The Fundraising Talent Podcast

Latest Episodes:

Should fundraisers learn how to “dwell”with their donors? Sep 15, 2021

Show notes

I recently asked my friends Rebecca and David to join me to discuss an article that David had written about what leaders in higher education should expect of fundraising in the next year. Our conversation offered a whole new layer of meaning to David’s encouragement that advancement leaders need to be carefully thinking about renewal, re-engagement, and raising the bar. Perhaps what was profound about this conversation was the notion that fundraisers learn how to appropriately “dwell” with a donor in order to ensure that they are putting the relationship ahead of whatever proposal we are trying to advance. Afterwards, I had to double-check my understanding of what it means to “dwell” with someone; it is not a term I’m accustomed to using and certainly something I wanted to contemplate more.

To “dwell” means to remain for a time, and when we say that we are dwelling with someone there is often a degree of intentionality that accompanies it. How many of us have learned how to dwell with a donor without finding it necessary to close the gift? This notion of dwelling echoes Rebecca’s challenge that, as we emerge from the pandemic, fundraisers will need permission to spend time with their donors having conversations that are about more than closing another gift. She insisted that we have to make room for listening to what people are saying to us, both directly and indirectly, about their experiences in the last two years and how all this will inform their decisions.

As always, we are especially grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast. And if you’d like to download Responsive’s latest edition of Carefully & Critically, just click here.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

What holds fundraising back on larger, unrestricted gifts? Sep 11, 2021

Show notes

Caitlyn wants to know what is holding back some nonprofits back from asking their donors for more significant and unrestricted gifts. While Caitlyn knows these types of exchanges aren’t sexy and may not seem all that appealing to some of our donors, they arguably provide an organization with the most flexibility in advancing their mission. But suppose our understanding of how we arrive at such opportunities is flawed? Caitlyn has learned that investing in relationships that lead to more in-depth conversations is the path to discovering where these opportunities can be found. Unfortunately, some leaders won’t encourage their fundraisers to venture down the exploratory path and, therefore, never connect the dots between the tight restrictions applied to a gift and their lack of investment in relationships.

Our conversation today raises the question of whether leaders understand what it takes to raise the expectation of more flexibly and generous gifts. With these aspirations in mind, we are talking about an exchange that is rooted in the relationship (an exchange of gifts) rather than the proposal itself (an exchange of commodities). Instead of asking how many strings a donor can attach to a proposal to ensure their confidence in what they’re “buying,” we should be focused on how much trust, rapport, and familiarity we’ve mutually invested in the relationship before we exchange gifts. Experience has taught many of us that an overly anxious board or boss is far more inclined to build restrictions into a proposal than the donor who is far more gracious and generous once the relationship has matured.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

What does your boss have to say about fundraising’s competing ideologies? Sep 07, 2021

Show notes

We have had a number conversations of the sort that Ben and I had today; and, admirably, all of our guests are generally very forthright about where they stand amidst debates about competing fundraising ideologies. Ben believes that too few individuals like him and me, white men of privilege, are doing their part in these conversations and that we all need to collectively acknowledge the inherent racism baked into our system. As someone who insists he’s in this for the long-haul, Ben wants to see a greater tolerance of risk, an inclination to lean into more than just what makes us comfortable, and the pursuit of more than job security.

As I shared with Ben today, he and I are on the same page; and I admit to wrestling with some of the same questions that he is. I too want to ensure that I’m using my platform to do more than merely make life more comfortable for myself. That said, there are some questions that I don’t believe enough fundraisers are asking themselves when it comes to competing ideologies. With all the talk about community-centered versus donor-centered fundraising, I’m curious whether the boards and bosses even give a damn. Are those of us in the fundraising community content to fight amongst ourselves, or are we doing the difficult work of ensuring that our organizations know what these frameworks actually mean? And if our organization were to fully understand them, would we unplug the fundraising practices that don’t align with them?

As always, we are grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

Did the pandemic permanently change some of our fundraising pratices? Sep 04, 2021

Show notes

My conversation today is the final of four that we have had with our spring contributors to the most recent publication of Carefully & Critically; Responsive’s professional journal aimed at elevating voices from the mainstream as well as those at the fringe of the fundraising community. In John’s article, he is asking if the pandemic has been good for advancement and like our conversation earlier this week with Dominique, whether the pandemic was the beginning of a season in which we explore new ways of doing meaningful work. As I have said repeatedly both on and off-air, the pandemic offered fundraising a qualitative turn.

