Which Staff Member Has the Biggest Impact on Fundraising?

There's a fantastic article I read somewhere years ago. Can't find it again and I've scoured the hinterlands of the internet for it.

I event went to page 2 of Google search results. I know. Rebel.

I live on the edge.

Essentially the premise was that the person who's responsible for scheduling meetings has a significant impact on revenue and expenditure. And, in many offices, the person responsible for scheduling meeting is often among the lowest paid, possibly an hourly employee and probably lowest in the office org chart.

The person who probably isn't allowed to order paper clips without approval can have a huge impact on productivity and revenue because they control the calendar.

Every person in every meeting represents a certain amount of salary that is being spent in the meeting vs. working.

Now, I hear you - this isn't to say that all meetings are a waste of time and aren't important work, but . . . how much time spent setting up for the meeting, fixing the tech, waiting for others to show up, dithering over agenda items . . . . the list goes on. That's a lot of impact one person can have.

Who is it in the fundraising office?

Which staff member in a fundraising office has the potential to the biggest, long-term impact?

The Major Gift Officer?

Sure. They bring in big gifts.

Chief Development Officer?

Absolutely. They have the ultimate responsibility.

Planned Giving, Annual Fund, Special Events - any of these?

All revenue generators. Sure.

But who has the potential to have the biggest, long-term impact on results, success, metrics and downstream (read: future year) impact?

It's your gift entry person.

Yep. The person who is in charge of entering the data, processing the gifts, generating receipts, producing acknowledgements . . . that one.

But That's Our Receptionist! S/he's Not A Fundraiser!

Think about it from just a gift entry perspective. Every gift that comes in has to be assigned to the right donor, soft-credited to the appropriate solicitor, coded to the right fund codes, entered correctly based on what the transmittal indicates, split across multiple funds (sometimes), assigned to the right grant/appeal/event . . . it's not insignificant.

Filing has to be done correctly, whether electronically or paper back up. The bank deposit has to be formatted correctly. Reconciliation reporting with finance needs to be done.

And then what about the data? What if there's a duplicate already in the system? Or there's some anomaly like a different address on the check, or it comes from a different bank account or there's no name on the DAF transmittal?

There's a lot to cover in gift entry and any shop that has a dedicated Gift Processor is truly, truly blessed.

Just data entry alone can significantly impact - negatively - future relations with donors. Which means future giving.

Take a look at this post in The Agitator (which, humble brag, references an earlier post of mine on The Annual Fund Lab). Compounding loss due to data quality. If that gift processor isn't committed to accuracy - and nobody's checking - records start going bad, they don't get fixed and year-over-year we start to get really bad data and we lose donors.

Pledge Payments

My goodness, just think about all the things that can go wrong with pledge payments! And if the notes aren't there or it's not entered correctly and then the gift officer who solicited it leaves - yikes! Now we've lost the real connection to this donor and, possibly, their future payments.

Today's gift entry error is tomorrow's upset donor. Tomorrow's upset donor is next year's lapsed donor. Next year's lapsed donor is that cold house file that gets mailed year after year after year after year and has less than a half of a half-a-percent donor reactivation rate.

Make Data A Priority

Solving data issues can be one of the quickest, simplest ways to improve donor retention and fundraising revenue. Your best prospective donors are, most likely, already IN your file.

If content is the currency of the Connection Economy (as Seth Godin suggests), then data is the gold standard that ensures its value.

If you can't reach your donors, your critically important, life-changing story isn't getting out. The most significant trust a donor places in us is that we'll use their gift as they intended - and if that's not entered correctly, how can we hold that accountability and say back to them, "We did what you asked us to?"

Hold data standards accountable. Do you have a manual that lists how information should be entered? Is there system of double-checks and validation for gift entry? Are you reviewing data regularly to ensure its accurate and well-maintained? It requires the same level of care and attention that any asset of your organization does.

And so does the person responsible for entering it and maintaining it. Ensure they understand the importance of their job and their value to the organization as a whole. That gift entry/data management person holds as much potential for good - or harm - as the one who's making the ask.