I see lots! Here are the ones that first come to mind:
Analysis paralysis. I’ve seen a bunch of philanthropists spend years trying to learn and perfect their strategy before giving any money. I think they’d learn more, and do more good, by viewing giving as an iterative process, where they can give, learn, and strategize simultaneously.
Wanting to solve every problem at once. I often see philanthropists deride alt proteins because they’re still “ultra-processed” or welfare reforms because they don’t “change the system.” Unfortunately my experience has been that when philanthropists seek solutions that solve every problem at once, they normally end up solving none of them.
Following future stories, over past track records. I see some philanthropists fall for ideal stories of the future (e.g. “this campaign will end factory farming by X date”). I’d encourage these philanthropists to review whether the group’s past track record suggests they have any hope of achieving their story’s ending.
Too must trust in our future selves. I’ve seen philanthropists who say they’re saving to give in future or just that they’ll step up their giving when they retire, get richer, or whatever. I’ve also seen this often not work out. I think this is especially a risk with people who are earning to give, and may get trapped in more expensive lifestyles than they expected to.
Too much concern about things that don’t affect impact. I see some philanthropists fixate on CEO pay, revenue growth, or other factors that places like Charity Navigator think are important. They’re really not.
What are some common pitfalls in the field of grantmaking that you encountered, and what advice would you give to new philanthropists to avoid them?
I see lots! Here are the ones that first come to mind:
Analysis paralysis. I’ve seen a bunch of philanthropists spend years trying to learn and perfect their strategy before giving any money. I think they’d learn more, and do more good, by viewing giving as an iterative process, where they can give, learn, and strategize simultaneously.
Wanting to solve every problem at once. I often see philanthropists deride alt proteins because they’re still “ultra-processed” or welfare reforms because they don’t “change the system.” Unfortunately my experience has been that when philanthropists seek solutions that solve every problem at once, they normally end up solving none of them.
Following future stories, over past track records. I see some philanthropists fall for ideal stories of the future (e.g. “this campaign will end factory farming by X date”). I’d encourage these philanthropists to review whether the group’s past track record suggests they have any hope of achieving their story’s ending.
Too must trust in our future selves. I’ve seen philanthropists who say they’re saving to give in future or just that they’ll step up their giving when they retire, get richer, or whatever. I’ve also seen this often not work out. I think this is especially a risk with people who are earning to give, and may get trapped in more expensive lifestyles than they expected to.
Too much concern about things that don’t affect impact. I see some philanthropists fixate on CEO pay, revenue growth, or other factors that places like Charity Navigator think are important. They’re really not.