Diss-Tance

ERNOP 2025, Heidelberg

The panel on “blurring boundaries” at ERNOP 2025 asked a deceptively simple question: what happens to philanthropy’s humanitarian mission when market logics and measurement tools move center stage? Four voices brought sharp, complementary angles: Arthur Gautier (ESSEC Business School), Antonia Muhr (WU Vienna), Georg Mildenberger (University of Heidelberg), and Chiara Andreoli (ESADE).

Ideology of measurement. Georg Mildenberger’s blunt line—“show me your standpoint on impact measurement and I will tell you your ideology”—landed because it names what many feel: measurement is never just technical. Treat impact metrics as proof and you risk narrowing the mission to what fits a dashboard; treat them as learning tools and you open space for improvement, dialogue, and course-correction.

Innovation without fetish. Antonia Muhr cautioned that not all progress requires novelty. Many funders are rediscovering the value of long-term, steady work at the grantee-organisation level, where process improvements—not big, shiny “innovations”—build resilience and impact. Chiara Andreoli added that false dichotomies obscure a practical truth: continuous adaptation often beats heroic disruption.

Impact investing, framed. Arthur Gautier urged balance: don’t “throw the kid out with the bathwater.” Yes, impact washing has created legitimacy problems as financial actors migrate into the field; but impact investing can be a net gain if framed as additional rather than substitutive to giving.

Shifting relationships. Several discussants noted how new tools moved attention from projects to organisations, and from “beneficiaries” to partners on equal footing. That cultural shift is healthy—if we remain vigilant about power dynamics and avoid a “benchmark dictatorship.”

Field context. From the floor, a contribution pointed to Philea: foundations manage separate “pots” (endowment vs. program budgets), and many are re-allocating endowments toward responsible, impact-aligned investments (no fossil fuels, no tobacco). Another intervention highlighted how New Public Management in government recasts nonprofits as “impact-generating service providers,” risking a flattening of their democratic, cultural, and community roles.

Takeaway

Tools are never neutral. The panel’s through-line was simple: use measurement to learn, not to police; use innovation to strengthen long-term work, not to replace it; use investing to add resources, not to displace giving. The humanitarian mission survives—and even thrives—when tools expand our moral imagination rather than shrink it.