Chapter One
Fundraising is
about relationships. A nonprofit
organization builds and maintains relationships with its donor base to provide
a stable and steady stream of income.
When a relationship is broken funding is removed by that particular
donor until the relationship can be mended.
Rebuilding a relationship is more difficult than maintaining a good
one. Maintaining a good relationship is
hard work. It requires insight,
integrity, involvement and empathy.
According to National Philanthropic Trust (2010), 81% of total giving to
charities came from individuals (including bequests). Individual giving represents those who give
smaller amounts on a consistent basis.
Many nonprofit organizations depend on these smaller, consistent (many
monthly) gifts to help fund the fulfillment of services to the clients. There are the occasional larger gifts from
corporations or grant making foundations, but combined these represent the
other 19% of giving. The key
relationship is that of the organizational member responsible for securing
funding for the organization and its donors.
Most nonprofit
organizations have an advancement department.
This department is responsible for engaging the donors, corporations and
grant making foundations mentioned earlier as funding sources for the nonprofit
organization. The advancement department
may have several team members or exist as a one person department.
The dynamics of
the advancement department are important in building the necessary
relationships to create funding for the organization. There are many advancement teams that
function quite well as a unit. They are
successful in creating funding for their organization. They are creative in building relationships
with long term donors and engaging new donors to get involved in the mission of
the nonprofit organization. Many of
these relationships have been developed over a long period of time. Many of these relationships result in
becoming personal friends. An influence
on this relationship is the other organizational members within the nonprofit
organization. During the early days of
building the relationship organizational members who are not a part of the advancement
department have an impact on the quality of the relationship or even if the
relationship can be developed at all. However,
long term relationships are also broken by the influence of the non-advancement
organizational members.
Relationships
bring a certain level of expectations.
The donors have expectations of the nonprofit organization. The advancement staff tries to meet these
expectations as the relationship grows and the donors become more
involved. As the donors have their
expectations met by the advancement staff they extend these expectations to the
rest of the nonprofit organization. When
the extended organizational members do not meet these expectations the
relationship becomes vulnerable. Consider these actual stories.
During
an event featuring clients, staff and donors of a nonprofit organization, a non-advancement
staff used an expletive after being injured during a fall. It was stated loud enough for many to hear
including donors. Being a faith-based
nonprofit organization, the use of this type of language was not deemed
appropriate. The donor’s expectations were
not met. The advancement staff spent
several future encounters rebuilding this broken relationship to not lose the
donor as a donor or as advocate for the nonprofit organization. It seemed like a simple slip of the tongue,
but it became a difficult barrier to overcome.
As
the year came to an end, several donors had committed to making a gift by year’s
end in response to a pledge they had made to the nonprofit organization. As the advancement staff reviewed these
donors to assist them in remembering their commitments, one particular donor
had not yet made their pledge payment. The
donor was contacted by the advancement staff to verify if a check had been
mailed. The actual donor was not in the
office but their finance staff stated that the check had already cleared. The finance department of the nonprofit
organization was contacted and there was no record of the check being
received. Additional phone calls were
made. The actual donor was contacted and
made aware of what was going on to the best of the advancement staff’s
ability. A couple of days later the
actual donor called the nonprofit organization and was transferred to the
finance department. During the
conversation with the finance department the donor was not treated with respect
and the problem was pushed back on them.
The donor felt this was inappropriate.
The donor did fulfill their pledge obligation. However, the donor communicated with
advancement staff that there will be no future donations. The advancement staff immediately started to
repair the relationship but to no avail at the current time.
These two examples
provide some anecdotal evidence for this research. It is my belief that these stories are more
the norm than not. Non-advancement staff
can make major impacts on the ability of the advancement staff to secure
funds. The climate of an organization
influences every organizational member.
The success of the advancement staff is dependent upon the climate of
the entire organization.
Statement of Research Purpose
My premise is that
the climate of any nonprofit organization will enhance or deter the ability of
its fundraisers to function most effectively. If the fundraiser resides in an
environment with less than an ideal climate, the ability to create and maintain
an effective relationship (secure funding) will be hindered. The advancement department may in itself have
a good organizational climate however; the larger organizational climate
creates the greater influence on the success or not of the advancement
department.
The primary goal
of this research is to understand the influence of organizational climate on the
advancement staff’s success in securing funding for the nonprofit
organization. The methodology will be an
exploratory study of the lived experiences of advancement staff and their
perceptions regarding how the organization’s climate has impacted their ability
to be successful. Using a
phenomenological interview process, two specific fund-raiser experiences will
be explored:
1.
