Category: Leadership

If you’ve been a fundraiser for long — whether in higher education, healthcare systems or large nonprofits — you’ve probably heard these phrases:

The fundraising team loves that program.

That program gets all the funding.

That faculty member is advancement’s favorite.

And the reality is, it’s likely true! We know that not all initiatives are created equal, and philanthropy reflects that. But we also know there are plenty of strong fundraising opportunities that can be created when faculty/physicians/program leaders invest in becoming a fundraising favorite.

Of course, we cannot raise money for every program within our institution, no matter how important the cause. But we can raise more money for the programs with leaders who are strong partners. That’s why we, as fundraisers, need to be honest about that, and then clearly define how a program can become a favorite.

Expectation-setting is critical. Leaders new to this area may expect quick magic, rather than the thoughtful process of building toward generosity. Expectations that I share regularly include:

• Not every program will have the same fundraising results.
• Fundraising must be a true partnership between advancement and program leadership to be successful.
• Leaders need to consistently make time for fundraising.
• Donors have their own interests and we support those interests, even if it means a gift to a different program.
• This work takes sustained effort and time – the results will not be immediate.

Then we must outline that we need the leaders’ partnership in three key areas: vision, engagement and alignment.

Vision

• Define a clear vision and impact for the project.
• Engage in a transparent budgeting discussion.
• Be prepared to demonstrate milestones and outcomes along the way.

Engagement

• Be prepared to communicate directly with donors.
• Share your research, lab, classroom or other showcase opportunity for donor tours/visits.
• Don’t feel that you need to go it alone – advancement will partner with you to create donor strategies, communications and more.
• Be available to edit communications/proposals.
• Learn to speak passionately about why philanthropy matters to your project – but know that your fundraising partner will solicit the gift.

Alignment

• Speak about the institution positively.
• Be a champion for your project and institution, both internally and externally.
• Be a true partner with advancement, working together to align communications calendars, messaging, donor outreach and more.
• Do not keep your own database: provide all engagement and biographical data updates to your fundraising partner for the university’s database so there is one accurate tracking system.

We know that leaders who partner with us by committing to supporting vision, engagement and alignment will be fundraising favorites. Let’s share this message with our internal partners and invite them in!

The topic of metrics comes across my desk regularly. It may also be one of the more challenging topics in fundraising, as metrics is both an essential tool and one that is often misused, thus causing damage to morale.

In a conversation I had last week, we discussed my approach to metrics: Advancement leaders should create a system that incentivizes and celebrates performance, rather than a system that is punitive.

Think about the traits that support long-term, generous relationships: collaboration. engagement, and perseverance. Metrics can incentivize and reward each one of these. For example:

• Some teams allow only one team member to take “credit” for a gift, which is counterproductive. Shared credit, when used correctly, incentivizes our teams to be more collaborative, to think about the institution first (versus the unit), and to elevate the role of donors in their giving. Not doing this creates silos and competition.
• Building the donor pipeline is both essential and often neglected. Give credit for outreach activity and for qualifying (or disqualifying) prospects, and team members will more clearly see this work as a non-negotiable part of their role. As a result, they’ll be better positioned to remain persistent in the face of “no,” or resist silence when reaching out to new prospects.
• Engagement leads to generosity, so measure and reward activities like donor visits and phone calls. By giving credit for this work, you’ll help motivate the team to stay focused rather than getting caught up in less important activities.

When we only focus on the financial goal, and not the activity that leads to the greatest generosity, we become more transactional in our approach. By creating a system that celebrates the hard work of building an authentic relationship that leads to generosity, we remove barriers that can stand in the way of team members collaboratively building authentic, sustainable relationships that reflect an institutional approach.

Metrics do matter. I believe in them and I used them when I led a team. But what I know from experience is they can be as effective in creating fear and poor behavior as they can be in motivating excellent work. And the only difference is leadership: what we choose to measure, what we choose to reward, and how transparent we are about those choices.

What metrics do you use that incentivize strong fundraising? And what might you change?

For a deeper dive into how data and metrics can support your leadership style, check out our recorded webinar Beyond Metrics: How Data Can Strengthen Your Management Style.

Last month, I wrote about the need for leaders to spend more time creating a culture of trust, openness and inclusivity in the wake of #metoo and the CASE Zero Tolerance Pledge. Advancement offices around the country are revisiting their harassment and discrimination policies and documents crafted by Human Resources and legal professionals. But this is the easy part. The true challenge – and the opportunity for greatest impact – is how advancement leaders rise to the occasion by implementing policies specific to fundraising, and by demonstrating their commitment to a safe work environment.

There is not a single right answer for every institution, region, or workforce, but the debate about policies and perception is critical. Consider the following potential guidelines; while they may not be incorporated wholesale into your institution’s policies, they serve as a foundation for thoughtful deliberation:

• Staff members are empowered to decline an invitation from a donor. For example, a team member can decline a dinner request from a prospect whom they suspect is seeking more than a professional visit. Or they can say they’re only available to meet during business hours.
• Safety considerations for travel (e.g. valet, car service, etc.) are respected.
• A team member may remove themselves from a donor strategy without retribution, and will be credited for a gift that results from the strategy.

What about internal interactions; should your team agree to these standards?

• Open conversations are encouraged but raising one’s voice is not acceptable.
• Supervisors should not request to connect with employees on social media.
• Contacting colleagues on personal phone or email is strictly for professional purposes, unless given permission otherwise.

The Gray Areas

No policy in the world can address the gray between “this behavior is illegal and obviously should be reported,” and “nothing is wrong here and everyone agrees.”

This is why leaders must demonstrate they take these issues seriously and have an open door. Encouraging dialogue on any topic that will improve trust, communication and strengthen culture will provide the foundation needed so employees feel safe to bring difficult topics forward. When a safe culture is not in place, leaders will not be trusted, nor asked to intervene before scenarios escalate, reduce incidences of exposure to inappropriate behavior, or limit institutional liability. This is where language can be powerful:

• “I understand that people will have different comfort levels with various donor behaviors. I would rather you come to your supervisor or me to discuss any irregular behavior than assume you shouldn’t be concerned.”
• “You may have an experience that isn’t illegal and doesn’t feel ‘concrete,’ but that still leaves you uncomfortable. We want to hear about those and support you in deciding how to navigate.”

Ultimately, no policy or nuance can overcome a lack of communication. Discuss your commitment to a safe culture early and often. Include it in hiring materials, discuss during new employee onboarding, and incorporate the topic into team discussions.

Navigating these issues is not easy for anyone. But when managers shy away from these difficult topics, they contribute to unhealthy cultures. Strong leaders must lean into this issue with transparency, openness and a commitment to creating a positive and productive workplace. These are the leaders who build teams who feel empowered to do their best work. And these are teams that are most impactful in service of our institutions’ missions.

KDD Philanthropy provides customized training and coaching to support teams in creating productive, respectful cultures. Contact me to learn more about Tools for Crucial Conversations, Navigating Difficult Situations and more.

Nearly a year ago, the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) released its Zero Tolerance Pledge on harassment. CASE invited leaders from throughout the advancement industry to join them in a commitment to “respond promptly and appropriately to any reports of harassment.”

This pledge was, in part, a response to a survey released just a few months earlier by the Association of Fundraising Professionals and the Chronicle of Philanthropy. It reported that approximately 25 percent of female fundraisers experienced sexual harassment on the job, with two-thirds of that harassment coming from donors and one-third from colleagues. What’s more, fewer than half of these fundraisers reported that harassment to their employer.

The Zero Tolerance Pledge likely sought to close this gap, but I regularly talk to teams who don’t trust leadership to manage difficult situations, regardless of whether those scenarios reach the threshold of harassment.

The reason is simple: leaders need to spend more time creating a larger culture of trust, openness, and inclusivity that demonstrates they’ll respond accordingly when an employee has a concern about an experience they’ve had. Employees who don’t feel their manager is accountable on any topic won’t feel safe taking a tough situation to them, let alone one where they feel they have been compromised – or worse.

This reluctance isn’t surprising: it can be difficult to speak up, especially around sensitive matters. Leaders need to cultivate the openness and responsiveness on everyday issues that will lay the foundation for employees to feel comfortable discussing bigger challenges. When these larger issues around trust and accountability make employees hesitant to speak up, leaders become unaware of what’s happening on their teams and unable to act – potentially leading to unsafe environments.

If you’re a manager, ask yourself:

• How have I demonstrated that I welcome feedback?
• How have I shown my team that I care about their workplace culture?
• Have I created an environment that’s inclusive?
• What steps have I taken to show that I’m open to hearing difficult information? And does our team have tough conversations?
• Do members of my team talk to me openly about the experiences they’re having at work?
• How have I taken action on concerns that surface during the conversations above, rather than sweeping issues under the rug?
• Do we set team ground rules based on a culture of respect?
• Does my team know I will champion them, whether it be on a performance issue, an equity issue, or a difficult situation with a campus partner?

This isn’t an easy issue. Getting it right requires us to respect our employees and honor our responsibilities as leaders. We have to recognize that all aspects of our team culture will ultimately support a safe environment, or they will undermine it. The Zero Tolerance Pledge has ignited an important conversation, but that dialogue must be much broader than donor behavior and harassment. We must look at what our work culture says about safety for all employees: if our team members can’t speak freely about the “small stuff,” how can we expect that they will bring the serious issues forward?

Next month, I’ll share my thoughts on specific tools for creating a safe workplace. I welcome your thoughts on how you create a safe culture.

KDD Philanthropy is proud to provide training on this topic that gives leaders and teams the context, tools, and skills to meet the demands of a new era of respect and expectations.

As advancement professionals, we’ve heard the complaints from our organizational colleagues: Fundraiser turnover. Competing priorities. Restrictive policies.

And, we know the results of these complaints: Hesitation to meet with advancement. Lack of participation in the fundraising process. Unwillingness to follow policy.

Ultimately, outstanding philanthropic success cannot be achieved without strong organizational relationships, and every member of the advancement team has the responsibility to build those relationships on behalf of the larger advancement enterprise, not a specific team or function.

How could these simple techniques to build holistic relationships boost both your credibility as a professional and your results?

• Use inclusive language. Consider how you represent yourself and your team when you say, “I will work with our writer in donor relations to create a photo book” versus “I’ll create a photo book to steward our donor.”
• Expand your organizational relationships. Bring colleagues to internal meetings and making strategic introductions at events, sharing how your coworker’s function boosts your work. (How often do various members of the advancement function meet with academic partners individually, rather than as a coordinated team?)
• Celebrate as a team. When announcing a win, acknowledge everyone’s role in the process. Send internal thank you notes. Recognize diverse contributions (in and out of advancement). Share wins along the way, building a culture of recognition. Include everyone involved in celebratory bagels or happy hours.
• Display a united front. Organizational partners will inevitably be displeased about an advancement policy or decision. This is a critical time to explain and contextualize decisions or policies of the advancement team. That doesn’t mean you can’t acknowledge real challenges, but it does require displaying and accepting nuance.
• Share your donor strategies. Many of our best donors and prospects have multiple relationships across the organization, especially at a university. By showing your colleagues the larger strategy, they’ll have a greater appreciation of a donor’s touch points and interests.

Think about the donor relationships you can create when everyone in your organization is pulling in the same direction, and whether you’re a part of building that culture.

KDD Philanthropy can help your organization strengthen its culture, build tools and expand partnerships throughout the organization. Contact us today about how we can help your team achieve even greater success.