Five Elements of Effective Collaboration for Investors

Five Elements of Effective Collaboration for Investors

Our new Managing Director of the Catalyst Loan Funds reflects on her first couple of months at Living Cities, sharing her thoughts on how those in the investment world can more effectively collaborate.

During my first two months at Living Cities, I have noticed that collaboration is key to how Living Cities operates. But, as the new Managing Director overseeing our Catalyst Loan Funds, it is surprising and slightly unnerving. This is particularly true in the investment world where, for various reasons, there are few incentives for parties to share information or work together; they can even be antagonistic toward one another. In contrast, a key differentiator of Living Cities’ Catalyst Loan Funds is the significant transparency – around a pipeline of new transactions, risk, failure, new financing models and what we’re learning. This transparency is used to promote collaboration among our investors, borrowers and other stakeholders.

Witnessing the way Living Cities operates has pushed me to think more about collaboration: when does it work well, particularly in the investment space? Below are five key elements that I believe make for effective collaboration:

1. Work toward a common goal. At Living Cities, our members and fund investors are collectively focused on improving the lives of low-income people in U.S. cities. Having a shared mission makes it easier to prioritize resources and objectives and to overcome challenges.

2. Take the time to understand one another. Living Cities is a cross-sector collaboration: our members and investors range from financial institutions to foundations. They have different ideas, styles and processes. Understanding these differences, and communicating them upfront, is an important piece of effective collaboration.

For example, if an amendment to a multi-party financing agreement is required, it is helpful to know upfront about each investor’s internal processes and timeline for obtaining approvals. This understanding helps the group to set expectations appropriately.

3. Harness complementary assets. The Blended Catalyst Fund (BCF), our most recent fund which is capitalized by senior and subordinated debt, is one such example. BCF’s senior lenders are largely financial institutions, which are fiscally conservative and less risk tolerant but able to provide larger amounts of capital if there is subordinated money that sits below them in a capital structure. BCF’s subordinated lenders are mostly foundations who are motivated by social impact and the desire for financial leverage. They are also willing to take on more risk when compared to financial institutions. Separately, neither the financial institutions nor the foundations would be able to complete a full capital structure, but—when layered together—they become compelling and complementary partners.

Separately, neither the financial institutions nor the foundations would be able to complete a full capital structure, but—when layered together—they become compelling and complementary partners.

Another example of complementary assets is skill set. The financial institutions we work with tend to primarily bring a fiscal lens to our work, while our foundation investors bring an increased level of sophistication around targeting and measuring social impact. Together, Living Cities’ funds benefit from both of these perspectives, ensuring we make investments that are financially sound and capable of delivering measurable impact.

4. Find partners with different constraints. Complementary constraints are the flip side of complementary assets, allowing partners to accomplish their goals through one another.

A complementary constraint could be different regulatory requirements for financial institutions and foundation investors. These requirements may include Dodd Frank or Community Reinvestment Act regulations for the financial institutions, and Program Related Investments regulations for the foundations. The requirements can lead to different constraints, mandates, risk-return profiles, and social-impact objectives, which mean financial institutions and foundations can play different roles within a single fund’s capital structure.

5. Ensure buy-in from the top, and a good, practical working relationship at the other levels. Many of the Catalyst Funds’ investors are also Living Cities’ members. This relationship is important to note because our members’ CEOs and senior program officers sit on our Board of Directors, helping to set our organization’s direction. They also provide guidance on how their organizations will interface with ours as part of the larger collaboration—an element of which is Catalyst Fund investment. Our main points of contact for the funds, however, are our members’ investment staff. The fact that leaders within our member organizations are bought into Living Cities as a whole paves the way for a smoother day-to-day working relationship with members’ investment staff.

Collaboration is not an end in and of itself, but it is a way to accomplish more than we could do on our own. In an increasingly inequitable world, addressing poverty and opportunity gaps is crucial. Living Cities knows that we alone can’t create the necessary social change. For the system to evolve, all players need to be at the table, working together in optimal ways.


Latest Articles

Supporting and Growing Overlooked Entrepreneurs with Urban Innovation Fund

In 2012, Julie Lein and Clara Brenner started Tumml, an urban ventures accelerator with a mission to empower entrepreneurs to solve urban problems. Through their experience with Tumml, Julie and Clara saw how investors can overlook certain types of entrepreneurs, mostly women and people of color. Building on their experience, Lein and Brenner founded Urban Innovation Fund (UIF) as first-time …

1863 Ventures Seeks to Close the ‘Friends and Family’ Financing Gap for New Majority Entrepreneurs

Melissa Bradley understands how barriers to capital for entrepreneurs of color hurt our economy and our communities. “There is clearly a cost if we do not invest in diversity,” said Bradley, founder of 1863 Ventures. “We miss out on great returns when we are not inclusive in our investment theses. There are opportunity costs for all of us.” She cites …

A Vision for Systemic Change in the Twin Cities: An Interview with Marcus Pope

JK:We’re celebrating your new role as President of Youthprise! Can you tell us a bit about Youthprise? MP: I’ll start by sharing Youthprise’s mission, which is to increase equity with and for Minnesota’s Indigenous, low income, and racially diverse youth. We take the “with and for” very seriously; half of our board members are young people between the ages of …

The Legacy of Wealth Inequities in the Brown and Flynn Families: A Hypothetical Exploration

The first post in a two-part series explores the potential of capital to undo the historical legacy of inequities. Race is a complex issue that continues to drive many of the socioeconomic outcomes in the US. For example, if you are a person of color born in the United States, your zip code is more of a predictor of your …

Get Updates

We want to stay in touch with you! Sign up for our email list to receive updates on the progress we’re making with our network of partners, as well as helpful resources and blog posts.