Self\-knowledge\. Individuals should decide to help an organization working on X by estimating their impact there\. Donor\-independence\. Donors should refrain from telling executives how to trade off between the success of X and Y\. Pareto improvement\. When organizations trade off between X and Y, they should do so at a similar exchange rate\.
Is the idea that a single organization should pursue X or Y and not worry about the fact that any given donors will value both X and Y to varying degrees?
(If so I might have called this organization-independence, or single-focus.)
Comments
Ryan Carey
I got the idea from someone who suggested that if donors would fund some organization-leaders to do task A, and those leaders think B is more valuable, then the donors should usually fund them to do B. In one version of the claim, the donors' role then is to make some global assessment of how worthy they are of funds, and not to argue much about strategy. This kind of thing could apply if the organization is focused on X only, half X and half Y et cetera.
Eric Rogstad
Fair to paraphrase as: donor-as-silent-partner?