Piya Saliba, CEO of Fountain Capital, has developed a four-question framework for deciding which commitments to take on, and her approach carries significant implications for how companies design employee volunteering, corporate social responsibility, and engagement programs. Saliba, who is involved with the Nalin and Naseeb Foundation and the Cedars-Sinai NICU Parent Council, told HRVendorNews that most people say yes to a cause based on how it makes them feel in the moment. She argues that is a mistake because a cause can be worthy and still be the wrong fit for a given person at a given time.
"People ask if a cause matters," Saliba says. "That is rarely the real question. Almost every cause matters. The real question is whether you are the right person to help it, right now."
For HR vendors, that distinction matters. Companies increasingly invest in platforms that match employees with volunteer opportunities, but Saliba's first question is not whether an employee cares about an issue. It is what that employee would actually contribute: time, money, a skill, a network, or a story. Each is different, and each asks something different of the person. "I have sat in rooms where everyone cared and nobody could say what they were there to do," she says. "Caring gets you in the door. It does not tell you what to do once you are inside."
Saliba's second question concerns cost, and she says the cost that trips people up is rarely money. It is attention. "You can budget money," she says. "You cannot budget attention the same way. It leaks out of whatever you are not looking at." She suggests asking which part of life will quietly shrink to make room for a new commitment: sleep, a hobby, time with family, or a slower version of work. Naming the cost in advance does not remove it, but it stops it from arriving as a surprise six months in. That insight could inform how HR tools communicate the time and energy demands of volunteer programs, rather than presenting only the emotional appeal.
The third question is whether the commitment fits what the person already knows. Saliba's own commitments track closely to her lived experience. Her work with the Cedars-Sinai NICU Parent Council draws on her own experience with families in vulnerable moments, and her involvement with the Nalin and Naseeb Foundation reflects causes close to her. "I did not pick these because they were the biggest need out there," she says. "I picked them because I had something specific to offer, based on what I had already lived through or already knew." She says this question filters out well-meaning but poorly matched commitments. For HR vendors, the implication is that matching algorithms should weigh employee background and skills, not just cause affinity.
The fourth and final question is the plainest: can I keep showing up? Not "can I say yes today," but "can I still say yes to this in a year." Nonprofits and causes rely on people who stay. A one-time burst of energy helps less than steady, smaller involvement over time. Saliba says she would rather commit to less and sustain it than take on more and quietly fade out. "Consistency is its own form of respect," she says. "It tells the people and the cause that you meant it."
Saliba also maintains a background in the arts, including singing, acting, and dance, and she sees that balance as a daily version of the same question: what can I actually sustain, and where does it belong. As HR vendors build tools for volunteerism and social impact, Saliba's framework suggests that the next wave of innovation may focus less on inspiration and more on fit, cost transparency, and long-term retention.
