fundraising – Page 39 – The Healthy Non-Profit

Stop hating on the donor because its not their fault that you’re broke

April 20, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, organizational development

Welcome to O.D. Fridays at DonorDreams blog. Every Friday for the foreseeable future we will be looking more closely at a recent post from John Greco’s blog called “johnponders ~ about life at work, mostly” and applying his organizational development messages to the non-profit community.

Today, we’re focusing on a post that John titled “My Other Two Dogs“. In this post, he shares an old Native American story about two dogs as it is told by Harold Kushner in his book Living a Life That Matters. It is a great story about how every day most of us struggle to maintain a balance between good and bad.

While John’s post is complex and can easily take you in many different directions, I immediately started thinking about donors. You know . . . those generous people who write checks to your non-profit organization because they believe you’re going to change the world.

I have seen this tendency to blame the donor for our woes. It doesn’t happen all of the time. It typically happens during our darkest hour when a fundraising campaign is falling short of its goal or our agency’s annual budget is projected to slip into deficit.

I’ve seen it often enough to know that this behavior is not atypical. If you’re still trying to get your arms around what I’m talking about, here are a few examples:

“If all of our donors just sacrificed a little harder and donated what it likely spend on Starbucks coffee every week, then our agency would have more than enough funding to do everything that needs to be done!”
“If every person who lives in our community would just give us $5 per year, then . . .”
“Oh yeah, sure . . . who does that guy think he is blaming the economy and the housing market for his inability to donate $50 to the annual campaign. It isn’t an inability, it is an unwillingness. Geez, it’s just fifty bucks!”

I can go on and on with examples of where we blame the donor for our woes, but I think you get the idea.

I need to also confess that one of those examples came right out of my mouth yesterday. Yes, I am a bit embarrassed because I like to think that I am a bigger person than that and a more savvy fundraising professional. However, this realization simply confirms for me that John is right on target in his post “My Other Two Dogs“.

ALL OF US (or at least most of us) are faced with this struggle for balance every single day of our lives. It manifests itself in our personal relationships, and it is likely present throughout the work day. We must work at maintaining balance because it will not naturally occur. If you’re not vigilant, then you run the risk of slipping. In the case of fundraising, you run the risk of saying something in front of a donor, board member or volunteer that could have lasting repercussions.

If your non-profit organization is struggling with fundraising, you need to look internally. The following are a few questions I suggest you ask yourself:

What does your written case for support look and sound like? Does it convincingly “make the case” for donors to write a check or can it use some tweaking?
How do your fundraising volunteers use your agency’s written case statement? Are they using it? Or does there need to be more training provided?
Do you and your fundraising volunteers look and sound like they’re having FUN while soliciting for a special event or pledge drive? Or is the energy level down and do people sound like they can’t wait for it to be done and over?
Structurally speaking . . . what tactics are you using to inject a sense of “mission-focus” into your fundraising efforts?

As John suggests in his blog post, we need to keep “feeding” the good dog so that the “bad dog” doesn’t win. I hope some of these suggestions provide you with some “food”.

Have you ever found yourself channeling that bad dog? How do you guard against it? What do you feed that good dog to remain focused on all of the right things associated with your resource development program? Please scroll down and share a few of your tips and tricks in the comment box below. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Erik Anderson
Founder & President, The Healthy Non-Profit LLC
www.thehealthynonprofit.com
erik@thehealthynonprofit.com
http://twitter.com/#!/eanderson847
http://www.facebook.com/eanderson847
http://www.linkedin.com/in/erikanderson847

Who should be “driving the bus” at your non-profit agency?

April 19, 2012 DonorDreams Board development, leadership, organizational development, Planning

In my travels, I’ve seen hundreds of non-profit organizations, and I must admit that they come in all sorts of different sizes and shapes . . . Big ones, little ones, short ones, tall ones, skinny ones, fat ones . . . you get the picture.

However, one question has haunted me for as long as I’ve worked in the non-profit sector and it is the title of this morning’s blog post:

“Who is responsible for driving the bus?”

Yes, I’ve heard all of the “best practices” and expert advice. I’ve sat through too many training events. Heck . . . I’ve even been the trainer for a number of those training events and sounded very much like the expert on this subject.

However, this question still haunts me because I see everyone answering it differently.

For example, staff are obviously responsible for day-to-day operations, but who gets to decide:

Which programs get run?
What impact and program outcomes get measured?
What new BIG grants (that might require new programming and new things to be measured) should be written?

I suspect that many of you have answers for these questions. I also suspect that there are many different answers. Some of you might see this as a question of “micro-management” and others of you might see “policy implications” all over the place.

Many moons ago, when I worked at my local Boys & Girls Club, I was presented with an opportunity to apply for a very large state grant. Many of you have probably heard of 21st Century Community Learning Center grants (this opportunity is part of the federal No Child Left Behind legislation). When I was presented with this opportunity, these were some of the facts I was facing:

The grant (if received) would increase the agency’s budget by more than 25 percent,
We would need to open a new site by asking a local school to share some of their space with us after-school (aka new collaboration with memorandum of understanding spelling out responsibilities of all parties)
The grant would result in hiring more staff (e.g. increasing overall staff size by 25 to 50 percent) and serving more kids (expanding membership by approximately 25 percent)
The type of staff we were accustom to hiring would change because the school district obvious wanted us to hire their teachers (and pay them the after-school stipend rate negotiated in the collective bargaining agreement)
The grant would require some different programming and outcome measurements.
The grant also required that some serious thought be put into “sustainability planning”. How would we continue serving those kids after the five-year grant expired. How would we fund it? Where would we provide service?

I was in favor of applying for this grant. It was a game changer for the organization. However . . . how much authority did I have as the executive director to make this decision. Sure, at first blush, the question was simple . . . “Apply for this one grant? Or don’t apply?” . . . but one question leads to another and then another.

So, what parts of this decision belong to the board of directors and what parts belong to staff? AND what parts needed to be shared between board and staff? AND what happens if there wasn’t agreement?

In the end, I engaged the Program Committee and came to the table with my “case for change”. We talked about it, agreed on all fronts and made the recommendation to the board of directors. The grant was written. We were selected to receive funds. We signed the contract with the state board of education. And the rest, as they say, is history.

That was easy . . . Right? NOPE! Because I see everyone making similar decisions in very different ways. Why? Because it isn’t easy and every non-profit organization has a different culture with different levels of organization capacity.

Is there a RIGHT answer to this question? I think so.

I believe there are A LOT of policy questions wrapped up in aforementioned example, and all policy issues clearly belong to the board of directors. Additionally, I see grants the same way I see “contracts,” and every non-profit bylaws document that I’ve ever looked at has clearly stated that entering into a contract is the responsibility of the board.

So, why do I see so many non-profit and fundraising professionals working alone on identifying grant writing opportunities, writing the grant proposals and committing the agency to the terms of the grant agreement (or asking their board after-the-fact to rubber stamp the grant agreement)?

Why do staff let this happen? Is it because we really don’t want the headache of having to build consensus? Or is it because of time constraints? Why do boards let this happen? Is it because they don’t know what the right answer is and in the end would rely on staff to inform their opinion? Or is it that they don’t understand their roles & responsibilities as board members? Or is it simply lack of time? And regardless of how you answer these questions, does it really change the fact that there is a “right answer” to the big picture question and our responses to these smaller questions really just amount to nothing more than rationalization and justification for doing something we know is wrong?

Today’s post really does raise some serious governance issues that most non-profits of all sizes and shapes struggle with on a daily basis. Please scroll down and use the comment box to share your thoughts as well as examples of how your agency has dealt with this issue. We can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

If you want donors to be loyal, then be loyal to your donors!

April 17, 2012 DonorDreams Donor-centered fundraising, Fundraising

I know, I know . . . I keep coming back to the issue of loyalty, but I think this is the biggest issue for this generation of non-profit organizations. In fact, I think it will determine who is going out-of-business or being forced into merger/acquisition talks in the upcoming years. It is just that transformative of an issue!

What set me off and down this path again, was an email I received in my inbox yesterday from Gail Perry titled: “Don’t Be a Fundraising Dinosaur: 5 Big Ideas to Adopt Right Now“. It was such a tantalizing and catchy title that I couldn’t resist clicking on it. In about 5 seconds, I felt just like Alice tumbling down the rabbit hole all over again. LOL

Gail’s second “big idea” was “Donor retention is more important than cash totals“. I read that header and thought to myself “DUH,” and then I read the following sentence:

“If you can only measure one thing in your fundraising program, then measure donor retention.”

Think about THIS for a moment . . . “only measure one thing” . . . isn’t she essentially saying donor retention is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to gauge how well your resource development program is succeeding or failing?

I think that is exactly what she is saying . . . and that is what got my attention.

It also begs the question: “What should non-profit and fundraising professionals focus on doing to encourage donor loyalty?”

Gail suggested the following few things:

ask your donors for video testimonials, and
ask your donors to do more than just write checks . . . get them involved through advocacy and volunteerism.

Both are great suggestions and you couldn’t go wrong if you decided to take those roads.

However, the words of Mahatma Gandhi keep ringing through my ears this morning as I read Gail’s blog post:

“Be the change you want to see in the world.”

Essentially, this translates into what I titled this blog post. If you want donors to be loyal to your mission, then you need to be loyal to your donors. What does THAT mean? Well, I turned to Adrian Sargaent for help in answering this question. In 2003, Professor Sargaent wrote an article in The NonProfit Times titled “Keeping Donors Loyal: How to Minimize Attrition on the Fundraising Database“.

In that article, Sargaent makes two great points:

one-third of lapsed donors surveyed said they stopped giving because they found other charities that were “more deserving,” and
engaging donors in HOW they are communicated with and WHEN they are communicated with and WHAT they want to hear is an effective and important strategy in the fight for a donor’s loyalty.

For those of you who read this and think: “We can’t do that. We’re too small. We don’t have the resources to pull-off that kind of donor communication strategy.” Sargaent cuts you off at the knees and suggests that even today’s smallest non-profit organizations can implement a strategy like this because donor database technology is very affordable and powerful.

I, too, was once an executive director of a very small non-profit organization. Back then, I am sure that I would’ve read that database-related comment and immediately come up with more reasons as to why he is wrong: staffing, budget, time, etc, etc, etc.

So, here is my challenge to you today. Rather than focus on the WHY NOT, I challenge you to focus on the HOW. I challenge you to engage board members in this discussion. I challenge you to engage donors in this discussion. While I won’t predict that it will get you to a specific place when it comes to donor-centered fundraising, I will dare say that it will get you closer to answering the question: “How can your organization demonstrate loyalty to donors so that they’ll be better positioned to reciprocate the gesture?”

There must be a million ways for your non-profit organization to show its loyalty to donors. Please scroll down and share a few of the things you’re implementing from a donor loyalty perspective. We can and should be learning from each other. Please share just one idea today!

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Gail Perry shared a link to a great resource . . . a sample dashboard that resource development teams could use to measure and capture important donor loyalty metrics. Click here and you will see the two slides by Peter Drury that Gail shared in her blog post. A good friend of mine at Boys & Girls Clubs of America used to say: “Inspect what you expect”. (I suspect he borrowed this quote from someone more famous. LOL) However, the point is still valid . . . you need to have a monitoring and accountability strategy in place as you start heading down these roads that aren’t traveled often enough by non-profit organizations.

Good luck, and as I always: “Here’s to your health!”

How “The Cloud” Can Make Your Life Easier

April 16, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, Mondays with Marissa, technology

Remember when computers were basically glorified word processors for many businesses? Documents were created, saved on floppy disk, and printed. That was the extent of it. Then email came along. If you were working on a project with someone, you could send it to them instantly. However, you and your colleague had to keep track of the ‘active’ copy in order to make changes.

Now, documents can live in ‘the cloud’, eliminating the panic that comes along with sending an email and asking yourself, “Did I attach it?”.

Let’s take a look at cloud computing and a few different applications that can make your life easier by utilizing the cloud.

What is the cloud?

Spoiler Alert: there really aren’t computers in the clouds storing your information. But ‘the cloud’ really does exist. When referring to ‘the cloud’ just think of it as a public server to which you have access. So, instead of saving files locally, you can save them on this public server and access them from any device with an internet connection.

The Pros of Cloud Computing

Using cloud apps cuts down on costs. One of the largest costs to a non-profit organization was purchasing a server. The cloud eliminates the need for this. Also, cloud applications work regardless of which operating system you’re using because most of them are accessed through web browsers. As a result, some IT costs are eliminated or reduced.
Files can be accessed from anywhere. This allows people to work remotely. Today, more and more companies are hiring employees to work from home or remote locations (aka telecommuters). Having files available in the cloud makes this human resources trend more possible.

The Cons of Cloud Computing

No local files. When you use the cloud to save your documents you are relying on a third-party to store your files. If something happens to their servers, you run the risk of loosing your files. Additionally, you will temporarily lose access to your files if your local internet service is interrupted.
Privacy can be an issue. Again, because files will be stored on a third-party server, they will have access to your files. Your agency will need to decide what type of files can be stored in the ‘cloud’ and which ones should remained locally. Unfortunately, having multiple storage areas might be confusing for employees or volunteers who need to access the files.

The Best Cloud Apps

Google Docs – Google has done a great job with it’s Google Docs product. Not only can you save files and allow multiple people to view them, but you can also create documents online using this application. Google makes it possible to create text documents, spreadsheets, presentations, forms, drawing and tables. Documents can be shared with an email link or downloaded by the user.

What sets Google Docs apart is that it allows for multiple users to work on a document at the same time. Everyone can see what changes each person is making in real-time. Also, Google Docs has a chat box associated with each document so people who are viewing the document can have a chat about any changes that need to be made.

Dropbox – Running a close second to Google Docs as my favorite cloud application is Dropbox because it is so simple. Dropbox simply gives you space on a server that allows you to share files with other people. You can upload whichever type of file you’d like to share, and others will be able to easily access it. A free account gives the user 2 gigabytes of storage, but if you get a friend to sign up for an account, Dropbox gives you more space.

What sets Dropbox apart is that you can add a “Dropbox folder” to your computer. This makes it possible to have documents stored locally and in the cloud at the same time. Dropbox also allows you to also share folders with other users. This works great for people working on the same project. While Dropbox does not allow for collaboration in the same way that Google Docs does, it’s simple approach makes using the cloud second nature.

Other Worthy Cloud Applications

Evernote – a note taking application that can capture photos and handwritten notes and make them searchable.
Basecamp – a project management and collaboration application
Backpack – an easy way to create a wiki or internal website for sharing information with your team
Carbonite – automated computer backup

Many of you might already be fans of the cloud. If so, let us know how you use cloud applications in your day-to-day non-profit work life. It would be great to hear how you might be using ‘the cloud’ to collaborate on grantwriting. Or are you using ‘the cloud’ to make your annual campaign prospect assignment process feel seamless? Please use the comment box below and share your best practices!

Want to improve your annual campaign pledge drive? Look at “structure” first!

April 13, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, leadership, organizational development

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Fighting the Physics“. In this post, he shares a story about how a paper airplane cannot perform any better in spite of providing the owner more training, encouragement and financial incentive. It isn’t until the actual paper airplane is “structurally re-designed” that performance is improved. He uses this analogy to illustrate how some of us are unrealistic in our expectations when it comes to employee performance and productivity.

When I read John’s post, it made me think of all the non-profit organizations I’ve worked with in the last five years. In many of those engagements, it was my job to either help them:

plan-implement-evaluate a new annual campaign pledge drive, or
improve an existing campaign.

I cannot tell you how many of those engagements sounded EXACTLY like John’s blog post about the paper airplane. Looking back I suspect that I was “Fighting the Physics” more often than not. Too much training and not enough work around structure. <<Sigh>> Hindsight is always 20/20.

So, if your annual campaign is not producing the way you hoped it would, the moral of John’s story is to first look at “structure” before you jump to the conclusion that more training, encouragement or incentives are needed. The following is a short checklist of structural questions you may want to ask yourself:

How are you recruiting your volunteers? What tools are you using? Are they effectively setting expectations and providing clarity for volunteers?
How are you maintaining a sense of “mission-focus” throughout your campaign and helping volunteers focus on the real reason they are asking their friends for money? What tools and strategies are you using? Are they effective?
How are you instilling a sense of accountability and urgency throughout your campaign and helping volunteers keep the tasks they committed to from slipping off of their daily “To Do Lists”? What tools and strategies are you using? Are they effective?
What does “staff support” look like for the campaign? Is staff just organizing meetings and making phone calls to check-in on volunteers? Or are they “rolling up their sleeves” and going on solicitation calls with volunteers? Are staff “directing” or are they “coaching”?

John is so right on target! Before you jump to the conclusion that you need to recruit different volunteers or offer more/different training, look at how you have structured your campaign and look at the following systems:

Volunteer recruitment
Prospect identification
Prospect cultivation
Prospect assignment
Kickoff meeting and training
Reporting tools, systems and meetings
Solicitation tools and techniques
Donor acknowledgement and stewardship systems

In the end, you may conclude that your systems and campaign structure are fine and that you really do have a “people problem”. However, jumping to this conclusion first, before looking at some of the aforementioned issues, might result in you feeling like Bill Murray in this scene from Groundhog Day.

If you haven’t already done so, you really need to click over and read John’s blog post about “Fighting the Physics“. It is really good and it may just make you look at your annual campaign differently.

Have you ever looked carefully at your annual campaign systems, decided to make a change, and found that the structural fix worked? If so, please scroll down and share that example in the comment box below.

Here’s to your health!

How to “make” an effective fundraising volunteer?

April 12, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising

Yesterday’s blog post titled “Are fundraising volunteers born or are they made?” stirred the pot for many of you and begged the question: “How do you go about making an effective fundraising volunteer?” So, I thought answering that question would make for a great follow-up post this morning.

When I consider this question, two really goofy and childish analogies immediately come to mind. The first thought that popped into my head is that of Dr. Frankenstein stitching up his newest fundraising volunteer and pulling the switch while proclaiming “It’s alive!” Ummmm . . . maybe this would be the wrong tone for this subject. LOL

Instead, I decided to pay tribute to my Generation X roots and take a page from an iconic 1970s television show: “The Six Million Dollar Man“. After all, don’t we all wish our fundraising volunteers were worth six million dollars or were capable of raising that sum of money for our agency? LOL

So, let me paint the scene. You and your resource development committee developed a prospect list of volunteers and recruited those individuals to help with your annual campaign. As these individuals stride purposefully through the front door of your agency for their first meeting, you hear those iconic words from the Six Million Dollar Man introduction: “Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability to make the world’s first bionic . . . fundraising volunteer.” Or something like that. 😉

So, now what? What does that approach and support look like?

Training
Formal training is obviously needed, but it must go beyond a simple PowerPoint slide show that illustrates the 12 steps to making an effective face-to-face solicitation. You may want to incorporate some video into this training opportunity. There are many good resources available on the market, and one of those DVD resources is Marc Pitman’s “Ask Without Fear“.

However, don’t stop with a PowerPoint slide show and a few video snippets.

I think people learn by doing, which means getting people to practice what they see. Yes, this means motivating people to do something they dislike, which is role-playing things like: 1) making the ask, 2) answering questions and objections, and 3) using the words they’re provided in the case for support document. To make this easier, don’t ask volunteers to do it in front of the large group . . . break them into pairs or groups of three and facilitate small group role-playing.

Support material
You can help improve the effectiveness of your fundraising volunteers by ensuring they have what they need to do a good job:

solicitation materials
pledge cards
donor profile sheet including contact info, giving history, and a specific ask amount for this particular campaign
letter to leave behind with the solicitation materials that reminds the donor of what they were just asked to donate (Note: this letter might act as a crutch and help the volunteer NOT leave the pledge card behind.)

The more organized and prepared a fundraising volunteers feels, the more confident they will be when it comes time to making the appointment and solicitation.

Support in-person
I cannot tell you how many fundraising professionals I’ve seen conduct a great training and provide great materials, and then think their job is done. Professional staff are not like orchestra conductors. I personally believe that they are “roll-up-the-sleeves” kind of people who get into the trenches with their fundraising volunteers and participate in solicitation meetings. It is especially critical to go along on solicitation calls with your newest fundraising volunteers. This is an opportunity to model best practices, provide support and encouragement, and coach.

However, there is a huge challenge that exists with this suggestion. Most volunteer will do everything they can to discourage you from going with them. Why? I suspect that it is because they are afraid. Afraid of what? I think they’re afraid of “doing it wrong” and being told to do it differently.

You can easily overcome this, but it will take perseverance on your part. Don’t take NO for an answer. Additionally, you can reduce their fear by easing into this approach. Perhaps, the first solicitation or two is set-up whereby they are simply sharing their passion for your mission and the information from the case statement with you “making the ask” and “closing the deal”. Then in subsequent solicitation meetings, you transition them more into asking for the contribution, answering questions, and overcoming objections.

Campaign structure
If all you do is provide training, support materials and role-modeling, you will still most likely fail in your quest to “make” an effective (six million dollar man) fundraising volunteer. There are structural things you need to develop and implement that create a sense of urgency, accountability, expectation, mission-focus, etc.

A few such structural tools-resources-approaches include: report meetings, weekly progress reports, written job descriptions, and things that remind volunteers why they’re out asking others for charitable contributions. I won’t go into detail because this topic in and of itself could be a blog post.

Retention
The biggest and most important thing you need to do is RETAIN your fundraising volunteers and keep them coming back year-after-year. There is nothing worse than investing time and resources into creating the Six Million Dollar Man, and then start over from scratch next year with a completely new set of volunteers. You need to build FUN and recognition into your fundraising activities.

Every year that a volunteer keeps coming back and making more asks, the more effective they will become. After all, we’ve all heard the expression: “Practice makes perfect”. Right?

What does your non-profit organization excel at doing to “make” effective fundraising volunteers? Please scroll down and use the comment box to share your favorite training video or best practice. Or share something that you do that you believe makes all the difference in the world. As I always say, we can all learn from each other.

Here’s to your health!

Are fundraising volunteers born or are they made?

April 11, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, Uncategorized, volunteers

I have often wondered if there is an answer to the question posed in the title of this blog post. I think it is almost as classic as the question, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” However, unlike the chicken question, the fundraising volunteer question haunts fundraising and non-profit professionals every single day. However, I think I might have some good news after attending an annual campaign kickoff meeting a few weeks ago for one of my favorite non-profit organizations.

