There is surprisingly little correlation between wealth and giving.
The number one myth in fundraising is that donations come mainly from wealthy individuals.
The simple fact is that people are by nature either givers or non -givers. If fundraisers accept this basic premise they can be much more effective in the work they do. Far too much time can be wasted in school fundraising researching the wealth of parents and alumni instead of looking for indications of altruism and what it has been prompted by.
The term ‘donor- centric’ has for many years be used by fundraising consultants to an extent where the expression is both misleading and irrelevant. Very few schools, despite what they may claim in their marketing literature, base their fundraising strategy around donors. The vast majority build their cases for support without first engaging with potential donors - how they can then claim to be donor-centric is mystifying. Instead campaigns are created from internal discussions and tend to adopt an irritating sanctimonious tone preaching about maintaining school values , passing on the torch of learning from one generation to the next and the importance of learning outside the classroom.
This does absolutely nothing to make either alumni or parents want to donate, in fact it does just the opposite and alienates potential donors.
School fundraisers should not be mislead by someone’s capacity to give. Giving has little to do with an individuals personal wealth and everything to do with their propensity to give. This will of course be motivated by many factors but the one common link is the positive emotional impact the act of giving has on the donor. Once a fundraiser identifies what motivates an individual to give at an emotional level the conversation is simply about how much.
Research should therefore focus on an individuals personal circumstances, outlook on life and what has inspired and motivated them ; this will highlight not just if they give but much more importantly why they give.
The number one myth in fundraising is that donations come mainly from wealthy individuals.
The simple fact is that people are by nature either givers or non -givers. If fundraisers accept this basic premise they can be much more effective in the work they do. Far too much time can be wasted in school fundraising researching the wealth of parents and alumni instead of looking for indications of altruism and what it has been prompted by.
The term ‘donor- centric’ has for many years be used by fundraising consultants to an extent where the expression is both misleading and irrelevant. Very few schools, despite what they may claim in their marketing literature, base their fundraising strategy around donors. The vast majority build their cases for support without first engaging with potential donors - how they can then claim to be donor-centric is mystifying. Instead campaigns are created from internal discussions and tend to adopt an irritating sanctimonious tone preaching about maintaining school values , passing on the torch of learning from one generation to the next and the importance of learning outside the classroom.
This does absolutely nothing to make either alumni or parents want to donate, in fact it does just the opposite and alienates potential donors.
School fundraisers should not be mislead by someone’s capacity to give. Giving has little to do with an individuals personal wealth and everything to do with their propensity to give. This will of course be motivated by many factors but the one common link is the positive emotional impact the act of giving has on the donor. Once a fundraiser identifies what motivates an individual to give at an emotional level the conversation is simply about how much.
Research should therefore focus on an individuals personal circumstances, outlook on life and what has inspired and motivated them ; this will highlight not just if they give but much more importantly why they give.