3 ms·

As someone who's been involved in setting up a corporate incubator, this is a pretty common dilemma. The way that we viewed it at my previous company was basic

As someone who's been involved in setting up a corporate incubator, this is a pretty common dilemma. The way that we viewed it at my previous company was basically it's two different businesses, two different P&L's and two different sets of metrics and KPIs. You could see them as two different business units that can succeed or fail independently. If one Business Unit is struggling, you can't just fill the holes by taking funds from another BU to fill the gap. You need to solve the inherent profitability problems in the struggling Business Unit in some other way, typically by selling more, increasing the price/mix or reducing the cost. Don't know if this is how Mozilla reasons, but this was definitely the way we reasoned in the last two large corporations I worked for.

manquer 6y ago
That doesn’t work in a non profit contexts . Most non profit missions are well, not profitable in the first place. While the Mozilla corporation is for profit entity , the goals of the foundation and reason Mozilla foundation /corporation exists is not to make or maximise profit . Non profits generally run on the principles of sustainability I.e are they spending more than endowments or they drawing on the principal amount etc. In Mozilla case drop in revenue/ donations resulting in cancelled projects is per se not abnormal , but which projects are shelved depends on how the mission is interpreted. It is perfectly within the foundation remit to infuse capital into the corporation if they had more money and they also believed the work of the corporation is more important than some foundation projects to the overall foundation’s mission. Just like NASA cancels other projects when one project like JWST goes a lot overbudget , with approvals from congress if required . Clearly the foundation did not think corporation projects were worth saying over others , we can debate that , but they did and do have that choice

manquer 6y ago

That doesn’t work in a non profit contexts . Most non profit missions are well, not profitable in the first place. While the Mozilla corporation is for profit entity , the goals of the foundation and reason Mozilla foundation /corporation exists is not to make or maximise profit . Non profits generally run on the principles of sustainability I.e are they spending more than endowments or they drawing on the principal amount etc. In Mozilla case drop in revenue/ donations resulting in cancelled projects is per se not abnormal , but which projects are shelved depends on how the mission is interpreted. It is perfectly within the foundation remit to infuse capital into the corporation if they had more money and they also believed the work of the corporation is more important than some foundation projects to the overall foundation’s mission. Just like NASA cancels other projects when one project like JWST goes a lot overbudget , with approvals from congress if required . Clearly the foundation did not think corporation projects were worth saying over others , we can debate that , but they did and do have that choice