Tag Archives: philanthropy

Innovate or Die: Post-Recession Impact on Finding Donors

4Fundraisers, Focused Fundraising, , , , , ,

Broken LightbulbThe future has a way of entering slowly, day-by-day. But sometimes the writing is on the wall. The words I see on the fundraising wall are Data Analytics. Sure, you say, we all know that. But what does it mean to your organization? To you? Answer: Innovate or die.

That may sound extreme. And it is. But it doesn’t make it any less possible. Before you dismiss that answer, let me tell you how I arrived at it.

The economic environment is affecting our donors – dramatically.

My favorite magazine of all time is The Economist. Lately they have been writing frequently about the growing inequality around the world and in America. How capital is taking a far greater share of wealth and how income, in the form of wages, is stagnating. Companies froze wages pre-recession, but even though profits have returned wages have not risen.

In his blog post “Where have all the donors gone?” Mark Noll makes the case that the result of these economics is the missing middle donor. Post-recession, people may be employed again, but too often at a lower wage. Where will our gifts come from?

In her book, Nonprofit Essentials: The Development Plan (2007), Linda Lysakowski, ACFRE is but one of many fundraisers talking about how Pareto’s 80/20 principle has turned into the 95/5 principle or worse. Way too much of our funding is coming from a tiny sliver of very wealthy. And where do the very wealthy like to give their gifts?

According to the Million Dollar List maintained by the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, fifteen of the twenty largest multi-million dollar gifts by value were from individuals to private foundations associated with their families. Higher education receives the highest number of million dollar gifts.

In the Agitator blog, Roger Craver writes:

“Giving USA 2013 is but the latest report to make pretty clear that sitting on the sidelines waiting for recovery [from the Great Recession] is a strategy only for the suicidally inclined…demands on charities [is] rising at the same time giving is nearly flat….”

 

 

 

 

 

 

It’s pretty clear that if fundraisers fail to innovate the organizations they serve will suffer.

So what does all this gloom and doom have to do with data analytics?

Data analytics is the cold method behind a warm philosophy: listen to people when they tell you something. And when thousands of people are telling you something, not only listen, but start digging deeper and ask more questions.

Data analytics allows us to “hear” from our constituents in ways we are physically incapable of hearing. If the data tells us that a large number of constituents click through on messages about one of our program outcomes regardless of where we put those messages (social media, print, etc.), but are not responding to messages about another program we planned to make our strategic direction for the next year – we should re-think that direction, right? Maybe.

Analytics alone is not enough.

It’s pretty amazing that we can “hear” our constituents through data, but don’t be mesmerized by all that glitters. We also need innovation in our approach to attracting donors, finding the “best” out of those and asking them for gifts. If the reality is that we will mostly have very large and very small gifts, how can we change our approach?

In 2012 the Chronicle of Philanthropy featured the Kauffman Center for the Performing Arts in Missouri, which raised $416-million, in part by attracting modest gifts such as $1,000 multi-year pledges. This gave smaller donors the opportunity to express their interest and commitment and to be recognized. Crowdfunding is a similar approach, but might be improved upon to become less transactional. People want to give; people take pride in giving. It’s our job to figure out how to make it easy to give while building affinity.

In addition to gift size there are other changes we need to adapt to. Population changes cannot be ignored. Preeti Gill has written a provocative piece about identifying women philanthropists. In “Hey, Ladies! Thanks for giving. Sorry we missed you,” she notes that many multi-million dollar bequests come from women who are “outside of our databases and away from the corporate and media glare”. In other words, traditional prospect research techniques are failing to identify them.

International donors can’t be ignored either. Harvard University just announced a $350 million dollar gift from a wealthy Hong Kong family. Have you looked at population trends and predictions for your organization?

Are your donors from the local community? Are they international graduating students? You need fundraising programs that meet the needs of the constituents you have and will have in the future, not the ones you wish you could have. Data has to come from outside your organization as well as inside.

