Or more properly, does The Agitator suffer from dissociative identity disorder?

Yesterday, in Yawning All The Way To The Bank, Roger wrote persuasively on the importance of fundraisers NOT chasing the latest ‘shiny new thing’. Indeed, he made the case for being boring, particularly with respect to consistency of message.

Communications whiz Tom Ahern picked up the theme and made a great comment on the post: “I’m opening the new wing of my Museum of Nonprofit Knuckleheads. It houses all the great stuff that worked that didn’t get repeated.” Love it!

OK, consistency of message and proven tactics … I get it. No argument from me.

On the other hand, if you search the ‘Innovation’ category of The Agitator’s archives, you find 631 results … 22 posts this year already — some with titles like Are You A Dinosaur, Essentials Of Innovation, Fundraising Evolution And Revolution.

In Fundraising Change Is Like Climate Change, Roger warned:

“The greatest fallacy in nonprofit thinking is that maintaining the ‘status quo’ is the least risky of all strategic options.

In fact, in this era of rapid change and shifting demographics there is almost nothing as risky as sticking with the status quo.

Most fundraisers — even the most sophisticated among us — intellectually recognize the danger of standing still and avoiding change. The trouble is that very few do anything significant about it. Sure, they pay lip service to the importance of taking risk and embarking on change. And that’s usually where it stops.”

So, what’s a poor reader to conclude? Do we want you to innovate? Or stay the course and be as boringly consistent as possible?

Unfortunately, there’s no simple answer; it’s about balance. But here perhaps are some guiding principles …

1. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
2. But don’t be so focused on the rear view mirror that you drive off the cliff.
3. Be guided by hard data in determining where change might be needed.
4. Give preference to signals/evidence from your donors/supporters as to where change might be needed.
5. When considering change, focus on significant opportunities that are worth the candle (i.e., worth the disruption costs).
6. Don’t change without an explicit hypothesis and without proper metrics to measure effect.
7. Consider the prudence of being a ‘fast follower’ (of course, this means you must remain alert to what are the most successful tactics of your competition).
8. Don’t NOT change because you might fail.

Where do you think the greatest danger lies: in the habit of ‘standing pat’ or the habit of ‘chasing the newest shiny thing’?

What advice would you add as to when to change?

Tom