Category Archives: Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio

Nonprofit Radio for September 26, 2022: In Nonprofits, Do We Trust?

 

Gene Takagi: In Nonprofits, Do We Trust?

Gene Takagi

Public trust in nonprofits is eroding. Why is that, what does it mean for our work, and what can the nonprofit community do about it? Gene Takagi, our legal contributor and principal of NEO Law Group, returns with his insights.

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Fourth Dimension Technologies: IT Infra In a Box. The Affordable Tech Solution for Nonprofits.

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 610_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220926.mp3

Processed on: 2022-09-23T21:28:12.890Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…09…610_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220926.mp3.618773837.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/09/610_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220926.txt

[00:00:52.08] spk_0:
Hello and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with me. I’d get slapped with a diagnosis of fragility as angry. Um if you nailed me with the idea that you missed this week’s show in nonprofits, do we trust? Public Trust in nonprofits is eroding. Why is that? And what can the nonprofit community do about it? Gene Takagi are legal contributor and principal of neo Law group returns with his insights On Tony’s take two. This is not planned, giving

[00:00:57.14] spk_1:
we’re

[00:01:41.13] spk_0:
sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c. O. And by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box the affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant four D. Just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. It’s always a pleasure to welcome back Gene Takagi, you know who he is. Of course he he we owe him the introduction that he that he deserves, but you know who he is, He’s our legal contributor, Managing attorney of neo the nonprofit and exempt organizations law group in saN Francisco he edits the wildly popular nonprofit law blog dot com, which you should follow and he’s a part time lecturer at Columbia University. The firm is at neo law group dot com and jean is at G tech. Gene

[00:01:58.66] spk_1:
thanks

[00:01:59.11] spk_0:
for being back Welcome.

[00:02:00.73] spk_1:
It’s great to be here.

[00:02:03.15] spk_0:
It’s always a genuine pleasure. Thank you.

[00:02:07.78] spk_1:
We’re

[00:02:20.77] spk_0:
talking about public trust today. Uh not only your concerns, but you’re, you’re seeing evidence of. And I’m certainly reading some things too about eroding public trust in nonprofits. What what are you seeing? What are you thinking about that?

[00:02:27.69] spk_1:
You know, my first thoughts, tony is that trust really is the foundation of, of good relationships, right. No matter whether we’re talking about person to person,

[00:02:39.09] spk_0:
person to

[00:03:18.40] spk_1:
charity, you know, person to other institutions and charities I think are especially reliant on trust because if you’re asking people and groups and organizations to give money to you, um, they’ve got to trust that you’re gonna do use that money for charitable purposes, not for personal gain, not for other things, but for the charitable purposes that they want to support. And when trust erodes in our charities, that’s really a red flag and sort of a harbinger of things, bad things that could follow. So trust is really important, I think, um, to talk about. And the study, the most recent study that came out from independent sector and Edelman Data and intelligence found that there’s low trust amongst all institutions. So maybe not completely surprising, but less than a third say the trust, government, large corporations and the news media

[00:03:35.93] spk_0:
and

[00:04:08.91] spk_1:
charities, relatively speaking are better than that in terms of the trust factor, but it’s been dropping and nonprofits as a, as a sector, The trust and nonprofits now is 56%. The rest either are neutral on it or have a distrust of nonprofits, only 56% and only 36% trust philanthropy or foundations and grantmaking organizations, so that’s really, really low. And women’s trust and non profits dropped even more than than men. Um, and I think another flag to point out is our younger generations, especially gen Z

[00:04:17.56] spk_0:
really

[00:04:18.43] spk_1:
have a distrust of nonprofits. Um, and

[00:04:22.83] spk_0:
with

[00:04:23.75] spk_1:
the wealth transfer that’s expected from baby boom generation to millennials and two gen Z, that’s got to be alarming to nonprofits. And I, I think it’s just worthy to call out right now.

[00:04:35.97] spk_0:
Do you know what that number is among gen z. Trust in nonprofits that in the independent sector include that in in their survey.

[00:04:49.81] spk_1:
Well, the statistic that I, I saw that that called out to me was 57% of gen z. Americans say giving directly to individuals makes a bigger impact than giving to nonprofits. So they would rather give to individuals on go fund me or another crowdfunding site than to give to a nonprofit. They find that more trustworthy.

[00:05:16.77] spk_0:
There’s another dimension to the, to the trust, which is government, trust in nonprofits. And you could read government as congressional or, you know, I. R. S. But you know, they they, the the U. S. Government has bestowed the charitable deduction so that the money is used for, as you said, you know, for charitable purposes as disclosed in your organizing documents. And if if I’m thinking more of Congress, you know, if congress feels that

[00:05:43.59] spk_1:
the

[00:05:43.80] spk_0:
nonprofit community can’t be trusted, you know, we could start to see some erosion of, uh, clawback of some of the, the benefits that nonprofits enjoy. Tax free status, for instance, and the charitable deduction to name a couple of

[00:06:00.50] spk_1:
wildly

[00:06:01.37] spk_0:
wildly valuable ones.

[00:06:22.64] spk_1:
Yeah, and that’s such a great point because just a few days ago, there was news about a case in Minnesota where government funding to feed poor Children, um, there was a huge scandal involving tens of millions of dollars. So, um, it really speaks to two if government stops trusting nonprofits or certain government agencies and cuts funding to agencies, how harmful that might be to charities and the beneficiaries they’re trying to serve.

[00:06:35.87] spk_0:
I think that one was even worse. I think it was like $240 million dollars

[00:06:41.59] spk_1:
worth

[00:06:42.04] spk_0:
of pandemic aid money. I saw that in, in Minnesota is supposed to be going to feed Children during the pandemic and, and pocketed. Yeah,

[00:06:52.51] spk_1:
patterns there as well. It’s, it’s,

[00:06:55.94] spk_0:
yeah,

[00:06:58.09] spk_1:
it

[00:06:58.93] spk_0:
is. It’s, it’s, um, and then of course there’s always been Charles grassley. I mean, he’s been, he’s been nipping at, uh, foundations and donor advised funds for for years

[00:08:03.64] spk_1:
now. Yeah. And in fact, the whole charitable sector, I think, um, and a significant portion of our lawmakers, um, take a consumer protection perspective of, we want to protect donors, um, and not strengthening the nonprofit sector perspective they want to create laws that will per, you know, try to prevent, um, uh, fraud or misuse of charitable funds as if this is rampant amongst the nonprofit sector, which my position is, it is not, but there are certain high profile cases that hit the new york times and the Washington post and all the other newspapers. And there’s so much media coverage that focuses on scandals because that’s what’s gonna sell right. The tweet or the short snippet that people’s attention span will, will actually stop on. Um, it’s gonna sell much more if it’s a scandal rather than a long term growth in in impact. Even, you know, the, the great news that child poverty has, has been really declining in in the country, which should be huge news gets short shrift compared to some of the big scandals that we hear about.

[00:09:08.60] spk_0:
Yeah, yeah. When I name dropped Charles Grassley, I should have said Senator, senator from Iowa, Republican, senator from Iowa Charles grassley. Um, yeah, right. It’s, it’s the scandals that, that’s, that get clicks that sell papers that get attention. I remember, I’m sure you do several years ago there was a scandal among an, an organization supposedly raising money for Navy Veterans like Navy Navy Veteran Foundation or something like that several years ago, but it was very high profile. Um, what was the other, do you remember, I don’t mean to put you on the spot. It’s okay if you don’t remember because I don’t the, uh, the veterans organization that was accused of squandering, you know, tens of millions of dollars on lavish retreats and high, high executive salaries. But, but, but it it had it had great outcomes. It was, it was funding lots of veterans organizations.

[00:09:25.25] spk_1:
I think the one you’re talking about is the Wounded Warriors.

[00:09:29.11] spk_0:
Thank you. Yes. Project.

[00:09:51.07] spk_1:
And yeah, it’s, um, it’s always difficult. Um, looking at an organization through the eyes of the media, um, about how, you know, how well or unwell they did. I don’t want to create, um, you know, uh, discuss particular scandals too much other than to say that they create problems for the whole sector. So, you know, that’s, it’s just something to be aware of. And they’re not necessarily reflective of the vast majority of nonprofits out there trying to do good work and help people.

[00:10:17.64] spk_0:
The 99.99% you know, our our that’s even higher than the nonprofit radio 95% No, uh, 99.99% of nonprofits are not scandalous. And could they, could many of them be running more efficiently. Yes, but we’re not, we’re not talking about mere efficiency. You know, we’re talking about erosion of trust because of high profile crises or scandals malfeasance.

[00:10:37.97] spk_1:
Yeah, high

[00:10:39.21] spk_0:
profile,

[00:10:39.92] spk_1:
not

[00:11:55.21] spk_0:
representative. It’s time for a break. Turn to communications. They know the nonprofit community and they know pr and journalism. Both partners are former journalists peter pan a pinto, one of the two worked as senior managing editor at the Chronicle of philanthropy. And after that he was at the council on foundations. So he understands the nonprofit space very well, which means he understands your challenges, understands how important pr and being a thought leader is to to your work. And the two of them together know how to build relationships with outlets, not just with journalists, but you know, also podcasters, um, conference organizers. So they understand nonprofits, they understand communications, how to build relationships and that’s what’s gonna get you heard across all media. So let’s turn to turn to communications. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o Now back to in nonprofits. Do we trust?

[00:12:00.88] spk_1:
It takes me to another tangent though, now that you talked about efficiency, tony and that’s kind of, we’ve talked about it before and you’ve talked about it with the writers of uh, article or a letter called the overhead myth. I don’t know if you recall

[00:12:16.06] spk_0:
that many years ago. Yes. The C E O. S of charity Navigator better business. Bureau wise giving alliance and guidestar.

[00:13:08.09] spk_1:
Yeah. And you know, they were saying that we shouldn’t, you know, base ratings on a charity in terms of how worthy they are to receive funds from donors simply based on overhead ratio. You know what their admin and fundraising costs are relative to their programmatic costs and those are really wise wise words, um, that that were stated in that letter. But even today we still see organizations even high profile ones that talk about their low overhead ratio. And it can engender trust um, in their organization at the expense of trust of other organizations that legitimately have higher overhead ratios because the infrastructures and you know, the things that they need to do may be completely different. So it’s not fair to, you know, compare across the board and across the maturity of an organization. So

[00:14:06.82] spk_0:
another very valuable thing to invest in is is research, research, uh, maybe maybe going beyond research, activating a new program that, you know, that may or may not succeed, but you have to invest upfront, you know that it’s annoying the folks who hold different opinions about wise investment in technology, you know, it’s Uber should be losing money for the 1st 12 years, you know, because it’s investing in the future. Um, Tesla, you know, non profit unprofitable for many years, but you know, look where they are now, but, but in the nonprofit sector, you know, we don’t we don’t allow that that research and um, spending on innovation, we consider that overhead like, you know, like, like rent, which rent happens to be important too, but you know, something, something um, rent is not a good example, but sort of, you know, frivolous or you know, self indulgent when it could very well be research and and scaling up for for a for a dynamic

[00:14:29.60] spk_1:
future or even things like a living wage.

[00:15:22.90] spk_0:
Yeah. Good. Exactly. Thank you. Yes. Um, yeah, I I don’t like the, you know, I don’t like the double standard where we we we praise it in in some industries, but we we we criticize it uh, in in non profits. And I’m thinking specifically about investment in the future and whether that’s people or programs or even technology, technology is a is a valuable investment. It saves time. It creates productivity, makes people more comfortable at work. It enables them to work out of an office now and be remote, give them that benefit, which so many people are craving now, you know, but these are these are all wise investments, not not um, detrimental overhead.

[00:16:33.02] spk_1:
Yeah, I absolutely agree. And there’s a way to do it cheap. You could invest in technology on the cheap and that might have long term adverse consequences, including to kind of the sort of the data protection and privacy issues that can result. So if you’re really thinking ahead and investing in, not only just technology, just to be sort of more effective and efficient in the short term, the protective of your beneficiaries and your staff and others your donors in the long term, um, then you need to make more of an investment in that. And that’s another thing where, you know, we lose trust if you if you sort of blow your donor lists that are supposed to be private and you know, other big companies get ahold of it and start to target your donor base for unrelated things or even if they’re related sometimes, but not your organization and it was due to a slip on your part or your technology and information technology protocols. You can run into trouble. So again, investments have a double edged sword there. Great. But they can result in a loss of trust too if you’re not managing it properly and you compromise people’s information.

[00:16:41.40] spk_0:
Um, and also, you know, you mentioned living wage but investing in people so that people stay with your organization.

[00:16:48.75] spk_1:
All

[00:16:49.07] spk_0:
right. And that that starts with a living wage that also impacts to on technology. Uh, you know, time away professional development. You know, these are, these are investments in staff that people see and appreciate and make longevity with your organization more likely than you know, than than to to jump ship every six months.

[00:17:11.75] spk_1:
And that builds trust to write, I’m much more comfortable working with you if you’ve been with the charity for 10 years, Tony than if you were hired three months ago and there’s always a different person I’m talking to as a donor.

[00:17:31.13] spk_0:
Absolutely. Yeah. All right. You have some insights into what we as a community or hopefully even individual nonprofits can can start to think about take to their C. E. O. S. Take to their boards. This is always where you Excel gene.

[00:18:33.73] spk_1:
Well in the first steps are kind of simple. Um you know, it’s be compliant yourself, make sure your own houses in order. Um so we can sort of raise all of the issues with where you can lose trust with organizations. Um but even though 99.9% of the organizations are well intentioned, I can’t say that 99.9% of the organizations are compliant. Um so working to make sure you’re compliant Working to make sure that the tone is set at the top with the strong board of directors that is actually providing direction and oversight and not just simply helping you, you know, with fundraising and otherwise just rubber stamping the decisions of the leaders. I think it really is important that the tone be set at the top of the organization through the board of directors. A

[00:18:34.26] spk_0:
tone say say more about the tone.

[00:19:11.50] spk_1:
So the tone of placing the importance of a trusting relationship with our beneficiaries with our employees with our other stakeholders. I think that’s really important and that should be reflected in policies. So it’s not good enough to say, you know, this is what we believe in. So the, you know, one of the hot topics today is a board sets a diversity equity and inclusion policy. But if that policy just sits on the shelf and that’s the end of the discussion of it. And there are no actual changes or action plans attached to that that’s gonna maybe harm the organization more than help it. So the tone at the top means a board that is doing its role in moving that organization forward and focusing um not only on doing good work and, you know, metrics for for programmatic success, but on building trust within and outside of the organization.

[00:20:07.00] spk_0:
And that that Ceo board chair uh Ceo executive committee, if the board has an executive committee relationship is key to this. I mean, they they all whether it’s two people or the Ceo and a committee, you know, need to be uh you know, committed to the same, not only the same mission, but the same uh strategy for getting there. You know, the same commitment to the things that you’re talking about, this needs to be a a unified

[00:20:08.30] spk_1:
working

[00:20:09.10] spk_0:
group at the top between the Ceo and the board leadership.

[00:21:55.36] spk_1:
Yeah, it’s absolutely critical tony I agree. There is, however, sort of another dimension to this which adds complexity and that’s kind of the feeling amongst particularly younger generations. Again, and why there’s a little bit of distrust is too much power focused on the top of an organization without sort of distributing leadership and and the right to participate in this. You know, the bigger decisions of the organization being dispersed throughout the organization and getting input from beneficiaries about um you know, how the organization should evolve or um move forward in further its purpose if we’re not really thinking about getting other voices in it, and particularly if our boards are not very diverse, um that’s gonna engender more distrust as well um with with an organization and this leadership. So while what’s happening at the top level and the relationship between the Ceo and the chair of the board is critically important, it is really important to also make sure that leadership, authority and power is being dispersed down through the organization and that the board actually can listen to directly um input from some of the staff. Um and we shouldn’t create like a wall between board and staff completely. You know, that there’s a little bit of um new thinking on that because the old old ways is like the board should not micromanage right. We should not interfere with staff decisions, which is partly true, but it doesn’t mean that we create a complete block. So the board members don’t see the staff members and the staff don’t see the board and they just don’t know each other. So, um there is a sort of a balance there that needs to be taken.

[00:22:20.82] spk_0:
Can we, can we say a little more about that in terms of examples of how this could be done? Like you’re you’re talking about staff, but also the beneficiaries of the programmatic work. Uh is this um like, I mean, certainly beneficiaries could be members of the board or or is it more an advisory committee, but then to your point, you know, you don’t want it to just be a committee that the board doesn’t listen to. The ceo doesn’t listen to. You know, how can we uh actually execute on on some of this in terms of staff and beneficiaries?

