Should We Care About What Motivates CEOs to Become Philanthropists?

According to GivingUSA, in 2016, corporate giving rose by 3.5 percent and was estimated to amount to $18.55 billion. Also, Inc. The magazine found that a whopping 85 percent of consumers are more likely to think favorably of and support the enterprises that engage in corporate philanthropy to causes that they also endorse. So, a question arises, “Is this just all good, or do we really need to look at the reasons behind corporate philanthropy?”

The Exemplary

As stated by Entrepreneur Magazine, some corporate philanthropy is spurred by issues that relate to the CEO’s experiences or can be initiatives that are in their field of endeavor that can benefit those in need. Corporate philanthropy can also benefit the local community.

The BBC relates the story of Dame Stephanie Shirley. Shirley had to flee Nazi Germany at the age of five via the Kindertransport. She was raised in Britain by foster parents and, in 1960, became one of the world’s first and most successful female technology entrepreneurs. Sadly, her son was autistic, so she founded first a foundation and then a school in Britain for autistic students. She has also opened a school for autistic adults.

Rusty Tweed, a financial advisor, also has been heavily involved in philanthropy. Tweed is a well-respected financial professional in the Greater Los Angeles area with national recognition that advises his clients on financial issues such as mortgages, loans for consumers with low credit scores, mergers and acquisitions, estate planning, marketing, asset management, and investment properties. Tweed has created a foundation that supports health, education and youth entrepreneurship and empowerment. Tweed also has helped to raise funds for needed detox centers in New York and New Orleans. Tweed provides scholarships for students – one for graduating high school seniors and one for students who are currently enrolled in college.

The Dark Side of “Corporate Giving”

Some foundations are little more than funnels for money that are likely criminal endeavors; or are, at the very least illegal. Other foundations and corporate philanthropy, according to Entrepreneur, are set up in order to remove blemishes from CEO and corporate reputations due to the scandal. Then, the CEO or corporation issues a press release heralding their corporate social responsibility in an attempt to quell the public uproar.

According to the Huffington Post, the Haitian people are very upset about the role of the Clinton Foundation in their country in the aftermath of the massive hurricane that destroyed so much of the country in 2010. An investigator states that the Clintons do not show in any verifiable form how much money they really received when they were soliciting donations to rebuild Haiti, nor how much of those donations actually went to help the people in need. In fact, there are discrepancies between how much the Clinton Foundation reported they received from major donors, such as the Gates Foundation, and how much those donors stated they contributed.

KTLA News uncovered contributions to scientists and youth organizations by foundations of Jeffrey Epstein in the wake of his sex offense conviction a decade ago. They found that the foundations issued press releases that spoke of the philanthropic contributions. In some of the releases, the amounts of the donations do not reflect the amounts that the charitable organizations actually received. Many of the youth organizations have since returned the donations when they learned the sordid history of the source.

It seems clear that the motivations behind corporate or CEO charitable donations and philanthropy really do need to be examined because they are not all above-board. Certainly, people and foundations that donated to the Clinton Foundation’s Haiti recovery fund did not send money so it would go somewhere other than the hurricane-ravaged nation. Also, one would not want someone like Epstein to have access to children due to some charitable donation to a school.

Finally, corporate philanthropy that is solely motivated to repair reputations after a scandal to make potential customers have a more favorable opinion of the enterprise or CEO is likely to be half-hearted at best and not be dependable over time. It does seem these days that we need to examine corporate and CEO philanthropy and ensure that we have more of the truly altruistic philanthropic endeavors, such as those of Rusty Tweed and Dame Stephanie Shirley that help improve and empower the lives of those in their communities

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *