More from these Authors

• Teaching Note | HBS Case Collection | January 2020

  How to Encourage Others to Give and When to Pass the Torch? Insights from The Philanthropy Connection

  Christine Exley and Kathleen McGinn

  This case follows the co-founder and president, Marla Felcher, of The Philanthropy Connection (TPC). TPC is a nonprofit organization that centers around collective giving: members of TPC make an annual contribution that is then distributed to select nonprofit organizations via grants. As Felcher works to maximize how much money they can give out via grants, this case allows for a deep dive into the motives for giving and how the organizational structure and processes can tap into why people give. As the case begins with Felcher’s founding of TPC and concludes with Felcher desiring to step down from her role as president, this case also allows for a rich discussion around if and when a nonprofit founder should step aside to let the next round of leaders takeover.

  Keywords: giving and philanthropy; Philanthropy and Charitable Giving; Motivation and Incentives; Nonprofit Organizations;

  Citation:

  Exley, Christine, and Kathleen McGinn. "How to Encourage Others to Give and When to Pass the Torch? Insights from The Philanthropy Connection." Harvard Business School Teaching Note 920-046, January 2020.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsPurchase

  Related

• Article | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | November 26, 2019

  Veil-of-Ignorance Reasoning Favors the Greater Good

  Karen Huang, Joshua D. Greene and Max Bazerman

  The “veil of ignorance” is a moral reasoning device designed to promote impartial decision-making by denying decision-makers access to potentially biasing information about who will benefit most or least from the available options. Veil-of-ignorance reasoning was originally applied by philosophers and economists to foundational questions concerning the overall organization of society. Here, we apply veil-of-ignorance reasoning in a more focused way to specific moral dilemmas, all of which involve a tension between the greater good and competing moral concerns. Across seven experiments (n = 6,261), four preregistered, we find that veil-of-ignorance reasoning favors the greater good. Participants first engaged in veil-of-ignorance reasoning about a specific dilemma, asking themselves what they would want if they did not know who among those affected they would be. Participants then responded to a more conventional version of the same dilemma with a moral judgment, a policy preference, or an economic choice. Participants who first engaged in veil-of-ignorance reasoning subsequently made more utilitarian choices in response to a classic philosophical dilemma, a medical dilemma, a real donation decision between a more vs. less effective charity, and a policy decision concerning the social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. These effects depend on the impartial thinking induced by veil-of-ignorance reasoning and cannot be explained by anchoring, probabilistic reasoning, or generic perspective taking. These studies indicate that veil-of-ignorance reasoning may be a useful tool for decision-makers who wish to make more impartial and/or socially beneficial choices.

  Keywords: Policy Making; procedural justice; Ethics; Decision Making; Policy; Fairness;

  Citation:

  Huang, Karen, Joshua D. Greene, and Max Bazerman. "Veil-of-Ignorance Reasoning Favors the Greater Good." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 116, no. 48 (November 26, 2019).  View Details

  CiteView DetailsFind at Harvard

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | November 2019

  Chief: Role for Carolyn Childers

  Katherine B. Coffman, Jeffrey J. Bussgang, Kathleen L. McGinn, Katherine Chen and Julia Kelley

  In 2018, Carolyn Childers is preparing to launch Chief, a New York-based peer network for women executives, and must decide whether to bring on a co-founder. After becoming the senior vice president of operations at her previous company, Childers was inspired to build a community that provided mentorship, support, and networking opportunities to women executives. Childers is now preparing to meet with Lindsay Kaplan, a marketing executive who excels at building brand experience. Should Childers bring on Kaplan as a co-founder? If Childers takes on a co-founder, what do they need to agree on?

  Keywords: Networking; founders; Entrepreneurship; Networks; Negotiation;

  Citation:

  Coffman, Katherine B., Jeffrey J. Bussgang, Kathleen L. McGinn, Katherine Chen, and Julia Kelley. "Chief: Role for Carolyn Childers." Harvard Business School Case 920-019, November 2019.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related