A major purpose of this class was to learn how to make a definitive decision.
It can be hard to make a decision, especially when faced with many equally good options.
But through voting on charity pitches, narrowing down issue areas, and ultimately making our
final grantmaking decision, we refined our abilities to be decisive and choose.
Yesterday, during the first round of charity pitches, I made a suggestion that completely ignored this lesson. I was, same as many of you, so conflicted with the decision I had to make - where to cast my vote. I couldn’t make the choice, so concerned that selecting one would validate the personal experience of that one person at the expense of the others. All of the organizations would do good with the money, but, more importantly, all the personal stories of our classmates who pitched them were so moving, so deeply motivated, that it was impossible to choose any one over the other. So I raised my hand and offered the option to not choose. I took the easy way, because 2 extra dollars was a small amount compared to the difficulty of the decision. I don’t regret doing this.
If these three charities had been pitched together earlier in the semester, I could not have offered this option. It would have been too dangerous of a precedent to set -- any hard choice we faced could just be avoided with a few more dollars. It would have undermined the important lesson of objective, definitive decision making that Professor Campbell was working so hard to instill in us.
We’ve made our big decision. No one would say it was easy. The truth is, any one of our finalist organizations would have been an excellent selection to receive our funds -- but that is why it was such a difficult choice. Despite this, we made our decision, and while not every organization that I voted for won, I am satisfied with what we picked, and I would not take it back even if I could.
The way I see it, winning the extra funds from the Learning by Giving Foundation has given us
2 extra dollars. We went through the difficult process of choosing two organizations to receive our grants, we’ve shown that we have learned to be decisive and make a decision. Now we
have the opportunity to help the other charities that we couldn’t help, but we know need it.
2 extra dollars. We went through the difficult process of choosing two organizations to receive our grants, we’ve shown that we have learned to be decisive and make a decision. Now we
have the opportunity to help the other charities that we couldn’t help, but we know need it.
That being said, I don’t want to split the $2000 3 ways and give $666.66 each to CHOW, WCC, and the Boys and Girls Club. I’m not convinced that the Boys and Girls Club had as much need as the other organizations, and would benefit as much from a donation of that size. Instead, I am proposing that we split the $2000 in half between CHOW and the Wilson’s Children Center, giving $1000 each towards operating expenses. I believe that $1000 would have the greatest, most far-reaching impact going to CHOW; it would pay for costs associated with the food reclamation program, helping them continue redistributing literally tons of food that would otherwise be wasted. And I believe that a $1000 donation would be immensely appreciated at the Wilson’s Children Center. The site visit showed a tremendous need for money, and because they’re located in Deposit, the WCC doesn’t have the network or exposure that helps organizations like CHOW and the Boys and Girls Club raise adequate funds.
This is all just my opinion, and as the discussion of where to donate extra funds is no longer hypothetical, please continue offering your perspectives in the comments. Lastly, I want to say congratulations and thanks to all of us. The effort and involvement that every single person contributed to this blog is what allowed us to even have this discussion about extra funds in the first place.
Dear Gabe,
ReplyDeleteWhile not entirely topic related, your post made me think about something called "cognitive dissonance".
“Cognitive dissonance is what we feel when the self-concept — I’m smart, I’m kind, I’m convinced this belief is true — is threatened by evidence that we did something that wasn’t smart, that we did something that hurt another person, that the belief isn’t true." (1) I would argue that throughout the course of this semester, many of us have had to struggle with our cognitive dissonance in this class. According to Carol Travis, co – author of the book, “Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), the reason most of us are affected by cognitive dissonance is because it threatens our sense of self. To elaborate even further, „psychologists call the cognitive dissonance we experience in decision-making the “free-choice paradigm.” When it comes to making decisions, usually we’re not presented with one perfect option, which means we have to weigh one imperfect option against another imperfect option (there are pluses and minuses to both), which creates dissonance. [...] You experience that internal conflict as your brain tries to balance those two (or more) choices [...]“ (2).
In order to reduce this, we either have to “modify the self – concept or accept the evidence.” (1). Now, accepting that you’re wrong is not very comfortable. However, I believe it is essential for self – growth and development. None of us were (or are) experts in how to give in order to have the biggest impact. We have had little to zero experience in the non – profit sector and took this class to learn more, to acquire unknown knowledge. How much sense does it truly make to take a class and realize that you already knew everything that was being taught. Your time could have been spent a lot more useful than that.
Admitting that we are wrong does not make us a weak person, it does not mean that we are dump or uneducated, it doesn’t mean that our arguments were totally bad, it means that we are open for other opinions, willing to change our mind if needed and that we have integrity. “When you refuse to admit your mistakes, you are also less open to constructive criticism, experts said, which can help hone skills, rectify bad habits and improve yourself over all.” Thus, instead of thinking I totally disagree with what my class mate just said that was just stupid, why not let go of our own self – defense mechanism and accept the fact that different opinions do not attack us, they make us stronger. Dr. Michele Leno believes that we should embrace cognitive dissonance because, “as a result of being more honest, you’ll think through your decisions in a responsible way and learn more about yourself, too.” (2).