[00:24:23.71] spk_1:
So there are a lot of different ways that it might be done and there’s no one right way for, you know, for all organizations, but getting other voices involved can be done in, you know, um through committees as you suggested, but they can’t just be advisory. If you’re really gonna disperse power, you have to give them some power even if they’re not made up of only board members and some people call any committee that is not composed of only board members, they call them at advisory committees. And because of the name, they think that they can only give advice to the board, but they don’t have any management authority. But that’s not true. You can give these other committees management authority, the way you can give a Ceo or CFO management authority, the board can delegate authority down to these other committees. These non board committees as well. So that may be one way of getting power dispersed through the organization, that that committee might be made up of some employees, some beneficiaries and maybe there is a pipeline so that some of the other people that you’d like to put onto a board, but you might not know very well, you might not have enough experience in certain things that you’d like to have them develop more knowledge of the organization and the work before they possibly a strong candidate for joining the board, but that could be a vehicle or an on ramp to being a board um board member as well. And again, creating a more diverse and stronger board with diverse perspectives and understandings of what the organization does and who it impacts. So I think there are definitely ways and we’ve seen this in other models as well. Some that have worked with some organizations and same models not working with other organizations. Hill Ocracy is sort of one example of that. What

[00:24:24.13] spk_0:
is that drug in jail? What? Hill Ocracy.

[00:25:53.62] spk_1:
Hill Ocracy is a form of management where there are still remnants of hierarchy, but a lot of decision making is made in kind of circles and circles might be employed, they might be employees and others and circles have certain autonomy over their body of decision making. So you might have a circle based on HR issues. So it’s not just one person with the final say, it’s this circle or a group in the law, we would just call it another committee. But um in hypocrisy there all circles and and this was used by some high profile for profit companies and some nonprofits, some had success with it, Some didn’t. So um there are other models out there as well, not one size will fit all, but again, there’s an administrative cost to trying to implement new models, um, but new models or maybe the way that we want to go and their movement organizations all over the place that are impacting how nonprofits and for profits are to be governed and managed. And we should be listening to some of these forces that are out there because they will gradually shape what we’re doing. You can see this by some younger people not sticking with employment as long as they were the great resignation and stuff. If you feel powerless within an organization or if you don’t feel the organization is representing what you want, your employer to be doing, they may not stay and having a little bit of say in what the organization is doing, even if it’s just the starting points because you can’t jump from point a to, you know, to the ideal point in one step, it’s gonna take a long, a long time to get there. But just to seeing that progress may be assigned to somebody to to say, I’m gonna stick around here and and find out

[00:26:35.35] spk_0:
alright creating vehicles for right people’s voices to be heard. Um, and you’re right, it’s, it’s incremental, but just the, just the showing of some progress, some initiative to uh, opening up the leadership, opening

[00:26:38.15] spk_1:
up

[00:26:41.97] spk_0:
strategic decision making, could be, it could be uh, you know, valuable to, to folks right? And encourage them to, to stay versus looking for someplace that’s more inclusive. Yeah.

[00:26:53.98] spk_1:
You know, if your Ceo doesn’t trust the board or if your employees don’t trust the ceo, how are you going to expect donors and your beneficiaries to trust the organization? So it really trust has to be built throughout the organization.

[00:28:41.45] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. Fourth dimension technologies. Are you seeing technology as the investment that it is not as an expense, but an investment in your sustainability, your staff productivity, your staff happiness, um, satisfaction, an investment in your donor relations through your crm database. Uh, it’s an investment in your organization’s work and its future. That’s what technology that’s where your technology ought to be thought of. And fourth dimension four D. For short can help you make those investments wisely so that you’re not squandering on something you don’t really need. Like maybe your backup is sufficient, but you need the multi factor authentication installed, etcetera. So you know, they can help you think through smart technology investments. That’s it four D. And you know where the listener landing pages to check them out. It’s at tony dot M A slash four D. Which by the way is just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. Let’s return to in non profits. Do we trust? What else do you see Gene as as things we can we can think about besides this sort of distributed, I’m calling it distributed leadership or maybe you call it distributed leadership. Yeah.

[00:29:32.73] spk_1:
So other things. Maybe some simple tips guard private data. We talked a little bit about it before with technology. If you’ve got data that you’re promising that will be kept confidential. Make sure you’re guarding that. Be careful about automating and depersonalizing interactions with technology as well. Like we could have a sort of a voicemail for everybody and you know, hit one if you want to do this. It too. If you want to do this and completely not let any donor speak to any individual without, you know, spending an hour on the phone that may not be, uh, seen as something that would build trust. So we have to be careful of our uses of technology there as well in our communications. Um, if you’re going to say something, um, don’t talk the talk. If you’re not going to walk the walk, right? So don’t make promises that you’re not going to keep

[00:29:41.70] spk_0:
that for an example of that is A D. I. Policy,

[00:29:45.44] spk_1:
right? Exactly

[00:29:46.80] spk_0:
written and never, never executed or remains written once and never evolves.

[00:31:13.44] spk_1:
And if you have a campaign to engage in a particular, uh, you know, program and you don’t raise enough money. And so that program never runs, you better be explaining this to your donors. Um, why that happened. And the possibility that that might happen when you start fundraising for it. So don’t just say, you know, after the fact when they complain that said, well we didn’t raise enough. So we used your money for other things that’s not going to engender trust. Um remember your mission and your beneficiaries don’t exist in a vacuum, right? Um, so it’s not just about your organization. And if you your numbers go up, um whatever metrics that you use financial performance or number of beneficiaries served whatever they are, you shouldn’t look at it as a silo. You should be looking at the entire ecosystem in which you are participating. And that would be, you know, open up things like environmentalism like you might not think environmental, your organization’s not environmental organization, but if climate change continues and creates hardships that, you know, scientists are predicting, predicting you probably will have an impact on your mission and your beneficiaries. And so to sort of think, just, you know, outside of that, that silo you want to be thinking about what your impact of your decisions will be, not only on your organization and beneficiaries, but on your allied organizations, on the broader community and what will that do to trust as well. So,

[00:32:03.91] spk_0:
a lot of these ideas, a lot of what you’re saying could be, you know, germinating in an advisory committee, you know, how could we look differently at at our contribution to climate change and what climate change means to us in the future for our for our for our people and for our work, but also what could we be doing right now, You know, even if we’re not an environmental organization siloed as you’re saying, you know, we still have an environmental impact. So what what contribution to to minimize climate change or reverse climate change can we make as well as planning for the for the future? Uh you know, that that those kinds of conversations can come out of these um advisory committees that is that are comprised of staff and and beneficiaries. I mean, these are the folks that live the mission day to day.

[00:32:36.09] spk_1:
Yeah, I love that idea to tony Sometimes the board may not have um or feel that they have the bandwidth to sort of discuss these sort of broader issues. Um and they’re a little bit more focused. So having the help um the advisory committee on an issue like like climate change for a non environmental organization or an organization whose mission is not focused on the environment. I think that would be great.

[00:32:45.06] spk_0:
Yeah. And I want to reiterate your point that which I’ve never thought of, advisory committees can be granted policy making authority and and and change within the organization. So whatever that looks like, you know, you can bestow that that authority

[00:33:05.16] spk_1:
Absolutely, and you can give them a budget to even sort of to putting

[00:33:11.20] spk_0:
money behind it. But that that yeah, money talks. That’s a that’s a big step granting them a budget granting them some granting them authority to make change that’s empowering and an advisory committee. All right.

[00:34:01.14] spk_1:
I think, you know, one area of trust that we haven’t spoken yet, but maybe, um why I as a lawyer and talking about these things and you’re not getting it from another consultant, is that the laws can also impact trust and non profits have to decide whether they want to set a position on certain laws. And um, some of the things that I’m thinking about is the deductibility of charitable contributions. So, we’ve had an above the line contribution where non itemizers could deduct as well because of Covid. Um, but that was just temporary. Um, and now there’s sort of a push for, well, we should make a charitable contribution deductible to all taxpayers, and not just about the 10% of taxpayers who itemize, who tend to be, you know, have a little bit more wealth, or some, in some cases a lot more than those who don’t itemize.

[00:34:17.90] spk_0:
Is it that small? The proportion of taxpayers who itemize is around 10%,,

[00:34:22.34] spk_1:
10-13%, is what I’m hearing.

[00:34:24.86] spk_0:
Okay,

[00:35:52.18] spk_1:
So, um, again, you know, part of trust and distrust has to do with concentrations of power and wealth, right? And when the 1% or the .1% control so much policy control the leadership of pivotal organizations in all sectors, and in government, um, there’s going to be a distrusted institutions. Again, that, you know, one third of people distrust big institutions. Um, and, you know, that concentration of wealth and power is, is the reason why. Um so laws that sort of enforce that. So if we just give you no deductible, make make tax benefits to, to richer people who can deduct, who can itemize their deductions and not to others that may feel really unfair to the public. And another reason for distrust. So, will your organization’s, even though tax policy is probably almost no organization’s mission, it has an impact. Um, and so it may be something that organizations want to take a look at. And there are organizations like independent sector of the National Council on nonprofits and others who the Tax Policy center that that can explain this a little bit. But you you may want to take a look and see if you want to put a position on it. And one of the things that I also think, um engender distrust is when the media miss reports, the law in one area where the mis reported it is a lot of media say, charities can’t lobby and that’s just not true. Um, so charities can lobby on things like, you know, the the above the line deduction. Um, and and on other things as well, and there are just certain limits that apply, but they’re often generous, So learn a little bit more and we can build a stronger sector?

[00:36:21.84] spk_0:
Well, you and I have talked about the the lobbying limits on previous shows, is it is it safe to say that the law hasn’t changed over the past? I don’t know, 23 years maybe, since you and I have talked about this.

[00:36:34.17] spk_1:
Okay,

[00:37:06.11] spk_0:
So, so at Tony-Martignetti.com, you can search gene Takagi, you’ll find many episodes that he’s on and one or one or two are about the uh, the lobbying limits, I think, I think the last time may have been 2020 when the pre election. So we may well, with the, with the election in late The election in late 2020, so we may have done something like in mid-2020 or so on the lobbying, uh, exemption or Well, that’s not that’s not that’s not the right phrase. What the limits of lobbying and you make the you just said, you know, they are, they are generous in some cases. It’s not it’s not that it has to be a de minimus proportion of your budget or something.

[00:37:24.83] spk_1:
Yeah, the

[00:37:26.87] spk_0:
yeah,

[00:37:27.68] spk_1:
the losses insubstantial which scares the majority of charities away from doing any of it, but it turns out it can be fairly generous limits to engaging in lobbying.

[00:38:01.79] spk_0:
Okay. Um, and the point that you made before that, I was going to say something about that too. Well, sorry, what did you say? Right before you were talking about the uh, the permissibility of some lobbying activities. You made a point? Yes, thank you. The last thing we want is for Donating to charity to be perceived as, uh, as an elitist activity. That only the only the top now you’re saying whatever 10 or 13% of the population can, can give because they’re the only ones who get the advantage because they’re the only, they’re the ones who itemize their deductions. The last thing we want is for donating to charities to be perceived as an elitist activity.

[00:39:13.92] spk_1:
Yeah, absolutely. tony and with, you know, with our current tax policy, how it works. Um, then I don’t want to get too complicated with that. We are seeing a shrinking middle class. I don’t think there’s anything denying that people, most people have less discretionary income. So if we look at the fundraising statistics now, the giving statistics, we see that, um, even if giving goes up Giving from kind of the middle class and smaller donors has shrunk, um, and, and quite significantly, and it’s, it’s the people, um, that have put in huge contributions that have made up for that. So the Mackenzie Scott, you know, with, I think $13 billion dollars over the last few years, they’re making up for that. But that can change the way nonprofits run if, if it’s all about, again, elite, wealthy, powerful individuals who make the big contributions that then have the ear of the boards of these organizations that then talk about policy and they create policy or, or advocate for policies that keep that dynamic in existence. So it is problematic.

[00:40:52.59] spk_0:
It’s time for Tony Take two. My latest video on linkedin is this is not planned giving uh it’s short under two minutes. I give you an example of what is not planned giving and remind you what planned giving is, how simple planned giving is when it’s done right, when you start with simple gifts by will. But I’ve got kind of a lighthearted back way of looking at it through what planned giving isn’t in the opening. So latest video on linkedin, you’ll find me on linkedin. My name is tony-martignetti by the way that has escaped you. And uh it’s my latest video there That is Tony’s take two. We’ve got boo koo but loads more time for in nonprofits. Do we trust with Gene Takagi? Look at this dark potential that people look at at the United States as alright, the wealthy control government because of dark money and and the Citizens United decision, the Supreme Court uh wealthy control business because only wealthy people start and or run run businesses and grow them and only only white males have the access to capital to start businesses. And then and then the perception that um the wealthy control the nonprofit

[00:41:13.41] spk_1:
sector, you

[00:41:21.27] spk_0:
know, and the wealthy control of media, you know, this is all this is all very uh a very detrimental, very dark cynical way of looking at the at the country, but I’m not I’m not sure that where that’s far away from

[00:42:10.55] spk_1:
it. Yeah, I agree. tony And I think past generations, you know, including ours, you know, we’ve always kind of done better than our parents. Our parents were lucky enough to put us in that position. But the younger generations now economically um and maybe, you know health wise and mental health wise, they may not be doing as well as their parents overall and they’re questioning kind of the system because of that. Um and we maybe didn’t question it because our generation did better than our parents um in those terms. But now there is just legitimate questioning of do we need to change these policies and these dynamics and these power structures and um you know, organizations have a say in this and and use your voice, get get people to vote. Maybe that’ll be my my one of my big messages vote

[00:43:27.00] spk_0:
voting is fundamental to although, you know, in a lot of states that’s being eroded you becoming more difficult, although in a lot of states it’s easier to um you know, another thing that comes to mind when, you know, you’re talking about the generations below the the the boomers not doing as well as the one before them. Um The FDA just yesterday recommended mental health screening at regular uh regular doctor visits, like an annual annual health health checkup for everybody under 65 And and they had been considering this policy that this recommendation is just a recommendation to the medical community from from for years before the pandemic. This is not, this is not pandemic-related recommendation. They had been considering this for years before the pandemic that there’s a lot of stress and anxiety among the population under 65 and 65 is basically the baby boomer cut off within a couple of years.

[00:43:59.55] spk_1:
And then, you know, as you noted, this was even before Covid that they’ve been advocating for this and now with Covid and the mental health issues that are sort of go along with not just the disease, but the isolation that many are experiencing and long Covid, which is sort of an underappreciated under recognized problem and disabilities maybe creating more disability, disabled americans than anything. Um, since you know, the World War two, I think would be the last one. It’s just, it’s mind blowing

[00:44:01.44] spk_0:
and I and I and all this does contribute to a decline in trust in all institutions and nonprofit. The nonprofit community is a major institution in the country. So you know, that’s, that’s how this is all related

[00:44:15.09] spk_1:
to what you

[00:44:21.48] spk_0:
and I are talking about. I want to make that connection explicit that anxiety among the population creates anxiety for nonprofits and, and and distrust and disbelief in nonprofit work. Whether that’s justified or not perception is reality.

[00:44:36.71] spk_1:
Yeah, I agree. tony

[00:44:40.74] spk_0:
All right. I don’t know. So we had, we had said one of the things we’re gonna talk about is what happens, what happens if this continues? I mean, I already painted a pretty dark cynical scenario. Um, is there anything more you want to say around? You know, what, what the implications are if the community doesn’t start to help itself?

[00:46:25.73] spk_1:
Well, maybe on a more micro looking basis, it just means for a charity, they’re gonna experience diminished fundraising. Not everybody gets Mackenzie scott, Jeff Bezos money. Right. Most of them are relying upon a pool of donors, um, many of which are aging, um, and may age out of their donor pool. Um, and shrinking again, middle class, shrinking, discretionary income for many people, meaning West donations. Um, we might see more direct giving to individuals as people are saying, well, I don’t trust charities overall. I’d rather just give to my friends who say, you know, somebody is in need as crowdfunding fight sites just continue to, to grow in importance and also in in power as well. Um, and that’s just gonna be to the detriment of, you know, beneficiaries of our charity. So again, in the micro level, we make less money, people trust us less. Our employee retention is less. Um, our donor pool is shrinking and we can help less people even as the need for our services increases. So that’s kind of the dark side look of it. Um, we can try to be the nonprofit that stands out and you know, is the trustworthy non profit from, from a public perception standpoint. Um, that’s good. But again, don’t see yourself in a silo lift yourself up with all the boats in the water and, and really try to strengthen the nonprofit sector where you can, and, and advocating on some of the laws that make things more fair, I think is a good start there

[00:46:41.97] spk_0:
advocating maybe there’s a way of partnering

[00:46:45.00] spk_1:
with other

[00:46:55.64] spk_0:
organizations, not, not in all in all things. I don’t mean a legal formal partnership, but you know, if, if there’s, if there’s a way of working together for an event or, or some kind of advocacy,

[00:47:03.61] spk_1:
you

[00:47:11.44] spk_0:
know, we’ve had shows on the values of that and how to do that. Um, so that everybody, you know it, so that it’s, it’s not seen as a, as a zero sum within your, within your community that if if if someone else, some other organizations benefiting, then you’re losing. You know, that’s not the way to look at,

[00:47:25.67] spk_1:
at,

[00:47:26.47] spk_0:
at the world and and that not nonprofit support. We we all could be or a couple of couple of organizations together could be rising together.

[00:47:37.64] spk_1:
Yeah, I’ll add that the independent sector survey, the Edelman Data Intelligence survey that we mentioned at the start of the show also has some tips on building up trust within the sector. So it’s not all of dark outlook. It’s just encouraging people that the importance of this is very, very high. Um, so let’s go out and actually make things happen? So that, that dark outlook doesn’t happen

[00:48:05.70] spk_0:
within independent sector. Gene, what’s the, what’s the name of the you’re saying? Edelman data?

