“You Can’t Fix Stupid”
“You can’t fix stupid.”
Ahhh, the sound of the exasperated fundraisers and consultants who’ve thrown up their hands after trying for the 5oth time to explain to a Board, a CEO, or a Client why that “brilliant insight” just won’t work.
Sure, you can be a seasoned, proven and highly respected pro, but somehow you just can’t break through in those environments where irrational and uninformed opinions, hyper-optimistic and just plain wild-ass guesses seem to win the day.
A few years back we compiled a list of our earlier posts to arm Agitator readers in contending with these situations:
- Training isn’t in the budget.
- It’s time to rebrand!
- I don’t like X; therefore, we shouldn’t do it.
- Those fundraising pictures are too sad.
- I give my time; I don’t need to also give my money.
- What about our Charity Navigator rating?
- We can do it all online.
- We need to focus on younger donors.
- We need to focus on Millennials. (Yes, this is different from younger donors because there’s some generational nonsense sprinkled on top)
- But X channel is so expensive; we need to lower our fundraising costs!
- That’s too political – we can’t do advocacy work.
- Younger generations are entirely different.
- We can’t afford to invest in fundraising.
- I won’t ask for money.
- We need to be more active on channel-of-the-week(e.g., TikTok, Snapchat).
- We don’t need to raise money on the site; we can use Facebook’s donations.
- Our target audience is everyone.
- If they can’t raise money, let’s bring in someone who can.
- All our donors need to know about all our programs.
- Direct mail is dead.
- We need to focus exclusively on wealthy donors.
- We need to focus on events.
- No one answers survey questions.
- It’s National Our-Cause-Here Day – we need to make a huge push
While I’m sure you can draw up your own arm’s-length list of topics and add to this list (Please do!) I have one piece of advice. Having explained or argued all of the topics above at least 25 times each in my career I can assure you that uttering “You can’t fix stupid” won’t change minds.
After you’ve made your most sincere, fact-based arguments and found them falling on deaf ears the most appropriate and honest response is….
…”I can’t care more about your success than you do.”
Roger
3 responses to ““You Can’t Fix Stupid””
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
As yes, we’ve heard all of these inane comments too often. It’s just awful, and so sad. The strongest opinion on the board – no matter how whacky – influences the vote.
Frankly, in my opinion, boards have no business setting fundraising policy. They don’t set artistic policy, or programming policy, and they should not be involved in choosing or recommending fundraising strategies.
The deeper issue is this: Boards (and CEOs) tend to make decisions based on their opinions and personal preferences – not data. Often when I’m working with a board, I ask them HOW they make decisions, and what role data and personal opinion plays in their decision making.
When they step back and examine their decision making process, sometimes a light comes on and they realize what they are doing. That’s when we have a window for better governance, wiser decision making and hope for the future.
I’d love to find some way to “hack” board/gatekeeper brains in order to persuade on these points… maybe using pathos. I wonder how much the ultra-serious context of a board room influences our ability to do so. Coincidentally, I wrote a related piece that went out in a newsletter to our list this morning. I originally called it “Is your ego (or theirs) holding back your fundraising?” (although the B in the A/B test was the winner: “Fundraising checklist: How to get out of your own way…”) and I told a personal anecdote filled with pathos to draw a parallel between ego as a barrier in a romantic relationship and as a barrier in the relationship between an org and its supporters. Not sure if this sort of approach will make any difference. Judging by your wealth of experience in this area, Mr. Craver, I suppose I shouldn’t hold my breath!
Bless you, Roger, for compiling a far-ranging list of the vapid thin shallow presumptions of untrained bosses and boards … and other know-nothings-in-power.
Thank you, too, Gail. I imagine you’ve endured, more than most, the slings and arrows of the loud-yet-ignorant-in-charge.
I’ll add an anecdote from a 1.5 hr. phone call yesterday with a consummate pro who was hired as newbie major-gift fundraiser by a world-class brand-name hospital.
She was unhappy.
She’d BEGGED for professional development, so she could learn the major-gifts trade ASAP. Her boss said NO … to several proposals from her, all aimed at making her more quickly effective.
I’m not a researcher … but I obey data. One new bit of data is this: In the U.S., in the last 20 years, as the number of IRS-certified charities almost doubled, the number of American households giving to charity fell by 25%.
Ignorance won’t fix that decline.