Twenty-second International Conference on Knowledge, Culture, and Change in Organizations

Abstract

The past two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in progressive grantmaking. While in the old paradigm a crowded field of NGOs offered direct services or advocated for changes in laws on behalf of disaffected groups, in the new paradigm—called variously impact investing, social justice philanthropy, participatory grantmaking—the NGO middle-man is cut out and ‘social movements’ are funded directly. These grassroots social movements promise the kind of structural change the old paradigm has been condemned for failing to realize. Intriguingly, in their efforts to fund movements, a range of philanthropic, development, and human rights organizations including CARE, American Jewish World Service, New World Foundation, Ayni Institute, Ford Foundation, and Solidaire are working together to develop an in-house ‘science of social movements’. This paper explores these new analytical tools for understanding, measuring, and intervening in social movements, such as the ‘social change ecosystem’ (which accounts for the multiple kinds of political action—legal reform, protest, lobbying—that make up social movements) and the ‘social movement lifecycle’. In developing such concepts, these organizations are also defining what social movements are or should ideally be: natural, organic, authentic, fluid, spontaneous, and possessing valuable local (rather than expert) knowledge. What does it mean that funders elevate the authenticity and organic qualities of social movements while simultaneously producing knowledge meant to help them intervene in those movements? Why produce new analytical tools rather than turn to the existing sociology of social movements? What are the motivations, stakes, and contradictions of this newly developing science of social movements?