Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook on Corporate Foundations pp 193–214Cite as

Outsourcing of Corporate Giving: What Corporations Can(’t) Gain When Using a Collective Corporate Foundation to Shape Corporate Philanthropy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 810 Accesses

Part of the book series: Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies ((NCSS))

Abstract

Recent years witnessed a diversification of the how of corporate philanthropy. The chapter distinguishes between in-house (direct) corporate giving and outsourced (indirect) corporate giving, bringing corporate philanthropy back to a make-or-buy decision. In addition, corporate donors can go down a collaborative path and participate in collective corporate foundations (CCFs): a corporate foundation serving the interests of multiple corporate donors simultaneously. The chapter examines the rationales of and consequences for corporations outsourcing corporate philanthropy by means of a CCF. The study entails a single instrumental case study in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Primary data stems from 19 interviews with various stakeholders, including (former and non-) donor organizations. The study finds two rationales guiding corporate decision-makers facing the make-or-buy decision of corporate philanthropy: (1) available resources and (2) need for efficiency. Second, the study finds three consequences for corporations from utilizing a CCF for corporate giving: (1) loss of control, (2) loss of involvement, and (3) fewer organizational one-on-one residues. Third, the study identifies a trade-off between the identified rationales and consequences. The chapter concludes by relating the rationales back to a strategic management and an economic view on outsourcing and by discussing the study’s limitations as well as the implications for corporate decision-makers and beyond.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Within this study, “corporations” are personified as the term is used as if corporations undertake actions themselves. Nevertheless, I acknowledge that corporations operate through people.

  2. 2.

    Deltalinqs is the ports’ industry association and is active in the joint interests of industrial companies in the port of Rotterdam.

  3. 3.

    In 2007, Deltalinqs approached the Port of Rotterdam Authority (PoR) to become a partner of the foundation. The PoR is a publicly owned but corporatized port-development company.

  4. 4.

    A business or industry cluster is a geographic concentration of interconnected businesses, suppliers, or institutions in a particular region or field (Porter 2000).

  5. 5.

    Each interviewee has a unique label (e.g., board member A; representative B partner organization; CEO former donor organization C) that refers to the type of interviewee, the function of the interviewee in his organization (e.g., board members, founding association representatives, partner organization representatives, (former donor organizations, and non-donor organizations), and the alphabetic letter assigned to the interviewee within each group.

  6. 6.

    One interpretation of participation costs is that it is simply the time involved in making organizational decisions.

  7. 7.

    Where the corporate foundation connects corporations, giving circles connect individuals to pool resources and collectively decide which nonprofit initiatives will receive their donations (Eikenberry 2007), are a relatively easy way to participate in giving (Eikenberry 2007, p. 872), and provide an opportunity for more effective giving and better decision-making (Eikenberry and Breeze 2015).

References

  • Altuntas, C., & Turker, D. (2015). Local or global: Analyzing the internationalization of social responsibility of corporate foundations. International Marketing Review, 32(5), 540–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anheier, H. K. (2001). Foundations in Europe: A comparative perspective. In Foundations in Europe: Society, management and law (pp. 35–81). London: Directory of Social Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, P., Subramaniam, N., & Ching, K. C. W. (2006). Internal audit outsourcing in Australia. Accounting and Finance, 46(1), 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeltaPORT Donatiefonds. (2016). Annual report. [Online] Available at: http://www.deltaportdonatiefonds.nl/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Jaarverslag-2016.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2017.

