You would think that in this period of economic difficulty now would be a time of extraordinary gratitude. After all, while donors are making difficult decisions about what they support, nonprofits are undergoing unprecedented challenges. To my surprise (and it’s hard to surprise me), I have been particularly struck by an attitude of ingratitude recently. Following are just three examples of what I’ve personally encountered in the past month. Multiply this by the thousands upon thousands of donors worldwide, and you’ll begin to get a sense of the magnitude of the problem. A year ago I gave $5,000 to a university for the president’s discretionary use so he could respond immediately to last minute needs such as the swim team meet or a faculty member who just got invited to a present a paper. When I was a development vice president at three universities, this is what the president always needed. I explained to the president and the vice president for “advancement” (we can’t seem to use the word “fundraising”) that I had been rethinking my own support of small college endowments. My view (and this is only my view) is that too many of these institutions make the mistake of measuring their presidents’ success by the size of the endowment at the peril of the day-to-day needs of the university. Right or wrong, this was my view as the donor. So a week ago I got a letter from the vice president telling me that the president hadn’t needed the cash for discretionary use and she took the liberty of moving my gift to something I specifically instructed I did not want—an endowment fund. That university is going through severe state budget cuts and is asking for support to overcome that loss. Is this the time to build an endowment? Regardless, where is the adherence to donor intent? My only consolation is that at least she told me. I have heard way too many stories in my career about the abuses of donor intent.Another example: I and four friends and leaders of a national organization gave a total of $1 million to fight a major problem in our society. The challenge requires the organization to raise $2 million in the next two years. In the first 100 days they have raised $242,000. Rather than receiving a standing ovation at a recent national meeting, these caring individuals who are each giving very large sums of money were met with criticism in public meetings. The national officer, current president, incoming president, nor treasurer said “thanks” to any of these men. Instead, these donors were reprimanded for not having their pledges completed; shamed publicly because one of them had already been giving and “all he was doing now” was pledging five more years; and many demanded to know why these men didn’t give the money now rather than pledge it.I have been raising money for nearly 40 years and I have seen my share of ugly treatment by not-for-profit leadership with an entitlement mentality.Finally, as a company we support many professional fundraising functions in various cities. Most are handled with appreciation and respect. But one local officer—I am sure harried by a deadline—emailed to ask for a $1,000 sponsorship. We agreed. A month later we received a call: did we have a logo we could send? Could we do it today and approve copy for a sponsorship brochure? He said a number of things, but “thank you” was not one of them. I’m sure I don’t need to point out that whether this was considered a “sponsorship” or a gift—whether a donor or a customer—gratitude was in order.Where did the common courtesy we are taught as children go?We wonder why some people don’t give. We wonder why other people don’t give at their potential. We wonder why people look upon the nonprofit world as unaccountable.
Hartsook President and CEO Matthew J. Beem Earns Ph.D.
Beem family: Joe, Matt, Kate,
Tom (not pictured, Maggie)
(Kansas City) Matt Beem recently earned a doctor of philosophy in organizational behavior and higher education administration from the University of Missouri – Kansas City. He defended his dissertation, Performance-Based Fundraiser Compensation: An Analysis of Preference, Prevalence and Effect, in December 2018.
Beem examined the preference for and prevalence of performance-based compensation and the relationship between it and productivity within the sample population of professional fundraisers. He reviewed the history of fundraiser compensation and prevalence of incentive pay in the nonprofit sector and among professional fundraisers, including its correlation to performance.
The Fundraiser Compensation Survey, an original study, was emailed by the Mid-America Chapter of Fundraising Professionals to more than 3,000 individuals. Findings revealed respondents’ dissatisfaction with the relationship between goal attainment, performance and compensation in their jobs. The study also found significant compensation differences based on respondents’ gender and ethnicity – findings different from research discussed in the literature review.
Beem’s dissertation adds important knowledge about the prevalence of and desire for performance-based compensation within the sample population. It also sheds light on the effect performance-based compensation has on the amount of money fundraisers raise.
Hartsook continues to be available to support nonprofit organizations in compensation plan design for its fundraisers, executive directors, CEOs and other senior leaders.