This is more important than just saying no nicely: Grantmaker and grantseeker communications at the

1
This is more important than just saying no
nicely Grantmaker and
grantseeker communications at the point of grant
refusalAnton Bradburn and Jenny HarrowCass
Business School, City University
2
A collaborative research project, work in
progress (CAF and ACF)- an evident research
gap, a private matter?- the theory and
practice dimensionsorganisational learning and
rationing 2 case studies- our starting point
pilot work in the SW,on grant rage.

•  

3
Before snowball sampling grantmakers, we pictured
them hypothetically , facing expressions of grant
rage as - Absorbers - Absolvers -
Agony Aunts or Nodders - First Aiders -
Stone WallersFirst Aider model paradoxically
added to the grant rage, and inhibited learning?

•  

4
A limited study the critical factor of those
suffering in silence

• How do grantseekers and grantmakers characterize
  their communications with when grant success is
  not achieved?
• What learning are grantseekers and grantmakers
  able to draw from these experiences and
  characterisations?

5
Glass, 1999 if grant makers and grant
seekers can communicate more frequently and more
frankly, the organizational changes that take
place in foundations in the next century can be
productive and rewardingThe Rockefeller
Brothers Foundation (2004) - poor rating from
failed grantseekers, less approachable -38
response level

6
Main communications survey not yet underway
meanwhile, we are back into case studies

• 1 . A pre survey survey led to the offer of a
  case study by a failed grant seeker, with some
  heavy duty learning
• 2. Grant rage wins in the South West
  secondarysources mini-case of the Arts Council
  reversing adverse grant decision for the
  Northcott Theatre, Exeter

7
1.The Easy Street case study

• Act The Natural Fit Act II This is our
  project..
• Act III the Waiting Game    
• Act IV The Lack of a Letter
• Epilogue I ll stage manage it next time
• Learning not to invest too hard in any bid,
  cut and paste from other work, substantially
  limit development of high commitment relations,
  put on a show avoid being over motivated

8
2. The Northcott Theatre, Exeter case study

• the shock December 07, losing ACE yearly grant
  of 547,000 from April 2009 but a slightly open
  door .
• Campaigns commence a bandwagon effect
• The ACE U turn in January 08 sensational
  backtracking
• Whose victory?......
• Moments of Reprieve, Dec/Jan 2007/8
  0r
• Dont You Just Love It When Youre Right?

9
Exeters Vice Chancellor the grant-ragers
perfect scenario

•  
• The Arts Council has listened to the reasoned
  arguments put to them by the Theatre and its
  funders.
• We always felt that the case for retaining the
  Theatre's funding was unanswerable and that has
  proved to be the case."

10
Some (preliminary) concluding thoughts- no
suggestion of indifference towards failed
grantseekers, tho they may feel it - what
counts as useful learning for the non successful
? (lessening effort and commitment not what
grantmakers want?) - public grant rage -
energizing supporters, or more (just) an
expression of rise of incivility in the
workplace? What legitimises grant rage? GR as
bullying?
11
-More than saying no nicely a major
challenge, since grant making is at heart a
financial transaction ,about which there will
never be perfect information - rationing
concepts need to be discussed? But (Mechanic,
1995)Explicit rationing is unlikely to be as
equitable as its proponents argue and is likely
to make dissatisfaction and perceived deprivation
more salient.
12

• ..grantseeking is a term invented by those
  with power, about those without power.
• (Mayer 1993)