Here's how you can extract valuable lessons from a failed philanthropic initiative.

Pain engraves a deeper image. Don't be afraid to look back at your failure and be honest to yourself. Treasure those lessons rather than putting them away. It's only a failure if you fail to learn from it.

Very important to reflect honestly. I did philanthropic initiatives twice. First time I lasted for a year. Learned a lot of lessons. Went back to my home industry (Tech), did sufficient preparations for the next 5 years, and then came back. Lasted for more than three years the second time. However, the revenue model did not work out for me to get established as a non profit consultant. But because of the lessons learnt the first time, the second time was very effective, except for the fact of financial sustenance

Honest reflection is the cornerstone of growth in any venture, especially in philanthropy. When a project fails, it's easy to focus on the immediate, visible issues. However, taking the time to delve deeper into the root causes - whether it's resource allocation, strategic missteps, or external influences - provides invaluable insights. This reflective process not only identifies what went wrong but also informs future strategies, ensuring more robust planning and execution. By fostering a culture that views failure as a learning opportunity rather than a setback, philanthropic organizations can continually improve and adapt, ultimately increasing their impact and effectiveness.

Failure is never easy, especially when you're committed to the organization's mission. I like to think that you either "win" or you "learn." Obviously, a "win" is when there is a positive impact on the intended stakeholders, but sometimes there are unintended positive impacts-- positive externalities--which were not originally considered. (Don't underestimate this!) When you "fail" (aka "learn"), it is important to consider why was this philanthropic venture a failure? Reflection is critical. How is failure being measured? Think about a matrix map in terms of success by balancing money AND mission focused impact. Last, ask your stakeholders/"family" to gather feedback and lessons-learned to adjust one's strategy in the future. Be positive!

As an expert in philanthropy, I've learned that extracting lessons from a failed initiative starts with deep, honest reflection. You need to dissect the project to understand the core reasons for its shortcomings—whether due to underestimated resources, execution gaps, or unexpected external factors. Identifying these root causes is crucial for making necessary adjustments. This kind of reflection transforms failures into learning opportunities, refining your approach for future projects. It’s not about placing blame but fostering a culture of continuous improvement and resilience within your organization.

My lesson learns thought me the following are helpful; digital or one to one surveys, benchmarks, data analysis/charts showing the potential causes of failure.

My favorite feedback loop tools are: 1. Quick pulse survey 2. Focus Group 3. 1x1 feedback session I found that if we do a good job communicating the results and CLEAR actions we have taken with those who participated in the feedback gathering efforts, then we are much more likely to see future engagement and improvement in the next initiative.

It's great to get feedback, but not all who have opinions are right. I like to consider best practices before I am swayed too heavily by critics.

More than likely, you failed because you didn't center the voices of the most impacted. It's pretty much always the story in philanthropy. So, when you gather feedback, ask yourself: what community is most impacted by the issue we were trying to tackle? Then go to that community and gather feedback from them. More than likely, this community will lie outside of your grantees and anyone that you had contact with during the initiative (which is exactly why it failed...remember from now on that those who are closest to the problem are closest to the solution)...so you'll have to do some digging and research. This will provide a better field analysis for your work moving forward.

Always, always, always ask for feedback from both your internal partners AND your donors/prospects. As a career fundraiser, I cannot count the times that a donor who I requested feedback from after a rejection, reached out at a later time to make the gift. Ask for money, you get advice. Ask for advice, you get money really is true.

Data analysis is usually pretty centered around white dominant culture. Bigger! More! We have to reach larger and larger amounts for anything to matter! This is all white culture BS. Don't analyze any data. Just reflect on what the most impacted communities told you about your work. That's your one and only data point to consider.

If you can’t measure it, don’t do it was the old adage. It’s still almost correct with the benefit of more data points and the ease of surgery and “quick questions” There is nothing wrong with thanking people for considering your request and saying that even though they are not accepting your suggestion, could they please give a brief suggestion as to how you might have framed the request better. Use that data to shape the next outreach and A/B test.

Forget strategies. Philanthropy doesn't need them and never has. What philanthropy needs to learn is that the community that is most impacted by the problem has the solution. Just give them the money and let them decide how to use those resources to the best advantage to tackle the problem. That is the only strategy you ever need. Give impacted communities the money and get out of their way.

