The folks from GOOD Magazine contacted me (and probably some of you- fellow bloggers) in a marketing outreach for their second “Choose GOOD” campaign. I personally have not seen the magazine to say anything about content but I can whole-heartily endorse their partner organizations that benefit financially from the campaign. Among my favorites: Ashoka, Acumen Fund, Kiva, Room to Read and Teach for America.
As GOOD describes their mission:
Beyond funds raised, GOOD endeavors to forge substantive bonds between our subscribers and our partners, by connecting our partners to a highly creative and influential audience, we hope to catalyze a movement of positive thought and action.
I like the creative model GOOD magazine is using to support those organizations that have shown themselves to be high quality/high impact organizations. This brings up a general question: is it better to support those that already have traction or start a new venture? In our microfranchising context and for those who are just entering the space or have financial resources they want to channel this way, is it better to support a Scojo or HealthKeepers or launch a new microfranchise?
Of course there is room (and need) for both but I think there are many supporters who go the route of creating their own, often re-inventing-the-wheel or crashing-and-burning, who would have been better suited to have backed an existing proven model. I think one issue is that they like the personal contact, feedback, and connection they feel through a new project. So the question becomes: how can those proven model organizations embrace these individuals and allow them to feel connected and involved if they are only supporting the cause financially? Thoughts?