Metrics, Friend Or Foe (Part Three)

Phil's Careers Blog Metrics, Friend or Foe? (Part Three) By Janice Boyle For a quick recap we have covered three of the most ubiquitous and challenging metrics which are (mis)utilized to demonstrate the success or failure of fundraising. Today, I wish to discuss somewhat extra about what I actually have noticed when a powerful focus is positioned on the metric of cost per dollar raised. First, I actually have a fast disclaimer. Anyone who I’ve worked with would describe me as being quite affected person and calm. In my work life, I actually have solely ever raised my voice twice, and a kind of instances occurred in a heated debate with our accountant. I think it’s because the monetary statements are used to measure virtually every little thing in organizations that the CFO’s position can ascend to that of a Demigod as the producer of those statements. They are seen as the font of all organizational information. Sometimes, that gets to me. That being mentioned, some of the most influential and sens ible mentors that I have had in my profession have been each accountants and monetary sector executives. What I most appreciated about their traits included pragmatism, the ability to make selections primarily based on out there proof, and their important thinking skills. They had been also good systems thinkers, and like in fundraising, their work was comparatively simple to measure, and it was difficult to earn their respect. It took time, perseverance, and demonstrable, repeated achievement. They are a difficult group to impress. I also bumped into some accountants that sooner or later in their career had adverse experiences with fundraising professionals that led to some initial mistrust (we all deliver our personal baggage into new roles). Ever had an accountant increase their eyebrow or stifle a snicker if you talked about monitoring pledges? Or moves? For them, it’s not an actual achievement till it’s been deposited in the financial institution. Ever rolled your eyes…I imply… seemed to the heavens for steering…if you introduced a successful and very large, multi-12 months pledge, and the first query from you accountant/CFO/Director of Finance is “Yes, however when is the cheque coming?” Their pragmatism (and the exhausting work of supporting all of us in achieving a balanced price range) leads them to use financial statements because the benchmark for fundraising, like everyone else. Again, this happens within the absence of being educated on what metrics they should be utilizing to judge the success of fundraising. Throughout my articles you may be getting the impression that I dislike financial statements. That’s not true. I do like them. It’s an essential report that gives important info on the steadiness between income and expense, monetary position, and so forth. It’s simply not acceptable as an evaluative report to measure both fundraising or mission effectiveness. It’s too blunt of an instrument for that. What I even have di scovered from accounting pragmatism that has been infinitely helpful is that if you'll be able to demonstrate one thing that works, they support it. A number of years in the past, my Development Committee Chair was an executive with HSBC. He taught me almost everything I find out about presenting to and dealing with board committees. At one level, having simply finished Penelope Burke’s Donor Centred Fundraising, I developed a plan to significantly increase the numbers of donors we were calling to personally thank. The high 2.5% of our donors had been already taken care of with an assigned growth skilled and/or board member, but we had several thousand extra donors that, I believed, with additional consideration, would be more loyal. Having initially come from a telemarketing background, I figured we may primarily use the first half of a telemarketing script (Thank you for your final reward!), and recruit volunteers in the evenings. Low value, high impact, I was feeling pretty goo d. Penelope Burke additionally stated you could ask for the following gift after you thank them for the final one, and at the time, our receipts had been often not as fast as our next ask. This would help clear up that downside. So, all excited, I ran it by my Board committee chair. He was lower than enthusiastic for two reasons. Firstly, different board members questioned if it was an excellent use of sources to thank with out an ask. On a private stage, as a donor, he most popular not to be thanked, so why would we have a look at doing this on a big-scale and probably alienate supporters? I was crestfallen, however they were both legitimate concerns. And the problem with trying one thing new is you have an educated guess on what the result might be, however success is certainly not certain. I had the Penelope Burke analysis in my debate arsenal, but it wasn’t sufficient. So I instructed a take a look at. I asked him to give me two months to conduct thank you calls with volunteer s, and we would monitor their giving patterns for six months after the call. We would control for other variables, and as soon as we had the results we may decide if it was a strategy value pursuing. He was very supportive. We known as several thousand donors over two months to thank them and inform them what their present paid for. The responses on the cellphone have been often comical, as a result of after we thanked them, there was a silence whereas they waited for the other shoe to drop. And they have been always stunned (and thrilled) we just referred to as to thank them. One $50 donor was nervous he didn’t put a decimal point on the cheque, as a result of he may understand if we had