Should the nonprofit sector be angry or jealous or upset at all that the for-profit world is drawn into finding solutions for the rest of the world they don't serve? And is it true, according to a quote in the New York Times article about designers and their venturing into philanthropy, that "straight 'philanthropy' suggests a hierarchy of donor and recipient: These design ventures are much more focused on effecting change on the ground through co-design and venture philanthropy rather than hand-outs, creating deeper and longer-lasting outcomes."?
Of course I have a bias nonprofits are certainly not in today's age all about hand-outs and are also if not foremost the leaders in achieving lasting change and results. And while the article suggests that the "new push toward sustainability, ethical sourcing and the need to produce products that increasingly serve a social, environmental or philanthropic function" nonprofits have always been about this.
But nonprofits are certainly not attracting the capital as problem solvers that the for-profits profiled in this and other stories tell. For sure, if a shift is necessary for nonprofits, it's that part of their business (aka program) plans need to include strong marketing communications strategies that attract their prospective customers and also attract their prospective investors be they philanthropic or otherwise.
