Doing Good, Public Good, and Public Value

• Author: Stuart C. Mendel,Jeffrey L. Brudney
• Published date: 01 September 2014
• Date: 01 September 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21109

23

N M  L, vol. 25, no. 1, Fall 2014 © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/nml.21109

Journal sponsored by the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.

Correspondence to: Stuart C. Mendel, Cleveland State University, Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Aff airs,

2121 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115. E-mail: S.mendel@csuohio.edu

Doing Good, Public Good,

and Public Value

WHY THE DIFFERENCES MATTER

Stuart C. Mendel,1 Jeff rey L. Brudney2

1Cleveland State University, 2University of North Carolina Wilmington

In this article, using multiple illustrative case examples, we demonstrate that philanthropic

institutions are in the business of creating public value. In framing the work of philan-

thropy more broadly to include the process of public value creation, philanthropic institu-

tions and leaders are challenged to be more strategic not only in their mission-fulfillment

grant-making with nonprofit organizations but also in the way they stimulate and encour-

age collaboration, create the “third space” necessary to incubate ideas to transform society,

and leverage resources to increase the return on their investments toward system-wide

change. The implications for philanthropic actors and institutions suggest that the strategic

contributions they make toward creation of public value are those that go beyond transac-

tional performance measures, such as number of dollars spent or clients receiving services,

to include ways that their investments are amplified by meaningful partnerships with

nonprofit and other organizations, changed behaviors of institutions and individuals, and

transformative public policies.

Keywords: collaboration, partnership, philanthropy, foundations, public good, doing

good, public value, Cleveland, Ohio, case examples

ASK ANY INDIVIDUAL involved in private philanthropy or leading a philanthropic institu-

tion, and he or she would likely agree that their organizations are engaged in eff ecting change

in society (Anheier and Hammack 2010; Payton and Moody 2008; Whitman 2008, 2009).

Most see their work as “doing good” or providing for the “public good” (Bremner 1980;

Smith 2005). Most would also agree that in serving to fulfi ll their missions, among their

highest aspirations are for the philanthropic investments they make to resonate throughout

society well beyond a dollar-for-dollar return (Orosz 2007; Van Til 2008). But what they are

really doing is creating “public value.”

Mark Moore fi rst coined the term public value as a frame to guide the work of politically

elected or appointed offi cials in executive branch agencies, along with the senior civil servants

who aid them, in producing outcomes for the public good (1995, 1–3). Moore and other

scholars of government argued that public value arises from the actions of these same public

24 MENDEL, BRUDNEY

Nonprofi t Management & Leadership DOI: 10.1002/nml

management authorities that contribute to the common good of a community and have ele-

ments of altruism; are sustainable environmentally and fi nancially; and motivate the public

to perceive society’s public institutions as stable, dignifi ed, and trusted (Alford and Hughes

2007; Jorgensen and Bozeman 2007, 361–62; Stoker 2006).

In this article we suggest that creating public value is a much broader concept that can be

stimulated by the direct and indirect actions of private philanthropic institutions in policy-

making, grant and contract work with nonprofi t organizations, and the development of pub-

lic–private partnership. We also suggest that philanthropic actors and nonprofi t organization

leaders and managers do not normally account for public value creation and outcomes in

their grant making and program and project evaluation work, and that simply reporting on

clients served and dollars spent may satisfy a donor’s intent to “do good” but are insuffi cient

measures for advancing the public good or for generating the transformational change to

which many philanthropic institutions aspire. In making these assertions regarding philan-

thropic institutions, we apply a frame for decision making by private grant makers that has

not been addressed by Moore or others in the public management literature nor examined in

the literature of the nonprofi t sector.

From the standpoint of the charitable and good works traditions of philanthropy, public

value as an outcome would reside less in the domain of government and more in the prov-

ince of individuals exercising their moral and ethical judgments and sense of responsibility

(Frumkin 2002, 96 and 104–14; Hammack 1989; Salamon 2002). From this perspective,

public value is realized when individuals trust public policymakers and public institutions,

have faith in the system of economy and justice, and enjoy (conceivably) a level playing

fi eld to achieve a measure of economic security (Bozeman 2007; Hartz 1955; Mendel 2003;

O’Connell 1983).  e institutions of philanthropy also generate and nurture public value

in specifi c ways through their directed giving or mutual benefi t programs and in general

through their standing as institutions that perform checks and balances on the power of the

public and private sectors (Payton and Moody 2008).

Appreciating the public–private collaboration origins of public value is particularly important

for philanthropic leaders who strive for the best ideas and strategies for implementing them

(Hammack and Heydemann 2009, 7). Developing a framework for philanthropic leaders,

nonprofi t organizations, and public managers to understand the essential but seldom rec-

ognized role that philanthropic institutions play in creating public value will serve several

important purposes: (1) inform giving and grant making whose end results are public value

outcomes; (2) off er guidance for philanthropy, civic and business leaders, nonprofi t organiza-

tions, and governments regarding the development of successful grant-funded endeavors such

as public–private partnerships that provide an observable mechanism for public value crea-

tion; (3) inform public managers on the subtle ways that public policy can stimulate private,

philanthropic investment leading to the creation of public value; and (4) generate for philan-

thropic and nonprofi t managers a broader framework to consider and measure the impact of

their work beyond immediate transactional measures.

Based on our examination of multiple public–private partnership case examples and the

public value literature, including treatments by Moore (1995, 2000); Barry Bozeman (2002,

2007), John H. Benington (2011), and others, this article draws attention to the role

philanthropy fulfills in public value creation. We argue that philanthropic-minded civic

leaders as well as leaders of organized philanthropic institutions can create public value

through their own stand-alone initiatives but also in and through partnerships with the