Individual donation drops in groups

I reckon that this may be partly what the Church of England has been hamstrung by in the past in relation to giving: there would be a vicious cycle of low donation which discourages others to give (and in any case 'trust money' had been sufficient to keep things going) because evading responsibility in a group is easier. By contrast it probably helps understand why events such as Comic Relief tend to help -they overcome the negative group effect by creating a new and different group dynamic in relation to giving.

A University of Missouri anthropologist recently found that even when multiple individuals can contribute to a common cause, the presence of others reduces an individual's likelihood of helping
Individual donation amounts drop when givers are in groups 

They're still investigating and hypothesing why. The front-runner idea is this:

perhaps potential givers did not want to be 'suckers,' who gave up their money while someone else got away with giving nothing. Selfish behavior in others may have given individuals an opportunity to escape any moral obligation to share that they might have felt

The article links to the bystander effect, and I think that's probably right. What I'm interested in though is how this plays into thinking about corporisations. Part of the matter is perhaps a study in how attitudes are aggregated and how less social attitudes tend to be easier to foster.

"The pro-socials caved to the pro-selfs," said Panchanathan. "Generally, people who started off refusing to give anything would not budge. If one person gave nothing, their partner would tend to reduce the amount they gave, even if that partner had originally argued for giving a larger sum."

So that would be an indication of how fallenness 'infects' corporatised entities: tendencies are amplified, yes; pro-social attitudes can be amplified but so can counter-social attitudes and behaviours. And, of course. sometimes we want to encourage counter-social behaviours: if the corporisation is doing wrong, then having people opting out or minimising their involvement could work for the good. It would be a good thing if donations to terrorist organisations could be cut, for example.