First posted on June 27, 2018

All pyramids are lies:

• They have a dishonest scheme named after them.
• They will not keep your razor blades sharp or apples fresh.
• They messed up the four food groups.
• Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs isn’t really true (there are fundamental needs, but there isn’t a hierarchy and people pursue different “level” needs simultaneously).

Even the Egyptian pyramids were really built by aliens.  I know that last one is true because I saw it on the History Channel and you can’t have lies in history.

It’s time to call the donor pyramid what it is: yet another three-dimensional-triangle lie for desperate presenters to shove into PowerPoint slides to give the illusion of intelligence.  (See also: clipart of stick figures doing things, photos of people shaking hands, any time arrows make a circle.)

So let’s see and know the enemy:

It looks innocent enough.  But do not be drawn in by its tetrahedral lies.  These include, but are not limited to:

Steady steps up the pyramid.  Some illustrations even have a person climbing up the side of the donor pyramid like Yodeling Guy from The Price Is Right (I’m sure Yodeling Guy has a canonical name, but hopefully this description suffices).

In reality, steps are so frequently skipped as to render the metaphor useless.  Think of the little old lady who gave your organization $10 each year at Christmas, then left you a bequest of $400,000.  She skipped all the steps.  You didn’t even try to get her to be a monthly donor, because your modeling indicated she probably refers to going online as “The Google.”  And major donor?  Fuhgeddaboutit.  $10 per year.  She was probably the last person you were going to ask.  Literally, the last person.

I will bet the contents of my wallet (seven dollars cash and some receipts I need to file for reimbursement) that this experience happens more often than someone stopping at every step of the so-called donor pyramid.  When the worst-case scenario for your metaphor is more common than your best-case, you have a metaphor problem.

More mundanely, it’s probably counterproductive to think that you are moving someone up one step at a time.  Look at monthly givers versus major givers.  Yes, you are probably going to invite your monthly donors to make major gifts.  But if someone is giving you a thousand dollars through the mail and has high commitment scores, you are going to start personal cultivation with that person (while not removing them from direct marketing, because you are not an idiot).  That will come at the expense of, and rightly so, an invitation to monthly donor land.

The pinnacle of donor experience is death.  If this is true for your organization, take a good long look at your donor relations processes.  Yes,  bequest giving is probably the capstone of your pyramid, but it shouldn’t be.

Progress.  The donor pyramid has never heard of a lapsed donor.  When the donor pyramid thinks someone is about to say “lapsed donor,” it sticks its fingers in its ears and says “lalalalalalalalalala” like a recalcitrant child.

Yes, in this analogy, pyramids have both fingers and ears.  Work with me here.

The idea that you would have to get a donor back doesn’t occur to this pyramid – its donors are too busy ascending.

Meanwhile, back here in reality, lapsed donors are valuable.  They are less valuable than multi-donors, but more valuable than person-off-the-street.  But they don’t fit into the pyramid power’s progress.  So they are left aside.

This last point also shines the way to the better analogy: donor journeys.  A journey is messy.  The fact that it’s the donor’s journey has the possession right, as their destination may not be yours.

A journey from point A to point C may not go through point B.  Despite your best efforts, a donor journey can get lost.

You can provide all the directions you want, but there’s no guarantee they will be followed. That lyin’ pyramid is a poor roadmap.

Nick