By Barry McLeish

I was taught that to create a successful strategy in fund development or product sales, I needed to first look at what my competitors were doing - or attempting to do – and then I needed to look at ways to outdo what they were trying to accomplish either through marketplace force, advertising strength, or fundraising persuasion.  If these tactics didn’t work I would then need to try to position the agency I was a part of in service or product areas that my competitors were not engaged in.
 
This “wisdom” often served me well.  However, I wonder if the conventional wisdom of yesterday is no longer the right approach today and in fact, may be leading me astray?  
 
Increasingly I am becoming convinced that, in organizations I am a part of, it is the honest assessment of their unique capabilities that helps me the most.  Strong capabilities can lead me as a  development director or marketer to look at an organization's current and potential donors, decide where the agency and stakeholder can grow together (or not), the way the capabilities of the organization allow this to happen, and the subsequent opportunities that might enable them both to evolve together.
 
This is a mouthful.  It simply asserts however that, even if you have a great cause, it still might not attract individuals the way you think it should.  Your agency’s capabilities must be integrated with each other and must support the overall goals and strategies of the organization.  Your organization’s capabilities should dictate what you can and cannot do strategically.  You only do what you can excel at because in doing so you deliver maximum value to those you are collaborating with.  To enable this to happen, you must be remarkably honest in your evaluation of your agency’s capabilities because they help determine who you can attract to your organization as a donor and who you will not.
 
In fact, a capabilities strategy is neither static nor complacent.  Your organization is evolving all the time through the people you hire and the programs you both abandon as well as the new ones you implement.  To achieve this tight match between strategic direction and capabilities requires a focus that few nonprofit agencies have.  However, to be able to discern your firm’s capabilities will give your agency an advantage few enjoy.

Let me encourage you to pursue an HONEST assessment of your capabilities -- and then determine just HOW those match up with your donors' values and concerns.  Seeking the perfect match with individual donors -- especially your major donors -- could be the difference between your success and failure.

by Barry McLeish

I have met many donors in the last year who believe that events in their lives can no longer be controlled the way they once were. This has led some to a type of despair and others to question their values and beliefs.

I believe this general perception of a loss of control is most likely going to continue in America amongst many individuals, including some who are your organization’s donors.

As a consequence of this lack of perceived personal power, the level of complaint as well as a persistent negativism in America is also on the rise. There are obvious reasons for this type of concern. Tremendous job insecurity is omni-present; in the past three decades income for the poorest fifth of Americans has risen marginally, while income for the richest fifth has risen by substantial amounts; and housing prices have fallen almost uniformly across America.

How do we relate to our donors during this time of upheaval, personal loss, and anxiety?

Listen to your constituents more than you ever have before. Become the master of the short conversation with them and look for data points that you did not realize before. Likewise, during a time of crisis shortcomings in your organization’s strategy often become obvious. Fix these errors quickly.

A series of questions, honestly asked and answered, can help put your strategy back in focus:

1. Is your organization still on mission or have you allowed “mission creep” to influence your strategy?
2. How is societal adversity affecting your donors’ values and their desire to be involved with you?
3. Are your assumptions about your donors still right, or has societal turmoil invalidated your basic strategic premises?
4. Have you engaged your employees, key stakeholders, and board members in face-to-face debates about how best to reach your donors and influence them while collaborating with them?

Most importantly, don’t waste time if your strategy needs to be put back on track.

My personal best to you in the days ahead.

By Barry McLeish

Do you remember how Stephen Covey in his best-selling book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People used the phrase “emotional bank account” to describe the amount of trust individuals can build up in relationships?

When nonprofit agencies – or their development or marketing officers - are in a panic for quick funds, or are hurried in their approach to fund development, they often seek to withdraw more relationally than has been built up through their urgent appeals for funds. I have learned the hard way that relationships require a regular and constant deposit in the form of relational building activities if they are ever going to survive and prosper.

The good news is that the relationships you and your organization make with individuals can have a transformative effect upon them, upon you, the attitudes you have towards each other, and the way you involve yourselves with each other.

The bad news is that it takes more time to build these relationships than most of us ever believe it will. Because most marketing and development directors inherit their strategies from previous administrations, if the previous administration did not spend much time building relationships on behalf of the organization, or simply did not budget the necessary time to accomplish this task, you and your organization are going to be hurt tactically and relationally.

You and I live in a world of urgency and immediacy. This cultural fact mitigates against building long-term relationships. And yet, long-term relationships allow nonprofit agencies to not only survive in downturns and times of economic instability, they also allow organizations to thrive and grow. The “emotional bank account” you build with long-term friends allows your agency a type of latitude that short term relationships do not have. These friends stay involved longer, give more than others, tell their friends about your organization, and stay involved during times of crisis and abundance. They simply are invaluable.