An
experience where an opportunity was lost considering conditions within your
organization and/or a donor’s experience with your organization separate from
your relationship.
2. An experience where you were successful in securing
a donation considering conditions within your organization and/or a donor’s
experience with your organization separate from your relationship.
Conceptual foundation
The conceptual
framework for this research project is based on a model of nonprofit
organizational decision making units (DMUs) (Gelade, Ivery, 2003) and nonprofit
funding decision making units and how this relationship creates success in
securing such funding.
Nonprofit
organizational DMUs (NPO) will be defined as the separate DMUs that create the
nonprofit organization. Nonprofit
funding DMU (NPF) is defined as private funding from decision making units such
as individuals, foundations or grant making entities. Nonprofit advancement DMU (NPA) will be
defined as the decision making unit used to secure funding. This would include, but not limited to, personal
asks, grant writing, direct mail or events.
The nonprofit advancement DMU will not be considered a part of the
nonprofit organization DMU for this study.
The specific area
of interest for this study is how the organizational climate influences the
DMUs. Figure 1 shows that there is a
one-way relationship between the NPO and NPF while there is a two-way
relationship between the NPF and NPA. My
position for this study is there also exists a one-way relationship between the
NPO and NPA and this relationship can be influenced by the overall
organizational climate of the NPO.
I
am seeking to understand nonprofit organizational climate’s impact on nonprofit
funding acquisition through the described experiences of the nonprofit
advancement DMU. The research design is based
in phenomenological principles. The
methodology will be an exploratory study of the lived experiences of the NPA and
their perceptions regarding how the NPO’s climate has impacted their ability to
be successful with the potential donor.
Significance of Research Purpose
Organizational
Climate has been/is being discussed in many different settings (Communication: Guzley,
1992; Commitment: Noordin, Omar, Sehan, Idrus, 2010; Involvement: Shadur,
Kienzle, Rodwell, 1999; Job Element Satisfaction: Thompson, n.d.;
Organizational Variables: Zhang, Liu, 2010).
There are discussions about the difference between culture and climate,
often times using the terms interchangeably (Denison, 1996; Fawcett, Brau,
Rhoads, Whitlark, 2008; Jung, Scott, Davies, Bower, Whalley, McNally, Mannion,
2009). I believe that climate is an outward
expression of culture based on various research studies (Patterson, West,
Shackelton, Dawson, Lawthom, Maitlis, Robinson, Wallace, 2005; Nazari,
Herremans, Isaac, Manassian, Kline, 2011).
It is what outsiders see about the organization. It is what organizational members see about
the organization. There are many studies
about the impact of climate on organizational performance (Cahalane, Sites,
2008; Cooil, Aksoy, Keiningham, Maryott, 2009; Elankumaran, 2004; Glisson,
Hemmelgarn, 1998; James, Choi, Ko, McNeil, Minton, Wright, Kim, 2008;
Johannsen, Johnson, Stinson, 1976; Neal, West, Patterson, 2005; Patterson,
Warr, West, 2004; Rogg, Schmidt, Shull, Schmitt, 2001; Glisson, 2007). Many of these studies take place on nonprofit
organizations as it relates to service outcomes. Nonprofit organizations with a better climate
provided better services to the end client.
The gap in the literature relates to nonprofit organizational climate
and the funding acquisition of the nonprofit organization.
If nonprofit organizational
climate can create better service to its clients, would it not also create
better funding acquisition? The potential
donors (NPF) perceive the organizational climate created in the organization (NPO). They make funding decisions on these
perceptions. Some donors (NPFs) perceive
the organization climate through their relationship with the member of the
advancement team (NPA). The relationship
between the NPF and the NPA is significant.
Many NPFs will fund based on this perception. If this was the only perception
of the organization considered then there would not be many funding issues for
nonprofits. However, the relationship
between the organization (NPO) and the donor (NPF) is a significant factor and
is the main one that creates a break in the donor-advancement team member (NPF-NPA)
relationship. In the stories cited
earlier, the NPO caused a break in the NPF relationship. The advancement team member (NPA) is the one
that must rebuild the relationship with the potential donors and this includes
mending any misconceptions about the nonprofit organization.
I want to enlighten
NPOs on the significance of organizational climate as it relates to funding acquisition. I want nonprofits to benefit from this research
and find ways to look at their organization as a whole and create a climate
that lends itself to funding acquisition success. Nonprofit organizations are looking for ways
to increase their funding acquisition. I
believe that creating a better climate within the organization will not only
lead to better services for the clients but better funding to provide those services.
Copyright 2011
nonprofitresearch@gmx.com
No comments:
Post a Comment