Too often, nonprofits are viewed as rigid and bureaucratic - less nimble and capable of adapting in this fluid environment than our corporate counterparts. I don't agree.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Nonprofits are the intermediaries between generosity and social change.
There are so many local nonprofits making a positive impact every day, and yet, oftentimes we don't hear enough about them or their needs.
The millennial generation and a growing number of employees are looking for more than just a paycheck. If a nonprofit could make that easy for me, they are doing me a favor. It's not just a one-way value exchange; it is an internal morale building opportunity.
We often have an exaggerated sense of what nonprofits and governments are doing to help the poor, but the really inspiring thing is how much the poor are doing to help themselves.
That's why it has to be a nonprofit, because a nonprofit is required to take monies it receives and use them for the purposes for which it's chartered by the government. It can't be pocketed.
While many in the social enterprise space often qualify themselves as 'non-profit,' these organizations should instead treat themselves as 'for-purpose.' These organizations should focus on their mission to create social good, while still treating themselves with the same commitment to rigor and discipline as the best for-profits.
Much corporate giving is charitable in nature rather than philanthropic.
The problem most nonprofits have is that they are run by romantics who are great to hang out with, but they have no clue.
I've thought for years that newspapers should all be owned by nonprofits.
Most organizations should be pro-active, but philanthropists concerned with poverty should deliberately be reactive, learning from the efforts of ordinary folks who tired of looking the other way as their communities fell apart.
No opposing quotes found.