Before sharing the good news, I think it is important to start by looking at the question, “What traits and skill sets does a good fundraising volunteer possess?” While I probably could’ve developed this list from my 15 years experience of working with fundraising volunteers, I decided to be lazy this morning and found a great online article by Nikki Willoughby at eHow.com titled “The Job Description of a Fundraising Volunteer“. The following are a few traits and skill sets that Nikki pointed out:

Good communicator
Persuasive
Mission-focused
Keen understanding of the agency they are fundraising for
Computer skills and general understanding of how to use the telephone (I am not kidding . . . I encourage you to click the link and read the article for yourself)
Being an extrovert helps
Salesmanship skills
Goals-oriented and driven

I believe Nikki generally hit the nail on the head. The only thing I would add to her laundry list is that an effective volunteer fundraiser must value the ideas of “philanthropy” and “charity”. Most importantly, they need to be a current donor to the non-profit organization to which they are asking others to make a charitable gift.

Unfortunately, this list doesn’t help us answer the question “Are fundraising volunteers born or made?” because some of the skills and traits cannot be taught such as being an “extrovert”. (Note: I happen to know a number of “introverts” as defined by the Myers Briggs personality test who I consider good fundraising professionals. So, I’m not sure if being an extrovert belongs on Nikki’s list. However, since I am an extrovert, I’m going to pass on arguing the point) 😉

As promised in the introduction, I have some good news for those of you who think you can train anyone to be a good fundraising volunteer.

A few weeks ago, I was asked to serve as an annual campaign fundraising volunteer for one of the non-profit organizations in my community. At the kickoff meeting, I bumped into someone I first met 12 years ago. In an effort to “protect the innocent,” I will refer to her as “Jane”.

When I first met Jane in 2000, she was perhaps one of the most reluctant fundraising volunteers that I’ve ever met in my life. I must admit that she doesn’t even come close to fitting that description today.

As I approached the building where the kickoff meeting was being held, we accidentally bumped into each other, hugged and exchanged warm greetings. And then it happened . . . before I even knew what hit me, she launched into a fundraising pitch. The case for support wasn’t for the organization who was hosting the kickoff meeting. It was for a local church who was trying to raise enough money to buy a LCD projector for their sanctuary. (Note: this wasn’t even for the church she belongs to!!!)

Yep, you guessed it . . . in short order she had me signing a pledge card.

Fast forward through the meeting and training, and Jane proudly shared a story with me about a solicitation she made last year with a very reluctant donor. Without breaking confidences, let me just say: “she came, she saw, and she conquered”. She ended her story by sharing what she thought was the secret to her success:

Don’t take NO for an answer
and
Refuse to leave their office until you get the signed pledge card

I can only imagine how many of my fundraising friends who are reading this blog post right now are wincing. Please know that I’m not sharing this story as a “best practice”. Instead, I am point to it as PROOF . . . I am more convinced after seeing Jane’s transformation that fundraising volunteers are “made” and not “born”.

Twelve years ago, Jane had a tough time even thinking about asking others for a pledge to the annual campaign. Today, she is a grizzled fundraising veteran who won’t take NO for an answer.

I am one of Jane’s biggest fans! However, I need to remember to never invite her into my home office. LOL 😉

So, what do you think? Are fundraising volunteers born or made? Do you have any personal stories that you’d like to share that proves your point? Please scroll down and use the comment box.

Here’s to your health!

Marketing does not equal resource development, usually

April 10, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising

A very good friend of mine from Ohio emailed me last week and said that her soap box topic for the month of March for any non-profit who would listen was: “marketing is not resource development“. Oddly enough, I too spent the month of March telling many people the exact same thing. So, this morning I decided to climb to the top of my online soap box and yell as loudly as possible that “Marketing does not equal resource development, usually“.

First, let me address the issue of why I used the word “usually”. Simply stated in two words . . . “Cause-related Marketing”.

For those of you who are still wrestling with what cause-related marketing is all about, I point you in Joanne Fritz’s direction. She has written a number blog posts on the subject including “Five Best Cause Marketing Programs For Local Nonprofits“. In this instance, cause-related marketing is a solicitation tool and can become a part of a non-profit organization’s comprehensive resource development plan.

So, what exactly is “resource development”?

