When I was in high school I went to a leadership conference and the organizers had each attendee take the Myers-Briggs Personality Test. (If you aren't familiar with this personality assessment, check out 16personalities.com. I found their analysis to be spot on and helpful as well.) I’m always the same type: ENTJ, the Field Marshall. It’s a relatively rare type and I had never met anyone else that was also an ENTJ. On the last day of the conference, the organizers did something fiendish. They split the group of about 200 student leaders up into smaller groups by personality type. We were given a project to accomplish with those who were our same type. There were only 2 other ENTJs. I immediately loathed both of these people. We all were supremely confident that we had the answers to lead the group to victory and we were all quite vocal about it. I began to wish that I had never met another ENTJ. Was I this terrible to be around? Our group made no progress on the project because we could not stop arguing. After a certain amount of time, these conference organizers gave us all new groups. We were matched with a diverse group representing many different Myers-Briggs types. What a relief! The other groups had struggled too, in different ways. Certain groups couldn’t finish because they just socialized and never got on task. Still other groups over-deliberated. Some never had a leader step forward at all. Each person in our new group had a natural role. I assumed the executive role and others helped the group cooperate and still others made sure we took all details into account. Compared to my ENTJ group, this was project bliss. What I learned from this experience was that there is truly strength in difference. Hiring others who are just like you is not a winning strategy. Also, work is more fun if everyone is a little bit different. Quirks emerge when folks are not all the same. Not to mention that it leads to more productivity when skill sets complement each other rather than clash. So, next time you take one of those personality quizzes on Facebook, think about the results those around you might get too and how that helps you succeed together. Consider this too in your choice of mentor and in your hiring decisions. If you are a big picture “N” (Intuitive), it might be worthwhile to have a “S” (Sensing) perspective in your office to balance your tendencies. You might be so idea driven, you miss critical details that would affect implementation. As a manager, if you are a “TJ” combination (Thinking-Judging), you’ll tend to make snap decisions based on rationality and you’ll often alienate those who are make slower decisions based on feelings. It’s a good idea to consult someone who approached problems differently, especially if your decision will affect many other people. Learning more about yourself is fun and, like a horoscope, it’s entertaining to see how your profile "matches" you. But, I would challenge you to use these types to learn more about those around you for better understanding and perspective.
0 Comments
Before the fall semester ramps up, now is the time to check in and assess the effectiveness of your phonathon scripts. What follows is an excerpt from my book, Successful Fundraising Calls: A Phonathon Scripting Workshop from Academic Impressions. If your scripts need some punching up, this guide walks you through the process of giving your scripts a makeover step by step.
1. Does your script/policies require callers to do at least three distinct asks if the prospect is objecting? a) No way, we trust our callers to make the right decision and not pressure prospects. b) We require it but we don’t monitor it through write-ups or other disciplinary action. c) Yes, absolutely. Callers must overcome objections and ask for the next level. 2. Do you allow open-ended or soft asks without an amount? a) Yes. As long as they are asking, the amount is not important. b) If the prospect sounds mad or needs to speak to his or her spouse, sometimes we do. c) No. An ask is constituted by a direct question and an exact dollar amount. 3. Which of these sounds most like the rapport section of your call? a) I am not sure what our rapport currently sounds like. b) “Last year, ABU was rated #1 in biological sciences research by the American Society for awesome biological stuff…..” c) “Did you know that ABU continues to get more accolades? For instance we were recently named #1 for biological sciences research.” d) “I see you graduated in biology. Do you still work in that field? Wow. That’s interesting! Well, you’ll be pleased to know that we recently named #1 in biological sciences research. Isn’t that great?” 4. What percentage of your callers would know what an “assumptive” credit card ask sounds like a) Huh? What is an assumptive ask? 0% b) Some of the best ones. Maybe 40% c) Any caller that has been around awhile. Over 80% d) All our callers are required to follow an assumptive ask structure. 