Lesley Slavitt is the executive director of the Dorothy A. Johnson Center for Philanthropy at Grand Valley State University in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Through her extensive experience in corporate philanthropy, Slavitt guides the university-based center in bridging research and practice in philanthropy through active community impact and systems change. Slavitt shares how her experience brought her to the Johnson Center and the work it does with family offices.
How did you enter the world of philanthropy?
Early in my career, I was trying to figure out where I belonged when I accidentally found myself in philanthropy. I soon learned that the spaces where I felt I could thrive and make maximum contribution were in translational roles — those that serve as bridges between ideas and their execution or between actions on the ground and people making larger-scale change. Corporate philanthropy just happened to become a way for me to do that. It also offered me a framework of bottom-line, driven connection to decision-making and larger strategy. The dynamic environment offered a lot of flexibility and opportunity that ultimately fit me well.
I spent 10 years at the company that ultimately became JPMorgan Chase, going through three large bank mergers and 13 legacy foundation mergers during my time there. For a variety of reasons, I decided that I wanted to apply what I had learned in new ways and challenge myself to make new contributions. For me, that meant moving away from philanthropy and getting a new perspective. My move was intentional because I had done funding work in educational attainment, workforce development and economic development. I went to work at a university and saw what it meant to get first-generation students and students of color through the door and across the stage. I gained a perspective on the work and went one step closer, which was incredibly enlightening.
When I relocated to Michigan, I had no intention of returning to corporate philanthropy, but FCA [Fiat Chrysler Automobiles] appealed to me because the opportunity still met my “standard.” The financial services sector — the automotive — had a different way of operating and culture. The foundation was at a different stage after the company went through bankruptcy. So the needs, challenges and opportunities met that standard for me to apply what I knew to do in new ways and learn new skills — in the broader philanthropic sector, which was my career pathway.
Can you highlight how your former career in corporate philanthropy and personal experiences shape how you approach your current role?
We’re all a product of our experiences. The career choices I made were intentional and grew my skills and abilities. They taught me how to problem-solve at scale and develop and implement strategy. I had the privilege of working with teams and people at different stages in their careers with different disciplinary interests and backgrounds, which framed my leadership practice to some degree. I didn't take the elevator to the investment banking floor at JPMorgan Chase. I was always very much drawn to and privileged to work in the civic sector, even in a for-profit environment.
Living in Flint, Michigan, during the Flint water crisis was a deeply profound experience. At the time, the sector was pulled toward trying to respond to and help address some of the challenges in the community in new ways. My neighbors and I lived through a unique time and experienced what it meant to be in a place where you turn on your tap and are afraid to drink the water. It wasn't the only time in my career when I experienced two very different perspectives on the same problem at once, but it was deeply personal in a very different way.
How does the Johnson Center support family philanthropy?
We're privileged to have the nation’s first fully endowed, named chair of family philanthropy here at the center. The Frey Chair for Family Philanthropy brings new knowledge forward, translating research to practice, and helps us understand where the practice of family philanthropy is going and why. They serve as a leading voice on family philanthropy issues, trends and innovations.
We’ve also convened the chief executives of limited-life foundations nationwide and explored the implications for multigeneration family foundations. This work provides insights into the day-to-day leadership and management of these types of foundations and the practical implications of the decision to spend down.
What are some trends and challenges happening in the nonprofit sector?
We continue to see the largest intergenerational transfer of wealth within high-net-worth families within which many of the other trends we’re seeing provoke critical questions that the sector will have to answer in the coming months and years — such as in the use of artificial intelligence, the maturation of Generation Z, and issues surrounding donor anonymity and the use of fiscal sponsorship. These trends will have implications for current and future generations in philanthropy.
How does the Johnson Center, a university-based research center, build knowledge and help progress on social issues?
We aim to apply research and build knowledge to create new knowledge and go deeper. The imperative to improve philanthropy isn't just the end product but also a process. Our work moves from theory to research to practice to make the practice of philanthropy better.
How has the philanthropy world evolved since you entered it? Are you hopeful about its future?
The scale and the scope of both the challenges and the opportunities demand that we are not only hopeful but encouraged by the way the sector — nonprofits, foundations and community members — has the power to improve the quality of life and enrich the aspirations of communities worldwide. There's no greater privilege than waking up every day knowing that you get to work with individuals who are deeply dedicated to making the world a better place.
A new paradigm for family giving
By CHRISTINA WING
The annual UBS Billionaire Ambitions Report was released in December, and this year there was a striking top-line finding: For the first time, the number of new billionaires who inherited wealth exceeded that of “self-made” billionaires. This has led to a lot of conversations around a great wealth transfer that will have economic and social implications.
But there’s one area where potentially dire results aren’t being talked about enough: philanthropy.
Why is this an issue? Self-made billionaires are more likely to become philanthropists who give away a large part of their wealth than are those who inherit. Much of the world’s current philanthropic architecture is built on the foundations of founders of companies, but the diminishing of first-generation billionaires may have a chilling effect on global giving.
That said, the younger generation still has a stated interest in social and environmental issues and doing good — they are often keener on impact investing and sustainability than their parents, for instance. And they may be averse to giving because they aren’t sure how to have a substantial impact on concrete problems facing the world.
How do we thread the needle between these impulses? The answer may be an approach to philanthropy that’s more directly tied to the activities of family offices, where philanthropic efforts are intertwined with the concept of social investment rather than being classified as charitable initiatives of the type successors often eschew.
I’ve found that many of the best examples of a family-office-led social investment approach are among wealthy families in middle-income countries — where there is often a greater sense of obligation to the local community, borne of generations of being rooted there as a business; and a sense that helping one’s nation develop its full potential is good for business in the long run.
Two such examples are found among prominent families in Turkey: the Sabancı and Ӧzyeğin families.
The Sabanci family, owners of the Esas Group investment firm, in 2000 created the social investment arm of their family firm, Esas Sosyal, tasked with focusing on alleviating Turkey’s high youth unemployment with school-to-work transition programs.
Emine Sabancı Kamıs¸ lı, who was the driving force behind Esas Soysal’s creation as she entered a family business leadership role in its third generation, sought to apply the same rigor in terms of research, objectives and metrics that had served the Sabancis well in for-profit investment to bettering society. In this way, Emine made philanthropy an arm of business, with all the accountability and attention to detail that implies, rather than simply cutting a check to charity or outsourcing it.
This approach can appeal to successors who want to do good but move beyond the old philanthropic model; it’s about finding an issue or goal that matters and can be measured.
Similarly, Turkish financial entrepreneur Hüsnü Özyeğin set up his eponymous philanthropic foundation in 1990 with the goal of advancing female education, especially in rural Turkey. The foundation worked with the Ministry of Education to build more schools, reaching far into the hinterlands to give girls an opportunity to learn and ultimately enter the workforce. Again, worthy social goals were tied to the long-term good of business.
Özyeğin later expanded his foundation’s role to disaster relief — a major humanitarian and economic challenge in Turkey — and played a key role in relief for the 2023 earthquake that devastated parts of central and southern Turkey. Through all this, the foundation has operated in a financially sustainable way, being allocated dividends from the family’s for-profit investment arm and having to meet expectations around quantifiable metrics.
In the case of both the Sabanci and Özyeğin families, philanthropy has depended on making giving an arm of the family office, subject to the same discipline as any investment enterprise. As the next generation comes into its own in the West and more traditional charitable giving becomes less in favor, examples from Turkey and elsewhere could be key for showcasing an approach that unites investment and philanthropy under the umbrella of the family office — and creates a paradigm for marrying social impact with long-term interest.