Seth Godin ticks me off. This marketing guru posted this scathing, provocative blog post about fundraising galas recently, but then he doesn’t even give you a chance to respond to his blog with a comment??? So, I’ve taken it upon myself to use my little soapbox here on Front Range Source to respond to this thought-provoking piece.
Let me say that I’m a skeptic when it comes to events. I worry about the expense, the retention of gala donors, and the bland (sorry) sameness of many of the fundraising galas I’ve seen. Not to mention the incredible drain it can be on staff and volunteer resources and morale.
However, while Seth’s post reminds us in a very extreme way of the worst side of fundraising galas, he doesn’t offer up any alternatives to organizations and communities where galas are a big part of the fundraising culture. It’s all fine and good to trash these well-intentioned events, but what can take their place?
Let’s dissect it:
“…I think we can agree that this is a ridiculous way to efficiently raise money for a good cause”
Indeed, if a gala is the cornerstone of your fundraising program, odds are that you are leaving income on the table. Galas are expensive and consume so much staff time, there is no question that you could be doing something that would cost less and raise more.
“Notice that the invitation isn’t being accepted because it’s a good cause, it’s being accepted because it’s a social obligation.”
So? For a lot of smaller and even mid-sized organizations, these events serve as major prospecting devices. They are a way to “friend build” and with proper follow-up, some of these folks who attended out of “social obligation” will be inspired to give again. Some won’t. But how is that different from any other kind of prospecting?
And what’s the alternative for smaller and even mid-sized organizations to get new donors? Spending $250,000 to start a direct mail program of scale? Paying $125 per donor to acquire monthly donors on the street through face-to-face?
At least these galas normally do net some money. That’s more than I can say for any type of direct response prospecting. Both Ann and I have had clients who have done very well in capturing the attention of new donors through events and getting them to repeat their gifts.
Now, I have to say, I have also seen the opposite happen. If the event really was just another rubber chicken gala; if it didn’t inspire the audience with stories of impact and hope; and if the follow up was flat and delayed, you aren’t going to get any repeat donors.
And I do think that our local nonprofits are dangerously close to a “cookie cutter” model of an event that could get a bit boring after a while. If the word gala means silent auction, dinner paddle raiser, then yes, I’m thinking we may want to try to mix it up a bit, but purposefully and incrementally, measuring results all the way.
“For this reason, the gala is actually corrupting. Attendees are usually driven by social and selfish motivations to attend, and thus the philanthropic element of giving-just to give-is removed.”
Really? So, just because you’ve gone and had a good time, you’re corrupt and there is no charitable intent? Why can’t charitable giving be both fun and good for you? Do we all have to sit alone in our homes whipping ourselves with chains while we write our checks? Doesn’t seem to me like a great way to endear people to philanthropy.
“Attending an event that’s dramatically overpriced for what’s delivered to the recipient is a signaling mechanism as well. It says to the other attendees, “I can afford to overpay and so can you, we must be similar, and our hearts are in the right place as well.’”
You know what? I could be wrong, but I don’t think donors are thinking this. I think they are thinking the opposite. They are thinking that every dime of their money goes to the cause and they feel good about THAT. That’s the catch with events. Unless they are really savvy philanthropists, donors don’t really think about the cost to the nonprofit of the fundraising vehicle. How many donors have said to you, “Well, I know giving to your event doesn’t make you as much money, so I’ll give through the mail because that gives you a better ROI.” ????
At the end of his blog, Seth questions whether gala-like events are “scalable alternative to selling generosity for its own sake”. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think “scale” is the ultimate goal for every nonprofit. Sure it’s great that some nonprofits fly into the stratosphere of fundraising through the web and enormous corporate grants. But, that’s not the model for so many of us working in local communities and I think that’s OK. (As long as you really having an impact and being a good steward of your donor’s money, of course!)
Tell us what you think. Unlike some people, we always want to hear about it at Front Range Source 😉
