Thursday, December 3, 2009

Strategic giving

“In almost any gift-giving situation, there is some expectation of return, whether is it a tax deduction, a named building, or an enhanced reputation. That’s why anonymous gift giving is so rare. Giving always occurs within a social context that makes a gift reciprocal in nature. Perhaps corporations that give with some expectation of return are only being more strategic and explicit than predecessors who gave with equal expectations but said less about it - or who gave without planning. For a gift to be genuinely altruistic in nature, that is, for it to demonstrate other-centered love, it must have benefit to the recipient as its primary motive and purpose, but not necessarily its only motivation or purpose. Therefore, strategic or “smart” giving may be regarded as ethical.”

from: Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning. Christians, Clifford. 2001.



Without knowledge of strategic giving this statement comes across negatively.

When I first read this, it seemed to be a one-sided beneficial tool. The gifts purpose is lost in the company’s want of an outcome beneficial to the company itself. After reading this about 10 times, and doing research outside of this, I understood exactly what strategic giving or philanthropy meant.

It can be ethical because it can be a two-sided beneficial tool. The main purpose of the gift giving is to benefit the recipient; however, if it in turn benefits the company, be it tax reductions or name recognition, it is an added bonus.



These are all companies that give strategically:

Home Depot: Volunteers (employees) use materials from their stores to build homes for Habitat for Humanity.

Their main purpose is to help those in need, those who are not as well off as others. Having their name and products shown to viewers or “audience” is the bonus. Their intent was not to show off their name, it is just an extra “gift” to themselves for their generosity to the community.


Exxon/Mobile: The corporate logo features a Tiger, and the company donates large sums to help protect tigers and their environment.

Again, helping the tigers and their environment does not benefit the company. The bonus is just having their name and logo connected to helping the tigers.


Starbucks: They sell Ethos water in their stores, with some of the proceeds going to third world countries to provide cleaner water.

Their main purpose is to help people in other countries have cleaner water. They could sell other water where the proceeds go completely to their store instead of helping a charity. This benefits them by showing that their company cares about national problems, like clean water in third world countries.






This video is an example of how Starbucks helped Africa last year


Another local example is my current job, Strawberry St Cafe. They are having a raffle and bake sale where some of the proceeds go to the Virginia Foodbank.


This benefits the Foodbank and the surrounding community. The Foodbank will get more donations towards their cause and the community will be able to help with that cause by donating. It benefits Strawberry St Cafe because it shows the community that we care about this cause and helping the community.


Strategic giving is something that does not have to be negative, and from the above examples should be looked at as positive.


Here are some sites that further explain strategic philanthropy: