This chapter discusses how strategic philanthropy, especially for neglected health issues such as palliative care, can help improve quality of life for patients and their families. It defines palliative care as responsive care. It is care that begins from the diagnosis of any serious illness, for both children and adults. Palliative care aims to address the pain and other symptoms related to the physical, social, and spiritual needs of both the patient and their family. The chapter showcases the work of Cipla, an Indian pharmaceutical company committed to supporting this proof of concept. In 1997, Cipla’s philanthropic capital was deployed to build a Palliative Care and Training Centre which remains the nucleus of the palliative care effort even today. Cipla’s commitment to palliative care has continued to grow and develop resilience over the past three decades. The chapter outlines how the three key elements of supporting direct services, training health-care providers, and engaging in national-level collaborations for policy change have helped build a system and approach that is sustainable and future-proofed. In showcasing the work of Cipla, this chapter shows how, by making sustainable changes to the palliative care ecosystem and developing an integrated model of care within the public health care system, philanthropic capital has been able to align with government priorities and attract more philanthropists to this space. This chapter elaborates how the vision of palliative care has been promoted across India and illustrates how strategic giving can focus on a neglected issue and work towards sustainable change.

This chapter looks at the extent of gender-based violence (GBV) in South Africa, policy and implementation gaps, and the role of multi-party stakeholder partnerships, including the contribution of the Vodacom Foundation, in fighting this gross human rights violation. The chapter outlines how the Foundation’s contribution to the fight against GBV has evolved into a resilient ecosystem that supports prevention, response, and victim and survivor empowerment through partnerships and mainly using information communication technologies (ICTs). GBV is one of the gross human rights violations globally which spiralled during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is defined by the United Nations (UN) as harmful acts directed at an individual based on their gender. South Africa, which is a constitutional democracy founded on the values of human rights and human dignity, has some of the highest levels of GBV in the world, leading the country’s president to declare GBV the second pandemic. As the chapter tracks the evolution of the ecosystem, it also shares how the Foundation has started transforming the relationship with its partner civil society organisations (CSOs) into mutually beneficial partnerships, thereby demonstrating that big business can do more than just generate revenues and can be a formidable partner to address societal ills and help strengthen civil society. The chapter explains how governments, CSOs, and big business can build strong and sustainable multi-party partnerships as a catalyst to addressing societal challenges.

This chapter focuses on promoting high-impact philanthropy for the Global South through learning from the experiences of Co-Impact, a global collaborative that advances inclusive systems change and gender equality through grant-making and influencing philanthropy through its network connections. It explains the constraints in philanthropic practice the Co-Impact model is designed to address and how to advance ‘trust-based philanthropy’ that both learns from and inspires others. The chapter argues why, under certain circumstances, pooling funding can achieve greater impact, and the importance and power of philanthropic networks to promote collaboration and impact. It provides a practical approach to addressing inherent power dynamics in philanthropy and discusses the spectrum between collaborative philanthropy and pooled funds. It also tells the story of Co-Impact’s growth and outlines its key learnings with respect to mobilising philanthropic resources. This experience reflects the belief that philanthropic capital can do more and better and that a crucial mechanism for achieving its potential is through active networks. It clarifies how the concept of networks goes beyond loose transactions and collections of people and organisations and instead embodies the idea of a community of interconnected and like-minded individuals and organisations that share similar values, working together to maximise impact. The chapter reinforces the idea that systems change through collaborative communities is critical to ensure that philanthropic interventions result in improved outcomes for millions of people where systems and societies are just and inclusive.

Roger Smith and Harry Kellogg frequently remarked that Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) was all about relationships. The statement sounds like a cliché but until one truly absorbs its meaning it does not resonate and may soon be forgotten as relationships are challenging to understand, cultivate, and nurture strategically. Relationships with marquee VC firms and tech startups in the VC ecosystem were what set SVB apart from public venture lenders, private venture lenders, and other banks that dared to compete in venture debt lending. SVB bankers worked hard at building relationships and expanding the products and services to capture 100 percent of the VC ecosystem. The path was not always smooth, but the bankers tried; they finessed the edges and founded SVB Capital, SVB Premium Wine, and SVB Securities. Peculiarly, no bank rivalled to SVB on its path of expansion.

Apple Computer, Inc. released its “Think Different” campaign in 1997 to mark the return of Steve Jobs and to resurrect the struggling computer company. The Think Different campaign “got an audience that once thought of Apple as semi-cool, but semi-stupid to suddenly think about the brand in a whole new way.”1 Interestingly, be different is what Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) embraced and practiced from its beginning in 1983. The Bank distinguished itself from the crowded banking sector by serving entrepreneurs in the region since the early 1980s. At the time SVB was formed and officially named, “Silicon Valley” was considered unattractive for banking to capture the public attention and adopted the available moniker.

This chapter focuses on the approach of the Indonesia-based Tanoto Foundation as a Global South-originated philanthropy with a far broader Asian and even global perspective, and on how it leveraged partnerships for impact. Now into its fortieth year of operations, the Tanoto Foundation has shown how philanthropy that is originated in the Global South is able to engage in knowledge exchange via global communities of practice to help create regional platforms to inspire collaboration. The pandemic has illustrated the importance of an evidence-based approach in the Global South whose results can be measured before they are scaled up and where collaboration is critical. Indonesia is a case in point, having suffered from natural disasters in the midst of the pandemic, challenging both humanitarian relief and disaster recovery. To help meet these challenges, the Foundation partnered with local (district) and national (ministry) government bodies, international development organisations, business entities, and philanthropic organisations both local and overseas. Successes in responding to the pandemic included the harmonisation of data-collation methodologies at the national level and the sharing of newly codified knowledge from the Foundation’s work. This chapter details how Tanoto Foundation built its internal institutional capacity, and maximised its impact by leveraging multiple relationships that can amplify resources, capacity, and knowledge.

The three founders of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) epitomize Californian determination and pragmatism. Medearis, the Stanford professor, who for ten years listened to his students struggling to obtain loans, decided to float an idea of a community bank for tech companies. The professor sought out a banking consultant who brought in a bank executive who carried his dream of founding his own bank, the trio together established a community bank for tech. Their backgrounds and convictions illuminate the startup spirit synonymous with Silicon Valley. Their journey led them to select what was then an uncommon name, Silicon Valley Bank, in 1983.