Have you ever been around someone that is a blur of activity, but never gets anything done? I’m sure you have. And if you stop and think about it, this person is usually more interested in the process than in the result. They LOVE the process. Just “doing the process” makes them feel good.
Early in my career, I used to be that kind of person. I love efficiency, sequence, process. It makes me feel good to know everything is in order and everyone is DOING the right things.
Then I went to a week-long training seminar on Managing by Objectives, and it changed my life and the focus of my work. In essence, the managing by objectives philosophy boils down to two major points:
- Do you have an objective? In the case of major gifts the objective is to secure funds. Now hang on. I know that the minute you read that you may have said: “Richard, you said this major gifts thing was not about the money. What gives?” Yep. I’m still saying that. But securing the funds is proof that you have honored the donor by properly servicing their interests and passions. So this point is consistent with the philosophy Jeff and I are propagating. I am assuming you are operating in a relational donor centered way. Believe me, if you aren’t, and you are going for the money you will not get it to the level you need to. So, securing the donation is proof you have done things right.
- Can you measure progress toward achieving it? That is, can you measure performance and achievements against those objectives? This is why the question “how are you doing in causing a mutually satisfying transaction with your donor” is a relevant question. If the answer is “they won’t talk to me” or “I don’t know how to approach them,” it is symptomatic of an MGO who has either not qualified the donor in the first place or not done the work to identify and service their interests and passions.
This brings me to the practice of measuring MGO performance. I am beginning to wonder if we are making the whole MGO performance evaluation thing too complicated. It goes back to what I said at the top of this post – are we too focused on measuring activity instead of actual progress against an objective? We might be. Hear me out on this.
I have seen way too many cases of MGOs doing all the right things but getting nowhere with their caseload. They do the right amount of phone calls, emails, touchpoints – even face-to-face visits, but get nowhere on achieving any revenue generation goals. In this situation the real question is not how much are you doing but what are you doing? What is the nature of your contact with the donor? Is it having an impact? Is it donor-centered? Is it focused on servicing the donor’s passions and interests?
“What! You don’t know the donor’s passions and interests?” Hmmm…
This is kind of like the person who has a ton of college degrees but can’t seem to make it in real life. Living life is not about acquiring all the knowledge you can acquire and that’s it. It is about DOING the right things with that knowledge. Or it’s like an MGO thinking that if they just get that CFRE certification they will suddenly be successful. Nope. Not gonna happen.
Now, to be clear, I am not against degrees and certifications. I am simply saying that if you can’t reach an agreed upon objective, more than likely, there is something wrong with your approach. That is what you should be curious about. You can’t just blindly do the “right” activity or follow a formula. It will not work.
To Jeff and me, the core question, when looking at a caseload and how an MGO is performing with the donors on the caseload is: “What progress are you making in achieving the goal you set for that donor?” As a manager, you need to make a judgment about the effectiveness of his approach, focus and style if the progress isn’t substantial. It is at this point where you make corrections and adjustments like:
“You know, MGO Name, you are too focused on getting the money. Instead, you need to figure out what this donor wants to achieve through their giving. What is that? Get that information, and tell me next week, when we get together, HOW you are going to service that need.”
This is a more profitable discussion than: “how come you only had three face-to-face visits last week?” To make the most of performance measurement, we need to change the focus to progress against objectives, rather than measuring activity.
Richard
This is so true Richard. Thanks for putting the concept out there. I often remind my clients of this when discussing the need to measure their performance relative to top-level organizational goals. Often we find that those orgs who don’t set goals and measure progress relative to and in terms of what’s important to the organization as a whole, are the ones who seem to report on activities rather than outcomes.
At the end of the day, it’s the outcomes rather than the calls, meetings, opens and followers that are important in achieving your mission. Measuring outcomes relative to top-level goals is also the only way you’ll know whether you’re 1) working on the right things, and 2) making progress against the actual mission.
Great post!
Richard – I gasped when I read your title…then settled down as I read the post. I am extremely successful in building and coaching great major donor relationship-building and I welcome some metrics to make sure I am both using my time effectively and also that I am taking the donor to a philanthropic dream and not just out to lunch. You see, I believe they really DO WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE – not just be my friend. So to me it’s all about the manager…if they just want to have a quick data report to determine how their reports are doing, it becomes a game about playing the numbers and metrics are really of little help. If they really want to coach and mentor their reports it takes thoughtfully reading actual contacts and talking together about how we are serving the donor’s dream giving outcome!
Yes, it’s about outcomes. And to Jeff and me the proof that the whole thing worked is a happy and fulfilled donor who partnered with the organization to make a real difference.