[00:48:11.03] spk_1:
Yeah, I think they contracted out with Edelman E D E L M A. And Data and intelligence and their third annual reports. This is an annual report is available on the independent sector website.

[00:48:26.66] spk_0:
Okay, thank you. Edelman E D E L M A N,

[00:48:30.68] spk_1:
correct.

[00:48:49.24] spk_0:
Okay. Okay. Uh, you mentioned the five oh one C four’s a little bit, but there have been a couple in the news very recently, most recently the uh, Patagonia companies, uh, sort of evolution into a uh, a new nonprofit, a new a new five oh one C four. non profit the hold fast collective.

[00:51:57.05] spk_1:
Yeah. So the founder of Patagonia and his family member, they were the principal owners of Patagonia and they decided to give up ownership of the company, but you know, they gave it not to a charity, but to a 501 C four organization. Um, it’s called the social welfare organization and for listeners who aren’t maybe familiar with it, you probably are familiar with many five oh one C four organizations themselves, like the N. R. A. Planned parenthood, the A. C. L. U. Sierra Club. So these are advocacy organizations that have kind of charitable like purposes. Um, but our can engage in unlimited lobbying and can engage in election nearing or political campaign intervention? Supporting political candidates and political parties, as long as that’s not their primary activity or purpose. So this is sort of the source or one of the big sources of where dark money comes in tony that you mentioned with the Citizens United Decision before donor that wants to support a candidate but stay hidden from public view about their support of the Can rather than giving directly to the candidate, could give to a 501 C four organization and the C Four organization can get their money’s into the candidate. And the donor that is disclosed is the C Four organization, not the donor to the C Four organization. So that’s how you can create dark money. And with the Patagonia case, it’s very clear who the donor was. So we don’t expect that to be the dark money that we’re as leery of, but it’s still, you know, a huge gift which, you know, for somebody who believes in in in the environmental movement I think is a great gift. But news media miss reporting it or some news media are mis reporting it as kind of something that doesn’t get a tax benefit because a donor doesn’t get an income tax deduction for giving to a five oh one C Four organization the way they do if they give to a charity. Um but there are other tax exemptions that apply like a gift tax exemption or in a state tax exemption. So this gift is overall saving. Um uh mr Schwinn nerd um the owner and his family probably somewhere in the realm of $800 million in taxes. Um So it is not completely a no tax benefit transaction. Again this is not to disparage them for taking advantage of a system that allows for these gifts Um to go with with some tax benefits, but it’s not just the income tax deduction that matters in in donations there for for very wealthy people like billionaires. Um the gift and estate tax exemptions which can be 40%, right? So it can be very very high higher than income tax they matter. Um and so that’s something to be aware of that. Um this is a very wealthy person who gave up much of the ownership share, I guess all of his ownership shares to this 501 C4 organization, except really importantly 2% of the gift. Overall gift was given to a trust that’s not a nonprofit.

[00:52:14.55] spk_0:
Yeah those voting, those are the 2% of the voting that are the voting shares,

[00:52:58.58] spk_1:
right? So because they’re in control of that trust with with some close advisers um they have not given control out of Patagonia, right? They still can control Patagonia. Um And again they’re taking advantage of existing law what what it allows but it allows billionaires to not give up control of their company, get an $800 million tax benefit for giving or you know $3 billion Uh to a 501 C4 organization that could spend nearly half of it on endorsing political candidates. Um So it’s kind of an interesting tax system that that allows for that.

[00:53:18.19] spk_0:
And if if you consider that, you know supportive of uh of a liberal progressive cause because the whole fast collective the the new C4 is is devoted to uh the ill effects of climate change, you know, reversing climate change, impacting climate change. Uh So if you consider that of a left cause, then there’s an example on the right side with uh mr barr seed and the marble Freedom Trust. Another five oh one C four.

[00:53:44.39] spk_1:
Yeah. And that sea forces led by Leonard Leo who maybe the person most responsible for the changing of our Supreme Court and therefore the decisions on things like abortion might be largely attributed to mr Leo,

[00:53:56.21] spk_0:
fundraiser and activist and very well connected guy in conservative circles.

[00:56:20.34] spk_1:
Yeah. And used to be Executive vice president of the Federalist Society whose mission was to change the composition of the Supreme Court. So um I I don’t think that’s controversial and that’s just what their goal was. And they were very effective at achieving that goal. But this $1.6 billion kind of same thing. There there are some tax benefits that go along with it. There’s no income tax deduction. Um and mr uh c passed away. I think this was given after his death. But another big contribution to an organization led by somebody who has immense influence and now a huge war chest that can be used for political activities. Again, the primary activity cannot be political campaign intervention. Um, but some people believe, or many people believe that means 49% of the funds can be used for political campaign intervention. And that’s kind of the source of dark money. Although again in this case we do know where the donor came from. Um, so it’s not dark in that way in terms of hidden donors, but it’s still donations that didn’t go directly to the political candidate. It went through five oh one C four first, get the tax benefits for that, which his heirs, I guess would appreciate. Um, uh, and the impact of that again, is that? Well, in both cases, very wealthy people are able to keep control with people who they trust or their family members of their money to be used for political purposes. They can’t use it for themselves to, you know, to buy huge houses and boats, but they can use it for things that were very important to them. But that means for people like us and most of your listeners, tony is like, what influence do we have compared to that individual who gave billions of dollars to influence political elections. Um, and you know, what, you know, can we change our Supreme Court sort of composition the way that they’re able to do, probably not by ourselves. So it again is, is the reason why people go, hey, these are nonprofits that they’re using to do this. I don’t trust non profits, this is what they’re used for. And charities kind of get lumped in because the ordinary, you know, people, the lay person doesn’t know the difference between a five oh one C three and five A one C four organization.

[00:56:36.19] spk_0:
Yeah, and that’s right. And it’s it’s if it’s mentioned in a in in press coverage, you know, it’s mentioned in passing that it it’s it’s an organization that’s distinguished from from uh charities. But you know, it’s like, it’s like a sentence or two. You know, it’s it’s never it’s never a focal point. So your point is correct that people just lump them all together

[00:57:00.57] spk_1:
and flows through nonprofits and that’s why we shouldn’t trust nonprofit.

[00:57:04.97] spk_0:
So the wealthy control government and they control politics and they control business and media and and nonprofits.

[00:57:18.46] spk_1:
Yeah, that’s that’s what we, We’re finding more and more is the case, but we’re trying to change policies and change minds about this so that we can see that the impact of the 99.9% out there is actually even bigger than the impact that we mentioned about a few individuals. Um, it just has to be organized. Um, and non profits are way to do that.

[00:58:21.68] spk_0:
Well, that’s a, that’s a pretty good way to close. Probably we should have closed with what our community can do. But you know, you’re suffering the lackluster host. So uh you can rewind to that section and then uh fast forward and you can end with that if you want to. Um, but but jean, you know, always thank you, you know, sort of reality, but also wisdom and inspiration. And and not only um ethereal pedagogical inspiration, but you know, ideas that we can we can we can act on. So thank you. Thank you.

[00:58:24.63] spk_1:
Thank you Tony. And your closing statement is actually always the greatest ending. So, I’m looking forward to hearing it.

[00:59:39.16] spk_0:
Okay, All right, thank you jean. Next week. Let’s see what develops and why do I even say uh, next week if I don’t know what’s coming up next week, but we’re here we are. We’re talking about trust and part of that is transparency. So I’m being transparent that I don’t know what next week’s show is gonna be, I know what the 1 to 2 weeks from now is gonna be. We’re gonna have beth cancer and Allison fine talking about their new book, but I can’t promise that for next week because well, that would be a lie and that’s going to reach the trust because they’re not on next week. Next week. Uh, it’s up in the air, but trust me, it’ll be just that’s conclusory. Just trust me now, I hope you trust non profit radio I’ll find something good if you missed any part of this week’s show, I Beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com responses by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o and by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box, the affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant four

[00:59:48.37] spk_1:
D. Just

[01:00:03.54] spk_0:
Like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. A creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff to show social media is by Susan Chavez. Mark Silverman is our web guy and this music is by scott stein, Thank you for that. Affirmation Scotty B with me next week for nonprofit radio big nonprofit ideas for the other 95%. Here it is, Jean, go out and be great.

Nonprofit Radio for September 19, 2022: The Tech That Comes Next

 

Amy Sample Ward & Afua Bruce: The Tech That Comes Next

Social impact orgs, technology developers, funders, communities and policy makers can all do better at technology development, argue Amy Sample Ward and Afua Bruce in their new book, “The Tech That Comes Next.”

 

 

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Fourth Dimension Technologies: IT Infra In a Box. The Affordable Tech Solution for Nonprofits.

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 609_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220919.mp3

Processed on: 2022-09-16T13:48:08.345Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…09…609_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220919.mp3.155826533.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/09/609_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220919.txt

[00:02:21.94] spk_0:
Hello and welcome to Tony-Martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with me. I’d bear the pain of pseudo ag raffia if I had to write the words you missed this week’s show the tech that comes next social impact orgs, technology developers, funders, communities and policymakers can all do better at technology development for greater equity, argue Amy sample Ward and Bruce in their new book, The tech that comes next tony take two heading to the Holy Land. We’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o and by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box the affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D Just like 3D but they go one dimension deeper. It’s my pleasure to welcome Amy sample Ward returning she’s the ceo of N 10 and our technology and social media contributor there at AMY sample ward dot org and at Amy R. S Ward and to welcome Bruce. She is a leading public interest technologist who has spent her career working at the intersection of technology policy and society. She’s held senior science and technology positions at data kind, the White House, the FBI and IBM She’s at a few a underscore Bruce who is a F. U. A. Together they’ve co authored the book the tech that comes next how change makers, philanthropists and technologists can build an equitable world. Their book is at the tech that comes next dot com. Amy welcome to nonprofit radio Thanks

[00:02:26.04] spk_1:
for having us.

[00:02:27.35] spk_2:
I’m glad to

[00:02:28.07] spk_1:
hear what you

[00:02:29.25] spk_0:
think both of you for the first time. Very nice to meet you. Glad to have you.

[00:02:34.51] spk_2:
I’m so excited to be here.

[00:02:53.06] spk_0:
Thank you, excited. That’s terrific. You may be more excited than I am. I don’t know, but I know I’m very excited. I’m very pleased. I already said I was pleased, excited. Is excited is even better than pleased. Thank you. Uh let’s start with you since people know AMY sample ward voice. Um I feel like we should start with a definition of technology the way you to see it.

[00:03:45.79] spk_2:
Absolutely technology can mean many things to many different people and even when people just simply hear the word of technology here, the word technology contra and hope of the future and assistive devices that may transform our world, but it can also bring up feelings of in trepidation and confusion and so in the book, when we talk about technology, we define it very broadly as to what our tools that exist to help us really exist in the world. Um and so this can be anything from digital systems and websites and like AI for example, but it’s also more basic things such as you know, pay deeper or other tools that are just used. And so we define it extremely broadly in the book. The focus of the book does focus on digital technologies though and really looking at adoption and use and development of digital technologies especially as it relates to the social impact sector

[00:04:07.28] spk_0:
and what what troubles you about our relationship to technology?

[00:04:36.38] spk_2:
Um, well I am an engineer, a computer engineer specifically. And so I love technology. I love being in technology. I love doing all sorts of things with technology. I love designing new ways to use technology and figuring out how to design technology to support new ways of interact that we have. I think one of the things that

[00:04:41.22] spk_1:
does

[00:05:34.13] spk_2:
give me pause though is how some see technology or some try to position technology as the be all and end all the magic solution that we could have to solve all of our problems. And that if we simply find the right technology, if we simply insert technology into any societal problem that we’re facing, that that technology will magically fix whatever we have been facing. And that’s simply not true technology not a natural phenomenon. It is something that we could create. It’s something that we should be intentionally creating to minimize bias to make sure that technology is developed and used in inclusive ways and really does enhance what we want to do as humans, which is hopefully live well together in community. Um and not just be used as some big tool to force uh different, often um different, often disproportionately impacting outcomes

[00:05:45.54] spk_0:
and you have a lot to say about development specifically more more equitable development.

[00:07:43.75] spk_2:
Yes, absolutely. Um I think equitable development of technology is something that can and should be continuing to grow. I think historically, especially when we look at the past several decades of the rise of digital technologies and technology more broadly the um the power, the money, the education has been concentrated in one group and a lot of other groups, it includes a lot of historically underrepresented or overlooked communities um based on ethnicity, based on gender identity, based on sexuality, based on ability, physical ability, mental ability or more um have really been left out or forgotten about. And so when we talk about a more inclusive design process and more inclusive development process for technology, we’re talking about one being more inclusive to who is actually allowed in the room when we talk about technology design. So who do we see as capable of being technologist um and who have who has those abilities to engage that way, but also recognizing that because technology does not exist alone, but because technology doesn’t exist in a vacuum, because technology can’t magically solve all of our problems on our own. Even if you’re not a technologist, you should be at the table in some of these design conversations because you are part of communities that have needs and those needs should be articulated at the start of the design process. You might understand a particular subject matter. I think in the book we talk about using technology in the education space, in the food space in other spaces as well, you may have some of that knowledge that is critical to making sure that the technology supports the overall goals of those sectors. And so it is important that as we think about being inclusive in developing technology, we make space for not just different types of people who are able to be technologists, but also different types of expertise that we need in that developed process.

[00:08:09.00] spk_0:
So you’re not so pleased with the model where rich, privileged white males develop technology develop, identify what’s going to be solved and how best to solve it. I I assume that that model is not working for you.

[00:08:27.26] spk_2:
I would say I would go even further than

[00:08:30.25] spk_0:
going out and

[00:08:30.92] spk_2:
it’s not working for most of us. Um so it is not working for most of us to have the power concentrated in that

[00:08:52.64] spk_0:
way. Okay. And in fact, uh someone see, I don’t know who wrote which sentences, but somebody wrote. We can’t continue to perpetuate the belief that those with the most money know best. I don’t know, maybe your editor put that in. You may not even be one of the two of you. I don’t know. Maybe

[00:08:57.13] spk_2:
I

[00:08:58.76] spk_0:
trust

[00:09:36.43] spk_2:
me amy and I spent many, many hours on many, many aspects of writing and editing to make sure that what is in the book. We both stand behind. And so absolutely with that sentence. Something that I think we we both stand behind. Um We can’t let you said we can’t let one small population in this case rich privileged white men be the ones who design all of the technology and decide all of the outcomes for everyone. We really need to. And in the book we talk a lot about how it’s so important, why it is so important to go back to communities and communities who understand their needs to understand their priorities and let communities drive that process. That would then include um policymakers. That then includes funders that that includes um technologists themselves and that includes

[00:09:53.21] spk_0:
uh

[00:09:54.53] spk_2:
the leaders and employees at social impact organizations.

[00:09:58.85] spk_0:
Another aspect of it is that just what’s what problems get solved? What what what gets attention?

[00:10:06.18] spk_2:
Absolutely. And um I think we have lots of ideas on this, but I have been talking for so long. Um I would love to pass it.

[00:10:29.88] spk_0:
We’ll get a simple word gets amy sample Ward will get their chance. Okay. Um Alright, if you insist for All right. Um Okay, if we have to go to Amy Now. All right. Uh You say somebody wrote this sentence. Uh Exactly related to what I was just saying. We dream of community centered work that builds from community centered values and there’s a lot of emphasis on going back to values. Um Why don’t you uh just sort of introduce us to the some of those values amy

[00:14:05.53] spk_1:
sure. Happy to. um I think that you know one thing we say in the book and we’ve we’ve enjoyed getting to talk to a lot of groups about since the book has come out is that everything we do as people is centered on values, but often times we don’t talk about them, we don’t make sure that our values are aligned when we start working on something. And so then those values become a some and I think we’ve all heard many different puns about what happens when you operate on assumption. Right. And so that’s that’s kind of part and parcel of also assuming that the only people that can make technology are people with certain degrees or that have a certain amount of money or that you know look a certain way. Um again that that’s those are values that we’re not talking about and that we need to talk about so that we can be really intentional about what we want to focus on. Um and in the book, you know of who has already been speaking to some of those values that there’s important role and we need to prioritize lots of different lived experience as an important part of any technology project. Um that a lot of different people should be involved in every single stage of that process, not like at the end, once we build something and we like pull the pull the little cover off and are like today we built it, what do you think there should be no pulling the cover off? You know, everyone should have already been part of it and known it was being built this whole time. Um but also values that I think are important to can it name early in the conversation around accessibility, so much of the barriers and the walls around technology projects that are there, you know again, whether people are talking about them explicitly or not that are maintaining this this false reality, that only certain people can be involved are coming from a place of saying oh we speak a certain way we use these acronyms. We we talk about things without slowing down for other people to be involved. So what does accessibility look like? Not just that a tool could be used with a system of you know devices but really that you are not using jargon that you’re making sure things are being held at the time of day when those folks that you want involved can be there. Um that child care is provided that your user group meetings, you know every level that you are operating in ways that really do make things accessible to everyone. Um and I think another value that we like to talk about early in conversations is the book is kind of a big idea like the world is not the world we have right now, like what if it was not this, what if it was equitable and just and wonderful. Um, and I know you want to talk about the illustrations colorful uh, you know, so to get there. It’s not like two steps. It’s not okay. That’ll be on like the 2024 plan, right? It’s a lot of work. And so technology and the relationship and expectations we put on it just like social change are that we can make incremental right now immediate changes and at the same we can be working on really big changes. The shifts that get us to a very different world that we have to do both. We can’t just say, well let’s live with harmful technologies and and harmful realities until we can all of a sudden just change over to the like non harmful one. Um, you know, we need to make changes today as we’re building for bigger change.

