It is an amazing thing to watch – truly amazing. Some authority figure casually decides to hire a MGO to chase what Jeff and I would call “ghosts and rabbits.” It’s wishful thinking at its best – and stupidity at its worst. I know that’s strong language, but I just cannot understand why a relatively intelligent adult, who claims to be a fundraising professional, would even think this way.
Let me explain.
I’m going to tell you about a non-profit that has a direct marketing program in place to acquire new donors – hundreds, sometimes thousands, of new donors who have an affinity for the cause. The heavy lifting has already been done. There is no shortage of newly identified donors currently IN the house.
Over time, some of these donors have expressed greater interest and support for the organization by giving more. Now they are giving larger one-time gifts. Some are giving regular monthly gifts that add up to a large annual sum.
So the nonprofit has:
- A large influx of prequalified new donors, and
- A highly visible group of donors within the new donor group who are giving larger gifts.
And then we come to the VP for Advancement. He has been tasked to raise more money, and he comes up with a brilliant idea, as follows:
- We’ll hire a new MGO.
- That person will use a six-year-old screening of our donor list to identify those folks who have NOT given large amounts yet, but have a capacity of $350,000 or more, and who are not currently assigned to other MGOs.
- The MGO will go out and get as many of these people to give as much as possible.
- These people will be all over the USA.
This is classic “grass is greener” thinking in major gifts – and a recipe for disaster; not only for the MGO, but also for the organization and the authority figure. There is no way this will succeed. And it is a horrible misuse of money and good MGO talent.
Jeff and I find some version of this situation in way too many places. A Director of Development looks right past the good donors who are already in the house, and he spends good money and time looking for good donors in faraway places. Many times, it is not just the DOD or authority figure who has lost his way on this point; it is the MGO as well. It is the MGO who has a qualified group of caseload donors right in her hands but who is obsessed with “all the new potential donors out there” who need to be found and drawn into the cause.
I just cannot understand why this happens. Maybe you have an answer. If so, please let me know.
Here’s how you can apply this today. Are you talking to the right donors? Stop for a minute and look at who you are dealing with. Are they the donors who have proven, by the frequency and amount of their giving, they are with you? If so, carry on. If not, please stop and reorder your focus.
There is nothing worse in major gifts than wasting time and money trying to prospect for major givers OUTSIDE the pool of the donors you currently have. It is wishful thinking and acting.
There is nothing better than building relationships with the people who have “voted with their wallets and pocketbooks” – they are the ones who have stepped up and said “I am with you!” They are the good people who not only merit your attention and care, but who have also made a REAL commitment to your cause. Take care of them.
Richard
I feel this is common because people feel it is much easier to deal with donors who are new to the organization – when that MGO is new to the organization as well.
People who do this are not willing and / or comfortable to have the conversation with existing donors with a history (to the organization) because it is messy. This MGO might uncover some issues the donor has with the organization that might be preventing them from making a much larger gift. Personally, I like these conversations because as an MGO you now have the chance to walk that donor through their concerns, address the concerns and move forward together to matching their passion to the cause and securing that large gift.
I also think with leadership, many times the leaders are not fundraisers them selves and therefore do not see the value of asking the ‘same old donors’ for donations and how helpful that can be to not forget about your most loyal supporters.
Even direct marketing folks know the house file is where they’ll raise more money!
Though even there, you see people chasing that greener grass instead of developing relationships with current donors – thanking them well, informing them about impact, offering ways to give more.
I wonder if it’s because somehow the “new” prospects can be (or must be) addressed less personally? It’s safer and more generic…
This is exactly what happened to me 5 years ago. I accepted the new MGO position because I loved the cause.. A year later two fundraisers were laid off, then the VP was fired. I survived nearly 5 years and then left due to a lack of resources and support. Why & how does this type of hiring happen? Silos and protecting territory. The pipeline of true potential major donors came in through another department who wasn’t willing to share information much less donors, two different VP’s, no collaboration. And, no cultivation, they were transferred up only when they made a major gift. It’s sad because this organization has gone through 4 reorgs in 5 years and still can’t figure it out.