John tells us that after the pandemic became our reality in March of 2020 he was slow to enact too many changes and that perhaps like most of us, he was unsure whether this was going to last weeks, months, or years. After a few weeks of just taking it in, John was convinced that getting back to normal wasn't going to happen. John insists that in many ways how we conduct the business of fundraising has been changed forever. John believes the pandemic has given all of us opportunity to pause, rethink and refocus how we go about our work. And when asked whether that is necessarily a bad thing? John insists, absolutely not.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

Will special event fundraising ever measure up to our expectations? Sep 01, 2021

Show notes

This week’s podcast conversations are with contributing authors to our recent edition of Carefully and Critically, Responsive’s professional journal. Today we talked with Dominique Calixte who asks if it is time to rethink special events; and, later this week, we’re going to be talking with John Feudo who is asking if the pandemic has been good for advancement. In both of this week’s conversation’s, we are asking whether the pandemic has been the beginning of a season in which fundraisers can begin to experiment and explore new ways of doing what can and always should be meaningful work.

In today’s conversation with Dominique we wrestle with the question of whether special events will ever measure up to the expectations that we have for them and, in our determination to see that they do, how much of the status quo are we are willing to let go. Dominique insists that special events are among the most transactional fundraising strategies that our sector relies on and that it is highly unlikely that attendees will engage in long-term partnerships. Dominique also challenges us to consider whether our events should continue to be designed for performative allyship and the momentary sense of changing the world or whether they can evolve in ways that elevate, celebrate, and reflect the communities that our organizations serve.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

What can fundraising learn from bad market research? Aug 26, 2021

Show notes

This morning I was delighted to, once again, enjoy a conversation with our friend and fundraising colleague, Travis. In addition to keeping his feet in the field as a major gifts officer, Travis is the founder of Role Identity Solutions and an adjunct at the Lilly School of Philanthropy. Any of our regular listeners will know that Travis has afforded us several enlightening conversations here on the podcast, and I am grateful that he has also been one of the contributing authors to Responsive’s recent edition of Carefully and Critically. In his article, Travis asked what we in fundraising can learn from bad market research. What we can glean from the misadventures of the team at Segway is similar to what we learn as fundraisers when we are overly presumptuous about a donor’s interest in a particular initiative or when we overlook the possibility that their charitable interests have changed completely.

Just as the team at Segway made the mistake of focusing their attention on Silicon Valley elites who, unlike the rest of us, can afford a $5,000 mode of personal transportation, fundraising has an enduring list of bad habits that can result in similarly disappointing outcomes. Travis wrapped up our conversation with the observation that a lot of us are currently gathering these types of critically important insights. Many fundraisers are finding themselves with the opportunity to re-engage donors that they haven’t interacted in meaningful ways since the before pandemic. Travis pointed out that much of our work in these cases is to be sensitive and aware of where our donors now find themselves. Rather than taking his donors for granted, Travis wants to be sure he knows whether his donors’ charitable interests have changed and whether they have any new priorities.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

What will your fundraiser say when the headhunter calls next week? Aug 21, 2021

Show notes

Unless you have been living in a cave or under rock for the last couple of months, you’re aware that the labor market is hot as hiring freezes are over and the great resignation is being talked about in all types of industries. My conversation today with Wendy was all about how nonprofits are navigating this phenomenon and how leaders can ensure their people aren’t bailing on them. Wendy has devoted her entire career to serving nonprofit organizations and continues to do so as the managing partner at Boyden’s Boston Office.

Here’s a question nonprofit leaders can ask themselves. If Wendy calls your fundraiser next week, what will they say to her? Perhaps they will say, “No, I’m not interested in making a change right now.” Or maybe they are going to say, “Yes, get me out of this crazy place as quickly as possible.” All of this really comes down to your employee retention strategy that Wendy insists shouldn’t be all that different from your donor retention strategy. Those on both sides of the charitable gift exchange want to be treated like living, breathing human beings and acknowledged for more than that how well they give or receive a check. If you’re worried about your one of your fundraisers bailing on you or you’ve got a vacancy to fill, this one’s for you.

