Donors are heroes. There, I said it.
Can we celebrate donors without ignoring everyone else? You bet we can.
My friend Vu wrote this in his usual funny and Game of Thrones-scented style about donor-centered fundraising.
His concern was that in focusing on donors’ roles and making them central, we were ignoring many other parts of our communities. We weren’t noticing the people who aren’t donors but are still needed if our organizations are to be effective.
My response was that I think we’re arguing about nothing.
I commented on his post, but I thought I’d expand on those thoughts here. (You should read what Lisa Sargent has to say here.) I really want to hear your thoughts as well.
Donor-centered fundraising works.
I probably first heard the term “donor-centric” 5 or 6 years ago. Since then, it’s become ubiquitous in fundraising circles. Everyone is claiming it though not everyone is really doing it.
But when I first saw the idea in print, I had one of those “well, yeah, of course” moments. It had been my approach already.
I’m not a pushy person. The hard sell, “just close the sale” approach never worked well for me. It didn’t fit. It was itchy and uncomfortable.
But appealing to people’s better natures? Being interested in donors and prospective donors as people? That fit. It’s what I would have done anyway. And while it rarely resulted in anything big and splashy during my career, it did produce results. And the good kind, the long-lasting kind.
I can still look at the donor list from my first fundraising job and see many donors who started giving during my time there. People I had gotten to know. People I looked forward to seeing at events. People who loved the place as much as I did.
So, yes, I’m evangelistic about this approach to fundraising. Because it’s just being a decent person. And because it works.
But here’s the thing: putting donors at the center of your fundraising doesn’t exclude the other people who make your mission possible.
Of course, the hard-working program staff on the front lines are heroes!
Of course, your volunteers, who donate their time and emotional support, are also heroes.
Of course, the people you serve are at the center of your mission.
But the place to celebrate everyone may not always be in your appeal letter.
Because the appeal letter (or thank you letter, or newsletter or anything directed at donors) is not about you. It’s not about your organization. It’s barely about your cause.
It’s about the person reading.
It’s how the writer is able to let the reader feel about herself. Does she see herself as empowered? As heroic even, when confronted with something that needs doing in the world? Does she feel like she has it in her to do something great? Does she feel angry about something awful that’s happening – and know she could help fix that? Or sad? Or scared?
Does the writing make her feel? And then feel like doing?
Because that’s the point. We’re not smarter than our donors. We can’t amaze people into giving because they’ve learned how awesome our organization is.
Fundraising is about waking up an army of heroes to join you in your mission.
It’s about inviting people in by letting them sense their own power.
To put it in Vu’s language: donors are unicorns, too. We fundraisers just help them see it.
Photo by Olaf Gradin (Flickr: Super Heroes) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Lisa Sargent says
Great post Mary. Sure hope you didn’t think I was one of the ones doing the arguing! Public and profuse apologies if so… we are now and forever in the same camp re: donor centrism. As I wrote in the guest post for Pam, ignoring it would be just absurd. Leaving you, the donor out of the center of appeals and thank-yous would be 100% crazy — that’s how I perceived what Vu wrote about donor centrism by default. (We once built an entire annual report around donors as heroes.) I do believe, though, that in the right forum there is a lot more we can and should do to be more authentic to donors — in newsletters especially — and was endeavoring to show some of the ways we’ve begun that shift based on results I’ve seen. Like I said, I could be completely sucking wind on it. 🙂 Love your blog as always.
Mary Cahalane says
Oh no! Not at all! I didn’t mean to direct that at you – or anyone, really. Probably just an awkward way to say I don’t think there’s a conflict, really.
I LOVED your post. In fact, I thought twice about going with mine, because you said it all, really. I also liked what Nancy had to say a great deal. As in everything, there isn’t a black or white answer. When we is inclusive, it can work beautifully. When it’s that royal we, it’s exclusive and off-putting.
As always, you’re right in front, doing the smart things and seeing the good results. Thank you so much!
Lisa Sargent says
Whew! *massive sigh of relief* I would have been very sad. 🙂
Mary Cahalane says
It would not be possible to anger your biggest fan. 🙂