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/smarter-living/why-its-so-hard-to-admit-youre-wrong.html.
2. https://www.everydayhealth.com/neurology/cognitive-dissonance/every-decision-we-make/-
Hi Gabe,
ReplyDeleteI think that you were right in opting to deviate from the status quo and giving to all three of the organizations from the first charity pitch. It was difficult for me to agree with this at first, but after having the time to really think about it, my decision changed. At first, I felt that everyone donating another two dollars so that all three organizations could receive a donation was wrong because it undermined the democratic system we had in place up until then. My mind was changed sometime after class when I realized that all we would be doing is more good than we had initially planned on; we didn't want to offend anyone who had pitched so we donated to all three. I disagree with you however over your opinion as to where the extra grant money should go. First, I think that like all other decisions, we should democratically decide where the extra money should go. My feeling was that we should donate the money to an organization we already voted to give a grant to, but I am open to making the new money available to the others too, should the class vote on it. With a personal attachment to the organization's program, I felt the extra $2,000 should go to MHAST, since it would help them reach their goal of just over $40,000 of donated money so that it may be doubled. Our donation in totally would account for practically a quarter of the needed amount, which seems like a very large percentage from where I'm sitting. I'm looking forward to seeing how our class goes about deciding on this.
Gabe,
ReplyDeleteI think you make a great point and express your point very well. I too had an immense amount of trouble deciding between those three organizations and I was actually nervous when it was becoming time to vote until you stepped in. Thank you for doing that.
However, I do somewhat agree with Ben, that there is a need for a democratic, open-space conversation to choose a recipient of this $2000. But where I differ from Ben and agree with you again is that there are organizations like BGC and WCC that could really use the money.
Lea just wrote a great post about how we may have counted BGC out to easily and how they could use help, feel free to check that out.
In terms of WCC, I could not agree more. Those people neeeeeeeed money. It is very clear that it is a low budget organization and any bit will help. We have given all of what we thought we had to MHAST, why not help out elsewhere with these new found funds.
In the words of the Salvation Army, let's make sure we are "Doing the Most Good."
Thanks, Gabe.
- Dylan
Hi Gabe,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your post and I agree that the charity pitch decision was somewhat impossible to make. I want to thank our classmates for sharing such their personal stories and advocating for organizations that truly meant something to them. Once again, head versus heart is back in discussion; its an aspect of philanthropy that will probably leave donors questioning themselves for a while. Of course we all want to say that we are going to make the most informed decision about where our money is going, however, sometimes heart is necessary to determine it as well. In the case of the charity pitches, these are probably organizations that each student is and will continue to be very dedicated to, because it has a mission that is meaningful to them. That is very important in philanthropy. It is a great thing to be effective with our money but by giving to organizations that align with our core values, we are more likely to keep giving. Passion drives philanthropy and after this class is over, it is our passions that will help us continue doing good for others.
On the other hand, I agree that the Wilson’s Children Center will benefit extremely from our extra class donation. In the small town of Deposit, it clearly makes a great impact within the community. $1000 going towards their operating expenses could help them with any operating costs and hopefully they can allocate other funds to starting their intended program. Moreover, I also agree that CHOW should get $1000 as well. I know I discussed that head versus heart needs a balance in philanthropy and I agree with that. However, as we studied the issues in Broome County it is clear that poverty is a huge issue. If we want to make an impact in the community and help improve the issue of poverty, I think some aspects of effective altruism need to come into play. In our final paper, I discussed how CHOW’s Summer Lunch program would be able to serve the most people with the least amount of money. While I don’t know what the effectiveness of our money will be in terms of the operating grant, I still think CHOW is a great option. With the operating grant they will be able to continue providing food to members of the community. A lot of us are stressed and worried about classes and finals. I could never imagine wondering where my next meal is coming from, while worrying about other problems. I think the best way to solve the issue of poverty in Binghamton needs to start right at home, and that is with a nutritious meal. This way families can focus on other aspects of their lives, such as education and employment.
Gabe,
ReplyDeleteI think you are definitely spot on by saying that the decisions we've had to make were not easy, but I am very happy with the outcome and would not change it as well. Our class has been given the incredible opportunity to donate an extra $2,000, so with this we now have to continue our journey in decision making. I completely agree with Katherine in that we should give $1000 to CHOW because their programs unquestionably provide meals to the most amount of people with the least amount of money. I originally wanted to give the $7500 grant to CHOW for this reason until I was convinced to give to MHAST. However, I really believe we should give the other half of the grant to BGC. Despite the popular belief that they have more resources and a nicer facility, in my opinion they displayed the most need in terms of being able to sustain their operations. They received a 32% and 60% decrease in funding in their children and teen programs, respectively, and this should not be taken lightly. These huge budget cuts have led BGC to reduce their daily hours and part-time staff positions. Because of these budget cuts, and because BGC aligns with my own core values, I really think we should consider donating to them as well.