Making the tactical decision to build these types of relationships alters the way you work strategically. Allowing these friendships with their intrinsic values to mature over time provides an organization with durability and a better future by allowing donors and friends to build a legacy with the organization, create an impact, and do something that is truly substantive. Frederick Reichheld author of The Loyalty Effect suggests, “The growth of any organization is simply the accumulated growth of the individual relationships that constitute it.”

Today in our lives there is a habitual tendency towards the short term. Reverse this trend in your organization and you will create a relationship reservoir that will continue in the life of your organization long after you are gone.

By Barry McLeish

Our country is in trouble and the needs many of you are providing help and care for are important and of great value. Some reading this are working with international nonprofit organizations where the need is even greater.

In the face of overwhelming need, when it comes to choosing a strategy to help fund and promote the cause your organization has chosen to work in, what criteria do you use to select the strategies you will use to fund the projects your nonprofit agency has chosen to undertake?

I try to use the following five questions to help me decide what I should do, how I should execute the plan, and the means by which I should do it:

• First, I need to know if I can afford to promote the service my organization is offering in a way that will allow it to be sustainable. If the cost the cause is excessive it matters little how important the work is. Either you have to rethink your promotional strategy or you have to decide that it is simply not feasible to promote the cause. Some of the services our nonprofit organizations provide simply are so obscure and the donor base is so small, that the question of cost becomes a real issue in our planning.
• Second we need to know if this is a commodity service we are providing or is it something unique that allows us to have a sustainable advantage over other organizations not involved in the same type of service. Your competitive advantage goes right to the heart of whether your service is sustainable over time or whether at some point in the future you are simply not going to be able to afford to provide the service.
• Third, perhaps this is obvious, but you really need to know if your strategy is going to be successful or not. Is this a strategy that will be easy for competitors to imitate or not, will it potentially have a long life or will it have to be changed in 12 months, is it adaptable to marketplace changes as they occur – all of these issues go to the heart of your strategy’s success.
• Fourth, can I implement the strategy or does it only look good on paper. Many brilliant strategies are stunning on paper but they are simply not feasible. Your strategy should be within the financial and human resources of your organization if it stands a hope of being implemented.
• Finally, does the strategy fit within the portfolio of other organizational strategies that are currently operating or will the suggested strategy’s implementation put other strategies at risk by its overwhelming needs?

Given the choice, build a strategy that has the possibility of providing a significant long-term impact upon your organization. Ensure you have the competencies to make the strategy succeed over time. Challenge the organization’s thinking to make sure it is the right strategy. And don’t ever be afraid to say that the choice of strategy was wrong and you need to start over.

Good luck on the road ahead.

By Barry McLeish

I love science fiction, both from the new and the old authors. One author I have followed for many years is Ray Bradbury. His story, “The Golden Kite, The Silver Wind” is one of my favorites.

At its heart, the story is about collaboration. Two neighboring towns fight for ascendancy in each others’ eyes until they finally realize that both have something that is unique to give to both their inhabitants and to each other. Though an old story by Bradbury I believe its message is timeless and one for nonprofit organizations today.

The societal problems most nonprofit organizations face – and are trying to remedy - simply will not be solved by organizations projecting an attitude of “going it alone.” Your organization needs more than the expertise it has, the systems it has developed, and the outcome measurements that are in place. It also needs a community of stakeholders acting in concert with it to solve a mutually agreed-upon societal problem jointly. Every one of your stakeholders must feel that what they do today in regards to your organization is indispensable to its survival. What’s more the same donor, volunteer, customer, or constituent must feel that what the organization does with them is also indispensable to their survival.

It should cut both ways.

Unfortunately most humans and most organizations are not set up to give and receive very well. It is usually one or the other. We expect to contribute to organizations without expecting much in return because that is how business is done; organizations expect to receive and process gifts and usually don’t feel compelled to give much back because they feel there is little need to do so. Sure there is the mandatory thank you letter from the organization after each gift is made and perhaps a yearly Christmas card. On the donor’s part they might attend an event or contribute to a walk-a-thon. But there is often not much more from either side.

All of this leads to a business-as-usual attitude; donors are viewed as expendable by organizations, organizations are seen as commodities by donors and in the process, societal problems become intransigent. Generosity becomes endangered of being extinguished.

There must be a better way.

Perhaps Ray Bradbury had it right in his story. The two towns saw the benefit of contributing to each others’ well-being and in the process saw each other prosper. Collaboration not only led to more collaboration in the story but also a mutual sense of fulfillment and a feeling that something was achievable only by both parties acting together.

This is the hope organizations need as they struggle each day to make a difference; this is the belief donors need to see your organization as different from the hundreds of others doing good work.

Good luck in the days ahead.