The Telling and Troubling Way We Continue to Teach Fundraising

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Consider all the fundraising texts, blogs, articles, podcasts and conferences. Evaluate the content and note how often and carefully they parse and re-parse the process of fundraising, providing tips, tactics and tools for:

  • Identifying prospects
  • Acquiring donors
  • Engaging prospects
  • Making more compelling appeals
  • Soliciting prospects
  • Stewarding donors

Note how often the tone of these instructive materials treats fundraising as something we do to prospective givers, not what we do with potential partners.

Note how often the tone of these instructive materials treats fundraising as something we do to prospective givers, not what we do with potential partners. See how often they tout the latest technology with acknowledging that donor attrition has accelerated even as more and more sophisticated technology has become available to us.

In Pursuit of Metrics

Observe how frequently are we told what metrics will produce the best annual yields and how infrequently are we instructed on:

    • The ways to optimize the lifelong potential of each donor we are lucky enough to have

    • How rapid and impersonal transactional fundraising inevitably leads to higher rates of donor attrition and, therefore, long-term fundraising potential

    • How to listen for, respect and align our interests with donors’ most deeply held values

    • How to build not just “predictive profiles” but gather relevant donor information that will allow us to more gracefully manage long-term relationships even in the face of the constant turnover of fundraisers

    • The most effective ways of building and deepening donor loyalty

    • How building loyalty leads to higher levels of giving over time and the more regular receipt of significant estate gifts

    • How to pulse donors to ask how satisfied they are with their giving experience and what we can learn from other organizations that have, in their estimation, done a better job than us

    • How to create donor experiences that money can’t buy

    • How to turn donor talents into greater commitments of time and, eventually, treasure

In Pursuit of Credibility

Observe how rarely they underscore what organizations must obligate themselves to if they are to strengthen their fundraising credibility and appeal, including:

    • Conducting needs assessments to show how they are responding to changing societal needs

    • Being clear about where specific amounts of private support will lead to greater service delivery

    • Establishing performance metrics for mission delivery, not just fundraising

    • Making stewardship and accountability a shared institutional ethic

    • Developing policies, procedures and practices to ensure donor intent is preserved even long after the donor is gone

    • Treating donors like shareholders by giving them opportunities to voice their hopes and concerns and to be an integral part of organizational planning

Sustained Success

Note how infrequently they touch on, much less delve into, the predicates of sustained fundraising success including:

    • The architecture and process, including step-by-step strategies and tactics, for building communities of shared purpose that allow donors to believe, belong and make the world better

    • Appealing to the cause orientation of younger generations

    • Creating “big tent” coalitions in which diverse populations can find common cause

    • Creating constituents and developing partnerships in ways that are not unduly fundraising-forward

  • Creating civic collaborations and community-based coalitions that demonstrate how purpose-driven organizations are working together to address the root causes of social ills or steadily widen the circle of opportunity
Sign that reads "time for change."

Time for a Change

These predicates are what too many fundraising organizations are oblivious of or have taken for granted for too long, which has contributed to the decline in philanthropic participation, more rapid rates of donor attrition, and the steady decline in the effectiveness of fundraising-forward approaches. That, in turn, has led to the tendency of unaware bosses and board members to fault fundraisers and double down on traditional tactics, ignoring the laws of diminishing returns. As a consequence, fundraisers’ effectiveness is sorely sub-optimized, leaving them discouraged and looking elsewhere.

The predicates are what most fundraising organizations need to turn to with urgency and imagination if they are to stem the longstanding and apparently unrelenting trend of “donors up, dollars down,” the greater reliance on the wealthy, aged few, and avoid the inevitable, steady “dollars down” that will come as the wealthy few pass on.

We value your insights! What stood out to you in this article? Join or start a conversation below.
  • Jim is the President of Langley Innovations and a leading expert in philanthropy and higher education advancement. With over 30 years of experience, he has led transformative campaigns, authored five books, and advised over 130 institutions. Known for innovative strategies and donor-centric approaches, his work has raised billions and reshaped fundraising practices.

    View all posts

Related Posts

Colored open hand illustration

Seeking Visionary Voices

Do you have:

  • A bold idea or unique insight?
  • A story of success—or hard-won lessons from failure?
  • Expert advice your peers need to hear?

Join other forward-thinkers shaping the future of philanthropy. Share your perspective, elevate the conversation, and let your voice be heard.

Contribute your wisdom today.

Related Posts

Wall Street Journal Clipping: Many Colleges Fail in Teaching How to Think

Many Colleges Fail in Teaching How to Think — And Donors Are Catching On

In 2017, the Wall Street Journal warned: “Many Colleges Fail in Teaching How to Think.” Eight years later, was it prophecy? Alumni giving is down. Public confidence has collapsed. Colleges are closing almost weekly. Donors now ask: Am I funding thinkers—or just diplomas? Real education, or expensive amenities? If students leave no better at reasoning than when they arrived, why should anyone keep writing checks? The warning was clear. The collapse was inevitable.

Read More »
Surreal desert landscape shaped like a human eye, symbolizing the illusion behind inflated legacy gift lists and the need for clearer vision

The $117 Million Mirage: Why Most Legacy Gift Lists Are Illusions

A nonprofit celebrated 1,270 bequest commitments worth $117 million. Reality check: filtering for actual prospects yielded 55 names. Calling those 55? They reached five people—none remembered making any commitment. The culprit: organizations spending $8,000-$20,000 annually on digital tools, expecting software to cultivate donor relationships. When results disappoint, staff move on, leaving nonprofits with the cleanup. The lesson: five genuine legacy phone calls will always outperform 1,270 fictional commitments. You can’t build relationships with shiny website objects.

Read More »
Depiction of Harvard University

Would You Donate to Harvard?

Harvard: citadel of brilliance or fortress of privilege? For decades, liberals slammed it as an elitist gatekeeper—legacy admissions, donor perks, and wealth dressed up as meritocracy. Now, conservatives aim to gut its funding, branding it a woke factory. Different flags, same battlefield. Reform or revenge—the motives have shifted, but Harvard remains rich, elite, and untouchable. The question isn’t whether it deserves criticism. It’s whether you’d bankroll an empire of inherited advantage… or gamble on the promise of change.

Read More »
>