NO GO PHRASES-- or things we should no longer say

Words matter.  And words that matter change.  Recently, a marketing company, Big Duck, published a list of words/phrases we should avoid   And, while I disagree with some of them, Number 7 on the list— Low-level donors/major donors—really resonated.

Big Duck notes that “(t)here types of operates assign a value to donors and funders based on their financial giving levels which perpetuates the harmful belief that worth is tied to wealth.”   

Aside from the fact that I think a marketing company should know that a comma is needed before the word which (or they could have substituted “that,” which wouldn’t have required that comma), it is something that has always bothered me about philanthropy.  Apparently, the larger your gift, the more important you are. 

Too many nonprofits spend far too much time trying to identify wealthy individuals, instead of focusing on those who care passionately about the work they do, the clients they serve, the cause for which they advocate.

This is not to denigrate major donors.  They are critical to the success of any nonprofit.  But to identify others as “low-level” doesn’t take into account the value they bring to the organization, not all of which is financial.

Many of these donors are also volunteers.  Others are amazing ambassadors for your organization.  All are making some sort of sacrifice to support you.  

While I do think it is important to differentiate between donors—so you can segment and appeal or respond to what that donor cares about—differentiating by gift size seems short sighted.  I want to know if a donor is “loyal”—having supported the organization for some specific number of years or more.  Or a first time donor.  Given that we retain only about 4 in 10 of new donors, making a big deal of those who make a first time gift is not just smart it is critical.

I also want to know if there is a particular program or population the donor is especially drawn to.  My niece often comments that it irritates her when her local humane society, where she had adopted many cats over the years, sends her appeals that only talks about dogs.  Dogs are not something that move her and they actually should know that! 

Beyond program, what media gets my donors’ attention?  Do they respond to direct mail, e-blasts, telephone calls.  Oh wait, does anyone respond to telephone calls anymore?  Nevertheless.  Are they more in tune with social media, and if so, what platform(s) are they spending time on?

There are so many important things to learn about your donors.  The more you know, the more you can engage with that donor, and the more that they are likely to make a larger gift.  Not that that should be the only measurement you care about.  

In my career, I met people who made a major gift—giving at or above some arbitrary number—but who would never give more than that amount.  And then there was Ivol, a donor who had regularly given annually to his alma mater.  The largest gift ever was $35.  Then one year, he made a donation of $250.  Still nothing major, but significantly higher than anything he had ever given before.  So I called him and discovered that he had just sold his business and was drowning in appreciated stock.  Much of which he used to fund a Charitable Remainder Trust to benefit our university—and from the annual earnings of the trust, many large current gifts over the years.

Granted, Ivol was a rare case.  But every donor has the capacity to do wonderful things for your organization, from being fabulous ambassadors, advocates, consistent supporters who you can count on year after year year.  And that, my friends, is worth a lot. Certainly a lot. More than being identified as someone who is only low-level.