Comments on: A proposal to reward failure http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/ Exploring how to get real change for your dollar. Thu, 17 May 2012 06:55:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Jeff Mason http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-47252 Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:25:04 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-47252 Holden makes a great point. Nonprofits should be rewarded for the journey toward perfection. This requires an understanding of what works and what doesn't and a commitment to make adjustments to improve. This is what performance management is all about. Kahlil Gibran once said "Advance, and never halt, for advancing is perfection." Holden makes a great point. Nonprofits should be rewarded for the journey toward perfection. This requires an understanding of what works and what doesn’t and a commitment to make adjustments to improve. This is what performance management is all about. Kahlil Gibran once said “Advance, and never halt, for advancing is perfection.”

]]> by: Holden http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-46201 Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:45:56 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-46201 David and Paul - thanks for the feedback. Responded in <a href="http://blog.givewell.org/?p=319" rel="nofollow">this post</a>. Brian - that's the basic idea, but I would go further. I would try to make the grant big enough to help the charity <em>change its approach</em> (something that would likely be impossible if only the study were paid for). If the charity can't change a failing approach, it may as well go out of business, so there isn't much point to paying for the study. David and Paul - thanks for the feedback. Responded in this post.

Brian - that’s the basic idea, but I would go further. I would try to make the grant big enough to help the charity change its approach (something that would likely be impossible if only the study were paid for). If the charity can’t change a failing approach, it may as well go out of business, so there isn’t much point to paying for the study.

]]> by: Brian Slesinsky http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-46101 Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:44:16 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-46101 How about offering to pay for the study if it shows that the charity's approach doesn't work? (If the study shows that it does work, they should be happy to pay for it themselves.) How about offering to pay for the study if it shows that the charity’s approach doesn’t work? (If the study shows that it does work, they should be happy to pay for it themselves.)

]]> by: Paul Brest http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45935 Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:27:30 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45935 Holden’s underlying idea of getting nonprofits to acknowledge failures as well as tout their successes is great. But the real problem is that, unless they are doing direct services, most nonprofits don’t know whether they are succeeding or failing. I’m skeptical that nonprofits will have the motivation and capacity to find out, let alone disclose, their actual social impact unless donors begin to demand that information. Holden’s underlying idea of getting nonprofits to acknowledge failures as well as tout their successes is great. But the real problem is that, unless they are doing direct services, most nonprofits don’t know whether they are succeeding or failing. I’m skeptical that nonprofits will have the motivation and capacity to find out, let alone disclose, their actual social impact unless donors begin to demand that information.

]]> by: ErnestO Stolpe http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45870 Mon, 29 Dec 2008 01:33:46 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45870 Untold psychological misery and cold will make a homeless person come to the brink of having to choose between their four legged friend, and going into a shelter. Only two shelters in the U.S. allow pets. If offering grants to charities that can prove their programs don’t work is a great idea, and a wonderful solution might be setting up pet shelters right along side human shelters. Untold psychological misery and cold will make a homeless person come to the brink of having to choose between their four legged friend, and going into a shelter. Only two shelters in the U.S. allow pets.

If offering grants to charities that can prove their programs don’t work is a great idea, and a wonderful solution might be setting up pet shelters right along side human shelters.

]]> by: David Geilhufe http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45841 Sun, 28 Dec 2008 20:18:15 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45841 Like most of Givewell's ideas, the basic driver is good and the delivery sucks. You don't reward failure, you reward performance. The idea that start up companies don't cook the books and give baseless rosy predictions to their investors (unlike the way charities interact with their grantors) is pure philanthro-capitalistic hallucinogenic fantasy. The ideas that charities should celebrate their failures is just plain negative and antithetical to the culture of the sector. Decide what you are going to do. Measure it. If the measurements say you are failing, understand why and change operations until the measurements say you are succeeding. Continually beating that very simple drum in a clear and positive way would go far in making Givewell an inspiration and healthy challenge to funders and charities. And Liv, far, far, far fewer millions of dollars have been squandered on charities with bad ideas than on commercial firms with bad ideas. The squandering or the bad ideas are not really the problem... the fact that a charity with a bad idea doesn't go out of business is the problem. Like most of Givewell’s ideas, the basic driver is good and the delivery sucks. You don’t reward failure, you reward performance.

The idea that start up companies don’t cook the books and give baseless rosy predictions to their investors (unlike the way charities interact with their grantors) is pure philanthro-capitalistic hallucinogenic fantasy. The ideas that charities should celebrate their failures is just plain negative and antithetical to the culture of the sector.

Decide what you are going to do. Measure it. If the measurements say you are failing, understand why and change operations until the measurements say you are succeeding.

Continually beating that very simple drum in a clear and positive way would go far in making Givewell an inspiration and healthy challenge to funders and charities.

And Liv, far, far, far fewer millions of dollars have been squandered on charities with bad ideas than on commercial firms with bad ideas.

The squandering or the bad ideas are not really the problem… the fact that a charity with a bad idea doesn’t go out of business is the problem.

]]> by: Liv http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45829 Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:09:14 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45829 I often ponder how many millions of dollars are lost to charities who squander money with bad ideas. I often ponder how many millions of dollars are lost to charities who squander money with bad ideas.

]]> by: rob s http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45708 Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:42:18 +0000 http://blog.givewell.org/2008/12/26/a-proposal-to-reward-failure/#comment-45708 great post. it would be terrific if Charities, like startup companies, would celebrate failed models. rewarding individuals rather than the Charities at the organizational level to do so would perhaps generate more interest. great post. it would be terrific if Charities, like startup companies, would celebrate failed models. rewarding individuals rather than the Charities at the organizational level to do so would perhaps generate more interest.

]]>