Who Should Set Fundraising Targets?
Faithful Agitator reader Reinier Spruit at Greenpeace International and 101fundraising blog has shared the results of his interesting survey on setting fundraising targets … We are going down … We have no target!
His survey of 103 fundraisers reported that:
- 29% set their own targets;
- 53% proposed a target to their manager, who made the final decision;
- 14% receive a target from “their boss”; and,
- 4% work without a target (as Reinier says: “Ouch!”).
Reinier prefers to have the boss set the targets, because he thinks that way goals will “normally” be set higher and presumably challenge the fundraisers more. And: “…because you would expect your boss to know why more income is needed.”
Sorry Reinier, I disagree.
My view is that there are two parties to the discussion of fundraising goals — the captain of the starship and the chief engineer in the engine room.
The job of Captain Kirk (‘The Boss’) is to ensure that a vision and set of programmatic goals are articulated that are worthy and inspiring of energetic, imaginative fundraising. And sure, be demanding of best effort in that process. It’s the job of Scotty (‘The Chief Engineer’) to have a realistic understanding of just how strongly the ship can respond, including adding a dash of ingenuity and pressing the limits.
But it’s a negotiation that respects the perspectives of both parties, isn’t it? Yes, The Boss ends the discussion with a decision, but hopefully without launching his or her crew into deep space without life support! And, by the way, the job of The Boss is also to make sure the rest of the crew delivers on the promise the fundraising team is selling.
The entire team needs to be exhilarated by the challenge … and a wee bit frightened. Then they’ve probably set the right mark.
On point is The Agitator’s survey earlier this year on how well The Boss ‘gets’ fundraising, see here — Fundraisers Rate Their CEOs!
Tom
P.S. Yesterday Roger urged US east coast readers of The Agitator to join him at Fundraising Success’ upcoming Engage Conference. in Philadelphia on May 9th. He also mentioned a special discount of $75 for Agitator readers. Here’s the correct Discount Code to use: Agitator75 (use no space). Register here.
3 responses to “Who Should Set Fundraising Targets?”
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
Hi there Agitator peeps. I agree with you, Tom… Key people in the starship must be involved in setting the goal…Jim and Scotty. Check out my NPQ web column, Setting Realistic Charitable Contributions Goals, posted July 28, 2011. And I start out by making the point that “how much money you want” is not the key driver!
My point is that there are multiple criteria that affect setting your charitable contributions goal – internal and external factors. Things like the effectiveness of your relationship-building program and your solicitation strategies; the economy, etc. etc.
And the worst approach is someone up on high who gives you the goal!
Couldn’t agree more, Tom. I’ve worked for Charities that adopted both approaches and the worst of them allowed senior management to dictate targets – which usually were as unimaginative as ‘last year plus x%’ on the basis that growth was forever possible, usually without increasing resources.
The organisation then organised it’s operations around an income that fundraisers knew was never achievable, and then had the pain of having to make redundancies when it wasn’t achieved.
Targets for income and expenditure should be developed together, based on an ambitious, but realistic view as to what is possible – so the organisation doesn’t overcommit it’s spending programmes. Fundraisers are in the best position to contribute to this.
I’m also slightly concerned about the implication that fundraisers, without being told to by management, won’t challenge themselves. Maybe it’s true in some cases, but I know that I, and the teams I work in, constantly challenge ourselves to do more and achieve more on behalf of our beneficiaries – I don’t need an imposed target to do that!
First of all, thanks for mentioning my post Tom.
I think what you describe would indeed be the ideal scenario.
In a nutshell that’s even what I tried to refer to:
“By having a healthy discussion and challenge some of the conclusions of previous plans, targets can easily increase.”
I think these scenarios depend very much on the people that are involved. In some cases you are able to have those ‘negotiations’, but in lots of cases these negotiations simply don’t take place, for whatever reason.
On a positive note, more and more fundraisers (on all levels) are working with clear targets and are therefore reaching better results.
Thanks again!