I could say to the people who I've described above to convince them that partnering with corporations like Wal-Mart (which they may not think have the most ethical policies) is a good thing for a nonprofit organization.