Enter a zip code
(Hardcover)
An innovative guide to how great nonprofits achieve extraordinary social impact.
What makes great nonprofits great? Authors Crutchfield and McLeod Grant searched for the answer over several years, employing a rigorous research methodology which derived from books on for-profits like Built to Last. They studied 12 nonprofits that have achieved extraordinary levels of impact—from Habitat for Humanity to the Heritage Foundation—and distilled six counterintuitive practices that these organizations use to change the world. This book has lessons for all readers interested in creating significant social change, including nonprofit managers, donors and volunteers.
Leslie R. Crutchfield (Washington, D.C.) is a managing director of Ashoka and research grantee of the Aspen Institute. Heather McLeod Grant (Palo Alto, CA) is a nonprofit consultant and advisor to Duke University’s Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship and the Stanford Center for Social Innovation. Crutchfield and Grant were co-founding editors of Who Cares, a national magazine reaching 50,000 readers in circulation between 1993-2000.
Crutchfield and Grant, cofounders of Who Cares?, a national quarterly journal devoted to community service and social activism, have put together a workable list of the six best practices for nonprofits based on a thorough study of 12 high-impact organizations, from Habitat for Humanity to the National Council of La Raza. The practices they advocate are fairly straightforward (e.g., "inspire evangelists"), if a little short on specific implementations, but the book's real strength is how well it translates business practices and philosophies to the nonprofit sector, in particular by shifting the focus from competition to collaboration. The work suffers a little from a surfeit of jargon, but it's a decent read with sound ideas. Every organization can take something from it, but if your nonprofit isn't on the road to national attention, don't expect to pick up more than a couple of ideas. Recommended for larger business and leadership collections.
More Reviews and RecommendationsLeslie R. Crutchfield is a managing director of Ashoka: Innovators of the Public, a philanthropic adviser, and a research grantee of The Aspen Institute's Nonprofit Sector and Philanthropy Program. She serves on the board of the SEED Foundation and resides in the Washington, D.C., area.
Heather McLeod Grant is an adviser to the Center for Social Innovation at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business and to leading nonprofits. She is a former McKinsey & Company consultant, serves on the Advisory Board of Stanford Social Innovation Review, and resides in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Reader Rating:
See Detailed Ratings
July 08, 2008: This book offers insight into great nonprofits and is a good read, too. If you liked Good to Great by Jim Collins, you'll like Forces for Good.
Reader Rating:
See Detailed Ratings
June 12, 2008: The method used to select charities to study both made the results too narrow for general use and also assumed a definition of 'effectiveness' that had more to do with changing government policies than with impacting people's lives: no non-American charities, no charities founded before 1964 or after 1994, no church-related charities, only charities with national impact, and then the 'best' were chosen not by an objective criteria but by popularity among charity leaders. Rather than finding and analyzing the most effective charities at helping people, the book analyzes those who've gained the most noteriety for affecting policies. Within that scope, the book's conclusions seem solid, but that scope does not apply to the majority of charitable work. And the assumption that the greatest 'results' come from policy changes runs counter to much more thorough and objective research from people like William Easterly, a long-time World Bank economist who demonstrated in 'The White Man's Burden' that top-down change through governments is most often counter productive. The charities that change lives most effectively are those who follow nearly the opposite objectives of the kind selected for study in this book. And whether one agrees with Easterly or not, at least his work is based on hard data and not just surveys and interviews.