Are Billionaires Solving the Wrong Problems? | Kedge Martin & Jamie Webb | Wealth Office
财富办公室

Episodes / Wealth Office X

Are Billionaires Solving the Wrong Problems?

Kedge Martin and Jamie Webb draw on long experience of royal-linked charity work to examine how private wealth can give with more humility, proximity and lasting effect.

Are Billionaires Solving the Wrong Problems?▶ Watch

Episode overview

In this episode of Wealth Office X, Michael Macfarlane brings together Kedge Martin and Jamie Webb to examine philanthropy in an age of enormous private wealth. Macfarlane frames the discussion around the transfer of more than US$100 trillion expected to pass between generations over the next two decades, the rise of new wealth in Asia and the belief that private capital can move faster than governments. Both guests have worked on philanthropic projects connected to the British Royal family, and the conversation opens with what patronage and visibility can achieve.

Webb argues that visibility mobilises giving when it meets a real social need and a trusted organisation able to respond. Martin, who saw Prince Harry take his first patronage at a charity she was running, describes how networks as well as profile can build movements. The two then test the harder criticisms: reputation washing, the absence of democratic accountability and what Macfarlane calls the Davos problem, where privileged people discuss problems far from those who live with them. Martin's answer is proximity, and she urges new philanthropists to visit before they give. Webb's answer is humility, and he cites Mark Zuckerberg's US$100 million gift to schools in Newark as a well-intended effort that met a backlash.

The second half turns to the next generation and to Asia. Webb describes how daunting inheritance can feel, the role of family values as a container for young people's choices, and an Asian philanthropic culture with a strong focus on education and closer partnership with government. Both guests see emotion and personal connection as the real drivers of lasting commitment, and both favour small, early experiments over large and remote cheques. Webb closes with counsel for a founder who has just exited: make giving joyful, take time to reflect, learn from peers and be wary of ego.

Key ideas

Visibility works when need and capacity already exist

Jamie Webb accepts that visibility mobilises philanthropy, but he sees it as catalytic only when an urgent social need meets a trusted organisation ready to respond. He points to the Prince's Trust during the youth unemployment of the 2008 financial crisis and to Help for Heroes after the war in Iraq. Kedge Martin adds that networks can do the work of profile, citing a private equity investor who built a global movement against child trafficking.

Movements and programmes do different jobs

Webb distinguishes charitable programmes, usually run by one organisation to serve a specific need in a place, from movements, which are organic and involve many actors pressing for change. He cites effective altruism, with its emphasis on evidence and measuring impact, and trust-based philanthropy, which lifts restrictions and reporting burdens from charity partners. He is equally clear that traditional charities remain vital for delivering services across the country.

Risk is what entrepreneurs bring

Martin sees the entrepreneur's distinctive contribution as a willingness to take risk and to lose some money without undue worry. She recalls Paul Newman's view that worrying about where a donation went means it has not really been given away. She also warns that conventional foundation grants can carry requirements that charities bend themselves to meet, even when the funding does not match what they actually need.

Distance distorts judgement

Macfarlane describes the 'Davos problem': privileged people discussing the world's problems far from those who live with them, and largely from a Western perspective. Martin recalls a celebrity supporter who paid to ship bundles of clothes from America to Lesotho when giving the money would have done more. Her advice is to listen, to accept that no one stands in anyone else's shoes, and to visit before starting a philanthropy journey.

Start the next generation early and small

Both guests favour early exposure. Martin describes a family that held quarterly philanthropy meetings at which even the youngest child chose a weekly project, perhaps £5 of pocket money for an animal rescue centre. Webb recommends that foundations give next-generation members a sum of money and a defined role, creating space for shared decisions. He also acknowledges that inheriting wealth, businesses and philanthropy can feel daunting for young people.

Emotion drives lasting commitment

Webb regards a personal connection to a cause as the chief driver of philanthropy. He describes an American philanthropist whose experience of 9/11 focused his giving on training and jobs for young people in the Middle East. Martin sees a human need to give, often arriving with age. Both insist that emotion be paired with listening, finding the best organisations, trusting them and staying with them for the long term.

Philanthropy need not last for ever

Webb sees the foundation as a useful structure that gives families shared space, continuity and the transparency philanthropy needs to remain legitimate. He notes Bill Gates's wish for his foundation to close 20 years after his death and argues that a foundation's lifespan should follow its cause. Perpetual endowments have merit, but so does accelerating progress towards a solution while the founder still has the energy to drive it.

In their words

I think undoubtedly visibility does mobilise philanthropy, but I think there has to be a real social need and perhaps an urgent social need that has to be present at the same time.

— Jamie Webb, Wealth Office

We're not in anyone else's shoes. And I think it's very important that people get out and visit before they start their philanthropy journey.

— Kedge Martin, Wealth Office

Philanthropy doesn't have to live forever. I think it very much is determined by the cause, the issue that you're working on and its time horizon.

— Jamie Webb, Wealth Office

I think cheque signing works very well for some people who want to be anonymous and be distanced and then you can be much more integrated and on the ground and then people get addicted to it. Doing good can be addictive.

— Kedge Martin, Wealth Office

Well, first of all, it should be joyful. … I think if it feels like your work, setting up your business or managing your investment portfolio, I think there's something gone a bit wrong there.

— Jamie Webb, Wealth Office

Quotes are taken word for word from the episode transcript.

Questions this conversation answers

Who are the guests in this Wealth Office X episode?

Kedge Martin and Jamie Webb, both of whom have worked on philanthropic projects connected to the British Royal family. Martin was running the charity that became Prince Harry's first patronage and later advised Prince William and Prince Harry at St James's Palace. Webb worked at the Prince's Trust and Help for Heroes and now leads a global peer network for philanthropists.

What does Michael Macfarlane mean by the 'Davos problem'?

Macfarlane uses the phrase for gatherings where privileged people talk at length about the world's problems with too little focus on solutions, even though they hold the resources to act. He adds that the people affected are rarely in the room and that the perspective remains largely Western. Martin agrees and urges philanthropists to visit and listen before they give.

What do the guests advise for a founder who has just exited a business and wants to have an impact?

Webb says philanthropy should be joyful. He advises taking time to reflect, learning from peers and networks, being careful of ego and remembering that leadership and catalytic roles can matter as much as grants. He also cautions against taking on too much and disappointing partner organisations. Martin's advice is to start with the change you want to see and keep learning.