danpalmer
10 hours ago
In my experience it's hard to justify companies doing things that don't have a clear reason. The reason doesn't even have to be a benefit, after all companies are made up of people many of whom want to do these things.
What I'm surprised with in this list is that with 4x the donations the change could be summarised as "more of the same". Don't get me wrong, another fellow would increase project bandwidth by 50%, an executive director might be transformational in management/logistics, but these are both just better versions of what the Django Foundation already does.
If I were the project, I'd be pitching specifics:
- A new fund targeting getting more of $group into Django development
- An executive director with a remit to run this specific new event
- Another Django fellow focusing on $project
Then, when a champion in a company is trying to justify a donation, it's no longer "can we give some money for no particular reason", it's now "if we send X, Y will happen". Maybe a company wants to market themselves as helping diversity efforts and they can do this better if they're donating money to the first or second example, maybe they're interested in a particular project, but I still believe there doesn't always need to be an ROI, just that having a reason helps individuals in companies justify it.
This is how academia, the arts, and other charities seem to work (as an external observer). Large donations are tied to specific projects, funds with particular mandates, prizes with a goal, etc.