Mark Zuckerberg was the first member of his generation, a millennial, to become the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, Facebook. In 2015, Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, announced that they would dedicate 99 percent of their shares of Facebook stock to changing the world. But they would not pursue that goal by establishing a private foundation, following the example of Bill and Melinda Gates and other technology entrepreneurs. Their innovative approach “rocked the philanthropy world” (Baird, 2015).

The Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative would be dedicated to “advancing human potential and promoting equal opportunity” (Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative, 2017), but it would not be a charitable nonprofit. Rather, it would be created as a for-profit limited liability company (LLC). Chan and Zuckerberg would transfer their shares of Facebook stock to the new company. They would not receive an immediate tax deduction, as they would were their personal assets transferred to a foundation. But the LLC would have more flexibility than a nonprofit entity. The new company could change its purpose at any time and would not be required to provide as much transparency as a private foundation (White, 2015). It also would be able to engage in activities that would not be permitted, or that would be more difficult to accomplish, under a nonprofit structure. The LLC could make charitable gifts, but it also would be able to make private investments in for-profit activities, raise private equity, hire lobbyists, become involved in political campaigns, and participate in political debates (Cordes et al., 2017)......

Questions
1. How do you evaluate the arguments for and against the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative? Does it hold more promise of accomplishing social change than traditional nonprofits or does its lack of transparency and accountability grant too much control to its founders?
2. How does the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative relate to the social enterprise spectrum and to the fourth sector, concepts discussed in this chapter?
3. Do you think millennials hold a different worldview about philanthropy from those of other generations? If so, why do you think that is the case?