Laundering Money

Consider this…. 

Is there any person, company or organization whose “no-strings attached" donation you would not accept? If you worked in an anti-human trafficking organization, would you take a donation from a producer in the pornography business?   If you worked for a cancer research organization, would you accept funds from a tobacco company? If you worked for a faith-based organization, would you accept funds from a strip club owner?

Over the last year, I have met with three different non-profit organizations that were faced with these exact dilemmas. Interestingly, these types of choices are not as uncommon as many might think. And, in all three cases, the ethical choice was seemingly easy and obvious – they all refused the money. Of course! It's what you are supposed to do - everybody knows that. So, logically, it was a no-brainer for two of the three groups, only one had any hesitation. And, while I mean no disrespect, I unfortunately agree with them - it was "a no-brainer," because from my standpoint they did not thoroughly think through the rationale and implications of their decision, rather they all three reacted with passionate conviction, albeit misplaced, and carried the water of the status quo. While I understand completely the visceral response, I believe that their decision was ultimately misguided and did not serve "their cause" well.

Let me be clear, I strongly believe that pornography, strip clubs and tobacco are all destructive forces and leave a wide wake of broken lives behind them.  I am in no way “light” on any of these industries.

In each case, I asked the leadership teams to tell me more about their decision process and the groups all gave very similar answers. In essence, the consensus was that it would compromise their ethics, standards and brand to take funds from the aforementioned people/organizations, who were representative of the very problem they were trying to improve. At this point, I asked:

Q: It was no-strings attached, right?

A: yes

Q: So, there was no expectation or public recognition of any kind, right?

A: Correct…

Q: Then how would accepting funds from the donor this compromise your ethics? Where were you compromising?

A: Silence…

These are all well-intended and great professionals, but in my opinion, they lost focus and sight of their goal/mission. Their apparent “disgust” for the donor, industry and/or their fear of possible public opinion misdirected their attention away from their goal, a-la Apollo Robbins and towards an array of negative distractions, leading them to make decisions contrary to their organization’s goals. It’s an easy reflexive trap to fall into and I assume that most unprepared people would make the same mistake. These groups were so turned off by any personal association with the donor that they turned away from seeing the excellent opportunity to use bad money to do good.  

Bear in mind, if there were any strings attached, it changes the equation completely and I too would say no….  But there weren’t. Therefore, you could take the donation and sleep “the sleep of the righteous.” At its heart, it’s an uncomfortable situation wearing the mask of a moral dilemma.

Now Consider, what happens if you don’t accept the money? …Nothing. Nothing happens; at least, nothing good. You might feel better about yourself, but then again this shouldn’t be about you, should it? If you don’t accept the money, it may be used to make another pornographic movie, open another strip club or produce more tobacco – three things contrary to these organizations’ mission. In such cases, I say, “The devil has used the money long enough - it’s high time that the money start doing some good.”  Personally, I am not willing to walk away from an opportunity to do good, because I am too uncomfortable with a situation or donor. These are clearly hard and possibly stressful decisions, but if you want to be a professional, you have to make hard decisions.  

I can guarantee you that anyone working for a non-profit will eventually confront this crossroad, if you haven’t already. Consequently, you are best served to consider this inevitable dilemma now and how it might correlate to best interests of your organization and begin to decide where your line in the sand is. In her work in Calcutta, even Mother Teresa faced this issue. She was often criticized for taking donations for her work with the “Missionaries of Charity” from anyone, local criminals and publicly disgraced figures alike (i.e. Charles Keating and Robert Maxwell). In spite of her many critics, Mother Teresa was unwavering in her perspective on the state of charitable donations no matter the source. She would bless the funds, declaring “all money is made pure in the service of God.”

- kdk