Philanthropy is often seen as society's risk capital. That means the onus is on philanthropists, nonprofit leaders and social entrepreneurs to innovate. But philanthropic innovation is not just about creating something new. It also means applying new thinking to old problems, processes and systems.

Of course, giving is deeply emotional. But supplementing emotion with research makes it more likely that a gift can have a bigger impact. It's like any investment. After all, you wouldn't put funds into stocks or bonds without understanding the potential return. Why wouldn't you do the same when investing in society?

Medical tests have shown that giving stimulates a part of the brain that gives us the same gratification as when we eat food or have sex.

Shouldn't you put the same amount of effort into your giving as you might for your for-profit investments? After all, philanthropy is an investment, and one in which lives - not profits - are at stake.

You can express your generosity in ways that are virtually limitless. This was what I wanted to convey in 'Giving 2.0' - that whether you have $10 or $10 million to give, if you identify the right opportunities and make the most of your resources, your impact can be tremendous.

Nonprofits are the intermediaries between generosity and social change.

The word ‘philanthropy’ brings up an image of somebody who’s had an illustrious career, has retired and is giving to highly established institutions that may or may not have ivy growing up their walls. I personally have felt the need to give philanthropy a reboot.