Author:
Rooney Patrick,Burlingame Dwight
Abstract
Using results from 22 key informant interviews from 15 different universities, we analyze why various centers/programs on philanthropic and nonprofit studies started, their key revenue sources, the diversity of funding sources, the role of leadership, succession planning, and what they might have done differently to make things better. These case studies provide insights as to why some centers/programs fail, others barely survive, yet some thrive. While the old saying, “It’s better to be lucky than good” remains true. We found that many of the things we teach in our academic programs work well when leading academic centers: diversify income streams, do not become too reliant on one donor, provide for leadership transitions and succession plans, raise money for endowments, and build advisory boards.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献