Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Christian Jaag

Publications and source records attributed to Christian Jaag.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Organizational Lifespan as Commitment: The Case of Foundations

An organization may bind future decision makers through a commitment over its own lifespan. This paper studies that choice for philanthropic foundations. A foundation may commit to terminate, commit to institutional continuity, or leave termination to future discretion. Discretion preserves state-contingent stopping. Perpetuity instead raises investment in foundation-specific organizational capital whose return is partly lost upon termination. A terminal commitment limits excessive continuation when future governing bodies obtain private benefits from organizational survival. A canonical model yields nonempty regions in which each regime is optimal, while a finite-horizon extension endogenizes the terminal date. Perpetuity is optimal when organizational capital is sufficiently productive relative to the cost of continuing in bad states; discretion is optimal when stopping flexibility is valuable and governance is aligned; a finite lifespan is optimal when survival incentives create sufficiently costly entrenchment. Organizational lifespan is therefore a distinct commitment margin.

econ.GN↗

Competition with a Common Purpose

Non-governmental organizations often compete for funding while valuing similar social outcomes. Fundraising may expand total giving to a cause or redirect a given funding pool toward the focal organization. This paper studies how cross-organizational purpose alignment changes the composition of such competition. The analysis separates two effects of fundraising: marginal \emph{lift} in aggregate funding and marginal \emph{shift} of funding between organizations. Incomplete alignment creates a wedge between an NGO's marginal mission return and the aggregate mission return that is proportional to shift minus lift. When NGOs choose among fundraising technologies, greater purpose alignment shifts effort toward the relatively lift-intensive technology. Relative to the aggregate mission benchmark, incompletely aligned NGOs choose portfolios that are too shift-intensive. A uniform restriction on fundraising may change total effort but cannot generally correct this composition distortion; correcting the portfolio requires changing relative incentives across technologies. A simple microfoundation interprets cause promotion as lift and organization promotion as shift. Productivity differences preserve reallocation when it raises mission output, while organization-specific benefits restore rivalry even under complete alignment. The model therefore predicts how a common purpose changes the form of competition even when its effect on the level of competition is ambiguous.

econ.GN↗