It’s All About the People

Data analytics helps us find answers and sometimes it can even help us ask questions, but most of the time data analytics requires someone with curiosity and creative problem-solving skills to direct it.

Fundraisers need to shake themselves awake from the traditional and begin interacting with the data so that they can better meet the philanthropic desires of (all) real people.

Organizations need to be willing to take risks, fail a little and ultimately win.

Ask Kodak or IBM about listening and innovating in the face of change. Innovate or die. It doesn’t sound so extreme now does it? And it is doable.

More Resources:

So much wealth in China! So little time!

Focused Fundraising, Major Gift Teams, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

asiaglobe_smThis past weekend I sat down and listened to frontline fundraisers and prospect researchers talk about how they work efficiently and respectfully to raise money in China. It felt long on a Saturday afternoon, but it was worth every minute. If you can find a viewing, go watch it!

If not, here are some of my top takeaways from NEDRA’s Panel: Inside Chinese Philanthropy recorded from their May 30, 2014 event with researchers from Tufts, Harvard, and MIT, and international frontline officers from Tufts and MIT.

On Teamwork

  • Put in place REALLY skilled fundraisers: the prospecting, cultivating and stewarding I heard talked about was very skillful and effective; this is not the time to practice
  • Teamwork between research and fundraiser MORE important: a constant feedback loop between frontline fundraiser and researcher is necessary to tease information out of sources
  • Develop a network of translators: you may be surprised how many people in your organization are fluent in other languages; these people can turn into keys unlocking the one piece of information that leads to a treasure chest full!
  • Contact information is the most important piece of information and the most difficult to find
  • A story was told about a frontline fundraiser sending cold emails in Southeast Asia and securing three $1M USD gifts for a specific initiative! (back to REALLY skilled fundraisers)
  • Get data collection and entry correct, especially events that are actually attended (back to the importance of contact information)

On Research

  • Create search tip checklists for each prospect: you don’t want to forget or make another researcher re-learn all the clever ways you found information on that prospect
  • Capacity requires country context research: because there are often fewer hard asset numbers to gauge capacity, you need to get a feel for how the prospect stands in her own environment
  • Names are so many different ways that it gets difficult (back to search tip checklists)
  • News is the best source for information: Factiva lets you search multi-languages
  • Access and connection is also key: they almost talked about relationship mapping, but didn’t

On Culture

  • Parents: get them in the first year!
  • This is the first generation of wealth: some may want to enjoy their wealth for a bit; don’t forget they grew up without luxuries like refrigerators; they are just reaching middle-age
  • The wealthy are often followers: showing peer giving is helpful
  • Attitude to U.S.: we appear very wealthy when they still have a lot of poverty; business and local pressures to support home projects; may want to show how their U.S. giving helps Chinese at home or abroad
  • Government: there are restrictions on exchanging USD and a cap on giving; may also want to be anonymous or hide wealth; party members and government dominated firms are not going to give

On Patience

  • Must be committed to cultivation over a long time: philanthropic culture is still transactional and local
  • Some programs started in the late 1980’s/1990’s and just now gaining serious traction

Research Tools Mentioned

Extra:

 Other Articles You Might Like

 

Get Worried! About Asking for Too Little

4Fundraisers, Focused Fundraising, Major Gift Teams, , , , , , , ,

When was the last time you had a knot in your stomach because you were worried you were going to ask for too small of a gift? If you are like many fundraisers, the answer is not often enough!

  • $8 Million gift from Glenn Korff to University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s School of Music.
  • $2 Million gift from Gene Feaster, an inventor of Superflab to the University of Kansas.

How badly do you want gifts like these?

The wealth screening companies tell us – perhaps with some bias – that organizations which raise more money and get whopping big gifts, screen their donor database for wealth regularly. This does not surprise me. Does it surprise you?

Bias aside, large organizations are much more likely to worry about asking for too little. It’s a high-pressure, go-get-the-gift environment and the winners are those receiving the largest gifts. And large organizations invest in fundraising, including prospect research.

