Blogs

Charity mergers are not always best 4

Fundraising | Andrew Scadding | 8 Jun 2009

It is reported that the think tank New Philanthropy Capital has called for the Breast Cancer Campaign and Breakthrough Breast Cancer to merge.  I don’t know why New Philanthropy Capital feel moved to offer such advice, or why they feel we should listen, but I think they are speaking out of turn. I believe the constant pressure for charities to merge is misguided and has the potential to damage public support. Let me explain why. 

First of all, I don’t believe that ‘bigger is better’. This is the failed philosophy of the corporatist ‘60s and ‘70s.  Larger organisations tend to become more rather than less bureaucratic.  Any promise of economies of scale tends to evaporate in the face of increased complexity and administrative overhead.  Look at the British-owned motor industry, which merged under government pressure into a monolith manufacturer.  Where is British Leyland today?  Larger organisations tend to be less rather than more responsive to the needs of stakeholders: who could claim that the local government restructure of the 1970s has encouraged engagement with local democracy?

Next, charity is a two-way street.  If it is truly as blessed to give as to receive, then charities plainly are as much about the needs of donors as they are about the needs of beneficiaries. If charities are not only about beneficiaries, efficiency cannot be only about delivering services. 

Similar but contrasting charities serving the needs of the same beneficiary group can legitimately seek to meet the needs of different supporter groups.  The high street offers a choice of butchers or supermarkets, what’s wrong with a choice of cancer charities?  Seen from the donors’ point of view, these charities are complementary not competitive, tending to expand the total of support and funds available.

I believe the right of people to band together to deal with issues of common concern is  fundamental and a hallmark of a free society.  There must always be space for new organisations to emerge to meet new needs, whether those are needs of donors or of beneficiaries, or to find new and creative ways of addressing recognised problems.

Meeting the needs of donors and beneficiaries requires a healthy and diverse charity sector in which organisations are free t o be born, grow and die.  Charities need also to be free to merge, but only when it suits their purpose.  We should not lazily assume that merger is a good of itself, that one big charity will be better than two smaller ones.  Outsiders have no right or duty to seek to pressure trustees into abandoning their charity’s distinctive contribution. Variety and choice benefit beneficiaries and donors alike.

Tweet

Directory: Breakthrough Breast Cancer | Breast Cancer Campaign | New Philanthropy Capital
Who's Who: Andrew Scadding