Without looking up definitions in a Fundraising 101 textbook, I’ve always thought of resource development as a big machine with a number of cogs that work together. Those cogs have the following names:

Prospect identification
Prospect introduction
Prospect cultivation
Prospect solicitation
Donor stewardship

In recent months, I have come across a number of non-profit organizations (esp. board volunteers), who believe that their agency simply needs to invest in more marketing to solve their revenue problems. The implication is that there is a direct relationship between dollars coming in and the agency’s visibility.

Please don’t get me wrong. I am not “hating” on marketing people today. In fact, I love the marketing profession and spent three years working as a newspaper journalist. I love my marketing friends; however, I really want them to stop telling my non-profit friends that they have the cure for their revenue ills.

Yes . . . yes . . . yes . . . It is true that better marketing will improve an agency’s visibility in the community, which can impact resource development activities like identification, cultivation, and stewardship. It is also true that in some instances like “cause-related marketing” that marketing becomes a solicitation tool. However, in the end, the reality is still:

Marketing ≠ Resource Development

Let me share a few examples of how marketing professionals and fundraising professions look at the same resource development issues and think differently:

Example #1: How to improve your existing annual campaign?

Marketing professional — give the donor something they really value (like a really nice premium gift). This will change the ROI calculation and result in more donors and increased dollars raised.

Fundraising professional — revise the agency’s case for support, provide better training and support to volunteer solicitors, recruit more solicitors to make more asks . . . these things collectively will allow for a higher quality solicitation as well as more solicitations all of which will result in increased dollars raised.

Do you see the difference in approach?

Example #2: How to engage more prospects?

Marketing professional — purchase advertising (or secure it for free using a public service announcement strategy) in local newspapers, radio and cable television. Tell people about your agency and those who are interested will opt-in using a telephone number, email or website address provided in the ad.

Fundraising professional — engage board members, volunteers, and existing donors in helping you identify their friends who share a common passion for your organization’s mission. Once those prospects are identified, ask those same volunteers and donors to invite their friends to participate in mission-focused activities like an open house, reception, event or cup of coffee with the executive director.

Do you see the different in approaches?

In the for-profit world, those corporations sell “things” (e.g. widgets), and those products are valued by consumers. So, when someone sees a marketing pitch around something they want, then it triggers this impulse to purchase. In my humble opinion, this is not the same dynamic at play when it comes to donors who make charitable contributions to non-profit organizations.

This is not to say that an impactful marketing program isn’t important because it surely is. However, I really want board volunteers to stop pinning their hopes of increased revenue solely on marketing efforts because:

“hope” is NOT a strategy, and
there is no substitute for board members and fundraising volunteers participating in a comprehensive resource development program.

I understand that sitting down and asking people for money can be scary, but it is the only thing in the universe that has ever worked. So, let’s stop “hoping” and looking for ways around it, and let’s start building a resource development machine that is supported by an effective marketing program.

So, do you disagree with me? I know there are tons of people out there who do. If so, please scroll down and share your thoughts using the comment box. Do you agree with me? If so, please scroll down and use the comment box to provide additional examples of how marketing professionals and fundraising professionals approach similar resource development questions from different angles.

We can all learn from each other. I am open-minded and willing to consider other viewpoints.

Here’s to your health!

Have you “Googled” yourself lately? You’d be amazed at what you find!

April 9, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising, Mondays with Marissa, technology

How do people get to your website? A lot of people are going to use a search engine to find a website. They simply type what they are looking for into a search bar. Most of the time, the website they are looking for is at the top of the list.

I say “most of the time” because there are instances where this is not true. The top result might be an article written by the local newspaper about your organization in which case your website might be listed second or even third. The order of search results when a user types the name of your organization into a search engine can tell you a lot about the quality of your website and interactions on social media sites.

Note: For the purpose of this post I will be talking about Google as the default search engine as it widely recognized as a leader in search.

Google is constantly changing and perfecting the algorithm they use to determine how pages are listed when a user searches for something. For example, recently they added “Search Plus Your World” which personalizes results based on your social network connections. The good news about this new feature is that you can help Google figure out how your site gets listed.

Before any of that can happen, you have to find out where your nonprofit agency currently stands in the rankings. Here’s how:

Make sure you’re signed out of your Google account
Go to www.google.com
Type the name of your organization (or other search term associated with your mission) into the search box
Record the top ten results

What came up? Was your site first? Maybe it was your Facebook site. Or your Twitter feed. Maybe it was a Yelp review of an event you held. Was a third-party site listed where you were mentioned?

Make sure you pay attention to the order as they are listed in popularity. A study in 2011 found that the site listed at the top of the Google search results was clicked on 36% of the time. The site listed second was only clicked on 12.5%. The tenth site on the list was only clicked on 2.2% of the time. If your site is not listed at the top of the page, you’re going to want to change that.