[00:16:31.93] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. Turn to communications. They have a bi weekly newsletter that I get. It’s called on message and they had something interesting in the, in the last one, it was five ways to find the timely hook and I’ve talked about news hooks with them that can be a great opportunity for you to be heard when there is some kind of a news hook. So how do you find these timely hooks, couple of their ideas track recognition days and months. I just did that in august, it was national make a will month and I did a bunch of content around that and there was, you know, there are days and months for everything like pickled day and a lot. So you can search for, you can search for the the recognition days and months, find something that fits with your work. Another one was just staying current with the news. They said they were gonna send their e newsletter on the day that queen Elizabeth died but they thought better of it because you’re not gonna be able to get people’s attention. People are just gonna be deleting emails more rapidly because they’re consumed with the death of the queen. So they held off a day or two. Um, and tying to a trend is another one that they suggested. Uh and they give the example of when um including salaries in job postings was trending and they used the example of somebody who actually wrote contrary to that idea. But it was timely because it was something that lots of people were talking about. So there’s a couple of ways of identifying the hooks, You can get their newsletter on message. Of course you go to turn hyphen two dot c o. Turn to communications. Your story is their mission now back to the tech that comes next. How is it that technology is not neutral? Amy

[00:16:36.71] spk_1:
well,

[00:16:37.09] spk_0:
humans, humans,

[00:17:26.74] spk_1:
I don’t think humans have the capacity to be neutral. And we are the ones creating technology. I mean even before digital technologies. You know, the number of um, pieces of farm equipment that could be considered technology, you know, humans built those that kill people who are left handed because the tool was built by right handed people to be used with your right hand, right? Like there’s there’s not a lot of evidence that humans can be neutral. And so then you add to that that we’re building it with a often very small group of people not talking about values for something that is meant to be you know, used in a different context with different people. It’s it just doesn’t have the capacity to be neutral. Let’s

[00:17:43.78] spk_0:
take something that’s so ubiquitous. It’s an easy example. Let’s take facebook. How is so somebody’s facebook is there, you can use it or not use it. How is that not just a neutral entity sitting there for you to use or not use,

[00:19:31.46] spk_1:
I mean you are welcome to use or not use facebook but just because you have the choice to use something or not use, it doesn’t mean it’s neutral. The platform is collecting your data is selling your data is deciding whether and how you can use the tool to connect with other people or to create groups, right? It is not allowing you the control over how your data and and use of the platform goes. So it’s kind of a false choice really. Um and for a lot of people, it is very much a false choice. There. There isn’t the feeling that they cannot use it if it’s the only quote unquote free tool that they could use to find certain resources or to otherwise, you know, talk and stay in communication with certain people, but at what cost, you know, and I think that’s the kind of conversation we’re trying to spark in the book is technology isn’t neutral, we just accept that and then we say and so at what cost at what harm are people having to make these choices around how they navigate technology? And we we have never presupposed in this book or in our lives that facebook or any other platform is going to necessarily make the choices that are best for the community and that’s why policymakers have an entire chapter in the book. You don’t need to be a text specialist or have a who is you know, technical background to be a policymaker that’s making smart protective policies that for users we need to say, hey people should be able to access and protect and restrict their data. Let’s make some policies around that. Right? Because the platforms are not going to make that policy themselves that that restricts them. Um and so I think again, all of these different groups together, get us to the tools that we need and not just the technology developers themselves,

[00:19:56.28] spk_0:
a few anything you want to add to that. Uh My my question about why facebook is not a neutral tool.

[00:20:50.18] spk_2:
I I think Amy gave a really good overview as to why technology and facebook in this case is not neutral. I think um you know, a lot of people now you’ll hear say they algorithm made me see it, the algorithm didn’t make me see something and that just also goes to the fact that someone has programmed the algorithm, someone has decided what will be given more weight or what will be given less weight, what will be emphasized won’t be emphasized. And so that then drives your interactions and the biases that the programmers have or the stated goals that the owners of the platform have then get seen to encoded into the technology that you use, whether it’s facebook or any other platform that then can affect how you interact, even if you do decide to often to using the technology as Amy mentioned, you always well not always, but you often have a choice as to which technology you want to use, what platform you want to log into, you want to engage with or not, but once you’re there, your choices are often limited in ways you might not realize because of the fact that technology is not neutral.

[00:21:20.02] spk_0:
We’re getting into the idea of oppressive systems which which the book talks about for you wanna explain. So, facebook may very well be an example, but what what what what’s oppressive systems generally,

[00:23:01.71] spk_2:
you know, I think one of the underlying themes of our book is that technology can really be used to enhance goals and to sort of enhance missions, and we argue in the book that we want to, you know, social impact organizations, especially communities to find ways for technology to enhance their mission, to help them accomplish their goals more often. But the reality is that technology again sits on top of people because it’s created by people and so to the egg extent in which extent to which um there are oppressive systems and society, whether that’s around how people get jobs or access education or access other resources, um that is then I can just be translated into the technology systems that then help facilitate our lives. It’s the same principles for different sort of outdated policies that have been rooted in unequal access. For example, if you just take those policies and write code then um that directly relates to policies, the new system, this technical system you’ve created has those same oppressive oppressive aspects in that system. And so again, when we talk about designing technology does need to come back to what communities are we designing for? Are we talking to them? Are we letting communities really drive that work? And through the development process are we really keeping in mind some of the historical context, some of the social context, some of the knowledge about biases and how that appears in different technology and what ties doesn’t have to how organizations function and how policymakers do their work, Um what we need to be funding to make sure that we have the time and the money to invest in a more inclusive process.

[00:25:40.82] spk_1:
I just want to add as I was talking about that um, and kind of trying to like hear our own conversation while while we’re in it and to share the reminder that while of course like facebook is this giant huge technology platform. Um, we are also talking about technologies that nonprofits make, you know, an organization that decided to have their staff or hire a web designer to help build something on their website that allowed users to complete their profile or to donate on their website. All of these things that organizations are doing with technology is also developing technology, right? It also needs to be inclusive. It should also have a lot of your community members and users part of that process the whole way, right. This isn’t just for for profit giant tech companies to hear this feedback, this is everyone including the way we fund our own technology inside of organizations, the way we prioritize or build or don’t prioritize or you know, don’t build technology and when we, when we think of it that way and you know, it’s just so easy, I think or I think it is easy to to say, oh my gosh, facebook is an oppressive platform, all of these things are horrible. It’s done all of these things. We can, you know, we could search for news articles from a decade of issues, right? But that kind of shifts the attention. Um, and acts like we as organizations don’t have any blame to share in that not that we’re sharing in facebook’s blame, but like we too are part of making not great decisions around technology, you know. Um there’s an organization that I I experienced this as a user on their website and had to give them some feedback that there they collected demographics as you’re creating your profile super common to do right? Um, their race and ethnicity category for like all humans that would answer this category only had four options total of all of the races and ethnicities in the world. There were four. Not one of those options was multiracial, not one of those was other. Let me tell you the thing you didn’t list here, right? You had to pick required question with four radio

[00:25:52.25] spk_0:
buttons.

[00:26:29.98] spk_1:
That’s that is that is harmful, right? Like you and maybe there was a good reason, not a good reason. Maybe there was a reason that you felt, you know, your funder makes you report in those four categories. I totally understand how hard it is to like manage your work as well as meeting all these funder reporting requirements. That’s something we talk about the book that is an issue. We need to go fix funders reporting requirements, but just because a funder says give us state in these four categories does not mean those are your four categories right? You have an obligation to your car community to be better than that. Um, and so I just want to name that as an example that we’re not just taking the easy route of complaining about facebook, which I would love to do for like five more hours.

[00:26:41.44] spk_0:
No facebook is not even facebook is not even,

[00:26:43.71] spk_1:
you know what I mean? Also trying to name it as something we’re doing inside our organizations to

[00:28:58.50] spk_0:
your example reminds me of the example you cite from jude shimmer who says, you know, she’s filling out a donation, they’re filling out a donation form and there’s no mx option. It was mr mrs Miss, I guess no mx um, by the way, you had several nonprofit radio guests quoted in the book, Jason sham steve hi jude. So I’m glad non profit radio brought these folks to your attention. You know, elevated their voices so that you, you became aware of them because you would not have known them outside. Well that’s elevating voices. That’s exactly exactly right. It’s time for a break. 4th dimension technologies, technology is an investment. Are you seeing this? You’re investing in staff productivity, you’re investing in your organization’s security donor relations because you’re preserving giving and all the actions and all the person’s preferences and their attendance and things. So you’re certainly investing in your donor relationships, uh, in your sustainability. So because technology is gonna help you preserve your mission into the future. So I don’t want to just throw something out and then not explain it. So see technology as an investment, fourth dimension can help you invest wisely. So, uh, make those savvy tech investment decisions. You can check them out on the listener landing page at Just like three D. But you know, they don’t want to mention deeper. Let’s return to the tech that comes next. All right. So let’s bring it. All right. So no, as I said, facebook is not mentioned in the book. I was choosing that as a ubiquitous example, but let’s bring it to something that is non profit created. Who wants to talk about. I kind of like the john jay college case because I used to do planned giving consulting for john jay, who, which of you knows that story better. Nobody

[00:30:43.41] spk_2:
looking at other resume. But I will, I will happen and talk about the john jay college example. So just briefly for folks who might not have read the book or gotten to that section of the book yet. Um, john jay college, an institution in new york city that had recognized that they had a lot of services geared towards making sure people finished their freshman year and started their second year, but not as many services geared towards people who, um, not as many services geared towards me, making sure people then ultimately graduate. And so specifically they had noticed that they had a large number of students or a not insignificant number of students who completed three quarters of the credits they needed to graduate but didn’t ultimately complete their degree and graduate. They partnered Data kind, which is an organization that provides data science and ai expertise to other profits and government agencies. Um so they worked with those data scientists to really understand their issue to look at the 20 years of data that the academic institution had collected. The data. Scientists ran about two dozen models, I think it was and ended up coming up with ended up developing a specific model specific tool for john jay college To use that identified students who are at risk of dropping out and potential interventions. The John Jay College staff then made the final determination as to what intervention would be done and how that would be done. And two years after this program was started at John Jay College credits the program with helping additional nine 100 students graduate. Um and so that is, I think, you know, one of the examples that we’re talking about of really the technology coming together with the subject matter experts really being used to enhance the mission and then really again, technology and humans working together to make sure that the outcomes are our best for everyone.

[00:31:04.33] spk_0:
There’s some takeaway there too in regard to ethics, the use of the data collection and use of the data. Can you talk about that? Absolutely,

[00:31:51.44] spk_2:
Absolutely, absolutely. As we think about data collect data collection data use data analysis, I think in general, especially in the social impact space, you want to make sure that you got consent when you collect the data that you’re collecting it in ways that make sense, that you’re not necessarily over collecting um you’re storing in the right way is protected in the right ways. Um and then as you need to do something with it, you can you can access it, you can use it as a way to foster communication across a different departments. I think one thing that was really exciting and talking to the john jay college staff as they said this program in that development actually force conversations across departments which if you’ve ever done any work at an academic institution, you know, working across departments on campus can be challenging and so sometimes the data can force those conversations and can also help strengthen arguments for the creation or um termination of different programs.

[00:32:15.79] spk_0:
Thank you because ethics is one of the one of your core values ethical considerations around around technology development and

[00:33:23.63] spk_1:
I think that’s I like that you’re bringing that up tony because I think it reinforces, I mean a fool was saying this, but just to kind of like explain those words when we’re saying that technology is there to help humans, it means that algorithm that was created is not moving forward and sending, you know, a resource or sending an inch invention to a student, it is not there to do the whole process itself, right? It’s there for its portion and then humans are looking at it, they are deciding, you know, who needs, what resources, who needs what intervention. And they then do that outreach right? Versus that idea that I think nonprofits especially think of all the time. Like if we just got the tool then this whole like thing will be solved and it’ll just like somehow run its course, you know, and like the robots will be in charge and that’s not great. We don’t need to do that. We’re not looking for robots to be in charge but also in this really successful example of technology being used, it’s still required people, you know, the technology isn’t here to replace them. It’s to do the part that we don’t have the time to do. Like crunch all those numbers and figure those things out and then the people are doing what people are meant to do, which is the relationship side, The intervention side, the support side, you know. Um and

[00:33:43.70] spk_0:
I just want to kind

[00:33:44.49] spk_1:
Of separate the two right?

[00:33:46.71] spk_0:
The tool was to flag those who are at greatest risk of not graduating after they have I think three quarters of the points or credits. Uh so so that

[00:33:58.99] spk_1:
that

[00:34:13.73] spk_0:
right, that that’s an ideal day. That’s an ideal uh data mining artificial intelligence task. Just flag the folks who are at greatest risk because we’ve identified the factors like I don’t remember what any of the factors were. G. P. A. I think was one. But whatever the factors are identified them now flag these folks. Now it’s time for a human to intervene and give the support to these to this population so that we can have 900 more folks graduating than than we expect would have without without the use of the tool.

[00:35:19.70] spk_2:
Yeah, absolutely. And just to continue to build on what Amy was saying. I think sometimes as nonprofits are considering technology or maybe hearing pitches about why they should use technology or why they should select a particular technology. It can be overwhelming because sometimes the perception is that if you adopt technology it has to then take over your system and and rem move sort of the human aspect of running your nonprofit and that’s simply not the case. You can always push back as to what those limits need to be sort of in general but also very specifically for your organization for your community. What makes sense? What doesn’t make sense? And so really prioritizing as Amy said, the using the technology to take advantage and to do those tasks that or just simply more efficient and computers are more capable of doing that while you use the humans involved for the more human touch and some of those more societal factors I think really um it’s important to emphasize that as leaders of social impact organizations, as leaders of nonprofits, you have that agency to sort of understand and to decide where the technology is used and where it isn’t used.

[00:36:57.67] spk_1:
Yeah, we, we were really conscious when we were working on the book to disrupt this pattern that you know, it’s like you learn a new word and then you see it in everything that you read. Um once, once we talk about it here, you’re gonna like go and everything you click on on the internet, you’re going to see it. But technology companies have been trying to sell us for a long time very successfully that their product is a solution and technologies are constantly using that language when you’re looking at their website, when they’re talking to you, you know, this is an all in one crm solution, this whatever, they are not solutions, they are tools and as soon as we, as you know, non profit staff start adopting that, they are the solutions, we then start kind of relinquishing the control, right? And thinking, oh well the solution is that this too, tool has all of this, It is just a tool, you are still the solution right? You are still the human and we, we didn’t want to have that language in the book. So you know, we’re always talking about technology as a tool because with, without humans needing to put it to work, it doesn’t need to exist. We don’t need to have a world that’s trying to make sure we can maintain all of this technology if we don’t need it anymore. Thank you for your service. Like please move along. We don’t, we don’t need that anymore. And that’s okay. We don’t need to feel bad that a tool isn’t needed anymore. It’s not needed. Great. We have different needs now, you know, um and changing that kind of dynamic and relationship inside organizations.

[00:37:24.77] spk_0:
A Crm database is a perfect example of that. It’s not gonna, it’s not gonna build relationships with people for you. It’s just gonna keep track of the activities that you have and it’s gonna identify people’s giving histories and event attendance and help them ticket etcetera. But it’s not going to build personal relationships. They’re gonna lead to greater support whether it’s volunteering or being a board member or donating whatever, you know, it’s

[00:37:39.88] spk_1:
not the mission, It’s not the food at the gala. Even if it sold the tickets to the gala right? Like it isn’t at all.

[00:38:13.47] spk_0:
So I, so I gathered so the Wiley did most of the writing on the book is what I gather because I managed a couple of quotes and nobody like nobody claimed them. So um and also the I I see there’s only two pictures, I like a lot of pictures in books. You only have two pictures and then you repeat the same two pictures from the beginning, You repeat them at the end and and they’re in black and white, they’re not even four color pictures. So there’s a little shortcomings

[00:38:15.70] spk_1:
that’s because in the book they could only be black and white, but in the e book they can, the one that’s meant to be in color can be in color.

[00:38:25.00] spk_2:
And also we knew that our readers have imaginations of their own and the words that we have on the page would evoke such strong images we didn’t want

[00:38:33.81] spk_0:
to overly

[00:38:34.58] spk_2:
provide images in the book.