There is no point in giving money unless you have a good picture of what it’s being used for and does it fit what you are trying to solve/help. It’s all down to the quantum, clearly no DD needed to feed someone for a day but if it’s a long term substantial commitment, make sure you are choosing the best in class with the highest % getting to where it matters. Philanthropy is time and money.

I agree with Rachael and add value by challenging another assumption “effective plan of action”. There could be no “Action plan”, as Philanthropy is not an action, it is a process of listening and providing support with tools, resources and knowledge where needed. What’s more valuable is understanding of the system from the inside and outside, that could provide a solid foundation and a guidance towards better outcomes through the “process of philanthropic endeavour”

When I started out as a fundraiser, I pursued a donor for months. Called and email, no response. I then went to a Komen event for a different purpose and the donor attended as well. I went up to her, introduced myself, and her response was "you've been trying to get a hold of me." I ended up getting a meeting with her and closing a 6-figure gift. Fundraisers need resilience and TENACITY.

Failure is a part of life and a part of fundraising. If you can't handle "no" or failing then you are not in the right field. Every day you are tested on how you are performing and chances are, you are going to have a lot more failures than wins. Why do you think your portfolio has 3x, 4x or 5x the number of prospects needed to reach your goal? If you can't handle the negative feedback from an angry donor, how can you expect to turn them back into one of your biggest advocates? Resilience is about seeking out the lessons in each failure to continue growing in your skills, experience and career.

I would rephrase it to a term “building a Learning Organisation” coined by Peter Senge. You need resilience when you constantly confront matters, take the hit. While Philanthropy is a challenge, no resilience will stand for long if one will keep pushing it to the limit. In contrast Learning Organisations do not have to fight the world, but rather adapt to the challenges by constantly learning, unlearning and changing themselves. I like the term Evolutionary or Living organisation. Thise that live in a moment and process of creating an impact through increase of awareness, not through “enduring failures”.

You have to have a clear direction of travel. So what is a reasonable plan and what are the alternate routes. Be prepare to change the route but maintain the destination. Set realistic achievements as your goal, it could be a simple as save one person from being hungry versus ‘feed the world’ you can overachieve and save 100 people from hunger but don’t make the philanthropic effort an unattainable goal.

Philanthropy of the 21st century has dramatically shifted the old notion of “Planning”. Planning, whatever extensive they are , always fails to deliver, when confronted with the reality of complex global social systems and challenges that philanthropy faces today. Instead it is more useful to think of systems. Listening to the system and acting in short iterations, based on systems feedback, gathered data and systems response. Adoptable short-term actions, adaptability and flux of information exchange is far more efficient than long-term planning, with inevitable failure against the set of expectations based on multiple assumptions and high-level biases. Don’t plan ahead, dance with the system.

I often find it helpful, during my time at UCLA Development, to reach out to colleagues at one of the other UCs or even beyond to seek advice and inspiration. We should not hesitate to tap on the wisdom and experience of our colleagues elsewhere, and be similarly open to sharing our own experiences.

Sometimes, a great idea from a mentor or another organization just doesn't fit a new one. Startups, in particular, have to find their own brand and followers. It's a challenge at the start but that type of exploration can be the most exciting. Don't be afraid to stand out from the crowd with a novel approach. Years ago, I worked with a group that launched community bonds. Now, we serve as a role model to others. Get used to risk as long as it doesn't blow your budget with overhead. If you keep an open mind, you will find your way and forge a new path suited for your organization.

Organisation Organisation Organisation It is a critical component in philanthropy and the key to positive long-term outcomes. It is often mistakenly assumed that philanthropic organizations can follow the same patterns as commercial enterprises. Nothing could be further from the truth. Philanthropic organizations operate on entirely different foundations. In a commercial company, consumers receive value and give feedback, creating a reciprocal exchange of value. In philanthropy, the value-receiver, or beneficiary, is the social system that can be improved, but it doesn’t return value in the same way. Therefore, philanthropic organizations need to operate on a different set of principles, structures, and evaluation criteria.