Research gives them the facts that can validate what they suspect, or disqualify a prospect, or find new information that impacts gift type and size.

But what can I do?
Hey! I heard that! “But we have no money for a screening.” “We can’t hire a prospect researcher anytime soon.” “Our leadership won’t invest in research.”

And I have a response! (It wouldn’t be much of an article if I didn’t, would it?)

Whether you are a smaller organization dreaming big or one of a hundred gift officers, you are in control of your own behaviors. And here’s a few winning behaviors to adopt – and maybe even influence others, like your leadership.

Get worried about asking for too little.
Words matter. When you talk strategy for a gift, state your target ask amount and then say, “But I’m worried that might be too low.” (That was easy!)

Get wealth-educated.
Pay attention to articles, blog posts, studies and conversations about wealth. Because when someone asks you – “why do you think that ask is too low? – you will need an answer.

  • He sold one company. Could there be others?
  • He seems like the kind of guy to have a vacation home, but I don’t have the tools to find out.
  • Jane board member says he owns a number of restaurants, but I don’t know for sure.

Get search savvy.

No, you don’t have to be a full-fledged prospect researcher, but every fundraiser should be able to find key information online about prospects. When was the last time you visited your county tax assessor’s online database? How about Zillow.com? Do you have rule-of-thumb formulas to create capacity ratings?

Wealth screenings are one tool in the research toolbox. Even so, I hope you are actively thinking about a future budget that includes a screening. You might not need it now, but you will need it sometime soon.

Your mission and the people and causes you serve deserve funding. And if for no other reason, that should get you concerned about asking for too little.

If you want help finding information about your prospects, click here to contact Aspire Research Group.


Other Resources You Might Like:

Fall Fundraising Trends by Preeti

Filla Fast Favorite Links – a categorized list with wealth studies at the bottom

When Should You Look for Cold Prospects?

Focused Fundraising, Major Gift Teams, , , , , , , ,
It's COLD out there!

It’s easy to tell fundraisers to look at their donors first, but are there times when it makes sense to look outside the donor pool? If so, when and how should you do it?

This may sound obvious, but usually the best time to go after cold prospects is after you have looked in your donor pool and need more. Apart from general donor acquisition, this might happen for a few reasons including:

(1) You need more major gifts than your current donor pool can support

(2) You need qualified prospects to fill board member positions

(3) You are strategically reaching out to a new constituency

Branching Out

When you are looking for more major gifts or new board members, a great technique is Branching. This technique is described in Prospect Research for Fundraisers: The Essential Handbook (p.26) and you might also hear it described as Relationship Mapping (p.175). The idea is that you take your high-powered, well-connected donors and trustees and put them at the center, branching their connections outward.

A simple, but great example, of this technique is demonstrated by Dan Blakemore in his blog post, “How One Web Search Led to a $20,000 Gift”. When the board chairman passed away and he needed to find donors for a named fund in his memory, Dan branched out from the board chairman’s connections to identify a donor who made a first gift of $20,000. Dan started with his existing donors, but he took an extra step outward and was successful. You don’t have to start with a huge project to get results.

Strategic New Direction

Branching exercises sometimes result in more of the same prospects because you are working within a network of connections. There are organizations that do not want more of the same. They make a deliberate decision to reach out to new and different constituencies. This might take the form of populating the board of directors with people who are more similar to the people they serve. It might also be a concerted effort to engage an entirely new group with the organization in a meaningful way.

In the book, Prospect Research for Fundraisers, we tell the story of Jeff Lee at Wycliffe Bible Translators (p.164). He was hired to build stronger fundraising efforts in Asian countries where Wycliffe operates, but also to build engagement with the U.S. Asian-American community, hopefully at some point in the future linking that engagement back to the home countries. Some institutes of higher education and other organizations are strategically building engagement with countries where new wealth is emerging, such as China and India. When you are starting out new there are usually few existing donors and relationships, so how do you go about it?