[00:40:08.82] spk_0:
Very good, well played. Okay, it’s time for Tony’s take Two. I’m headed to the Holy Land in november. I’m traveling to Israel for two weeks and I’m wondering if you have suggestions of something that I should see? We can crowdsource my my sight seeing a few things that are already on my itinerary, of course the old city in Jerusalem um Haifa and the Baha’I gardens the Dead Sea and uh mitzpe ramon. You may have some other ideas, things that uh you found or places to eat, maybe that would be that would be great little uh terrific places that I should try in either Jerusalem or tel Aviv I’ll be spending a lot of time in, in those two places but also near these other, these other ones that I mentioned to Haifa So if you know a good restaurant eatery, I’d appreciate that too. You could get me at tony at tony-martignetti dot com. I’d be grateful for your Israel travel suggestions and anything else that you may recommend about Israel travel. I haven’t been there, so I’d be grateful to hear from you that is tony steak too. We’ve got boo koo but loads more time for the tech that comes next with Amy sample ward and a few a Bruce. Let’s let’s talk about another story. Talk about, let’s talk about, yeah, you, you all pick one, pick one of your case cases stories to talk about that that you like,

[00:44:39.78] spk_1:
I can talk about one since the flu already talked about one, but I was thinking because you already said it earlier, the food sector, so there’s one in there on rescuing leftover cuisine, an organization founded in new york. Um, and I think a pretty classic example of non profit trajectory like someone has personal lived experience they want to address, you know, make sure people don’t have the experience they had and create an organization kind of accidentally like they just start doing the work and they’re like, wait, what am I doing? Wait, we’ve just created a nonprofit, you know, and and kind of want to build because they start to have success actually doing the thing that they set out to do. Um, but like many nonprofits you reach the limit of human scale, like you get to the, this is only the number of people I can personally talk to or physically carry food, you know from one restaurant to to a shelter or whatever. Um and realize, oh we’re gonna need some tools to help us make this thing work. Um and grow beyond just the handful of initial people and also like many nonprofits, that was a very reactive process, right? Like oh gosh, we need a calendar tool, here’s one, oh gosh, we need a, you know, a phone tool, here’s one and not what is the best, you know, what what do we really need? How do we solve these goals? So they found themselves a few years in with very common nonprofit sector, like little patchwork, you know, all different kinds of things. They’ve kind of forced and often the the integration to use the technical term, the integration between tools was humans like answered the phone and then typed it into the tool because the person on the phone doesn’t have access to type it into the schedule er right? Like I they were having to be the tech integrations as humans, which meant humans were not doing human work, right? Humans were doing work that that the robots should be able to do. Um and that’s when they brought in more strategic dedicated technology. Um staff helped to build and again, what they didn’t really realize at first is they were building a product, you know? Um I think this is a bigger conversation of you and I have with organizations is we are we have products, we’ve built products. It’s not bad. And I think especially in the US, we’ve come to think that product is like a for profit word and we will have nothing to do with it. But what it just means is like it’s a package, it is a thing that’s doing what it’s meant to do. And we should think about how we make sure it works and who can access it. And you know, we bring some strategy to it. Um, but their process is really what drew us to including them in the book. They had a really inclusive process where all the different folks from, you know, that were users. So the volunteers who physically like went to the restaurant and picked up that food and and took it to an agency, the people in the agencies, the people in the kitchen of the restaurants, all those different people were able to say, oh, I wish the tool did this. I wish that I could do this every day when I need to pick up food. I wish I could get this kind of message. Everyone was able to give that feedback and then see everybody else’s requests so that as the staff and community and the tech team prioritized, okay, well what works together? What can we build next? What’s in line to be built next? Everyone had transparency. Everyone could see that everyone understood, okay, my thing is last or like I know why my thing is last, right? Like people could really see and give feedback and be part of the process the whole time kind of back to the very beginning of this conversation with us said, even if they were not the technical developers themselves, they had important expertise, Right? It was good to know, oh, these five different restaurants all want the same thing, what’s happening, right? Like what is the thing that’s happening for restaurants trying to offer food? Let’s figure that out. We know who to get feedback from, you know, um, we’re just such a wonderful example of people really having everyone involved in the whole process. Um, and as they have done that and continue to do that, they were able to move people out of, you know, answering the phone to type into the calendar and move people into human jobs. Um, grew the organization, it’s now in eight different cities in different states. Um, and that’s just more of the mission happening, right? Because technology was invested in in the right kind of way.

[00:45:02.73] spk_0:
So takeaways are transparency in prioritizing development inclusiveness, including

[00:45:10.61] spk_1:
the, including

[00:45:11.71] spk_0:
the community, all the, all the different

[00:45:14.65] spk_1:
people

[00:45:15.63] spk_0:
who are impacted, giving them agency

[00:45:18.80] spk_1:
to

[00:45:19.70] spk_0:
contribute and not not have it developed.

[00:45:24.33] spk_1:
Yeah. And they had,

[00:45:25.28] spk_0:
I don’t know how much

[00:46:40.74] spk_1:
of this made it into the book, but you know, in talking with them and having conversations, you know, there were a number of times where the thing they were hearing from, all these different users that needed to be prioritized wasn’t something as staff, they maybe would have identified or at least prioritized, but when you’re really listening and having the community drive that development, you know, is that what you’re investing in is actually going to make it better for your community, right? It’s the thing that they’re asking for versus you saying, Gosh, we have, you know, what’s next on our development docket, wonder what we could build, Like let’s think of something you’re not kind of guessing, you know, exactly what needs to be built and that’s kind of reinforcing for your users that you are listening that you are valued that they want this to be as good of an expiry as possible for you, right, Which is really kind of um bringing people in closer and and I think we all know, especially tony as the fundraiser, like keeping people, it’s a lot easier than bringing in new people. So if you can keep those partners in great, you know, you keep those volunteers in instead of having to recruit new ones because you’re burning them out because they don’t like working with you, it’s not a good experience, you know? Um yeah,

[00:47:26.71] spk_0:
let’s talk about the funding, but but not from the funders side because most of the very few of our listeners are on the, on the funding side, they’re on the grantee side and so from the, well the book, you talk about social impact organizations, but this is tony-martignetti non profit radio not tony-martignetti social impact organization, radio So so if we could use, please use nonprofits as an example in their funding requests, they’re doing grants, what what can nonprofits do smarter about requesting funds around technology, the development and the use that’s going to be required for the, you know, for the, for the project that they’re trying to get funded.

[00:47:32.08] spk_1:
Yeah,

[00:47:32.45] spk_2:
absolutely. This is a question that Amy and I have gotten so many times since the book has come out.

[00:47:42.97] spk_0:
Okay, well I’ll give you a milk toast bland ubiquitous question that not that

[00:49:01.18] spk_2:
it’s a milk toast question, but it is one that is so important to organizations and that even for non profit organizations that have thought about technology before, then the question becomes how are you going to get it funded right? And so, um, it’s an incredibly important question. And so I think that there are a couple of things that non profits can do. One is to seek out funders who are explicitly funding technology, we’ve seen an increase I think over the past several years in different foundations, different companies who are specifically funding technology and so looking for those types of funders. Um, I think it’s really important, I think then another thing to do is to really make the case as we make in the book that um, funding technology is part of funding programs of the organizations and part of funding the running of the organization. Um, it’s not simply an overhead costs. That is a nice to have that. If you get around to it, you can do it, but really you need to have strong technology and data practices in order to design your programs to run your programs. Um people, you know, are used to being out in the world and interacting with technology in certain and so when they come to your nonprofit, they still probably would like to have a website that sees them that recognizes them. That’s useful. They might like to know how to get connected to other people in your community, other staff members and what those communication technologies might look like and more. And so really looking for ways to write technology into program design as non profits are doing that

[00:49:25.77] spk_1:
as well. And

[00:49:25.97] spk_2:
then I think thirdly, just being connected with other nonprofits through organizations such as N 10 and listening to other great podcasts such as this one um to hear what, what other nonprofits are doing and what’s been successful as well. And applying some of those techniques to your own organization.

[00:49:47.95] spk_0:
I feel bad that I gave short Shrift to the, to the foundation listeners. So, I mean there’s there’s lessons in what you just said. Um, are there one or two other things that we can point out for uh for foundation listeners that to raise their consciousness.

[00:51:25.89] spk_2:
Absolutely. Um, I think one of, I think, you know, there are many things about technology that can be funded, especially with nonprofit organizations. And I really encourage foundations to think about what it means to really fund that inclusive innovation process and to fund when I say innovation. I mean recognizing that version one is might not be perfect. And so funding version 1.1 and 1.2 and version two point oh, is just as valuable as funding version one. We see this all the time in the private sector that, you know, my phone gets updates on a regular basis and I still have a, and that’s okay. And so really wanting to make sure that funders recognize that we don’t need to just create new technology every time for the sake of creating something new, but really allowing the space for that iteration and really adjusting to the community needs is really important. I think also making sure that we’re funding inclusivity and so that can be things such as uh compensating people, you know, from the community for time, um, as they are involved in this development process, making sure that there’s money in the budget for all staff, not just a member of the tech team to get training on technology, but there’s money for all staff to get training on the different technologies that the organization is using. Um, and also the timelines that are given to nonprofits doing their programs allows for that really critical community listening and community input process into developing any technology and then ultimately developing and executing programs,

[00:51:49.02] spk_0:
I’m glad you just used community as an example because I wanted to probe that a little deeper how

[00:51:55.99] spk_1:
I

[00:52:11.32] spk_0:
guess, I guess I’m asking how you define community because you say that, you know, technologists and social impact or eggs and policymakers and communities can can be should be more involved in uh, technology development. How are you defining communities there?

[00:54:23.04] spk_1:
We’re not in a way because technology that N 10 builds for, you know, the community that that we have is very different than um, you know, that would be a bunch of nonprofit staff from mostly U. S. And Canada, but also all over the world, um of all different departments. Right? That that would be the community that intent has, but the community around, um, you know, the equitable giving circle in Portland. Well, that’s Portland’s specific very, you know, geographically different than the N 10 community. Um, it’s folks who can do monthly donations that want to support, uh, you know, black community in Portland, it community is meant to be defined based on what is trying to be built and and for whom it’s meant to be used. Um, and that’s going to be flexible, but I think where it really comes in is what we talked about in the book, in the funding section, but also all of the sections is what does it look like when we expect that transfer to community ownership is the final stage of technology development. Right. And so if that is the final stage, if um the community, you know, owning the technology that was developed by someone, um is the final step well, there needs to be a level of training and an investment that is very different than if you’re planning to keep this privately yourself the whole time, right? If you’re going to turn it over to the community to own it and maintain it, you’re going to be investing in that community in the process in a very different way. You’re going to be including people in a different way. You’re going to be thinking about knowledge transfer, not just technical transfer, right? Um and so that relationship with the community is inherent to the goal at the end. And I think that’s for us, part of what is so important about thinking about that big question of what does it look like for community to really own technology? Like even in the biggest widest sense, because right now, We as users don’t own the Internet, right? Really, there’s there’s 45 million people just in the us that can’t even access broadband. So the idea that the any of these tools, even in the widest biggest, you know, most access sense are are collectively owned isn’t real. And so that goes back to community, but it also goes back to policy, it goes back to how we’re investing in these tools, what values we are even using when we, when we access them? Um, that’s the whole book right there, I guess.

[00:55:00.40] spk_0:
Uh, the book is also, uh, a lot of questions. I always hope to get answers. When I read books this, this book, lots of questions questions at the end of every chapter and then they’re compiled at the end. They’re organized differently at the end. Why did you take that tack?

[00:56:06.65] spk_2:
Absolutely, yes. Our book does perhaps answer some questions, but it does provide questions. And that’s because what this work looks like varies based on the community you’re in based on your nonprofit organization, based on your role as a policy maker based on your roll thunder perhaps. Um, it varies. And so what your specific solution will look like. There’ll be some of the same building blocks, but the actual techniques you use will need to vary. And so the questions that we have at the end of each chapter at the end of the chapter on social impact organizations. For example, there are, I think 25 questions and five of those are questions that you ask someone as a nonprofit can ask of other nonprofits about technology. You as someone as a nonprofit can ask of your funders to start that conversation with some funders that we were just sort of summarizing now. What are specific questions that you should be asking of your funders were specific questions you should be asking of technologists that come to you and say, have we got a solution for you? Um, what are specific questions that you should be asking? Policymakers? Um, within the realm of what’s allowed for nonprofits to do part of the policy making process. And what are some real questions that you can ask of the communities that you serve and the communities you partner with to really get out, what are their needs and how might that tie to some of the technology needs for your organization?

[00:56:43.69] spk_0:
So what have we uh, what haven’t we talked about yet? That, that either of you would like to, uh, you feel like I’ve spent enough time on the well, here, I am asking you and then I’m proposing something. So I’ll cut myself off what, what what would, uh, whatever we talked about yet, either of you. That

[00:58:18.09] spk_1:
I mean, I think one thing that we have experienced is that there are some topics like how do we do this or how do we fund this or how do we make change? Um, you know, there’s some topics that recur throughout a lot of conversations, but ultimately, we have never had the same conversation about the book twice because that’s part of writing a whole book. That’s just questions, you know, and isn’t all the answers that isn’t Oh, great. You know, turn to chapter three where we list the 10 things you need to do tomorrow? Like there are no, I mean there’s probably 100 things, right? But um because of that, what we wanted to do when we wrote the book, even if, you know, we said at the beginning, even if no one reads this but ourselves, we want to feel like we are starting a conversation that we are just going to keep starting and keep having and keep getting closer to figuring out what’s next because it’s gonna be a whole long path. Um, and if it if we’re here to write a how to book that, who are we to write that? Right? Who are we to write the how to book on how we completely change the world? But what if we wrote a book that said, y’all, how do we change the world? Like really truly how let’s go, let’s go figure that out that motivates us. And so if it motivates us, it probably motivates others. And these conversations, I mean, I just love them because this yes, we had some of those recurring themes that all of us think about all the time. But this was a completely different conversation than we’ve had before and that, well, you know, different than we’ll have tomorrow. And I think what we’ve talked about the two of us is when we have

[00:58:31.93] spk_0:
not only not only different, but better,

[00:59:15.21] spk_1:
but when we have opportunities to talk about the book together with folks like you knowing that people are listening, right? Thousands of, of non private radio listeners, we want to, in a way have this be like a practice session for all of them so that when they finish the podcast and they go to their staff meeting, they’re like, hey, a food amy like never had their sentences thought out before they started probably said a million times. The bar isn’t high. I can just start asking questions, right? That’s why we have all the questions at the end. I can just start talking about this. There is no perfect, perfect doesn’t exist. So let’s not worry that I don’t know the exact way to talk about this technology project. Let’s just start talking about it and and get in there and have these conversations that we have almost model that process of just practicing the work of, of changing things.

[00:59:33.45] spk_0:
Anything you would like to uh leave us with anything we haven’t talked about that you would like to,

[01:00:00.54] spk_2:
you know, the subtitle of the book talks about building a more equitable world and we call out a few specific roles. But really I think it’s just important to recognize that we all have a role to play in building a more equitable world. And so if you see something in this world that you want changed. Hopefully this book does give you some real ideas about how you can go about doing that, some real questions to ask to find other people who can help you along that journey because really building an equitable world is an inclusive process and that includes you. So that’s that’s all I would add.

[01:00:43.80] spk_0:
She’s a for Bruce at a few uh underscore Bruce, her co author is Amy sample ward at Amy R S Ward and you’ll find the book the tech that comes next, how change makers, philanthropists and technologists can build an equitable world at the tech that comes next dot com. Amy, thank you very much. Pleasure.

[01:00:46.45] spk_1:
Thanks so much Tony.

[01:00:48.33] spk_2:
Thank you.

[01:01:39.63] spk_0:
You’re welcome. Thank you. Next week. Gene Takagi returns with Trust in nonprofits. If you missed any part of this week’s show, I beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com. We’re sponsored by Turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o. And by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box, the affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. Our creative producer is claire Meyerhoff shows social media is by Susan Chavez. Marc Silverman is our web guy and his music is by scott stein, Thank you for that information Scotty B with me next week for nonprofit radio big nonprofit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great

Nonprofit Radio for September 12, 2022: Planned Giving For Eastern Donors

 

Vidya Moorthy: Planned Giving For Eastern Donors

Cultural and familial differences between East and West raise issues for Planned Giving fundraising. Vidya Moorthy from Clural LLC and Bassett Education India, raises our consciousness.

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

 

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Fourth Dimension Technologies: IT Infra In a Box. The Affordable Tech Solution for Nonprofits.

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 608_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220912.mp3

Processed on: 2022-09-12T05:04:53.650Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…09…608_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220912.mp3.890319495.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/09/608_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220912.txt

[00:02:00.46] spk_0:
Hello and welcome to Tony-Martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with me. I’d get slapped with a diagnosis of two targa. I’d get slapped with a diagnosis of a target to turn to 22 to turn to torta no pia, I’d get slapped with a diagnosis of tutor to know pia if I saw that you missed this week’s show planned giving for Eastern donors, cultural and familial differences between east and west raise issues for planned giving, fundraising. Vidya murthy from chloral LLC and Bassett Education India raises our consciousness on Tony’s take to scott stein’s new album. We’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o. And by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box. The affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant four D. Just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper here is planned giving for Eastern donors. It’s a pleasure to welcome to nonprofit radio video murthy. She is founder of austin texas based chloral C L U R A L L L C and C. E. O of Bassett Education India Video is a communications specialist. D. Eye specialist and the specialist in cross cultural training, boundary crossing tactics, media relations and interpersonal communication. The company is at chloral dot C. O and you’ll find her on linkedin video. Welcome to nonprofit radio

[00:02:23.84] spk_1:
thank you so much. tony Happy to be here

[00:02:41.56] spk_0:
it’s a pleasure. Glad to have you this is a very interesting topic to me of course, because we’re talking about planned giving, but in a culture that I am not acquainted with, so I’ve got a lot of learning to do from you um before we go into the, all the cultural differences that, that I want to talk about, let’s define the eastern world for folks and for me, so I know what, what regions or what countries, you know, we’re talking about.