  • Eikenberry, A. M. (2007). Philanthropy, voluntary association and governance beyond the state: Giving circles and challenges for democracy. Administration and Society, 39(7), 857–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eikenberry, A. M., & Breeze, B. (2015). Growing philanthropy through collaboration: The landscape of giving circles in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Voluntary Sector Review, 6(1), 41–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, J., & Graddy, E. (1986). Contracting out: In what? With whom? Public Administration Review, 46(July/August), 332–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fourie, A., & Eloff, T. (2005). The case for collective business action to achieve systems change. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2005(18), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frumkin, P. (2010). The essence of strategic giving: A practical guide for donors and fundraisers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gautier, A., & Pache, A. C. (2015). Research on corporate philanthropy: A review and assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), 343–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Kumar, N. (2006). Make, buy, or ally: A transaction cost theory meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 519–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, C. R., Youngblood, S. A., & Gray, D. A. (1999). Human resource management outsourcing: The make or buy decision. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(3), 85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W. (2003). Governance choices for corporate social responsibility: To contribute, collaborate or internalize? Long Range Planning, 36(5), 481–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Industry Fabrics Foundation. (n.d.). About us. [Online] Available at: http://www.indfabfnd.com/about_us. Accessed 9 Sept 2017.

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L. (2015). Understanding the role of the broker in business non-profit collaboration. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(2), 201–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. N., Huynh, M. Q., Chi-wai, K. R., & Pi, S. M., (2000). The evolution of outsourcing research: What is the next issue? In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liket, K., & Simaens, A. (2015). Battling the devolution in the research on corporate philanthropy. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(2), 285–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIvor, R. (2009). How the transaction cost and resource-based theories of the firm inform outsourcing evaluation. Journal of Operations Management, 27(1), 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, M., Lugo Knapp, A., & Corrado, M. (2011). What is a family foundation? The Foundation Review, 3(4), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ndubisi, N. O. (2011). Conflict handling, trust and commitment in outsourcing relationship: A Chinese and Indian study. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(1), 109–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrovits, C. M. (2006). Corporate-sponsored foundations and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 41(3), 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rey-Garcia, M., Martin-Cavanna, J., & Alvarez-Gonzalez, L. I. (2012). Assessing and advancing foundation transparency: Corporate foundations as a case study. The Foundation Review, 4(3), 77–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, H. K. (1998). Social origins of civil society: Explaining the non-profit sector cross-nationally. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9(3), 213–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SBF Foundation. (2015). Welcome address by Mrs. Therese Foo. [Online] Available at: https://www.sbf.org.sg/images/pdf/2015/Welcome_Address_SBFF_Fundraising_Dinner.pdf. Accessed 28 Jan 2019.

  • Shook, C. L., Adams, G. L., Ketchen, D. J., & Craihead, C. W. (2009). Towards a strategic toolbox for strategic sourcing. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 14(1), 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. (1995). The art of case research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, G. W., & Ussher, J. M. (2001). Making sense of S&M: A discourse analytic account. Sexualities, 4(3), 293–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toy Association. (n.d.). The Toy Association. [Online] Available at: http://www.toyassociation.org/. Accessed 9 Sept 2017.

  • Toy Industry Foundation. (n.d.). Get involved. [Online] Available at: http://www.toyindustryfoundation.org/TIF/Get_Involved/TIF/Get_Involved/Get_Involved.aspx?section=landing&hkey=3c56da97-6574-4585-a705-5e3a234339fb#.WbkIik0UnmQ. Accessed 9 Sept 2017.

  • Turnbull, J. (2002). Inside outsourcing. People management: Connected HR (pp. 10–11).

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. J. (1994). Tax and government policy implications for corporate foundation giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23(1), 41–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications, a study in the economics of internal organization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1981). The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. The American Journal of Sociology, 87(3), 548–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rotterdam School of Management (RSM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Stephanie Maas

Authors
  1. Stephanie Maas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Maas .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Rotterdam School of Management (RSM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands

    Lonneke Roza  & Lucas Meijs  & 

  2. Center for Philanthropy Studies (CEPS), University of Basel, Basel, Basel Stadt, Switzerland

    Steffen Bethmann  & Georg von Schnurbein  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Maas, S. (2020). Outsourcing of Corporate Giving: What Corporations Can(’t) Gain When Using a Collective Corporate Foundation to Shape Corporate Philanthropy. In: Roza, L., Bethmann, S., Meijs, L., von Schnurbein, G. (eds) Handbook on Corporate Foundations. Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25759-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25759-0_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25758-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25759-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation