Fundraising is not a dirty word

Do people really think Fundraising is a dirty word?  If you sit on a nonprofit board and have had to struggle with funding, you may very often consider it so.  When I ask board members why they feel this way, I often hear these responses:

• I hate to ask my friends for money.
• Our annual gala is successful, but it takes so much time.
• Our last campaign failed to reach goal, and I had to do too much work.
• Our golf tournament is sold out, but we can’t depend on it forever.
• It seems that they only asked me to be on the board because they wanted my money.

On a broader scale, whether on a nonprofit board or a volunteer, if you are experiencing the following feelings, or find yourself doing these things, you’re not alone:

• Feel that asking for money for the organization is nothing more than twisting arms 
• You make a casual ask, but are quick to take no for an answer
• Experience a sense of dread knowing that you will have to ask your friends for money
• You don’t want to risk your personal relationship capital
• You find yourself thinking that your personal charm and charisma will carry the day
• Can’t wait for the campaign to end
• Keep putting off your assignment of filling out pledge cards in a volunteer campaign, or worse, fill out your pledge cards with no’s and zeros just so you can say you tried
• Thinking any amount of money raised is okay (you are just taking up a collection)

The truth is these are not only common feelings, but completely normal.  People don’t join nonprofit boards to raise money!  They join because they are passionate about the cause, the mission, the community, or even mankind. Even though many organizations often slip fundraising into the job description of a board member, and most board members truly embrace that part of their job, one would be hard pressed to find the board member that joins with that as their top reason for joining the organization at the highest level.

One can’t escape the fact that there is probably a reason for these thoughts and feelings.  Afterall, one does not naturally eschew fundraising. . . it’s probably a learned behavior.  And I blame that on the fundraising-industrial complex that has emerged in the nonprofit world. This ecosystem that has grown steadily over the years often has unintended consequences such as:

• Leaving a bad taste in one’s mouth from a failed campaign that lingers and often metastasizes into a full-blown aversion for the process. 
• The friendship that becomes strained because you pressed too hard for a pledge is still fragile years later.  
• The pain of watching a nonprofit that you truly care about struggling to meet the demand for its services because it spends too much time raising money rather than fulfilling its mission… and the long-term effects this have on the organization itself.

None of these are healthy for the nonprofit world in general or the fundraising industry in particular. Thus begins the journey of fundraising slowly becoming a dirty word.

In the fall of 2023, I had the honor of being on a panel discussion with Claire Axelrad, the highly respected owner of Clarification, on exploding fundraising myths. Claire is the most eloquent person I have met to date that can effectively defend the position of the emotional appeal, but more on that later. One of the topics discussed was the fact that people just don’t like fundraising.  In fact, it was joked about that many have heard the phrase “the F-word” used in nonprofit board meetings.  The inappropriate connotations of this phrase were exactly the point in people choosing to use it, and none of them put fundraising in a positive light.

What ensued was a spirited discussion about emotional versus rational appeals, the effectiveness of story telling in fundraising, and general suggestions on how to improve fundraising at the organizational level. The panel discussion was so interesting to me that I subsequently reached out to Claire to continue the discussion.  That interaction with her was so fascinating that I formally began my forthcoming book, The F-word, Why Fundraising is Not a Dirty Word, because the topic, and the realization that I was very much in the small minority with my alternative view, was so compelling to me.

The Fundraising-Industrial Complex

Those of us of a certain age may remember the phrase “military-industrial complex”  from various political, war, and anti-establishment-themed movies, but in reality it was first used publicly, according to most sources, by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address to the American people on January 17, 1961. In his speech, Eisenhower warned against the potential for a large domestic arms industry and military establishment to have "unwarranted influence" over American affairs. 

The “fundraising-industrial complex” was first introduced to my ears by Chris Madrid, a marketing professional with a penchant for flying that was very familiar with the term military-industrial complex. As we discussed the similarities and nuances of the phrases, several general areas of the fundraising-industrial complex emerged. These old adages, which contribute to the aversion of many towards fundraising, have been around for years, and are still strongly advocated by fundraising associations, the popular press, and many who are grounded in old-school methods. 

1.    You have to know the person you are asking for money.

Some of this is rooted in the donor-centric movement, and I couldn’t agree more that this helps, but it also has huge limitations. The prerequisite that one must have a previous relationship with a fundraising prospect is just not valid anymore.  It severely limits the pool of potential fundraising targets, connotes a long and drawn-out cultivation period, and implies that the relationship is more important than the good work a nonprofit does.  While I agree that people don’t give money to strangers (unless it’s a beggar on the street), the implication that there needs to be a strong personal relationship is just not true anymore.  When Convergent parachutes into a city to raise money, we oftentimes only know the client that hires us. We explode this myth every day.

2.    The “story” is the most important part.

Creating a Compelling Story, Storytelling: The Most Important Tool in Your Fundraising Toolbox, and It’s the Story That Counts. While these may be actual webinars, articles, and newsletters, I just pulled them out of thin air. There are so many of this type that I can’t keep them straight in my mind. Those that advocate this position believe that the story of the homeless person, the starving child, the abused pet, and so on is what get people to open up their pocketbooks.  Many nonprofits believe that if they could just get their “story” right, the money would pour into their coffers.
These are powerful methods, and do work to some extent, but we have found that the higher up the food chain in terms of investment expectations one goes, the more the motivation moves to the results (outcomes) might be and the bang for the buck, rather than how good the story might  be.  Add to this the fact that AI further complicates the issue of it being a genuine or fabricated story, and the future of this mind set is cloudy. While it is important to be able to provide something that is relatable to your target, don’t forget that outcomes matter more to many prospects.

3.    Giving is an emotional act.

The vast majority of the fundraising-industrial complex is rooted in emotional giving.  In fact, there is an entire segment of this machine devoted solely to tugging harder at your heart strings, telling better stories, and deepening your emotional response. Some sectors of the philanthropic sector rely exclusively on this emotional appeal. This is closely related to the preceding point but deserves a category all its own.

This reliance on the emotional appeal is a big part of the reason that people (and corporations and foundations) are not giving like they used to (see the 2024 USA Giving Report). They have appeal overload, donor fatigue, or whatever you would like to call it. The visuals of the suffering child or the abused pet are powerful, but they cannot be the only reason one expects people to part with their hard-earned dollars. We have found that the more rational the ask, all other things being equal, the more money raised. This rational approach of asking for money normally revolves around what we call Investable Outcomes^TM.

Entire books have been written on this subject, and Asking Rights deals with it specifically, but let me offer a few brief comments.

• Donors (or Investors as we like to call them) are more educated today than ever before. They can look deep into a nonprofits books, for example, and learn more than they ever could before.
• A picture of an abused pet is certainly stronger than a page of numbers that describe how many pets are in the same condition.  But that is not the same thing as saying that giving is purely emotional and excludes rational thought. Great outcomes, such as how many pets you saved, found new homes, and did so at a highly effective cost, go a long way in getting that investment.
• The limbic brain, sometimes known as the middle brain, is associated with social behaviors, trust, reciprocity, and that “gut feeling “about a decision.  Some believe that this is the part of the brain that makes the final decision on things such as a request for an investment in a nonprofit.  Demonstrated outcomes, especially when they are valued by the prospect, can be a wonderful way to get that pledge card filled out with a big number.  They key is not a “better” picture, but determining which outcomes are valued, and communicating the value of those outcomes in ways that are meaningful to the prospect.

While the bulk of the research is certainty on the side of emotion, storytelling, and personally relating, the rational appeal occupies an effective place in personal asks and transformational fundraising.  That doesn’t mean that old school methods will cease to exist, but they are becoming less and less effective.   Moving away from some old-school methods such as only asking your friends for money and relying on pure emotion will certainly be worth it in your campaign. As this happens, more and more board members, staff, and volunteers will move away from fundraising being a dirty word and something they dislike.

At the end of the day, people give because of the outcomes they value…and those outcomes that are delivered by the nonprofits that ask for their money.

The F-word, Why Fundraising is Not a Dirty Word, a forthcoming book by Tom Ralser, is based on how people (especially board members) feel about fundraising, based on interaction with thousands of board members and hundreds of campaigns over the last 29 years.