Apr 2009
Do You Need New Donor Software?
Sun Apr 26 2009 Filed in: Donor Software
By Sally Funk
Let’s face it. Changing your donor management software is just plain expensive. In addition to the cost of the software, there’s the cost for conversion, the cost for training, and the huge cost in time for the whole process. In short, it’s not something to jump into until it is truly necessary. So how can you know it’s time to change?
1. Your current software doesn’t work. You run a report and the numbers don’t add up. You pull a list and names are missing. You run a function and your computer crashes, or simple processes grind to a halt. That kind of “not working.” Not trusting the data coming out of your software might mean it isn’t working, but it’s more likely you need to clean up your data first. Cleaning up your data may solve the problem, and even if it doesn’t, it will make the future data conversion significantly easier.
2. Your current software doesn’t fit. You’re storing data in fields meant for something else. You have “extra” databases: Joe keeps contact information in his email software, Suzy is tracking mail results in separate Excel worksheets. Martha keeps a card file, and Fred wrote an Access program in his spare time to track his information. Double entry and the resultant errors are running amok. In short, your software doesn’t support your strategies. Keep in mind that some “software problems” are actually people or process problems in disguise. The problem could well be caused by poor configuration, lack of data standards, inadequate training, or non-productive work patterns.
3. Your current software is not going to fit. Your organization is upgrading it’s computers across the board, or reworking the network, and your current software won’t be compatible. Or, you’re planning a new e-mail newsletter strategy that links to your website, but your software doesn’t have a field for email addresses. You get the idea. Growth is a good thing, but it can have secondary costs that need to be thought through carefully.
Of course, you can change your software because the new Vice President wants to look like he’s on top of the “technology thing,” or because the second cousin of a board member has a friend who has heard of this new “really cool” new software. It might even work. But it’ll cost you.
Let’s face it. Changing your donor management software is just plain expensive. In addition to the cost of the software, there’s the cost for conversion, the cost for training, and the huge cost in time for the whole process. In short, it’s not something to jump into until it is truly necessary. So how can you know it’s time to change?
1. Your current software doesn’t work. You run a report and the numbers don’t add up. You pull a list and names are missing. You run a function and your computer crashes, or simple processes grind to a halt. That kind of “not working.” Not trusting the data coming out of your software might mean it isn’t working, but it’s more likely you need to clean up your data first. Cleaning up your data may solve the problem, and even if it doesn’t, it will make the future data conversion significantly easier.
2. Your current software doesn’t fit. You’re storing data in fields meant for something else. You have “extra” databases: Joe keeps contact information in his email software, Suzy is tracking mail results in separate Excel worksheets. Martha keeps a card file, and Fred wrote an Access program in his spare time to track his information. Double entry and the resultant errors are running amok. In short, your software doesn’t support your strategies. Keep in mind that some “software problems” are actually people or process problems in disguise. The problem could well be caused by poor configuration, lack of data standards, inadequate training, or non-productive work patterns.
3. Your current software is not going to fit. Your organization is upgrading it’s computers across the board, or reworking the network, and your current software won’t be compatible. Or, you’re planning a new e-mail newsletter strategy that links to your website, but your software doesn’t have a field for email addresses. You get the idea. Growth is a good thing, but it can have secondary costs that need to be thought through carefully.
Of course, you can change your software because the new Vice President wants to look like he’s on top of the “technology thing,” or because the second cousin of a board member has a friend who has heard of this new “really cool” new software. It might even work. But it’ll cost you.
0 Comments
Walk a Mile in that Software!
Mon Apr 20 2009 Filed in: Donor Software
By Sally Funk
For some things, good fit is essential. A good fitting pair of shoes will take you a long way, but poor fit will ensure a long, dusty stay in the closet regardless of their style or expense. It’s just the same with your donor software—except your software costs a lot more. So, how do you evaluate the fit of your software—or prospective software?
There are four elements of your organization that relate to the fit of your donor management software: size, geography, strategies, and technical capability.
Size: There are two size factors to consider. The first, obviously, is finding software that meets your needs, yet is still affordable. The problem is that even small organizations have complex data management needs that often aren’t available in many of the cheaper software options.
The other factor is the number of donor records on your file. Some software is designed specifically for smaller organizations, and will grind to a painful crawl with too many records to process. (Yes, you can literally outgrow your software.) The opposite problem, having more computing capability than you need, occasionally exists, but is mainly an issue of inefficient resource allocation.
Geography: For some organizations where the physical location of the organization, staff and data are critical issues that define what type of software will meet their needs. Perhaps your organization has key staff in multiple locations, or multiple physical sites, so a web-based software might be an elegant solution. On the other hand, you might be in a location where Internet access is questionable and installed software is far and away the best solution. Security and access issues are major factors in evaluating this area.
