Independent Sector

This post is authored by Steven Fajon, an intern at the Case Foundation. Steven is a fresh graduate of McGill University where he majored in management. He is currently exploring opportunities in the nonprofit sector and is sharing lessons learned with us at Social Citizens.

Is there a textbook definition of the common good? There’s a ton of research, articles, blog posts, and debates out there about what the common good means, but none of it actually seems to get to a shared conclusion. But even if there was such a definition, would it be that useful? Ayn Rand, famous author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, described the common good as "a meaningless concept [that is] undefined and undefinable." So why, then, would we even want to attempt to explain an idea that can’t be explained and that has no particular use?

What the Heck is the Common Good Anyway?

Recently I listened in on a webinar hosted by Independent Sector, as part of their 2012 NGen Leadership Series. It was dubbed “What the Heck is the Common Good Anyway?” Kara Carlisle, from the Kellogg Foundation, moderated the discussion. Four speakers from various organizations debated the purpose of a shared definition of the common good: Ai-Jen Poo, director at the National Domestic Workers Alliance; Nick Troiano, national campus director at AmericansElect; Billy Wimsatt, co-founder of Rebuild the Dream; and Kristin Soltis, policy research director at the Winston Group. Their experiences in nonprofits were helpful in discussing the importance of a shared common good definition, with a purpose to supposedly to unite organizations, individuals, and communities towards building and protecting a common ideal of a better and more just society.

As a new actor in the nonprofit world I’ve already been exposed to dozens of worthy organizations in the sector, all fighting for causes that, while diverse, are also linked by a shared desire to improve the lives of others. In that sense, it’s easy and quick to apply a “common good” label to these organizations’ actions -– to achieve that ideal world.

What’s Good for One Person Isn’t Necessarily Good for Another

The speakers explored the difficulty of defining the common good in a universal way, applicable and beneficial to all. This debate is magnified by the simple notion that what is good for one person is not necessarily good for another. For example, what’s good for shareholders in a corporation might not be favorable to its employees. Further, allocating limited resources to providing access to clean water to populations in Sudan might take away from sending food aid to Ethiopia. While I admit these analogies are simplistic, I believe they illustrate the issue at hand.

The common good is never “common” in the literal sense because it can only apply, in the best case scenario, to a majority of individuals who share a common interest: as Alison Goldberg explains, "The ‘common good’ embodies the idea that shared resources should be used to improve the well-being for the greatest number of people possible." Then, can we only use the term to aspire to a world in which most win, while some lose?

I Don’t Get It

As it may have become obvious, I was starting to get confused. I decided to turn to the experts, so during the webinar, I asked: "Is it possible to address the issue of the small few sacrificing their morals or self-interests for the good of the many?" In my mind, I had come to the conclusion that using a definition of the common good to justify actions could lead, in the worst case scenarios, to dangerous situations where one community or individual attempts to take advantage of another in the name of that common ideal.

Ai-Jen Poo responded that the purpose of the common good and its definition is not to provide something universal that all should adhere to; in fact, its objective is to initiate a dialogue between communities in need; to give a voice to those that actually make these sacrifices. It is also not to state that every single individual has the same needs, but rather that those needs can coincide and that by working together, agents of change are able to do just that -– change things.

All This Got Me Thinking…

At the onset of the webinar, the organizers surveyed participants to ask whether they felt that a universally shared definition of the common good was necessary. At that point, 14 percent answered that no, it isn’t necessary, and 17 percent said they didn’t know. When the discussion was over, the same question was asked, and this time 20 percent said no, while those unsure amounted to a measly 3.4 percent.

For my part, I answered “No” at first because I didn’t think it was possible to give the concept a single objective definition. At the end, confused and unsure, I think I was the only one to select “I don’t know.” With hindsight, though this was my instinctive choice at the time, I probably still don’t believe in a shared definition. Because in the end, the idea of the common good doesn’t need to be an exact science –- it simply has to strike up a debate, just like it did in my mind. It raises questions and creates conversations to become one of many useful tools in the nonprofit world.

Now that I’ve shared my thoughts on the "Common Good," I’m curious as to what our audience thinks. Let me know in the comments section!

(A special two-part blog post covering the 2010 Independent Sector NGen Ambassador Lunch. Read the companion piece, The Changing Faces of Mentorship-For the Mentor)

Have you found the right hair stylist, job, primary care physician or significant other? The right mentor? If you can claim having anywhere from two to four of these nailed down then you’re doing pretty well. For the overachievers reading this who have all five, congratulations, you’re halfway to winning at the game of Life.

Arguably one of the most often overlooked and underutilized “milestones” on this life checklist for Millennials is that of finding the right mentor. There probably has at one time or another been a mentor in your life or at least the suggestion of one—someone who you looked to for guidance, advice and information because of their unique experience and knowledge. Take a moment to consider the status of that relationship and its value to you.

Whether you are drawing a blank or reminiscing about your mentor, it’s time to take another look at how you define a “mentor” and what that title means. The idea that a mentorship is focused on a mentor advising a mentee only is long gone. This traditional view of mentorship has evolved into an era of “mutual mentorship” that is changing the professional landscape.

Independent Sector hosted a special mentoring luncheon during its 2010 Annual Conference, taking place this week, to look at this new dynamic. Leaders from the next generation (NGen) and the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors (Ambassadors) came together during this progressive-style lunch to learn from one another and to discuss the role of young leaders in the professional community. With each new course, attendees had to move to a new table and engage a new mix of people.

