Who’s Worse?
The client or the consulting firm?
Seth Godin recently featured the meeting in the following video. Do you recognize it? Have you been there?! [I can’t wait to hear from consultants!!]
He comments: “We owe it to our work and to the people who pay us to stand up (often) and say, ‘no, sorry, I won’t do that’.”
Amen … and enjoy!
Tom
4 responses to “Who’s Worse?”
Ask A Behavioral Scientist
Behavioral Science Q & A
Thanks so much for raising this. Yes, capturing donor information can be helpful for stewardship like newsletters, thank-you letters, impact updates. But how you ask matters. Forcing full data capture introduces friction that can significantly depress conversion, many donors may simply abandon the process. Beyond the friction itself, required fields also shift the emotional experience […]
Read Full Answer
Unlike holidays that everyone already knows, Giving Tuesday is a created event. Many donors recognize the name but not the exact timing, so referencing it becomes a helpful cue. It serves as a reminder and taps into social norm activation (“everyone’s giving today”), which boosts response. However, we still want it paired with the mission, […]
Read Full Answer
When a subject line leads with the match (“Your gift matched!”), it risks triggering market-norm thinking: the sense that giving is a financial transaction rather than an act rooted in values, identity, and care. This shift reduces intrinsic motivation and, over time, can weaken donor satisfaction and long-term engagement. It also makes the email indistinguishable […]
Read Full Answer
There’s no evidence that QR codes suppress mid-value giving; all available research suggests they either help or have no negative effect. In fact, behavioral and usability research consistently shows the opposite: reducing friction at any point in the donation process increases completion rates and total response. And that has nothing to do with capacity and […]
Read Full Answer
What you’re experiencing is very common. Resistance often isn’t about capability, but about motivation quality. If board members feel pushed into fundraising, that triggers controlled motivation (low quality motivation) i.e. obligation, guilt, or fear of judgment, which often results in avoidance. Instead, we need to create conditions for volitional motivation (high quality motivation) by satisfying […]
Read Full Answer
That’s a really thoughtful question, and you’re not the first to raise it. Many of our clients have been cautious about placing the ask at the very end. To address their concern, we’ve tested both approaches, and the results are clear: when the ask comes last, even if that means it appears on the second […]
Read Full Answer


That was excruciating to watch, and may have induced the consultants version of PTSD.
*facepalm*
Oh my, yes I have been there. Classic example of who needs to protect whom. Consultants from themselves, consultants from clients, clients from consultants or clients from themselves…
The consulting firm is worse, by far! They choose to ignore obvious facts and a project doomed to failure rather than help the clients see reality and adjust plans accordingly. It is one thing to push back against typical resistance to change and help both client and other outside experts to see new possibilities, grow and adapt to new realities. This is a good thing. It is something else to totally ignore reality in order to make client happy and, therefore, doom the client to failure.
Fortunately, the consultants with which I have had experience over the years are not like this one!