What does it mean to disrupt philanthropy?
Posted by [email protected] on Nov. 14, 2023 / Events / Subscribe 0
A friend sent me a screenshot of an article titled "Here's how to Increase Auction Revenue by Planting Donors at Your Nonprofit Gala" without any context. Subtext read "A 'donor plant' refers to a person who attends your gala/special event with the intention of making a significant donation. They are strategically invited or placed at the event by you, the organizer, to encourage and inspire other attendees to donate generously."
I know this is a tried and true strategy for raising funds. My early career self did this, and never questioned it.
But I immediately got the ick reading that screenshot. I know she sent it to me because it gave her the ick. We both have been intentional about thinking critically about our work, and our strategies, and how they reinforce stereotypes, discrimination, and outdated donor-centric principles - which leads to ick a lot more than I'd like.
So let's dissect this a bit, just in case you didn't get the immediate ick or can't put your finger on where it's coming from.
The entire premise of this strategy is duplicitous. You're lying to the attendees, who think that this planted donor is giving because they are inspired by the event. You're tricking them into giving by making them feel left out.
The planted donor(s), and then others, begin to make pledges out loud during the event. Everyone else feels like they need to keep up with their peers. They feel pressure, they feel guilt, they feel inferior - there are a lot of feelings that could pop up, but most are negative. They're not giving because they feel a strong tie to your work or your mission, they're giving to keep up with the Joneses.
That's not donor-centered or community-centered. That's straight up manipulation.
Does it work? Absolutely!
But does that mean you should do it?
That's the big question.
Actually, there are so many questions. Do you want to perpetuate this cycle? Do you want to continue to uphold outdated strategies? Do you want to encourage your donors to give for the wrong reasons? Do these types of strategies fit your organization's values? Does this fit within your personal code of ethics?
You can decide how you want to proceed and what strategies you are using, or at the very least I hope you can voice your concerns to whoever does have that decision power.
You can perpetuate the same old, same old. Or, you can think it through. You can build fresh strategies that are grounded in your community, your vision, and your organization's core values.
It doesn't have to be an all or nothing situation. You could use a donor plant, however, you can be upfront that you're doing it.
"Now we want to call up to the stage Mr. Mickey Mouse, who is going to share what inspired him to make a significant gift tonight."
Mr. Mouse talks about his passion for the mission and his confidence in the organization's programming to execute that mission.
"Thank you, Mr. Mouse, for being a part of our community. If you'd like to join Mr. Mouse in supporting us tonight, you can scan this QR code and make a gift now."
Will some people still give just to outdo Mr. Mouse or make themselves feel good? Sure! Will most of them give just because you're building a stronger, deeper relationship between them and the community you're supporting? Yes! Progress, not perfection.
The disruption lies in your ability to see through the noise. Think before you act. Question the motives behind certain strategies or campaigns. You're not a robot, you're a human. You get to decide what feels icky and what feels right.
Are there bigger ways to disrupt? Absolutely. Do most of us have the ability to disrupt on that level? No way. But we can make good, strong decisions in our every day fundraiser lives that push our industry towards being better.
0 Comments