[Catherine Russ]

thanks Erin for your thoughtful comments. Much appreciated.

[Catherine Russ]

Wow this is brilliant Group 1 – thanks for your great observations and a reminder of the constant need to address mutual benefit as partnership goals can change in the course of the work.
This next excerpt came on my LinkedIn feed and thought you might appreciate in light of our conversations of the differences and similarities of different sectors:

‘When people think of NGOs, they often imagine something very different from business. Mission-driven, altruistic, even “outside” the market.

But in practice, NGOs operate under many of the same pressures as businesses. Just with a different bottom line.

Consider this:
– NGOs exist in a two-sided market. On one side are the communities or issues they serve — which usually cannot pay. On the other are the funders — governments, foundations, individuals — who expect a return, but measured in impact rather than profit.
– That means need is not enough. Many urgent gaps remain unfunded, not because they aren’t real, but because they lack a clear case for impact, scale, or influence.
– Sustainability requires aligning mission with market. If funders can’t see how your work creates leverage, credibility, or measurable change, the model won’t hold — no matter how important the cause.

For leaders, this raises a fundamental question:
How do you design an NGO that stays true to its mission, while positioning itself as an investable proposition?’

See you Thursday.

[Catherine Russ]

Thanks both for your thoughtful reflections and recognition of the layers complexities we manage in our partnerships. The more the complexities are unravelled and managed the better chance we have of success on all levels.

[Author]

Posts