[00:02:58.65] spk_1:
Yeah, sure. So I think that’s a great place to start. I think when we talk about the eastern world we’re really talking everything that is east of africa and east of europe. So you’re talking the Middle East and then further on your talking china India sri lanka, um, you know all the way up until Singapore and Japan.

[00:03:21.56] spk_0:
Okay, Alright. So it is, it’s fair to lump japan and India together in our, in what we’re talking about today.

[00:03:45.44] spk_1:
Yeah. And the reason that, that I, that I think it might be okay, tony is uh, you know when you look at it at a, at a granular level is Alabama the same as California. No, not at all. But it is possible to paint all of America in broad strokes and I’m going to try to use those similar broad strokes with reference to the Eastern culture. The Eastern philosophy.

[00:03:54.61] spk_0:
Okay, okay. And Middle East as well you said

[00:03:57.19] spk_1:
yes, Middle East as well for

[00:04:03.79] spk_0:
sure. Alright, so we’ll talk in broad strokes and uh you know if I if I transgress and say something. You know if I try to draw a conclusion that’s inappropriate, you will you’ll cut me off at the knees, right?

[00:04:10.34] spk_1:
I doubt that’ll happen. But yes,

[00:04:20.02] spk_0:
now now there’s a good chance you gotta you gotta lackluster house at best, so you’ll be sure to stop me if I draw some conclusions or something that it’s just wrong. Just dead

[00:04:24.84] spk_1:
wrong,

[00:04:26.63] spk_0:
please. I’m counting on you, I’m counting on you to do that. All

[00:04:29.20] spk_1:
right.

[00:04:43.33] spk_0:
And I’ll of course I will try not to make a fool of myself as well. Alright. Uh I usually I I often I often succeeded that just often. So patriarchy, patriarchy is very important. What what do we need to know about the role of men in these cultures?

[00:05:14.22] spk_1:
Well again with reference to broad strokes, I think patriarchy is a familial structure, it’s an authority structure and it’s an organizational structure and the power of the male voice is not something that can be easily underestimated in the Eastern society. Um I think that it has a significant amount of both influence and control with reference to all kinds of decisions of all kinds of personal and professional decisions and I think particularly with respect to plan giving um I think the male voice kind of dominates those decisions in the Eastern world.

[00:05:38.57] spk_0:
Okay. Yeah, go ahead more more. I hope

[00:06:09.77] spk_1:
just one more point. I also want to kind of set the context that in several Eastern cultures. Um, the daughter in a family tony always gets married and leaves and walks into her husband’s house and her husband’s family. The Sun, however, stays back to carry on the family legacy and the family name and oftentimes his wife moves in with him and his parents. Business decisions, personal decisions are all just continued therefore from father to son and generation to generation. So a patriarch passes on his power and control to his son and

[00:06:26.21] spk_0:
like

[00:06:26.68] spk_1:
it or not, that kind of dictates the preference for the male child within the eastern family

[00:06:33.45] spk_0:
unit. Now everything we’re talking about today is this likely to be, uh, to be continued in folks who have immigrated to the US.

[00:07:32.00] spk_1:
Uh, I think the Western lifestyle is so powerful that it does seep through the walls of homes and it does tend to influence, um, and bring upon Western influences into Eastern homes. Um, I think basically the responsibility and the close knit structure of the family does stay together, but, but our immigrants families, you know, living together with their sons and daughters in law in multigenerational homes as is very common in the East. I doubt it. I doubt it because that’s where work takes folks right. I mean, my son might work in in, in California and, and therefore he cannot continue to live with me. And, and so I don’t see that system being perpetuated in immigrant families when they exist in, in, in Western worlds, but certainly the emotion is there certainly the sense of responsibility and the closer knit family structure is very much intact

[00:08:03.15] spk_0:
and, and still male dominated, you, you believe, but still, so patriarch quickly organized, not, not physically organized around patriarchy with, with the, with the wife of the sun moving in, not physically located, but, but the, the concept still prevailing. You think,

[00:08:31.24] spk_1:
oh absolutely, I think it does prevail. And I think that while I say that I must use a word of caution as well because just as with every generational difference, you know, even in America, even amongst families here, there’s a significant amount of difference in the last two generations. So I think we need to allow for that. Um, and, and, and know that, you know, there are going to be some families which kind of morph into more Western structures, but essentially at the core of it, the patriarchal voice is a very important, controlling, influencing voice.

[00:09:15.89] spk_0:
It sounds like the lesson is, you know, no, no, your donor and know know their family, you know, so we can, we were here raising awareness of what might exist in a, in a, in an immigrant family from, from the east, um, or might not. So, you know, for, for fundraisers, you know, we can raise your consciousness, you need to be aware of what the, what the dynamics are in a, in a donor and donor family that that your your you might be talking to.

[00:09:20.79] spk_1:
Oh absolutely. And I think that once you understand the nuances of the donor family and and whose voice is perhaps the loudest and what their key motivators are for any kind of giving. I think then you are on the verge of being able to design an effective approach strategy

[00:10:08.64] spk_0:
of course, write what moves them uh you know, programmatic program wise of course. But just in terms of, you know, where the decision making is, you might be talking to a female donor who might actually be, you know, uh in a in a marriage where the husband makes the decisions around finance as you were saying or you might not or it might it might be that the western culture is more seeped in in that family. So that’s what I’m saying. You know, you want to know the dynamics of the family you’re you’re working with.

[00:10:14.80] spk_1:
Oh, absolutely.

[00:10:16.20] spk_0:
Okay.

[00:10:17.11] spk_1:
And while you know, insight into that might be difficult. My my tip would be to pick up on a lot of nonverbal cues and kind of read between the lines when you’re interacting with these families. You know, sometimes

[00:10:32.24] spk_0:
that’s that’s juicy. Okay, what are some nonverbal clues, clues,

[00:11:19.45] spk_1:
clues for example, you know, you approach the home of the donor, you set up a meeting and whether they see you in the office or you see them in their home, Um, you’ll get and pick up a lot of cues in it. So for example, sometimes the wives may or may not even join the conversation and, and then you know, instantly that you know who, whose voice kind of dominates. Sometimes you might notice that as you walk into their office, you don’t see their wife’s office right next to his, you know, so you know, that perhaps she’s not engaged in that same line of work or you know, the responses seem seem to bear a certain unilateral authority rather than saying, Hey, I love talking with you, Let me talk to my wife and I’ll get back. He might, let’s say, you know, yeah, let’s do it done. And he’ll sign up right then and there or say no right then and there. So so you can kind of pick up and even when you’re talking to the wife, she might, you know, say this sounds great. It’s a very important, cause I suggest you talk to my husband, I’m traveling. I’m not even gonna be in town, but you can take it up with him. You know, and then you know that she’s probably not part of the routine decision making engine of the family.

[00:13:47.56] spk_0:
It’s time for a break turn to communications. I saw on linkedin, somebody defined crisis communications as applying to anything that’s out of the ordinary, not necessarily something bad just outside the day to day routine. And she used the example of dignitaries visiting her non profit obviously delightful, wonderful, great opportunity. Um, I can see, you know that sort of definition, but uh, because because it requires a crisis level response, even though it’s terrific, you wanna make sure, you know, you get the word out broadly leading up to it and, and during the event and after the event and you want to have that messaging being consistent and on brand and of course you have to manage the event itself. Um, you wanna tie in your own dignitaries, like your board and your major donors, major volunteers, Right folks that are your, your insiders. So, uh, maybe call it a positive crisis. You could think of it as as that. And another example might be a major anniversary, could be a positive crisis. So like your 20th or your 50th, this is all to say. That turn to, can help you with communications for these positive crises, great things that are happening that are way out of the ordinary. They can help you out with the messaging around all that because your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o Now back to planned giving for Eastern donors. You mentioned business to, uh, the, the, uh, I think you’re referring to the sun taking on the business of the of the father. Can you say a little more about that, that prevalence.

[00:14:46.12] spk_1:
Well, a lot of the times with reference, I think to to indian immigrant families and to Eastern immigrant families here in the United States, um, I would say that the fathers who moved here, let’s say in the eighties or in the nineties, you know, they worked tremendously hard tony to set up these businesses. Right. And, and that’s how they build better futures for themselves and their families. And so chances are that a significant portion of their Children are looking at taking over these organizations that their parents have created and along with inheriting not just the business, they tend to inherit the culture and the organizational philosophy that their parents intended when they started the organization. Right. So, so they take it upon themselves as a matter of, of responsibility to continue to toe that line and and to be able to make sure that they are indeed perpetuating what their parents most likely their fathers intended.

[00:15:02.34] spk_0:
Okay, so, so there is a responsibility across the generations,

[00:15:07.23] spk_1:
no

[00:15:09.38] spk_0:
doubt. Okay,

[00:15:10.08] spk_1:
no doubt.

[00:15:10.87] spk_0:
And that applies to daughters as well. You said, you said Children,

[00:15:25.02] spk_1:
of course, of course there’s numerous instances of, of super intelligent, empowered women that have done magic with what their fathers or mothers have created. And and that’s really heartening to see. And in fact, I know of several stories like that and those are the encouraging ones that, that I think a lot of other upcoming entrepreneurs and business women look up to as examples.

[00:15:49.28] spk_0:
You you mentioned when we were talking alone something about, you know synchronizing generational giving what what what what what’s what’s this about?

[00:16:58.46] spk_1:
So with reference to synchronization I think when Eastern families raise their kids um they are caught in a duality of their original cultures and also wanting to adopt, adapt and fit into the Western cultures. So every household kind of creates a marriage between the Eastern and the western world’s and picks values that they really try to instill and pass on into their sons and their daughters. They try to set boundaries on you know when they’re really young, you know saying this is what is acceptable to us or this is not acceptable to to us and they define and pick and choose which Western values can permeate through their walls into their homes and by doing so they try to sync up with their kids on their own values, what they believe in their approach towards money, their approach towards giving towards contribution to society. Um and and values that that they all follow in their personal lives as well in terms of whom you marry, how you spend money, how you communicate with those around you and maintain a social circle along with all of these. I think for sure you know the sense of giving back is also communicated and synchronized generation to generation.

[00:17:27.71] spk_0:
What can you generalize about thinking around supporting charitable work. You know I mean you know in a lot of other countries that doesn’t even exist very much, but but here in the U. S. You know, what what can you what can you generalize about support to to charity?

[00:20:25.88] spk_1:
What can I generalize? That’s such an interesting question, tony because uh you know, and this is in the Eastern world, in the Eastern world. If I were to draw generalizations, not here in the United States, but in the Eastern world, I would think that there are broadly three primary factors that drive planned giving in the Eastern world. It could be won a very heartfelt feeling for the cause itself. You know, you have you have philanthropists of of various economic capabilities who are trying to do their part towards the cost that they feel passionately about? And that’s the human drive, right? So, so that’s common for everybody across the planet. If you can you believe in a cause the humanness and you calls out to you and you give um in the Eastern world, a lot of plan giving is out of political pressure and and you do have to wade through through a lot of murky areas in order to navigate. I think those regions, because a lot of plan giving is very political in the Eastern world and and instead of a direct contribution to a political leader, he might say, hey, you know, can you build this park in this constituency or can be create a center of art in this constituency from from his constituency. So it’s it’s very politically driven. And third, I think is certainly the social status that comes with being known as a donor for a visible cause. And the social status in the Eastern world earns you so much in terms of almost a demigod kind of a status if you are that visible and if your donation is that visible. And I think in terms of generalizations, if I were to take these three and try to see if I can paint the Western donors from Eastern heritage in this same light, is it possible? I would say that only two of them are probably more applicable. A small percentage of them, I think would do it for uh, for political, the reason is a very small percentage, but broadly either they do it because they believe in the cause and they feel like it’s their turn to give back because they’ve crossed continents, rebuild their lives and, and now they feel almost a sense of social responsibility to give back. And also the second part that motivates them would be certainly the visibility in society to be seen as an immigrant who is successful up to the point where they’re being noticed for their philanthropic efforts. And, and guess that’s where, you know, the curve of life would take most immigrants to be in a position of visible donor to be respected for it to be acknowledged for it

[00:20:49.91] spk_0:
very interesting. So, you know, lessons for us in in stewardship and and public acknowledgement of the public acknowledgement as a part of stewardship so that the person feels this and and enjoys this elevated social status.

[00:21:33.08] spk_1:
Absolutely. And I think you know, when, when you approach donors, you know, if you can um, if you can give them incentives for increased visibility. So if you say, hey, you know, we’ll interview you and we’ll put a link on our website or there’s a plaque with your name on it or you know, we will have this section dedicated to you and and your name and picture will be visible here or we will announce this donation in this forum, whatever you can do or if there is a kind of a yearbook, almost that that you can include them in and their name and photograph or an interview with them that talks about, you know why they are giving to this cause and what their drivers were and make it a very personalized story that they can tell through you to the world. Um, I think all of them would be excellent motivators for them to give

[00:22:00.48] spk_0:
you even mentioned the word demigod in in in their own culture, being seen as a, as a demigod.

[00:22:10.21] spk_1:
Oh yes, and that’s a very interesting phenomenon and I think that’s very

[00:22:14.15] spk_0:
specific to the eastern

[00:22:15.46] spk_1:
world.

[00:22:16.54] spk_0:
Yeah,

[00:23:00.36] spk_1:
because you know organizations, the larger ones, especially if you take you know the non Gardena House of business or the even bigger Ambani House of business back in India, you know, they actually have a day called Founder’s Day during which all the employees in the organization, literally thousands of them, they celebrate, you know, the founder’s birthday and there is a large photograph and their garlands around it and people bow and their flowers and they recognize his, his contribution not just in founding the organization but recognizing his philanthropic efforts. Um, sometimes, you know, they would go as far as not even wear slippers or shoes right Up to the photograph, just like you would in a, in a temple, you know, and that’s why I call it the demigod status and, and it’s not artificial, it’s not a put on, they really feel it from their heart. They feel like they owe their sustenance to this individual who started this organization 50 years ago or 80 years ago.

[00:26:34.48] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. 4th dimension technologies, technology is an investment. You’re investing in staff productivity because you know how unproductive folks can be when, uh, technology is not doing what it’s supposed to do. You’re investing in security obviously, um, donor relationships because you’re preserving, giving histories and actions, people’s preferences, their own personal info, uh, their attendance at events. Um, you’re investing in your organization’s sustainability. So I hope you see tech as an investment and not an expense and 4D can help you invest wisely see how it all fits together, help you make your tech investment decisions doing it smartly you can check them out on the listener landing page for help with your tech investing at tony dot M A slash four D. Just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. It’s time for Tony’s take two scott. Stein has a new album, I love it. You know, scott of course, he’s the composer of cheap red wine, the show’s theme song, it opens and closes every single show. You know it, his new album is uphill. I’ve been listening and uh hoping that you will listen. I’m suggesting giving him giving him a listen for the new album, my favorite song is the last one on the album. So even though he calls the album Uphill, he ends with the song, It’s a good life, which is the one that he premiered on the 600 show. Uh and I love his lyrics like don’t just stick to what, you know, let it fly and watch it go. Of course I’m not gonna bother trying to sing. Uh you’ll be grateful, you are grateful. Trust me. Another one that I love also from that song uh from it’s a it’s a Good Life no matter how you sing your song, there’s always someone singing along. So you know, I love scott. Um I’ve been using his song for many, many years. Um I’m enjoying his new album. Uphill. You can sample every song on the album if you go to scott stein music dot com. So I’m asking you please give give scott a listen at Scott Stein music dot com for his brand new album. Uphill, That is Tony’s take two. We’ve got boo koo but loads more time for planned giving for Eastern donors with Vidya murthy. Let’s talk about the one, something very concrete. The beliefs around the word death, death is is not not a good word.

[00:28:32.38] spk_1:
Yeah, I think, you know, if you spoke to anybody tony in the, in the Eastern world, um, generally Eastern philosophy, I think it lends itself to the fact that words are very powerful and uh, you know, most spirituality or different kinds of religions, I think they focus on energy and consciousness as opposed to a book or as opposed to uh rules of commandments, right? That’s what most easter religions are built on. So this is not just with reference to Hinduism, but it extends to buddhism or taoism or organism where they believe in the power of words. So, you they also believe then that what you talk about manifests in life. So what you don’t want to be doing certainly is approaching a person and saying, okay, so after your death, how can we ensure that the system of giving continues because that’s just too direct for them and it’s too much in your face. And it’s not something that I think people like to discuss openly as factual as it might be, as certain as it might be, they’re very watchful with, With using words in that context. So when you approach, I think a donor from the east, you really clearly want to stay away from using those kinds of words which talk about, you know, the term in al itty of life you want to really talk about, you know, how can we, how can we ensure that that what you’re doing continues for the next 80 years? That’s probably a better way to say it. And it’s just a choice of words.

