Does consolidation among larger charities normalize merger?

Ever since I started #Mergerwithamission and posting almost weekly about mergers in the nonprofit space, I’ve shared multiple examples here here here and here of mergers between chapters or locations of larger charitable organizations. These are the household name charities that many people think of when they think of nonprofits. Part of the reason for #MergerMondays was to normalize this activity as a strategic part of nonprofits’ work. How do they consider their business model as an aspect of mission delivery? Can it be another way to live their values and to further their mission? Let’s not assume that operating the same way as the nonprofit down the street will serve the unique mission of your nonprofit.

But when I talk to nonprofit leaders about these examples, the assumption is that it comes out of financial crises or a failed succession plan. Financial changes are not always the “fault” of the nonprofit. Our world is changing and in the case of many United Ways - the business model has shifted. Workplace giving is not what it used to be. And trust in institutions generally is waning. We know leadership changes often prompt merger activity - but why is that a bad thing?

I hope that we can keep talking about merger and all the reasons why nonprofits would use this as a tool for furthering their mission instead of judging organizations who are trying to be iterative in a rapidly changing world.

Looking back and the news coverage of a number of mergers this year between nationally recognized nonprofits like this one:

I think we have a long way to go in educating the general public about how collaboration looks different for nonprofits. How do we use this tool that is so common in the business world while also keeping the values and missions that drive our work at the center?

So, do these household name mergers normalize this practice?