Doug Miller, Chairman, European Venture Philanthropy Association

Much of this success is due to its first Chairman and co-founder, Doug Miller, who has worked determinedly to grow the organisation’s membership, develop its services and raise its profile and influence across Europe.

Miller, who has 35 years' experience in investment banking and private equity, is founder of International Private Equity Limited, a fund placement boutique. An American, he has lived in London for 29 years, and raised his family here.  However, he soon will be spending more time in Asia and the US, but, thankfully, will stay involved in European philanthropy.

This month Doug steps down as EVPA Chairman, handing over the reins to fellow co-founder Serge Raicher.  In this Philanthropy UK Interview he talks to Susan Mackenzie about the challenges and opportunities for philanthropy in Europe, his lessons learned, and what’s next for EVPA. 

Philanthropy UK: How has philanthropy changed in Europe in the past 5-10 years? 

Doug Miller: I am still on a very steep learning curve with regard to the wider practices of philanthropy.  My perception is that philanthropy in Europe is driven primary by two factors, which vary by country: (1) the attitude of individual versus state responsibility for addressing social issues, and (2) the tax structure related to giving.

In addition, there are a number of attitudes which are beginning to become more prevalent.  These include the desire by many people to ‘give something back’ to the community, the risk-taking that enables philanthropic efforts to be more innovative and explore new solutions to social problems, and the recognition that social outcomes need to be more transparent and more measurable. 

P-UK: What are the main challenges for British philanthropy over the next five years?

DM: Philanthropy in the UK is generally more developed than in most of mainland Europe.  I think that all philanthropy needs to demonstrate that it is both well grounded in theory and that it is being effectively implemented.  I also think philanthropists need to collaborate more to share knowledge and ideas.  The industry seems too fragmented and too short term in orientation. 

Funding one or two year projects and then moving on makes no sense to me.  Neither does the funding of multiple subscale organisations attacking common problems or just limited segments of specific problems.  Take homelessness across London.  It would seem to me to be more effective to just have four or five substantial organisations who address this issue on the basis of shelter, assessment and treatment of underlying issues such as substance abuse, family issues, work issues, etc – i.e., a concern across the whole spectrum for each individual rather than what I perceive is mostly a fragmented approach.

P-UK: What are the opportunities?

DM: I believe there are tremendous opportunities to break silos between the different actors in order to share knowledge and ideas, identify synergies, and explore new methods.  To do this takes trust and leaving one’s biases at the door.  This can be difficult when funders bring very different perspectives.  If real teamwork (as opposed to superficial co-operation) could be achieved, I think the results would be staggering. 

P-UK: What key lessons have you learned from your experiences in philanthropy?

DM: I have learned a number of key lessons and no doubt have an even greater number to learn. So far, my key lessons are:

1. Do your homework – what you see and/or are told is rarely the full story (this applies to most things in life).
2. Look for root causes and holistic solutions.  Be aware of unintended consequences.
3. It will always take more time and more money than initially expected.
4. It is important to look for ways to leverage your own knowledge and your own capital – work with other similarly minded people.
5. Social problems are very often complex, and the easy solutions probably do not exist.
6. Almost all ‘social’ organisations I have seen are subscale.  I am amazed by how fragmented the NGO sector is.
7. Private philanthropy needs to work much more closely with governments – anyone who can make this happen more effectively deserves recognition from us all.

P-UK: What has been your most rewarding philanthropic experience?  

DM: My two most rewarding social investments (I regard philanthropy as a social investment) have been a scholars programme at my alma mater, and the EVPA.

I’m working closely with my former university (University of Kansas) to expand the Multi-Cultural Scholars Programme from the School of Business across nine schools at the university.  We recruit, mentor and financially support Afro-American, Hispanic and Native Americans throughout university and into employment, developing them into leaders and role models.  My investment is all about giving deserving and potentially high-performing individuals the opportunity to improve themselves and society at large.   

The EVPA is also an investment of time and capital.  The intent is to address the barriers in philanthropy, particularly in terms of breaking silos, looking for both cross-institutional and cross-border synergies as well as fertilisation of ideas.  To achieve this, however, will take time and commitment.  Nothing worthwhile doing is easy to implement.

P-UK: Has EVPA met your objectives?  What’s next?

DM: The five co-founders of the EVPA had three very specific objectives:

First, to build a broad-based organisation, both geographically and by diversity of members.  We now have over 100 members from 21 countries, representing VP and social enterprise groups, foundations, private equity and hedge funds, universities and professional service firms.  This is a very exciting start and far exceeded our expectations.

Second, we also wanted to increase the visibility of venture philanthropy/social enterprise across Europe.  Our 2007 Conference, held in Madrid, attracted over 300 delegates from 30 countries, while press coverage of EVPA and venture philanthropy has increased substantially.   

And third, we wanted to promote the concept of engagement and that individuals have both an opportunity and a moral responsibility to address the numerous problems society faces.  By working alongside others, progress has been achieved.

However, we have only taken the first steps along a long road.  Looking forward, EVPA and its individual members need to prove that the VP concept works.  And we must be careful that ambition and hype do not create unrealistic expectations.   

P-UK: As you step down as EVPA Chairman, what is next for you?

DM: I intend to stay involved with the EVPA and will remain a trustee.  One project is the establishment of the European Venture Philanthropy Fund, along with Rob John, to assist the start-up of new VP funds, building on the success of our pilot programme in Estonia. Rob and I also intend to jointly explore the establishment of an Asian Venture Philanthropy Association.  This looks quite challenging as the geographic distances, as well as cultural differences, are much greater than in Europe.

Additionally, I plan to continue with smaller projects such as the Multi-Cultural Scholars Programme which we are now replicating at the University of Warwick, as well as some other direct social enterprise investments.  
Philanthropy is like a drug which produces feelings of both fulfilment and personal happiness: the more you do, the more you want to do.  I encourage everyone to get engaged.

P-UK: Thank you.