Strategies: It seems simple, but the capabilities of your software should match up with your development/fundraising strategies. If you are dependent on pledges from your donors, your software should have strong pledge tracking features. Same thing for events, or grants, or mailings, etc. This is another area where your organization can outgrow your current software. As you consider launching new strategies, you may need to upgrade your software capability, as well.
Technical Capability: This area is usually closely related to organizational size – some organizations have a fully staffed IT department, while others have a “computer guy” who comes in for a half day each month. At the same time, some software programs need ongoing technical involvement for customization or maintenance, while others need a bare minimum of technical savvy.
For some things, good fit is essential. A good fitting pair of shoes will take you a long way, but poor fit will ensure a long, dusty stay in the closet regardless of their style or expense. It’s just the same with your donor software—except your software costs a lot more. So, how do you evaluate the fit of your software—or prospective software?
There are four elements of your organization that relate to the fit of your donor management software: size, geography, strategies, and technical capability.
Size: There are two size factors to consider. The first, obviously, is finding software that meets your needs, yet is still affordable. The problem is that even small organizations have complex data management needs that often aren’t available in many of the cheaper software options.
The other factor is the number of donor records on your file. Some software is designed specifically for smaller organizations, and will grind to a painful crawl with too many records to process. (Yes, you can literally outgrow your software.) The opposite problem, having more computing capability than you need, occasionally exists, but is mainly an issue of inefficient resource allocation.
Geography: For some organizations where the physical location of the organization, staff and data are critical issues that define what type of software will meet their needs. Perhaps your organization has key staff in multiple locations, or multiple physical sites, so a web-based software might be an elegant solution. On the other hand, you might be in a location where Internet access is questionable and installed software is far and away the best solution. Security and access issues are major factors in evaluating this area.
Strategies: It seems simple, but the capabilities of your software should match up with your development/fundraising strategies. If you are dependent on pledges from your donors, your software should have strong pledge tracking features. Same thing for events, or grants, or mailings, etc. This is another area where your organization can outgrow your current software. As you consider launching new strategies, you may need to upgrade your software capability, as well.
Technical Capability: This area is usually closely related to organizational size – some organizations have a fully staffed IT department, while others have a “computer guy” who comes in for a half day each month. At the same time, some software programs need ongoing technical involvement for customization or maintenance, while others need a bare minimum of technical savvy.
Cutting Budgets? Be Undemocratic.
Wed Apr 15 2009 Filed in: Nonprofit budgeting | Nonprofit measurement
By Sally Funk
OK, there’s no avoiding it. You’re going to have to cut budgets. Your first thought is to be “fair” to everyone and cut an even ten, fifteen, or whatever percent across the board. The problem is that what seems fair to “everyone” is often harmful to your organization. For some of your strategies, a ten percent cut barely scratches the surface, but other strategies could be crippled for the long term by the same “fair” cutback.
Better to look at each strategy in light of your organization’s operational priorities. Look at each area’s performance to goal and at its long term effect on long term objectives. Some programs could be cut back more than ten percent, others could be put on hold until the economy turns around, while others might need to be increased to maximize income or ministry impact.
You won’t really know without measuring each strategy by its key performance indicators, and calculating the probable effects of different levels of cutbacks. For example, you may have a segment of your new donor follow up strategy that has consistently resulted in less than average response. Moreover, the donors that do respond from that segment tend to be lackluster over the long haul. Cutting that segment from your mailing strategy could save costs without a large negative impact.
Keep in mind, though, that the cost savings might be more or less than an arbitrary, “fair” percentage cut. Plus, cutting further could very well harm the growth of your donor base, and your income for years to come.
OK, there’s no avoiding it. You’re going to have to cut budgets. Your first thought is to be “fair” to everyone and cut an even ten, fifteen, or whatever percent across the board. The problem is that what seems fair to “everyone” is often harmful to your organization. For some of your strategies, a ten percent cut barely scratches the surface, but other strategies could be crippled for the long term by the same “fair” cutback.
Better to look at each strategy in light of your organization’s operational priorities. Look at each area’s performance to goal and at its long term effect on long term objectives. Some programs could be cut back more than ten percent, others could be put on hold until the economy turns around, while others might need to be increased to maximize income or ministry impact.
You won’t really know without measuring each strategy by its key performance indicators, and calculating the probable effects of different levels of cutbacks. For example, you may have a segment of your new donor follow up strategy that has consistently resulted in less than average response. Moreover, the donors that do respond from that segment tend to be lackluster over the long haul. Cutting that segment from your mailing strategy could save costs without a large negative impact.
Keep in mind, though, that the cost savings might be more or less than an arbitrary, “fair” percentage cut. Plus, cutting further could very well harm the growth of your donor base, and your income for years to come.