Building Up and In

In the U.S. there are many sources of information specific to industries, ethnic communities and more. For example, local Business Journals usually publish a “Book of Lists” each year. You can build a list of the top philanthropists in your community, the top business leaders and more. You can ask a researcher to build you a specific list, or as a frontline fundraiser you might start by, for example, joining a local association of Chinese business owners and using a researcher to help you get more information after you have identified specific individuals.

First you build up your list of cold prospects (some people call them targets, but that often sounds harsh to a fundraiser’s friendly ears) and then you make the inside, face to face connections, getting prospect profiles on individuals once you have made a connection.

Cold Prospecting Takes Effort

No matter how you go about it, cold prospecting consumes a lot of time and resources. Make sure you set yourself up for success. Following are some tips:

Plan & Track:
Make sure you have a plan in place. You wouldn’t just show up on a plot of land and build a house willy-nilly. Draw up a plan and track your progress periodically.

Polish Skills:
You may find it takes a different set of skills to engage a new group of people. Be sure to get any training you need. Network with colleagues who have done similar work successfully.

Educate Yourself:
You may need to broaden your knowledge of the culture and history, inside or outside of the U.S. Researchers can help you gather this information as well.

There are good reasons to do cold prospecting, but it needs to be treated with careful respect because of its expense. Just as you nurture donors acquired through direct mail to ensure you raise much more money in the long-term than the initial cost of acquisition, likewise you need to plan your major gift prospecting projects to ensure that they lead to large gifts and deep relationships.

About the Author

Jen Filla is president of Aspire Research Group LLC where she works with organizations worried about finding their next big donor, concerned about what size gift to ask for, or frustrated that they aren’t meeting their major gift goals. She is also co-author of Prospect Research for Fundraisers: The Essential Handbook.

Got retention? You'll need it for major gifts!

Focused Fundraising, , , , ,

When the conversation turns to identifying major gift prospects out of a base of donors, we usually hear how a wealth screening will highlight those annual fund donors who have capacity. Presto! Like magic. And there is quite a bit of truth in that wealth screening picture. But what if your organization is small, your development staff number fewer than five, your ability to cultivate major gift prospects is limited by staff availability and you know most of your best donors? Paying for a wealth screening may or may not be a good investment right now.

And let’s be honest. Is your major gift program actually based on annual cumulative giving at your highest giving level? Is mastery of your database still in on the to-do list? If this is your world, then a focus on annual fund donor retention could go a long way toward improving your higher-end giving and prepare you for a future campaign or multiple-year, major gifts.

What you Want to Know

Most organizations have a system in place to provide extra attention to donors who give at or above a certain dollar amount. And most of us have heard about reporting on the following:

  • Lybunts – last year but unfortunately not this year
  • Sybunts – some year but unfortunately not this year

These are donors you will want to pick up the phone and call – most especially if your numbers are small, such as under 100. Make sure your calls are at least loosely scripted and sincere.

You might also want to consider keeping track of the following:

  • New Donors – What about knowing who all of your brand new donors were last year and what they are doing this year? New donors are expensive and we need to spend extra care to make them feel welcomed to the family. Don’t be afraid of calling on the phone.
  • Upgraded and Downgraded – What about knowing who gave a higher or lower gift? Either action begs for a response.

How this Helps you Raise More Money

Really good stewardship, the kind that is timely and genuine, depends upon an efficient use of your time. You need to know which people on the list should get additional attention. If you can learn how to use your database to track information like this about your appeals, then the following are likely to happen:

  • Your donors will tell you what they want to know and how they want to hear it.
  • You will find out why people drop out and why some become even more excited about your organization.
  • You will get much better at using and maintaining your database.
  • You will learn about common wealth indicators (luxury vacations, multiple homes, etc.) from actually talking with your donors.
  • You will have conversations that deepen donors’ engagement with your organization and open up opportunities to discuss planned and major gifts.

When these things happen on a regular basis, you will be able to respond to your organization’s donor trends, which may not be the same as other organizations, and you will raise more money. Practice this kind of donor tracking and touching and your donors will be ready to support you when the next big fundraising adventure – like a capital campaign – comes knocking on your door.

