In an article on 14 April in The Australian Financial Review it is noted that the ‘commercial path’ was rejected in favour of naming the Melbourne Theatre Company’s new theatre after the company’s founder.
Naming rights have become increasingly popular as a way of recognising benefaction – but there can be hidden risks which may relate to organisational reputation and potential conflicts of interest. As some North American institutions have found, physically gouging out a benefactor’s name from the material fabric of a building is messy and unsightly.
Is there a need for less ostentation and a greater reflection of true benefaction without personal or corporate gratification?
Filed under: charities, nonprofit, philanthropy | Tagged: benefaction, nonprofit, organisational reputation, sponsorship
