In most nonprofit organizations, a tension exists between fundraising disciplines to determine who “gets the credit” for certain types of donor solicitations. In this day of accountability, ROI metrics and budet struggles, stuggling over initial donation source codes has become, sadly, standard operating procedure. For example, departments responsible for lower-end donors (typically direct mail solicitations) find themselves at odds with the major donor development group after the big donor mails in a big check to a routine direct mail appeal.
Enter the online donation transaction and things really heat up.
I recommend the following article, “Smashing Through Reporting Silos” by, Duncan Rein, CEO of Silas Partners. Here’s a quick summary:
“Organizations that evaluate online success by looking at online revenue exclusively are likely to conclude that their online efforts are more and more successful over the next several years. The Harvard Initiative on Social Enterprise estimates that up to 30% of all donations will be raised online by the Year 2010. Therefore, it is likely that all nonprofits will see their online revenue increase, whether or not they are doing a good job online.”
“Furthermore, we believe that the value of online communication efforts are often under-estimated by organizations that have not instituted a framework for integrated reporting due to the hidden boost an effective online presence gives to all offline communication initiatives.”
The bottom line? Begin now to develop an accurate and integrated reporting framework. Assemple your team to perform a rigorous analysis of how donor communications affect each other and learn how each appeal effort interacts with each other. Tear down the silos. We are in a New Day and we need to give this issue serious attention.
Until this happens, we’re only guessing.
Tags: General Fundraising, Nonprofit, Web
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://dukesmith.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/trackback/
October 23, 2006 at 10:23 pm
Randy Fisher
This is a very interesting article, and thanks for posting it.
I see potential conflict with a number of areas, starting with the marketing department / or function. In some respects, they might be the first point of contact with a ‘big’ donor re: something they heard, were given or attended an event.
Depending on the organization, communications efforts themselves may not be sufficiently organized - or even valued - whether they are online or offline! And, there may not be the appropriate tools. And also, even when the function is valued + the right tools are being used, they may not even be measuring the right thing! It all comes down to design, I believe.
Silos of course, are not uncommon in most organizations. Just look at how we hire people. We don’t hire them for their ‘relationships’, but really what we consider to be their ‘functional expertise’. Most functional areas have their own specific terminology, ‘language’, code of conduct, culture really.
There are the soft-type skills in bringing disparate groups together, and building a bit o’ trust and mutual understanding. There is also a structural component — to ensure that a person’s performance evaluation and overall compensation takes into account their contribution to the achievement of a specific metric / ROI.
This is a complex issue without easy answers. My sense is that there’s a fair bit of education that has to go on here, as well as internal discussion as to how to best spread out the kudos. In my experience, as nonprofits move towards greater ‘accountability’. there is a very real danger that individuals in all functions spend too much time ‘reporting’ ~ trying to justify their particular position / programs. It’s largely based on the fear that the funders will cut the funding, or simply not renew or donate.
The smarter thing to do of course, is to rally the troops from all departments and devise a communication & reporting strategy that further reinforces to their donors that they are working smartly together, and not simply covering their asses. To my mind, that would go much farther in developing stronger donor relationships ~ isn’t that the objective? ~ and contribute more significantly to organizational capacity, stability and sustainability.
October 24, 2006 at 12:00 am
Duke Smith
Randy, I so agree with you about having the “right” communication and reporting strategy…rallying the troops…to work smartly together and make it all about the donor and the MISSION of the organization. Thank you for such a thoughtful and spot-on comment. Wow.