Originally Posted on the Blog of the Nonprofit Leadership Center of Tampa Bay

Jen Filla was guest blogger for the Nonprofit Leadership Center in support of her upcoming workshop: Using Prospect Research to Boost Giving. Join Jen for this interactive program as she demystifies prospect research and teaches you to use prospect research tools and resources efficiently and effectively to boost giving. Click here to register for this program on 2/20/2013 from 9am-noon.

Jen is is president of Aspire Research Group LLC where she works with organizations worried about finding their next big donor, concerned about what size gift to ask for, or frustrated that they aren’t meeting their major gift goals.

Looking for Annual Appeal Examples?

  • ClickLinks posted a contest for the best annual appeal. View their results by clicking here.
  • SOFII.org is an all-around useful resource for everything annual appeal.

Who are "Asian-Americans"?

Focused Fundraising, , , , , , ,

According to the Economist article, “Racial classification: All together now” published in December of 2012, the two big surprises in 2012 were that Asian-Americans outnumbered Latinos in immigrating to the U.S. and that 71% of Asian-Americans voted for President Obama in the last election – roughly equivalent to Latinos.

Fundraising organizations in the U.S. have become very interested cultivating Asian-Americans. But who are they? The largest subgroup are Chinese-Americans, but they represent just 23% of Asian Americans. As a group, Asian-Americans are wealthier and better educated than other groups including whites. But the differences run deep including different religions and very different languages.

According to the Economist, only 19% of Asian-Americans use the term to describe themselves. Not too surprisingly, many second-generation Asian-Americans (median age of 17 years) are okay with the term and less concerned about their heritage. What is surprising and a bit revealing is that in some cases, Asian-Americans can unite as a much larger group and demand attention and power in civic life.

If you are considering different fundraising strategies that involve pursuing specific ethnic groups like Asian-Americans, this is a reminder that some of the names we assign to ethnic groups are purely inventions that may not resonate with those individuals. When considering donor motivations, passions and priorities, targeting such a diverse group as Asian-Americans is not likely to be effective. You will need to get more specific. Doing the research on your donors’ communities to discover how they interact within them is critical to creating and executing a strategy that focuses on a specific group.

Prospect research is always important, but when you are looking to reach out to new ethnic groups with ties to their home countries, prospect research takes on a different flavor. We need to discover more than what we can learn about a specific individual. We need to learn how the donor prospect fits into the local community and how cultural differences affect philanthropy.

Mastering Moves Management: 3 Key Pieces

4Fundraisers, Focused Fundraising, Major Gift Teams, , , , , ,

Moves management is the process of moving a donor prospect from identification to major gift. Also known as prospect management, when you throw those terms into a search engine most of the results are for software companies, especially donor database companies. But I argue that moves management is not primarily a software solution but sincerely a *people* solution!

A database is a tool. Its importance increases as the number of an organization’s donors and friends increases. We need our donor database to keep track of gifts and all of the other information and tasks surrounding our donors and friends.

The more gift officers and the more major gift prospects you have, the more important it is to use your database in your moves management system. But beware! Anytime you spend more time typing into your database than you do talking with your prospects, you will struggle to raise enough money.

Moving a prospect usually requires a pretty intense relationship over a year or two. You need to discover her interests and motivations for giving and connect her in a very personal way to your organization. What if you have 100 prospects being moved? How about 300? And what if you have 3 gift officers moving prospects? Or 5, or 10, or more?

Now you seriously need a system!

Pretend you are an astronaut looking down on earth. Now pretend you are consultant looking at an organization from a distance. This organization has a moves management system humming along. You notice there are three gears in motion producing consistent relationships with prospects capable of making a major gift. These gears are:

Ratings – Each prospect is rated so you can stay focused on those who can help you reach your dollar goal.

Moves – Actions with prospects are deliberate and planned (and tracked in the database).

Reports – Regular printed reports are reviewed and regular meetings are held to build internal skills and keep all the moving parts in balance

Can you do moves management without a database? Of course you can! You could keep track of your gifts in Excel too, but it is rarely the best solution.

Mastering moves management requires learning the balance for your organization between the three moving gears:

  • How many ratings do you need to stay on path with the most capable prospects?
  • How will you plan for moves, make your moves, and record your moves?
  • What measurements should you report on to keep you accountable?
  • How often should you meet and who should meet to keep your major gifts program growing?

Everything in our world is in constant flux. Moves management requires re-balancing as your major gifts program grows and changes. If you keep the emphasis on the moves – on the in-person interactions with your donor prospects – everything else will find its place.

Have you mastered your moves?

Millionaires use Social Media

Discussion, Focused Fundraising, , , , , ,

In a Wall Street Journal blog post, Robert Frank reports that “According to a survey of millionaires from Fidelity Investments, 85% of respondents use text-messaging, smartphone applications and social media.  One third use social media professionally, with 28% using LinkedIn.”

Are Millionaires Talking to You?
Over the past couple of years I have been hearing prospect researchers talk about mining Facebook and alumni forums for phone numbers and emails. More recently I’ve been hearing that gift officers are communicating with their major gift prospects on LinkedIn, Facebook and, yes, even Twitter.

Sometimes it is obvious that the donor prospect is oblivious to how public these forums are or can be. But mostly I am hearing that the donor prospect initiates the contact through social media.

For Donors, Philanthropy is Personal, not Professional
If 85% of respondents are using social media, but only 33% of them use it “professionally”, it makes me speculate that donor prospects view their giving as “personal” not “professional” activities. Kind of obvious, huh?

So why should we care if millionaires are using social media? Well, for fundraising it’s a no-brainer. Our organizations need to be engaging and involving donors in social media as another cultivation tool in the toolbox. But what about prospect identification and qualification?

Social Media for Identification and Qualification
The murky issues of privacy and trust begin to swirl when we talk about mining data from social media – especially with privacy conscious millionaires! But I also think that using social media in fundraising serves to highlight how prospect researchers and fundraisers work best when working together. Here’s how:

(1) If a gift officer is invited to friend a donor prospect over a private network, it is the same as visiting the prospect in her/his home. You get to view the photographs on the mantel – so to speak – such as pages liked, friends, photos, videos and of course, posts. But that information can only be known and used by a researcher if it is communicated (yes, I’m talking about notes in the database as well as verbal conversations)

(2) A prospect researcher shouldn’t ignore relevant public information, even when it is left open on a social media network. Conversations with the gift officer might be necessary and wise before saving personal information gleaned from Twitter, blogs, Facebook etc., but key insights into giving motivations can be found and should be communicated. We never, ever want to record embarrassing things on a donor prospect record, but ignoring social media is not acceptable either.

More on Privacy and Prospect Research
If you want to learn more about privacy and prospect research, check out the video below by Aspire Research Group that puts a little fun into the subject. For comprehensively researched prospect profiles, click here.

How to Find Giving History

4Fundraisers, 4Researchers, , , ,

A great way to qualify a prospect and gain insight on a donor is to learn about the person’s giving history with other organizations. This demonstrates philanthropic inclination and aids in determining how much to ask for. But where do you find this lucrative information?

The Vendors
There are vendors who crawl through the web and/or scan and index printed donor recognition reports (NOZA, DonorSearch, iWave, WealthEngine). You type in the name and maybe some other criteria, and the software lists all the gifts found that match that name as a donor.

Do it Yourself
You can do the same thing using search engines, but it can be a bit hairy if your prospect has a very common name. And you won’t find old listings that have been removed from the internet. Using Google, click on the Advanced Search link found somewhere near the search box. This gives you a form to complete. Fill in the blanks under Find web pages that have… as needed. Try different combinations of the prospect name, including maiden and nicknames. But the real magic happens under the Need More Tools? options.

Search within a site or domain
You have a few ways to play with the Search within a site or domain option. You can choose just “.edu” or “.org” or you might choose the domain of an organization you know your prospect has an affinity with such as “afpsuncoast.org”. Once you start to fool around with these options you will find what you want much more quickly.

What if I don’t find any giving?
Just because a vendor or your own searches do not turn up any record of giving does NOT mean your prospect does not make gifts. Many organizations never publish the names of their donors. Does your organization publish donor lists? If you do not find any giving, and even if you do, you have a few options still available to you to determine philanthropic inclination.

  1. Does the person volunteer, serve as board member or is involved in some other way with charitable organizations? (Don’t forget church membership here.) People who are involved are more likely to give.
  2. Does the person attend lots of charity benefits and events? Sometimes an area has a culture of charity events and donors are not really asked for other gifts.
  3. Check for Federal Election Campaign Contributions (www.opensecrets.org) because these donations are correlated positively with charitable giving.
  4. If you know where she went to school, search that domain for your prospect’s name. Many schools publish every alumni donor, regardless of gift size.

Should I Do it Myself?
If you are a fundraiser, using these tools can give you a quick information edge as you qualify and cultivate your donor prospects. But you will find that if you get carried away trying to do all your own donor research two things are likely to happen:

  1. You will spend less time cultivating, asking and stewarding your gifts, which results in fewer gifts; and
  2. You will be much more likely to ask for smaller gifts than you might if you were better informed about your prospect.

Do I think you should know some basic prospect research techniques? You betcha! It’s a life skill these days. Just make sure you spend most of your time with your donors, not behind your computer screen.
(Re-printed from the July 2011 e-news: Information Seeking)

What is Really Blocking your Success?

Discussion, ,
Carla Harris

So many fundraisers work for organizations that do not value fundraising. Are you in one of them? Do you go to work, have your hands tied, get thrown into a padlocked trunk, tossed into a pool and then told to go raise millions? If this sounds like your fundraising experience, here is a hot tip from Carla Harris that might just help you begin to turn the situation around.

Why Fundraising?
There are many reasons why fundraising gets discounted. One situation might be that the dollars raised are a small percentage of overall revenue. Healthcare is an obvious example of this. If the organization’s balance sheet is the CEO’s number one indicator of success, fundraising as a source of revenue could be way down at the bottom, so why invest much in it?

We all know the answer to that question – mission! Fundraising makes our organization’s mission achievable by adding and expanding services to the community for which there is no other source of revenue. For example, the needs of cancer patients and their families dramatically increase as the disease progresses, which coincides with a decline in their ability to meet those needs emotionally, spiritually and financially. No insurance or government payment covers that!

Carla Harris was a keynote speaker at the 2011 Planet Philanthropy conference put on by the AFP Florida Caucus. A Wall Street banker, she overcame confidence squashing early in her career and has had tremendous success on many levels. She is a banker, gospel singer, mentor and volunteer.

When You are Not in the Room
One of the many fine points she made during her presentation and in her book, Expect to Win: Proven Strategies for Success from a Wall Street Vet, was that most of the decisions made about your career happen when you are not in the room. So true, right? Think how decisions are made about promotions, pay raises, and new hires. I bet that most decisions on fundraising budgets, staff size, office space and more are made when you, the development staff, are not in the room.

Three Adjectives
She advocates deciding on three adjectives that you wish other people used to describe you when you were not in the room. Once you have your adjectives start using them! Use those specific words in your own speech. You need to eat, breathe and sleep like those adjectives. Doing this trains others (and hey, maybe even yourself) to see you like those adjectives – because you *are* those adjectives.

Why not do the same thing for your fundraising department? The adjectives should be based on the skills required to fundraise with excellence. However, if fundraising is not being valued in your organization, first find out what *is* being valued and why. Listen for the words your own CEO uses frequently to define her and the organization’s success. Then you can use those words and demonstrated actions to begin positioning fundraising as the successful, revenue-generating, mission-achieving engine that it is!