100% 5. How would you rate the transition between the rapport and first ask in your script? a) We let the callers figure that out. It’s important that the rapport be natural. b) It’s a little clunky. Sometimes when I am coaching that part feels awkward. c) Pretty solid. We try to tie the fantastic things going on at our school to the need for private support. For every A, give yourself 1 point. For each B you marked, give yourself 2 points, for every C give yourself 3 points and if you selected D give yourself 4 points. 5-8 POINTS Your scripts need some work. The scripts don’t provide callers with enough structure for them to feel confident and comfortable asking for money. If you are not requiring three asks or enforcing the delivery of those asks, you are leaving money on the table for your institution. Your alums might not be enjoying these calls as much as they could. Your callers are in danger of becoming de-motivated because they aren’t seeing success. 9-11 POINTS You are on the right track. Your scripts may be having trouble striking that balance between over-scripting and not providing adequate guidance for transitions or special circumstances. Some key tweaks to your system and scripts could result in huge improvements in revenue and fundraising success for your institution. Your callers might need a little boot-camp to get them on board but they’ll thank you as they begin raising lots of money and having a great time at work. 12-17 POINTS Way to go! Your scripts are making it happen! You might need to freshen up key sections, like rapport, your credit card ask, or your transitions. But, you have a great foundation from which to build. Perhaps most of what you need is to put a great coaching and pledge verification system in place to make sure that your awesome script is being put to use in calls. Rock on! If you found this quiz helpful, visit this page to learn more about my book. And subscribe to Real Deal Fundraising and you'll get a free copy of my e-book on Call Center Games. "The #1 Reason People Give Is Because They Are Asked"
This slogan was emblazoned on posters in nearly all of the call centers where I have worked. Asking, almost as much as relationships, is key to successful fundraising. I have said that new major gift officers should be made to spend some training time in the call center, asking. The concentrated experience in persistent asking would accelerate their learning curve. This truth that asking is at the core of fundraising was brought home to me recently from an unlikely source: my 18 month old son. My 6 year old daughter had just received $5 from her grandmother to get a "subaru" (her word for a souvenir) on our next trip. My baby son stood in line behind her and waited patiently for "his" money. Obviously, the baby didn't need $5 but she hunted in her purse and gave him a dollar. He was quite pleased with his results. (See photo above). I posted the cute picture on Facebook and someone said "Oh gosh, another fundraiser in the family!" and I realized the meaning of the photo. My mother gave because she was asked. It didn't occur to her that baby boy had a need until he expressed it. He asked and was rewarded. Donors can have a relationship with us, admire our organizations and the work those institutions do in the world and still not give to us financially. If we do not state our needs and desires and set expectations about the kind of support we want to receive by ASKING, we will not get the gifts. You must ask. Twice in the last month, I’ve been asked for advice about becoming a Certified Fundraising Executive (CFRE). I’m sure some of you have thought about what it would take to earn this designation. I thought I would share my experience. Applying for the CFRE is actually very easy and user friendly. Visit www.cfre.org and create a log-in. From there, you can begin working on your application. I recommend doing this anytime you think about it. You can create a profile and compile the data you need whether or not you plan to apply soon. It doesn’t matter if you never actually apply. You can come back to it and track each conference right after you get back. This system will give you a clear idea of how close you are to meeting the requirements. It’s a bit of a myth that you need those little CFRE credit sheets from every conference you attend. As long as the session was sponsored by a reputable organization (Association of Fundraising Professionals, Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, Academic Impressions or others like them), you probably will just need the session details. You will need the title of each session, the name of sponsoring institution, and the date. Due to a recent change, all volunteer or service work will be counted under “Education” now. You also get points if you have an advanced degree. You will also need to produce evidence of professional practice (the time you have been a professional fundraiser) and professional performance, which can include dollars raised, management projects and communications projects. For dollars raised, if you are a campaign manager or annual giving, you get credit for dollars raised under your management. I was the campaign director for a completed building campaign, so I got credit for those dollars since I ran that campaign from the beginning. For the