Now, how can you improve the Google results standings for your website?

Tell Google about it. Google wants to tell people about you, but first they need to know you exist. You can tell them by submitting your content. This will ensure that Google has your site in their index. In most cases they already do, but you want to make sure.
Describe things in detail on your page. The crawlers that Google sends out to the internet can only read text. Every word on your page can be used in the algorithm to send a person to your page. If you have wonderful photo on your site that includes words, Google is not going to know about it. Make sure all photos have captions or use ALT text when posting a photo.
Create quality content for your users. If you do this, people will want to visit your site again and again. This is the main basis of the rankings on the results page. Yes, putting words on your website that are associated with what you think a user might enter into a search engine to find your website will help people find your site once, but will it make people want to come back?

That’s it. It’s as easy as 1, 2, 3.

Just kidding! Search Engine Optimization (SEO) is a huge business and a very complicated subject. For more information you can check out Google’s guidelines by clicking here.

Ok, so we’ve talked about what you can do for your agency’s website, but what about all of those other results. In a perfect world, I would like to see my organization’s website listed first followed by all of the associated social media sites.

How does that happen? Again, the key is to get people to visit your sites, and being active on your social media sites will do exactly that. Also, make sure that all of your social media sites are listed everywhere you can. The description section in most social media sites is a great place to list your other sites if you are not given any other options.

Implementing changes to ensure that your site is at the top of the results list can dramatically increase the number of people (aka prospective donors) that know about your organization. Schedule time to Google yourself from time-to-time and stay on top of it!

Donors and board members also cast long shadows

April 6, 2012 DonorDreams Fundraising

Today we’re focusing on a post that John titled “Dr. Pepper’s Shadow“. In this post, he uses the example of how a CEO’s off-handed cafeteria comment resulted in an inadvertent major change in what was being offered in the beverage cooler. As John masterfully explains, leaders need to be mindful that they are leaders who are always under the microscope just like the E.F. Hutton television commercials from the 1970s. (By the way, if you’re too young to understand the E.F. Hutton reference, click here for a YouTube reminder)

This happens ALL THE TIME in the non-profit sector. In fact, it is considered by some to be a best practice.

For example, when a donor off-handedly mentions that they value “education” because they were the first member of their family to go to college, many non-profit people are trained to recognize that as GOLD!!! The comment might get captured on a contact report and entered into the donor database. The mail solicitations start echoing messages about effective educational programming. The stewardship discussions with this donor start revolving around the agency’s educational programming. The major gifts proposals focus on supporting educational programs to support the organization’s mission.

Non-profit fundraising professionals are trained to be like the people who appear in the background of that E. F. Hutton television commercial. Of course, there are consequences to this behavior as John points out in his Dr. Pepper’s Shadow blog post.

After all, isn’t it possible that in the fictitious example I just provided that the donor might “value” education but has fallen in love with your agency for a completely different reason? If so, then overreacting to the revelation that the donor values education might produce a chilling effect on the philanthropic relationship.

The solution is simple. Stop overreacting to isolated data points. Continue capturing whatever you can using contact reports. Continue collecting this interest-based information in your donor database. However, double down on stewardship activities and use this kind of data to drill deeper and develop stronger relationships with your donors.

For example, I can envision an in-person stewardship visit over a cup of coffee where the fundraising volunteer says to the donor, “I’ve heard you say that you cherish educational institutions and the idea of life-long learning, what do you think about some of the educational programs our organization offers clients?”

I can also see a fundraising volunteer in a pre-proposal cultivation meeting saying, “We would like to prepare a major gifts proposal for your consideration. I’ve heard you talk about your passion for education. Would you prefer we focus the proposal on educational programming opportunities or is there something else you’d be interested in hearing more about?”

I think John’s Dr. Pepper phenomenon is a real thing especially in non-profit fundraising circles. What are your thoughts?

In fact, I’ve also seen Dr. Pepper’s Shadow appear in the board room with something as simple as lunch. All it takes is one board member off-handedly saying that they wished there was a tuna sandwich option, and staff scurry around before the next board meeting dealing with menu changes. The consequence might seem inconsequential, but there literally can be a few hours wasted engaging people in tuna conversation. Don’t believe me? I’ve seen it happen!

Have you seen John Greco’s Dr. Pepper phenomenon in action at your agency or someplace else? What were the consequences of it? What do you do to guard against overreacting to comments from donors and board members that were only meant to be off-handed? Please scroll down and share your thoughts in the comment box.

Here’s to your health!