Upendo Shabazz-Phillips of the Alleghany Franciscan Ministry is one of the young leaders who participated in the NGen luncheon. For Shabazz-Phillips, who found NGen at the direction of a senior colleague, “the event helps to build and sustain talent in the sector.” Many of the ambassadors and NGen attendees came to the luncheon for this very same reason.

The event opened with a dynamic discussion about personal life lessons on mentoring from Brian Gallagher, President and CEO of United Way Worldwide; Diana Aviv, President and CEO of Independent Sector; and Susan Berresford, Independent Sector Board Member. The discussion yielded several important reflections valuable to today’s younger professionals that may just change the way you think about mentorships:

You Better Shop Around

Unlike the traditional model of one mentor for every mentee, you may have two, three or 10 different mentors throughout your professional career. Each mentor can advise and consult with you on different matters.  As Aviv notes, “you don’t always get everything from one mentor.”

More importantly than having a plethora of mentors is finding the right one(s). This means identifying individuals who have a connection with you and help you create that special spark critical for mentoring relationships. Berresford added that it might be someone who you don’t even know, but simply find intriguing.

That’s What Friends Are For

A big question for many mentees today is how to relate to your mentor… is he/she a friend, colleague, peer, superior? The once solid lines of mentorship are becoming increasingly blurred with this new relationship model. Berresford believes that those engaged in a mentoring relationship should find the right fit for them—whether that is becoming personal friends or maintaining a professional relationship.

Ain’t Nothing Like the Real Thing

Mentees should be willing to talk candidly about their performance, goals, expectations, successes and failures with their mentors. Both Aviv and Berresford advise that the success of any mentor/mentee relationship is based on trust in the other. As Berresford reminds us, “Be courageous, learn from your mistakes.”

One is the Loneliest Number

Not necessarily… the panel at this event notes that this evolved mentorship dynamic is not necessarily the right fit for every young professional. At the end of the day, you don’t have to have a mentor to be successful. There are alternatives, for example a supervisor or colleague who you can turn to occasionally for professional advice, but not necessarily develop a full-fledged mentorship.

Lean on Me

Ultimately, Berresford concludes that a good relationship is one in which a mentor and mentee can admire one another; can teach one another; and can confide in and trust in one another.

The truth of the matter is, it’s a relief not to have to know everything all the time, be perfect all of the time or have the right answer all of the time. In this day and age of instant gratification and expanded choices, I think we can all agree that it’s a luxury to have someone who we can turn to for advice. While mentors are not the answer to every professional challenge you may face, they are there to play a significant role in your professional development. (Check out more modern day mentoring ideas from past Social Citizens posts.)

What I want to know now is what the evolving relationship dynamic means for mentees and their role in the relationship. Does this mean that mentees must now step up their game to stay on this two-way street, rather than playing the part of the traditional “passive” mentee? What’s your definition of a mentor and mentee? Do you agree with these observations about the evolution of mentorships?

Even at the risk of making some broad generational generalizations, there’s little question that Millennials across all sectors share something in common -- a burning desire to make a positive impact in the world. It’s built into our DNA and it’s something that is becoming more and more apparent as the blurring of lines among sectors creates enormous opportunities to collectively solve some of our most pressing social problems.  But who are these leaders driving change in our communities -- and is cross-sector collaboration really something that's all talk and no action?

That’s part of what the American Express NGen Fellows, a group of nonprofit leaders under the age of 40, chose to tackle in a recent report released earlier this week. Their final report is based on a survey distributed to more than 2,000 NGeners in the nonprofit, government, and private sectors. It asked about perspectives on leadership development, cross-sector collaboration, and how to respond to major challenges facing our communities. 

So what did they find? Here are the major takeaways – and some of them may surprise you.

• NGeners mostly agree on the top issues facing communities, the nation and the world – with education, poverty, health and the environment topping out the lists

• NGeners feel collaboration across sectors is very important but don’t know the people, leaders or the methods to facilitate collaboration

• The majority of NGeners could not identify a single leader under the age of 40 who is effectively solving a societal problem

• NGeners believe the nonprofit sector is best positioned to take the lead in engaging other sectors to solve problems

• NGeners believe they need more organized leadership development opportunities

There are several things that truly stand out about these findings, and you can download the full report here. Perhaps what surprises me the most is the inability of my peers to identify other leaders under the age of 40 who are effectively solving social problems. Back in February we explored in a post on Social Citizens, "The Lost Generation of Social Entrepreneurs"  and came up with a diverse list of under 35 year olds who will have no problem serving as role models for their peers and who have chosen to focus a little less on profits and a little more on changing the world. That list continued to grow with the help of our readers.

In addition to not being able to identify these so-called generational leaders, I also found it interesting that "next gen" leaders don't have a good understanding of how to facilitate cross-sector collaborations. After all, we talk a lot about how Millennials thrive far better in collaborative environments as opposed to hierarchecal structures. I wonder however if Millennials thrive in groups of similar minded people, making it more difficult to reach across to others who may have different skills and backgrounds.  This is something we'll explore in more detail in a subsequent post.

In the meantime, it’s clear that the fellows' analysis and recommendations are not final conclusions, but instead provide an important starting point for further discussions about what leadership and collaboration really mean for rising leaders and our communities. I’d add that these conversations should be happening across all generations so that we can ensure more two-way sharing of innovative ideas.

Independent Sector will be hosting a call on August 19, to explore these ideas in greater depth - I hope participants in the call will represent diverse backgrounds, age cohorts and sectors in order to truly make it a meaningful discussion.

What are your take aways from this report? Are you surprised by any of their conclusions?