Strategy And Risk
Roger warned yesterday about the ‘S’ word — strategy, discussing what is strategy and what isn’t … as well as who is a strategist and who isn’t.
The image that came to my mind was the Wizard of Oz, projecting dramatic but fake theatrics from behind the curtain.
In response, Charlie Cadigan of National Geographic offered this superb comment:
“Asking hard questions about newly proposed ‘strategic direction’ should make agencies/consultants uncomfortable because it should involve risk. Sadly, this is an element increasingly absent from true strategy discussions. I would additionally pose the question: ‘What does this strategy place at risk?’ If the answer is nothing, that should tell you something.”
To which Steve Sullivan at Seattle’s Woodland Park Zoo added:
“I sometimes find that I run into resistance when talking about overarching strategy that encompasses other’s areas rather than stick to my own slice of the pie. Especially if it means change. Risk aversion is very real in a nonprofit culture not used to taking big risks, or even being punished for doing so.”
Two great points about risk and risk taking.
Formulating and acting upon a strategy requires making choices, eliminating options, assigning priorities — big decisions with serious consequences … hence risk.
What’s the last serious risk you took in your fundraising role, Dorothy? And were you punished?
Tom
4 responses to “Strategy And Risk”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Agreeing with lots of the thoughts here about strategy- though always distressed about how many nfp strategists seem quite stuck in the 1950s talking about aims, goals, tactics, objectives etc.
Tools like strategy maps, red ocean blue ocean, etc have risk and uncertainty built in… Have look here http://www.managementcentre.co.uk/knowledgebase/an-introduction-to-strategy-maps-the-bsc-in-charities
But…key pojnt for me is best expressed by Peter Drucker “Culture eats strategy for breakfast” How about a post on culture? (So hate that ‘not for profit’ simply describes what we are not.) Let’s talk about the C word not the S one…;-)
This reminds me of systems thinking and learning organization theories. Use cage-rattling questions to generate meaning conversation that produces learning and then…change! Leaders use cage-rattling questions.
As Bernard notes: What kind of culture does an organization have? And how does leadership (consultant and others) build an organizational culture that chooses to question, to talk together, to take risks, etc.
Thank you for this whole conversation! I’ve been finding myself, the last few years, pushing for this kind of thinking. And, like Steve Sullivan, usually being told to stick to my knitting. But it’s simply not possible to do a good job with fundraising in a vaccuum. And thinking about those big, hairy questions – the ones that threaten all the comfortable habits too many organizations cling to – only gets you knocked back.
And while tactics are very useful, they can’t create the kind of change so many organizations need on their own. But I’ve found that they’re so much easier for everyone to talk about. You start to feel like Cassandra or the kid in the Emperor’s New Clothes…
But sometimes, it is the client who isn’t willing to take risks. How on earth can they expect their agency or production vendors to take risks when they can’t stomach it themselves???