been calling to thank him for a $5,000 reward, however $50? And the volunteers had a blast. It’s probably one of the rewarding, really feel good actions I’ve ever done. But then got here the time to see whether or not the calls made any distinction. I was nervous, as a result of I had been so sure it will, but now it actually had to show in the numbers. It’s probably why eleven years later, I still remember the outcomes. In the 6 months since the calls were made, the donors who got a thank you call gave on common 37% greater than those that did not get a name! I was so joyful, I truly cried. My Board committee chair was convinced by the proof. (As an apart it didn’t damage that his sister-in-legislation was called, and he or she known as him raving about getting the decision. I swear that was not intentional! Honest!). Where the most obvious difference in the Accountant vs. the Fundraiser perspective appears in how every views the objectives and objectives of the “back end” of fundraising, or donations processing and receipting. Below, I even have a comparability highlighting those differences (and sure, they’re from precise experience). The goal: Increase net revenue (we each agree on this) · Streamline information entry processes · Increase staffing and in cur extra time as needed to maintain 7 day goal in peak seasons (+$) · Recruit and practice volunteers to assist employees efforts · Data entry completed before despatched to finance for deposit (ensures precedence to donor service first and that database and accounts are reconciled) · Outsource activities that can be completed sooner and extra cost effectively than in-house (by hand). E.g. Printing and mailing(+$) · Purchase or rent workplace equipment to hurry routing tasks e.g. Letter opener, examine stamper, scanner that takes any dimension paper by automated feeder for checks. (+$) · Focus on knowledge clear up throughout slower instances · Streamline data entry processes · Hire staffing sufficient to fulfill annual volume demand (no change in peak intervals). (-$) · Decrease quantity of information entered in peak season eg. Phone numbers, spouse, etc. (-$) · Recruit and train volunteers to help workers efforts · Gifts deposited first, given to donations processing a fter (monetary statements, getting revenue deposited before month/year-end a priority) · All actions accomplished in-home by existing employees or volunteers. (-$) · Utilize normal workplace gear to complete all work (-$) · Ensure staffing sources minimized to eliminate “slow” times (-$) Consistent 7 day production of receipts Increase in annual donor retention price Increase in frequency of giving Increase in common present Reduction in returned mail Reduction in donor complaints Increased gross income Increased bills Increased net revenue Lowest possible price to complete required work So, which arm of the group should be in charge of donations processing? Would it shock you to know that I consider it shouldn’t matter? Whoever is in command of it, so long as the goals of the work are clear and agreed to, the appropriate strategies and metrics turn into obvious. With the above instance, I simply wanted to demonstrate how totally different perspectives powerfully drive our methods and metrics (and misunderstandings and arguments). Both views are valid. Both are helpful. Both professionals are achieving their goals. My expertise and abilities as a leader have been well honed working with these within the monetary sector. Learning another perspective is like studying another language. It’s another software in the tool bag. What I actually have discovered extra essential than anything else when working with the finance division is that you must begin the conversation with them about your views on tips on how to achieve more net revenue. I’ve been most professionally annoyed after I have assumed we now have the same approach. And we all know what “assume”ing does to “u” and “me”. OK, I feel like I’ve got my frustrations about monetary statements as an overused yardstick off my chest. If you find yourself annoyed with your personal accountant, I actually have this advice. Invite them out for an after-work drink/espresso/libation of your s election and have a conversation. Get to know them. I promise you it will be value it. Janice Boylestarted her fundraising profession as a scholar caller for UBC’s annual fund. Her profession has spanned the social providers, schooling and healthcare sectors over the last 20 years in senior leadership roles. She is passionate about bettering her area people, along with her specialties in non-revenue leadership, supportive infrastructure, and team constructing. She was acknowledged in 2011 with the Association of Fundraising Professionals’ Outstanding Professional Fundraiser Award as well as the Business in Vancouver’s forty Under 40 Outstanding Achievement Award in 2002. She can be contacted Post navigation Fill in your particulars under or click on an icon to log in: You are commenting utilizing your WordPress.com account. (Log Out/ Change) You are commenting utilizing your Google account. (Log Out/ Change) You are commenting utilizing your Twitter account. (Log Out/ Change) You are commenting utilizing your Facebook account. (Log Out/ Change) Connecting to %s Notify me of recent comments by way of e mail. Notify me of new posts via e mail. Email Subscription Enter your e-mail address to observe my NEW weblog and keep on prime of the latest profession alternatives and fundraising information. Sign me up! Follow On Twitter Browse by Category Phil’s Careers Tweets Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a couple of minutes and refresh this page.