donderdag 6 maart 2008

Transformation Design Library: Slate magazine

image courtesy Time magazine

transformation design is a human-centered, interdisciplinary process that seeks to create desirable and sustainable changes in behavior and form – of individuals, systems and organizations – often for socially progressive ends.


Mr Maschmeyer, over at his new blog has been trying to get an example library started.


So here is an example that I would like to add to the list: Slate's list of the 60 most generous.


The List came about, when in 1996 Ted Turner wondered about the influence the Forbers Richest List had on corporate America. "What if we could make charity as sexy as the Forbes list ?" (in a nutshell) was his idea.


Slate Magazine took up the challenge to find out. with some success. Althought I will admit that their is no evidence that is 100% waterproof.


"Whether by coincidence or not, philanthropy has blossomed since Slate's list was created. In 1996 the top donor gave away $100 million, or $121 million in 2005 dollars. But last year's top donor, Cordelia Scaife May, gave away $404 million, and the list (with 63 donors, counting ties) totaled $4.3 billion". (read the rest of a great article here)


So in the grand tradition of Michelline Guide, Guiness Book of Records, Slate has managed to create (lasting) change in the behaviour of the über-wealthy of America, kinda, sorta.


I guess greed is good, just depends what you lust for...


Salute Slate..

3 opmerkingen:

Leland zei

This could absolutely be an example of TD. But I'm curious about a few questions:

What did turner do/create to get people to perceive philanthropy as sexy? Did he do anything to get the uber-wealthy to give more, more often? Did he create/commission any new literature or language around the issue? How was slate magazine involved in creating this change, beyond making the list?

Part of transformation design is creating tools (a product, an object, new language, a reoccuring event, a new service, etc..) that people can act through or with in the attainment of some value (a.k.a. end psychological goal). By using these tools, people act differently. Tools change and help sustain new behaviors. Sometimes it takes a system of tools to do this. Sometimes it takes one tool.

So I would just be curious about what tools were created to help make charity sexy before I call this a TD example.

Niko H (nomme du guerre) zei

The way I see it, it was not Turner who created a tool, but it was Slate magazine. It created a tool for the wealthy to be get to be seen in positive/different light. via the Slate top 60 list one can now achieve a certain amount credibility and fame not just for being rich, but to be also seen as a humanitarian.

Ted Turner was merely the catalyst for Slate Magazine to create this tool. perhaps in my writing this did not come forward enough, so thanks for the correction.

Niko H (nomme du guerre) zei

Some more thoughts..


Slate 60 in itself is the biggest tool. In the beginning as novel way to let people earn praise (aka getting on the list). now it has eveloved in a platform.

but here are some examples of what I beieve are Slate tools for change:

Event:
The William Jefferson Clinton Foundation co-hosted the 2d Slate 60 Annual conference for Innovative Philantrophy.

The event, which convenes America’s most generous charitable donors is another way for change to happen, because the changemakers are being gathered in one place.

Vocabulary:
At the 2006 conference,Mayor Michael Bloomberg said, "There's the U.S. News and World Report's 20best American leaders, CNN's 10 biggest news stories, Time magazine's Person of the Year, but I'm in much better company being in the Slate 60."

So the Slate 60 has created special meaning for it's name, it has entered the evoked set of the über wealthy/powerfull and become part of their social calender.

Like I said before, I can not state that there is cause and effect with regards to more donations, there is mere corralation.

But...has it altered (some)behaviour? Yes, I believe it has.

Thank you.