management projects, I submitted an inter-office “white paper” I wrote that outlined a plan to improve the way that development officers requested written proposals and recorded building naming opportunities. These projects required coordination across multiple divisions including advancement services, major gift officers, executive officers and communications staff. The CFRE software assigns the points as you enter the information and shows you clearly when you have a “green light” on a particular section. When you have been approved to apply on all sections, you will need to come up with a plan for paying the Exam Fee. Currently, for initial certification, the fee is $875. If you are a member of a participating organization (like AFP), it’s only $700. Most organizations will cover the cost if you express the interest early and include it in your budget request for that fiscal year. After you apply, your materials will be evaluated and if all is well, you will receive an "Approval to Test" notification. That test is a beast of a unique sort though, so I’ll save the information about the CFRE exam for another post. For those of us working in higher education fundraising, the issue of student debt has an increasing amount of relevance. The Project on Student Debt through the Institute for College Access and Success writes, “Over the last decade—from 2004 to 2014—the share of graduates with debt rose modestly (from 65% to 69%) while average debt at graduation rose at more than twice the rate of inflation.” How can we expect our young alumni to give back to our institutions when they can barely make their loan payments? Many in society are questioning whether a college education is good investment and the view of college is shifting to one that is transactional, rather than transformational. Not only should advancement professionals stay up-to-speed on these issues because of how it may affect the way young alumni give (or don’t give), but we should also utilize this as an opportunity to put out positive messages about how philanthropy can mitigate this situation for scholarship recipients. There are great resources available that track this information. The organization cited above (The Project on Student Debt) collects data from most colleges and universities and reports it online. You can access overall statistics, historical trends as well as data by state and by institution. With a little bit of research time, you can learn how your institution compares with peer institutions and with other institutions in your state. You can also see how the trends have change over time. The historical reports are a bit more difficult to find so here are links to the reports for 2011, 2012 and 2013. 2011: http://ticas.org/content/pub/student-debt-and-class-2011 2012: http://ticas.org/content/pub/student-debt-and-class-2012 2013: http://ticas.org/sites/default/files/legacy/fckfiles/pub/classof2013.pdf Another great resource for geeks like me is this interactive graph from the New York Times. I love this resource because it lets you see how the trends with student debt change across time and you can see how the cost of tuition has risen. You can break it down by all different kinds of criteria. For instance, here’s the some data for the Southeastern Athletic Conference for 2004 (top graph): Notice how low nearly all of the schools are in terms of both cost and student debt (blue dots). The only outlier is Vanderbilt (orange dot), which had slightly higher debt loads but was much more expensive. The expense is not surprising since it’s the only private school in the SEC. Now take a look at the 2nd graph. It’s the same data for the same schools 6 years later. At the University of Georgia in 2004, the annual tuition was only a bit more than $4,000 and the student debt was around $13,000. By 2010, tuition at UGA was over $7,500 and the average amount of student debt was now almost $16,000. There’s a totally different story at Vandy and it’s completely counterintuitive. In 2004, the average Vandy grad carried over $24,000 in student loans. The cost of an education was almost $28,000. The cost to attend Vandy rose to over $38,000 in 2010, but the average amount of student debt DECREASED to $18,600. How could this be? The answer is obvious: philanthropy. Vandy must have raised and awarded more scholarship during this 6-year period. So, charitable giving can make a marked difference in the future of an average student where debt is concerned. Why are we not writing this into each single phonathon script and direct mail piece that we produce in higher education fundraising? I encourage you to play around with these tools and do some research into the trends at your own institution. You can then build statistically relevant objection responses for alumni who say they cannot give due to student loan debt loads and more importantly you can more effectively market the potential positive impact that major donors can have when they make a gift for scholarships. |
Jessica Cloud, CFREI've been called the Tasmanian Devil of fundraising and I'm here to talk shop with you. Archives
July 2020
Categories
All
|