As always, we are especially grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast. And if you’d like download Responsive’s latest edition of Carefully & Critically, just click here.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

Will the current system deliver on fundraising’s higher aspirations? Aug 18, 2021

Show notes

It was perhaps two years ago when a mutual friend introduced me to Meghan, and I immediately felt compelled to help elevate her ideas throughout the sector. Not only do I believe that Meghan represents a smart and ambitious generation of young leaders, but she is also demonstrating extraordinary courage in sharing her opinions both as a guest on the podcast today and as the featured contributor in our recent edition of Carefully and Critically. Meghan provided our readers with a very timely and provocative article that begged the question of whether our sector can learn how to better center the voice of the marginalized communities that we serve and offers a counter-narrative for how meaningful and effective a more community-based approach can be for those on either side of the exchange.

As our conversation got really warmed up, Meghan and I wrestled with how much we believe in the current system and whether it can be counted on to meet some of the expectations that so many have raised as of late. I am far more skeptical. For example, as much as we like to believe that it can, I am quite convinced that the current system will not effectively deliver on our DEI aspirations. As admirable as our intentions might be, the homogenous population of donors that Megan refers to in her article are also the donors who collectively feed our deep-seated needs for efficiency, predictability, and control.

As always, we are especially grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast.

And, if you’d like to read Meghan’s article as well as those from our other contributors, you can download Responsive’s latest edition of Carefully & Critically here.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

Are we using the wrong approach for retaining fundraising talent? Aug 12, 2021

Show notes

Nonprofit bosses and hiring managers, are you trying to understand why your fundraiser just bailed on you? If so, this is the podcast conversation you need to hear. I met Kate after speaking at the Ottawa fundraising conference back in May, and we subsequently struck up a conversation on social media. Kate insists that we have got to stop sending a million emails as if we’re communicating with passive consumers and start treating our donors like human beings who actually matter to us. What quickly emerged from our conversation was the idea that perhaps fundraising needs to make some bets on our donors as loyal citizens instead of relying on marketing gimmicks that are, by design, sending all the wrong messages. Kate believes that the “iPad babies” aren’t going to tolerate the cheap, shallow tactics contemporary fundraising has gotten itself way too invested in.

Kate insists that humanization is the most important part of fundraising and that perhaps those who are handing in their resignations right now are begging us to humanize the work and stop treating those on either side of the gift exchange like they are widgets in a well-oiled machine. Our conversation begs the question of how fundraisers can identify new opportunities where they are more than reluctant salespeople only accountable for closing deals. I would venture to say that Kate, just the like donor on the other side of the table, want organizations to stop making claims that anyone is at the center of their thinking, to stop looking for the next shiny gadget that will solve all your stewardship problems, and instead start thinking about how to create an environment in which the relationship between fundraiser and donor can thrive.

As always, we are especially grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast. If you’d like to be a guest on the podcast, email us and let’s hear what you’ve got on your mind.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com

Perhaps a field approach to fundraising expertise is a bit overdue? Aug 10, 2021

Show notes

I have quite enjoyed getting to know Angee, first at our roadshow in Toronto in partnership with our friend David Hutchinson, then as a guest on the podcast shortly thereafter; now Angee is back to share with us how she has navigated the pandemic with the help of Responsive’s three lanes model. It was quite encouraging to hear that the centerpiece of our sense-making toolbox provided a framework for Angee to think through how she might approach the uncertainty of what has been our reality for the last eighteen months. While often confused for a prescriptive plan, the three lanes are intended to help fundraisers make sense of what’s leaning in their favor with the help of a systems-level understanding of how fundraising really works. Rather than relying on experts who notoriously put their experience on loan only to ensure they are called upon over and over again, tools like the Three Lanes ensure that fundraisers develop expertise of their own.

Perhaps what most excites me about hosting a platform like this podcast, and creating tools rather that best practices, and elevating the ideas and opinions of fundraisers like Angee, is that it all contributes to a field approach for developing fundraising expertise. Instead of relying on those privelged with keynotes and breakouts in the Emerald City, the fundraising community benefits from expertise that is developed while navigating the messy and unpredictable Yellow Brick Road where fundraisers do hard work in their local context. I simply get the pleasure of hosting the party a couple of times a week and ruffling the feathers of those who are perhaps a tad bit overly invested in an early twentieth-century approach to professional development. I really admire the likes of Angee, and I’m grateful to consider her a friend.

As always, we are very grateful to our friends at CueBack for sponsoring The Fundraising Talent Podcast. If you’re interesting in elevating the experiences that you’re learning in the field, perhaps you’d like to be a guest. We would love to hear from you! Email me at jason@responsivefundraising.com

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fundraisingtalent.substack.com