[00:29:41.11] spk_0:
Right, Okay. And that’s very consistent with what I teach folks about talking about planned giving, which is that it is not a death conversation, although the word death may work its way in, you know, someone, uh, someone from the West may very well say, well, you know, I’ve already got my, my plans for my death, you know, laid out or you know, they may bring the word up. Um, but your, your point is that, you know, dealing with someone from the East you don’t want to. Um, and again, that’s consistent with what I teach, which is that planned giving is the, the, the life of the nonprofit, the sustainability of the nonprofits work and mission and values for decades and generations to come. And listeners may have heard me use that exact phrase decades and generations. Um, so, you know, you’re not talking about the person’s death, you’re talking about the life of the nonprofit, the survivability of the nonprofit. Okay. But interesting about just the word, you know, or around. Yeah, the words death dying, uh, you know, they should be avoided, which they don’t really belong in a plane giving conversation to begin with unless the donor brings it up.

[00:30:28.20] spk_1:
Sure, sure. Um, I just like to, you know, throw light on two different aspects and maybe this is an appropriate time. tony is, I think when you are trying to, um, talk to and attract donors, um, one, I think the western way of doing business is very transactional as opposed to the relational way of doing business in the Eastern world. And I think kind of softening the edges is, is a great place to start. So you know, when you, when you talk to a potential donor, maybe you can engage in some conversation about their family. Maybe you can engage in some conversation, you can ask questions about, about what their kids are doing and try to paint and present the picture that you’re not just doing this as a transaction between a donor and your organization, but rather this is a family that’s committing because they believe in the cause and position it based on the relationship that you seek to develop with the

[00:31:36.30] spk_0:
family. Yeah, I mean, these conversations are never the first time you’ve met the person, You know, these, these conversations take place over time. You’re talking to folks who are already committed and loyal to the organization. They’ve demonstrated that commitment and loyalty through their giving history and you know, it’s, it’s really, of course, as you’re saying, it’s, it’s relational, it develops over time to, to the point where you believe, you know, it’s a good, it’s a good time, the right time for an individual donor or family to raise the idea of a gift in their, in their long term plans. Yeah.

[00:31:40.20] spk_1:
And I think you’re right in terms of just warming up to it and then adding that personal touch. And because sometimes I think the western way of doing business, you minimize references to a person’s personal life. And I guess what I’m suggesting is talk about that personal life more.

[00:32:01.34] spk_0:
Yeah. Okay. Getting to know the person, getting to know their family

[00:32:06.35] spk_1:
and

[00:32:06.49] spk_0:
that and that is going to happen over over time. Right?

[00:32:09.14] spk_1:
Yes. Over time. Of course.

[00:32:11.90] spk_0:
Um, what else would you, what would you like to talk about around this?

[00:32:29.76] spk_1:
Oh, yeah, sure. So I think, um, you know, I’d like to go a little bit into detail now, tony If it’s okay with you to talk about the different kinds of family structures that exist. And, and uh, would you think that that’s an okay thing to talk about at this point,

[00:32:34.89] spk_0:
please? I opened the door. Yeah, I’m not going to say no. Now, I just, I just opened the door for you.

[00:34:56.44] spk_1:
Fantastic. Fantastic. So when I was researching this, I was very intrigued by this. and because I don’t think that immigrant families here who have lived in the US for generations, um are all homogeneous in their structure. And I went into a little bit more detail into finding out how our families organized here. And, and this is not my own research. It was something that was put out by Merrill private wealth. And they classify families as as essentially five different types of families. And the first type are individualists, families which are a lot of Western families as well. Nuclear units that that function mostly in isolation. Um then you have connected families and connected families. Um they’re very much nuclear units, but they stay in touch, They might meet once or twice a year. Um they might touch base once every few weeks. And those are again very similar, I think, to many families here in the Western world, then you have the third kind of families which are called tribal families. And tribal families tend to stay more connected. Um and they tend to know what’s happening in, in their daily lives, you know, so they might touch base certainly once a week and say, hey, what’s going on? And and even distant relatives stay in touch in the tribal family setup. Um then you have economic families and economic families. Um They own assets together. They might have a joint source of income and and family economics I think makes them one larger common unit and and the fifth kind of family is an integrated family where, you know, it combines the tribal and economic structures. They’re super close. Um, and mostly patriarchal and they have the money flow tied into decision making tied into raising kids, raising multiple generations and they all live under the same roof. And I think when you identify very clearly what kind of family structure a potential donor, um, lives in, it might be very helpful to you and, and critical input to you as you devise your strategy for approaching the donor. And so you could align

[00:35:22.53] spk_0:
it. Are we most likely to see folks from the Eastern cultures that we’re talking about being aligned in sort of the last one? The economic type family structure.

[00:35:51.83] spk_1:
Yeah, they’re mostly either tribal families, economic families or integrated families. And you will find that for example, if there’s a family of positions, um, you know, which is very common from the Eastern world, you’ll find that, that, you know, certainly they, our tribal families, they stay in touch, they talk about money and business, they might own assets to grow together. If they’re three brothers, you know, they make joint investments, um, they even make sure they support their nieces and nephews, not just their own Children. And so when you approach these families, then it might help to have a broader strategy of visibility, not just for the person you’re directly engaging with, but for their brothers or sisters as well.

[00:36:27.90] spk_0:
There are times of day that are better to talk about long term planning and finances than other times of the day in the cultures we’re talking about. Can you flush that out please?

[00:37:42.29] spk_1:
Yes, that’s an interesting concept and and if I may, you know this is a kind of a personal story, tony is when we were, when we used to live in in India and it was a multigenerational home. We had four generations in the same house, but the elders in the family would often discourage us from having either banking counselors or insurance counselors in our homes during the evening hours after 5 30 to at least 7 30 or eight p.m. And the belief was that that that is a pious time of the day when when all goodness walks into your home and it’s probably not the best time to be sitting and having a discussion on insurance or giving or what happens after you die. So they would actually shoo away invest insurance agents who would knock after 55 30 now. No, no fault of the insurance agent. You know, they’re just too trying to come by your place because it’s after work hours and they think that that might be a time that’s good for you to talk to them because you’re done with your work. So my suggestion is probably just during business hours is always the best to talk about um you know, plan giving, especially if you’re discussing, you know, what’s going to happen with generations to come with reference to the

[00:38:10.44] spk_0:
giving.

[00:38:11.81] spk_1:
Yeah. And it’s nobody wants to sit in most eastern worlds talk about unpleasant things between five and 7 in the evening.

[00:38:19.82] spk_0:
Okay.

[00:38:20.87] spk_1:
Yeah.

[00:38:21.65] spk_0:
Planned giving is not unpleasant, but of

[00:38:24.23] spk_1:
course it’s not. Of course it’s not. But God forbid, you know the word debt. But

[00:38:56.51] spk_0:
we are we are talking about money and finance and and you, you know, you might be talking about rates of income from charitable gift annuities or you might be talking about a gift from a life insurance policy. Again, this goes back to know your donor. No, the family, but we’re raising consciousness here about what you might, what you might, uh, what you might face. So be aware, be aware you have something called the, uh, answering the call of Oneness from humanity. It sounds very aspirational. What is that?

[00:40:25.15] spk_1:
The Eastern world is a very trying world tony in many places. There’s a lot more competition for someone I think, who has not seen what the race for survival is. It can be very humbling and answering the call to to human Good, I think is something that strikes at the very heart of many donors of Eastern origin. And while they live work and play in the Western world, I think many donors are more inclined to give to a human cause that contributes, let’s say to to Children or to senior citizens amongst us or to those with physical challenges or mental challenges, something that improves humans and families and gives them access to better education, better futures generally. Again, broad strokes, they tend to connect more with these causes as opposed to causes that let’s say, promote art or, you know, if or promote, let’s say automobiles or promote music, even sometimes, you know, because they more relate and many a time they are witnesses to two stories of struggle and, and success within their own families. They know how little their fathers came from or how little their grandparents had and what helped them. So they look at plan giving as a way to give back and which is why I think human causes, um, attract them more

[00:40:53.72] spk_0:
because

[00:40:54.38] spk_1:
they’ve seen poverty and helplessness most of the time from a whole another level than, than what is visible here in the west.

[00:41:07.11] spk_0:
Okay,

[00:41:17.84] spk_1:
so I think I’m talking about what causes appeal to them more and the reason that it appeals to them. Yeah.

[00:41:20.00] spk_0:
Um, what else would you, what would you like to make folks aware of? We haven’t talked about yet.

[00:42:40.31] spk_1:
Um, well, as as I think we continue this discussion, I would, I would like to focus on some strategies that I think would be effective when you’re reaching out. Right. Um, I think, you know, to, it kind of touches upon some of the things that we’ve already spoken about. tony But um, one, I think the human angle is something that you should certainly reach out up front point number two Is the social status that comes with giving and three be sure you talk about generational impact or the impact on the broader family structure, not just on the donor himself, but with the 34, 10 people that encompass his immediate family, which might mean his brother, her sister, her aunt, just a few more people apart from just that one individual. And when you talk about generational impact, the human angle social status, um, I think then, and you’re sensitive about, you know, who’s making these decisions and who’s calling the shots. I think you’re really onto something in terms of being able to make them want to give to your cause?

[00:43:13.58] spk_0:
Let’s flush out that generational impact because that, that sounds like something that may be a stretch or maybe I’m just not conceiving of it correctly. So how can we, if we’re talking about a long term gift, a planned gift with someone. Um, I mean there are, there are planned giving methods that can include other people like charitable gift annuities and charitable trusts. There could be value for other family members that way beyond the donor. Um, is that, is that the kind of thing, you know, you’re talking about, are you referring to financial impact for siblings and, and other generations or are you talking about something broader than than a financial benefit,

[00:43:58.89] spk_1:
certainly broader than a financial benefit. tony I think what I’m, what I mean is if you’re looking at a charitable trust that composes the whole, the broader family unit, which is very common in Eastern families. And I suspect in the Western as well, obviously just because of its of the benefits of the financial benefits of having one, you are talking about not just the monetary component and the benefits through generations, but the val Values that you’re able to pass on from generation to generation and what you want your family to be remembered by what you want, your son to grow up and stand for or your daughter to say, Hey, you know, my mom did this 20 years ago and now I want to do it for the same organization and feel a sense of connectedness and pride. So you’re passing on the emotion, you’re passing on the value and you’re passing on the monetary commitment and the benefit.

[00:44:32.18] spk_0:
All right. All helpful. Okay. Um, what do you think should we, should we wrap it up there or something else? Is there anything pounding like, why didn’t he ask me this question? Anything else? Um, not

[00:45:24.17] spk_1:
that not that anything comes to, comes to my mind, but I think that, um, you know, just being sensitive to, uh, to the cultural impediments of fear, complexity and inconsistency. Um, in terms of, especially when you’re reaching out to, to first time donors. Um, I think that a lot of immigrants might be first time donors and they might need a certain kind of education to, to say, hey, you know, we would be honored. This is, uh, this is the main purpose and this is the higher calling. And if you’re able to walk them through that, then I think it makes, it, it’s simpler for them. It breaks down the complexity and it removes the fear of having never done this before. And like you rightly said, everything doesn’t have to be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. It could start small. And, and so if you give them the different options and the different that it’s not, you know, an arm and a leg to begin with. I think that is something that will mitigate the fear as well.

[00:46:48.25] spk_0:
And again, planned giving is never gonna be the first gift that you’ve asked someone to give. You may start them, you know, you’ll, you’ll, they need to be committed already to the organization before you’re opening the door to a planned giving conversation. So very well, you know, as you said, you know, we might be introducing them with $100 gift or $1000 gift. And that may be years before we get to a planned giving conversation. But the relationship has to be built and I, I thank you for raising our consciousness teaching me, uh, about some of the Eastern sensitivities around around a conversation that ultimately leads to plan giving or might be talking about planned giving now because the person already is a committed loyal donor, but now you’re talking about the next level of giving and uh, we need to be sensitive to the Eastern Eastern cultures, Eastern beliefs structures. So thank you. Thank you.

[00:47:17.77] spk_1:
Thank you. I hope that, you know, the listeners do get a couple of tips that might help them approach donors of eastern descent and also follow some broader strategies. But at the end of the day, tony as a multicultural specialist. Especially, um, I think what hits me most is that people are more similar than we are different. You know, it’s, it’s just a slight nuances that vary, but in a, in a broader sense, I think what we all strive for what we all want. Our motivators are, are shockingly alike.

[00:47:31.58] spk_0:
Video murthy, founder of Austin texas based chloral LLC at chloral c l U R A L dot c o. And you’ll, uh, you can connect with video on linkedin video. Thank you very much delighted.

[00:47:46.40] spk_1:
Thank you so much tony It’s been a pleasure

[00:49:03.65] spk_0:
next week. The tech that comes next. That’s the new book from AMY sample ward and a few a Bruce. They’ll both be with us if you missed any part of this week’s show, I beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com. We’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o and by fourth dimension technologies i. Tion for in a box. The affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D. But you know, just like three D. Except they go one dimension deeper. And remember scott Stein’s new album, Please check him out Scott Stein music dot com, Our creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff. The shows social media is by Susan Chavez. Marc Silverman is our web guy and this music is by scott Stein. Thank you for that. Affirmation, scotty and congratulations on your new album. You’re with me next week for nonprofit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great.

Nonprofit Radio for September 6, 2022: Sustainable Fundraising

 

Larry Johnson: Sustainable Fundraising

Larry Johnson is author of the book, “The Eight Principles of Sustainable Fundraising.” He walks us through several of them, including “Donors are the Drivers™,” “Leadership Leads™” and “Divide & Grow™.”

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

 

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Fourth Dimension Technologies: IT Infra In a Box. The Affordable Tech Solution for Nonprofits.

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 607_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220906.mp3

Processed on: 2022-09-02T04:02:17.874Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…09…607_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220906.mp3.762728218.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/09/607_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220906.txt

[00:01:51.84] spk_0:
and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh, I’m glad you’re with me, I’d suffer with infra occlusion if I had to bite down on the idea that you missed this week’s show, sustainable fundraising. Larry johnson is author of the book The Eight Principles of sustainable fundraising. He walks us through several of them, including donors, are the drivers, leadership leads and divide and grow. I’m Tony’s take to make it about your mission. We’re sponsored by turn to communications. Pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o and by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box the affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant or d just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper here is sustainable fundraising. It’s a pleasure to welcome Larry johnson to non profit radio He is founder of the Eight Principles and author of the award winning book the eight principles of sustainable fundraising. He’s an internationally recognized coach trainer and thought leader in fund development and philanthropy. The principles are at the eight principles dot com and larry is on linkedin. Larry johnson, Welcome to the show.

[00:01:54.56] spk_1:
Well Tony, it’s indeed a pleasure. I’m looking forward to this.

[00:02:14.05] spk_0:
Thank you very much. I am as well. It’s a pleasure to have you, Let’s talk about the eight principles. What were you thinking when you uh rarefied fundraising into into eight Cognizable bites for folks.

[00:03:22.38] spk_1:
Well um you know, I’ve been in this business what 30 plus years now, yikes anyway. One thing I’ve noticed throughout my career is that people tend to focus on the process or the tools and not really the underlying principles or unchanging sort of laws that are operating in the background. And, but if you look at organizations that are truly transformative in the way they raise money and the way they engage their donors in the way they continue to grow every year. Even if they don’t, they ever heard of the eight principles, you could take and look at their organization and see them observing all eight of them. And so when I went to write the book, the idea was to create a book that was sophisticated, yet simple and that could be applied both at the technical levels and at the board level that here, this is what’s going on. And if you understand it, then you’ll be able to assemble a program that makes sense for your organization because not every organization is the same. The constituencies aren’t the same. And so it’s really, it’s foolish to try to make everything work everywhere because it won’t. Uh, and that’s one of the reasons why so many organizations are pushing uphill.

[00:03:32.41] spk_0:
So, you see these as a, as a foundation for all sustainable fundraising.

[00:03:33.99] spk_1:
Yeah. And the reason why is they’re all based on human nature. Um, and, uh, I mean, we’re actually gonna be going into into, into ASIA, into India later this year and they’re just as applicable there as they are here because they’re based on human nature.

[00:04:24.33] spk_0:
Okay, well, we’re gonna, we’re gonna hit three of them that I feel are areas that we haven’t had many guests or any guests talk about. And then, you know, if, if there’s still time we’ll go back and hit a couple. But uh, you know, for listeners, I want, I want it to be stuff that we haven’t talked about very much with with other guests. So your number one of the eight principles of sustainable fundraising is donors are the drivers. What’s going on here?

[00:05:33.58] spk_1:
Well, um, donors A. K. A. Investors. I like the word investors. Um, they are driving the philanthropic enterprise without them. There is no philanthropy. There is no fundraising. But the irony here is they’re not driving it with their money. There’s the key, um, people are obsessed about the money. Well, yes, money is involved, but it’s not really the focus. And especially at the focus of, of donors, investors. They’re looking for something different. But then it’s also not really, their focus is really not the mission of the organization either. Um, it is, again, tangential, what donors are looking for is the fulfillment of their own dreams and aspirations. That’s what they’re really looking for and the organization that can provide that they’re the ones that will elicit the transformative and ongoing support of these people. Um, and so they are indeed driving the enterprise. And there’s a lot of, a lot of my friends out there in the wealth management world, tell me that for lack of engagement by nonprofits, there’s probably at least a billion dollars sitting out there un engaged. And, uh, and that, that doesn’t mean it’s tied up in a donor advised fund or any sort of instrument there. It’s just sitting out there because it’s never been engaged.

