Is Your Organizational Structure Holding You Back?

I’ve seen a lot of non-functional organizational structures in fundraising over the years. And while we could all trade stories about messy org charts and strange reporting lines, it’s more useful to step back and ask why this happens—and how to fix it.

Too often, organizations create structures driven by anything but logic or donor needs. It usually comes down to one of three reasons:

• Political considerations — A leader has so much internal influence that decision-makers carve out a special reporting line just to keep the peace.
• Loyalty factors — Long-standing relationships between managers and staff result in positions that don’t really fit.
• Talent skill sets — A staff member excels in one area and is promoted into a role overseeing functions they don’t actually understand.

Colleagues across the sector will quickly tell you how damaging these dynamics can be. I remember a former client once sharing that a single staff member’s unchecked political power was stalling donor strategy and stifling collaboration. 

Stories like this are not rare. They illustrate how easily dysfunction can take root when organizations put comfort over clarity.

The danger, of course, is that these “creative” structures inevitably backfire. They cause chaos, undermine donor relationships, and often drive good people away. The alternative is simpler: align your structure to reflect the donor pipeline.

At its core, the major gift pipeline begins with broad-based, direct marketing strategies. As donors move deeper into the relationship, cultivation becomes more personal. Your org chart should mirror this. For example, don’t put a major gift officer under a direct marketing manager—it doesn’t align with the way donors are engaged.

A clear approach is to divide responsibilities between individual donors and institutional donors (government, foundations, corporations, and other organizations). From there, ask critical questions:

• Who is responsible for acquiring and stewarding donors at each stage?
• Who ensures general donors are upgraded into mid-level, then qualified for major gifts?
• Who owns planned giving?
• Who carries capital campaign responsibilities?

When these responsibilities are clearly defined, transitions between donor stages become seamless. Donors feel cared for. Staff know their roles. Leaders can focus on strategy, not firefighting.

That leaves the perennial question: Where do events belong?

The answer is not in fundraising. Events are best aligned with brand-building functions like marketing, communications, or public relations.

Yes, some events raise money, but rarely do they create deeply committed donors. More often, participants are connected to the event itself (a golf tournament, a gala, a walk) rather than the mission. By the time you account for staff hours and expenses, net revenue is minimal, and long-term donor value is negligible.

This is why events should not be confused with donor cultivation. They may have a role in visibility or awareness, but they won’t sustain a healthy donor pipeline.

The takeaway is simple: structure and process are not just operational details—they’re the foundation for major gift success. When you get them right, donors are served well, fundraisers are empowered, and the organization is positioned for long-term growth.

Get the right people in the right seats, remove the noise, and you’ll create an organization where strategy replaces survival, and donors stay connected for the long haul.