[00:05:48.98] spk_0:
I mean, there could be more than that. That that’s a very speculative,

[00:05:51.90] spk_1:
right? It is, it is

[00:05:56.19] spk_0:
Estimate, I mean, it could be $10 billion. I mean, I know nonprofits could be more engaging with donors. So I’m not, I’m not quibbling that it’s not a billion. It could be 10 times that,

[00:06:03.96] spk_1:
yes, it could be absolutely, absolutely. But the keys, they’re driving the enterprise, but they’re not driving it with their money,

[00:06:19.09] spk_0:
right? You’re saying their aspirations and their dreams say more about how you see nonprofits fulfilling donor aspirations and dreams.

[00:06:46.11] spk_1:
Well, tony if I were approaching you as a, as an executive of a nonprofit or a fundraiser, a board member or anybody else and you were a potential investor. Um, I would first try to figure out what it is that you that really gave you fulfillment what it is you’re really looking for. And we’re talking about very serious transcendent fulfillment, not immediate short term and, you know, especially with today’s technological tools that are available, you know, in the old days, you just ask people and that still works. Um, but you can figure out pretty quickly, you know, what is it that’s driving these people, what is it they’re not missing because what you’re giving them is something they cannot buy. You see, they can’t buy that. Um, and let me tell you a little story

[00:07:21.93] spk_0:
before your story, hold, we’ll get we’ll do your story. I love stories, not putting the kibosh on the story, but hold off what they can’t buy. They can’t buy the fulfillment that nonprofits can provide, that

[00:09:26.91] spk_1:
they can’t buy that. So, if the if the nonprofit is going to offer this to them, you know, and then they will more than gladly give them an exchange. You see, let me let me let me illustrate this. There is a there is a for profit market vertical that understands this intrinsically and in fact, their entire um market proposition. Their whole sales proposition is if you use their product, you will become personally fulfilled sex appeal, you know, self worth all in one package. And most of us use those products and I, and I usually say, so what is it to a group? And maybe one person will get it right, It’s the cosmetics industry, Alright, that’s exactly their sales proposition you use our product, you’re going to be beautiful, self fulfilled sex appeal, the whole thing. So, and the story is okay to illustrate that I went into a department store, it’s been four or five years ago now and I went into the cup of the men’s cologne fragrance counter, whatever you wanna call it. And there was a young clerk there, young man and I walked up and I knew what I wanted, you know, and he says, um, can I help you sir? Well, if you know me, you know that I love to ask questions just to see what kind of response I’m gonna get. And right in front of me on the counter was this, you know, men’s health? One of these men’s magazines opened to a full page cosmetics at full page. And the ad was very simple. It was a um it was a photograph, full page photograph. And it was this this uh this gigolo with this, with this blonde in a white bikini on a yacht, in the Aegean. And then the, an image of the product was superimposed onto the photograph very prominently. And it’s, you’ve probably even seen it. It’s a very well known brand. So I said to the young man, I said, well, so tell me pointing to the ad, if I buy this, do I get hurt? Well, he looked at me like he didn’t, he was just he was he couldn’t quite

[00:09:31.60] spk_0:
was a man,

[00:09:33.80] spk_1:
it was a gigolo with the, with the blonde.

[00:09:36.78] spk_0:
Oh,

[00:09:38.32] spk_1:
okay, so you know, the the idea is you’re you’re transmuting yourself there on the yacht with this blonde, that’s the whole thing. Okay,

[00:09:46.19] spk_0:
Yeah. The guy at the Clark county has to offer you?

[00:10:19.58] spk_1:
Well, first of all, he couldn’t quite process what I just said because it was so damn obvious. That’s why. And then, so then I said so, but that’s the implication, isn’t it? And he said, yes, it is. That’s what I’m telling you. And you see, and you see, so they’re making billions of dollars selling a counterfeit. And what I tell nonprofits is you have the real thing because people want to be involved in something that’s bigger than themselves. They want to feel they’re part of something bigger than themselves. And if you can provide that they will be with you over and over and over again. You try to browbeat them with with moral ISMs or statistics or other things. You know, people just kind of tune you out. They may give you a hush and go away gift. Like here, take some money, go away. But you’re not gonna get the kind of transformational engagement that you can, if you really understand that you want to tap into that person’s desire to do something bigger than what they can do.

[00:11:11.01] spk_0:
Let’s see what are some ways that, that we can, we can do this. How can we, I guess I guess I’m asking you in our, in our marketing, which may just be conversations, I don’t, I don’t mean necessarily in our print marketing or digital. But in our conversations even, you know, how can we rise to this principle of fulfilling dreams and aspirations for donors?

[00:12:17.47] spk_1:
Well, the first thing is you have to figure out what the dreams are. You have to know what they are. And that takes some time. Um, it takes some effort. It’s not impossible. And you know, I worked for one of the major consulting firms for over seven years and I did a lot of campaign feasibility studies a lot, uh, could do them in my sleep. And one thing I discovered about those is even though they consisted of anywhere from 40 to 50 individual interviews, um, if the initial interviews were chosen correctly, if we could get the right balance in the first half dozen or even maybe nine, um, I knew how it was gonna turn out in the end. I can tell you this is what’s gonna happen at the end and that comes from doing it from the experience. So, but the client of course one of the 50 interviews and that’s what the client got. All right. But I could because I remember getting a call from my boss once after the after the first three or four days. How’s it going larry? I said, well, it’s going to be X, Y. Z. Okay, fine. And I spent the balance of the time during the interview. So a lot of it is, you know, I’m an old school guy. Be

[00:12:27.18] spk_0:
careful there. I hope you didn’t, I hope hope after those first eight or nine interviews you didn’t engage in confirmation bias and then you just you just attempted. You and your all your subsequent interviews. You, you skewed your conversations to confirm what you had already told or you already fixed in your mind even was gonna happen. You didn’t let that happen. Did you know, confirmation bias?

[00:12:43.26] spk_1:
No, I’m an engineer by training.

[00:12:47.04] spk_0:
Okay. You’re

[00:12:48.01] spk_1:
looking at the data at the end.

[00:12:49.76] spk_0:
All right.

[00:13:40.22] spk_1:
You’re you’re looking at, okay, this, this is all the answers to the questions how they all stack up, but you can get a pretty good idea of how it’s going. If you’re listening carefully, you begin to see patterns emerge. And there are there is the odd ball one that you, at the end, you get a few interviews that that throw everything out of whack that happens. But typically you don’t have my point in saying that is you don’t have to, you don’t have to go out and interview 300 people. You really don’t have to do that. Um, you know, you interview a good segment of your population and the key is to be listening uh, and ask open ended questions. And if you guarantee them anonymity and confidentiality, they’ll tell you anything, you want to know, people really want to do that. So that’s that’s an old school guy. And so that’s what I would do uh to get some ideas as to what are the messages And there aren’t, they don’t have to be that many, maybe three or

[00:13:42.97] spk_0:
four that

[00:13:59.89] spk_1:
resonate with the people who support us because I know we’re not talking about principle for, but principle four is learning plan learn who would naturally support you because not everybody will okay, learn who that is, who big picture and, and then then make plans on how to reach out to those people because they’ll be reachable different ways. So you go back to donors. Other drivers, figure out what those touch points are, you know what and there and they’ll be there and they may be a little bit different than what your mission is, but it doesn’t mean it’s, uh, it’s contradictory, it’s just, it’s just a collaborative or a line.

[00:14:36.07] spk_0:
Okay, let’s move to, uh, principle number three. Of the eight principles of sustainable fundraising leadership leads, leading by example, Talk about this one. Why is this so critical? What are, what are leaders not doing that? They ought to be doing?

[00:14:42.99] spk_1:
Well, let me go back and say one thing about, is the drivers that I’m going to go into this.

[00:14:47.90] spk_0:
Alright, alright.

[00:15:30.90] spk_1:
There are levels of donors are the drivers, remember if donors are driving the car, they’re in the driver’s seat, they got their hands on the steering wheel. Um, if that donor is a really good match for you and you’ve done your work, you’re gonna be in the passenger seat, you’re gonna be in the navigator seat up front. Uh, if there’s sort of a match, you’ll be in the back seat, you’ll still be there, but you’re not gonna get the kind of attention that the, that the navigator would get or if you’re barely hanging on, you’re gonna be in the trunk, okay? And so you get whatever’s left over, you open the trunk after two hours and you’re still breathing okay, fine. That’s their levels of that. Not every donor is going to be that 100% sweet spot. Uh, and I’m not suggesting that you limit yourself to that. But if you’re focused on that, you’re gonna pick up everyone that would remotely be in that, that, that universe.

[00:17:12.88] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. Turn to communications, like so many other things in life. Getting in the media depends on relationships. You’ve got to be known by folks who work in the media to be heard by folks who work in the media to get their attention. It’s so much easier when you know somebody, it’s so much easier when you want to be heard when you have an existing relationship before you’re out for the ask, right? You draw the fundraising analogy first meeting. Do you ask somebody for a gift, highly unlikely you build up a relationship, you get to that point. Media is the same way. You have much, much better odds if you have an existing relationship when you make your ask based on the news hook or something happening at your organization that, that is no, is newsworthy? Whatever it is, it’s the existing relationship turn to knows how to set those up for you, how to build them and grow them. So you get heard at the time you make the ask turn to communications, your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot C o. Now back to sustainable fundraising.

[00:17:17.97] spk_1:
Leadership. Leadership

[00:17:19.68] spk_0:
leads. Yes. What, what, what, what can we be doing better here?

[00:18:57.77] spk_1:
Well, let’s look at what that means. Leading by example, you look at any organization, whether it’s a commercial enterprise, whether it’s a civic association, whether it’s a political party, whether it’s a nonprofit social, whatever it is. Um, leaders are expected to assume certain responsibilities. I mean, they’re obviously the fiduciary ones, uh, and the other issues that are related to that, but it’s, they set the pace for the example. What’s the quality of the leadership by these people morally upstanding? Do they represent the essence of the organization? Um, you know, are they representative of those who are investors to the organization? That’s a big key. Uh, and I’ll give you an example about that. Um, I was working with a social service organization that covered about 45 counties and they were concerned, they weren’t getting any support out of this one county. And I said, well, who on your boards from that county. Well, no one I said, well, there’s your problem right there. You’re not tapped into the networks there. So they corrected that. Um, but then the other key is they only have in a nonprofit setting leaders, I. E. The governing board and certainly their their employee, the executive. And I think that needs to be stressed is that the executive is an employee of the board. Sometimes you get these weird sort of relationships and how they relate to one another. Um, but the key there is that they only have three things they should be focused on. Number one setting policy for the organization, number two advocating for it. Hey, if they’re not, if they’re not a fan, why are they on the board? And three, they should be there charged with making sure they’re sufficient resources with the delivery of the mission and in a non profit that almost always includes some philanthropy or some fundraising. I mean, there are other sources of revenue,

[00:19:17.15] spk_0:
but fundraising

[00:20:57.82] spk_1:
is a part of it. So wherever the leaders lead you, that’s where your people on the outside are gonna take their cues. So if for instance, I’m a big believer and I make no bones about this. Is that every board member and I’ve been a nonprofit board member needs to be financially committed. And now, what does that mean? Well, some people use it to say there’s a board minimum or we have this or that or whatever. You know, I really don’t, I don’t really like those because I prefer something I call equal sacrifice, not equal amount because everyone around that table is gonna, their pockets are gonna have different depths to them. And you know, for someone, $1000 could be quite a sacrifice. And for someone else, hey, they’ll spend that at Sun Valley down the road for me and one weekend easy. So it just depends on who you are and and where you come from. And because I’m a big believer in that board should be representative of the constituencies they they support or that they reach out to. So, so but they all have to be and that includes person that should be personal funds, not corporate funds. I think, you know, people use people, you know, people who are corporate appointees. Um they not, they may not be useless, but they tend to be very weak board members because they’re told by their boss to go and be a part of that. They want to have a representation. Um, it’s not really that effective. Neither is the board member who’s on 12 other boards and you’re getting them simply because they have a recognizable name names don’t bring in support. They really don’t. But but leadership leader, they will lead you irregardless of whether they’re leading you in the right place at the wrong place. They will lead others, they will get that message, but here’s another piece of it is people before

[00:21:07.03] spk_0:
you move onto the next piece. The equal sacrifice. I like that. Uh equal sacrifice instead of equal amount. Sounds sounds like the stretch gift. You know, everyone should be stretching to to what is a stretch for them.

[00:21:20.64] spk_1:
Yeah, it should be uh,

[00:21:24.66] spk_0:
I think

[00:22:36.94] spk_1:
stretch but doable and then the way you achieve that and what I, what I counsel clients to do is something called peer solicitation and that’s not what it’s known in the current and the current. That’s not the current version of that. Pierre solicitation is where boards, there’s a small group of the boards that that takes and evaluates people in terms of their bill And then people are asked face to face for a specific amount for their annual gift at the beginning of the fiscal year. Uh they can pay it in cash, they can make a pledge, they can make payments whatever they want to do, but it’s got to be satisfied by the end of the fiscal year. And then you take all those, all those, all those evaluation amounts, you add them up, take about 20 or 30% discount on that total. And that’s your, that’s your group goal because you want the board to feel as though they’ve accomplished something. I don’t like goals that are so high that it’s almost impossible to reach goals should be floors, not ceilings because the idea is to create that momentum. And if you do it up front and you can say, hey, you know, our, our goal for our board this year was $65,000 and we raised 72 5. Great, Wonderful. That’s terrific. Think about how that plays in the public square. Think about what that says to the people who are on that board and and all their friends and people they know, wow, Hey, you know, they must really believe in that, that that organization is going places. Let me let me learn more about it.

[00:22:48.96] spk_0:
And alright, well, and you achieve that by taking the, the what you expect the aggregate to be for the year and you’re discounting it.

[00:23:04.21] spk_1:
Yeah, yeah. But, but it’s reasonable. It’s something that’s based on what, you know, the individual. All

[00:23:04.48] spk_0:
right, what else about leadership leading?

[00:25:02.28] spk_1:
Well, another thing is, you know, I said, fundraising is a big part of it and people, they always start groaning well, you know, um, You know, I’m not good at asking for money. That’s just not for me, I don’t feel awkward, I feel awkward. Well, what I tell people is board involvement in fundraising only about 5% of its actually asking. Alright, that’s the very minor part of it, a big, big part of it is the board to be able to number one properly resource a fundraising program knowing it costs money to raise money. And then also when they, when the reports are made and when the analysis is done for the board to be sophisticated enough to ask the right questions of the fundraiser and the executive, you know, you know, one of the, you know, the number that usually, or often let’s put it that way comes up, you know, at a board meeting is, well, what did you raise in the last quarter or six months or whatever it was? That is a totally meaningless number from a fundraising perspective, that’s an accounting number. That’s a cash number. That’s the result of your fundraising. That doesn’t predict anything. Even the brokers say past performance is not an indicator of future performance. They get that in real fast. So, but there are other variables that are identifiable in a program that will, if the board is aware of these and presented and educated, they’ll be able to evaluate, they’ll be able to see, okay, you know, our retention rates really low. We need to work on that our average giving rate is stagnant. You know, we’re here here here and you see board members are not stupid people, You know, they can assess this, but they’re not given this opportunity. I think there was a study, Oh, it’s been several years ago now where I, I shocked that 75% of the board members they surveyed wanted some sort of formal understanding of fundraising or training and only about 20% were ever offered anything like that. And that’s, and so these are these people are volunteers Tony this isn’t their full time job. So it’s not their stick to go in and kind of relationship is really, really aggressive to go and figure it out on your own.

[00:26:28.74] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. Fourth dimension technologies. They have the free offer. It’s still going exclusively for nonprofit radio listeners. You know, you’ll get the complimentary 24 7 monitoring of your I. T. Assets and they’ll do it for three months, 90 days monitoring your servers, network, cloud performance, your backup performance All 24, 7 of course, if there are any issues during the period, they’re going to let you know immediately and then at the end of the three months you’re gonna get their report, telling you how you’re doing. It’s all complimentary. It’s on the listener landing page. It’s at tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D just like three D. But they go on to mention deeper, Let’s return to sustainable fundraising. Let’s talk some more about what board members can do around fundraising besides soliciting. And I understand re sourcing you said re sourcing the development function, properly asking the right questions, focusing on the meaningful metrics, not the vanity metrics. Uh, let’s talk something about individual board member activity aside from soliciting. So, you know, making introductions, hosting small events, things like, you know what your ideas around those that individual board members can do around fundraising.

[00:28:03.88] spk_1:
Well what I tell you what I tell organizations when they’re looking to evaluate their board or improve it or whatever I say, you know, the, you know, boards are, excuse me. Boards should be organic groups, meaning they’re responsible to each other, they’re not responsible certainly to their employee. The executive and the boards that do best are the ones that are, are organic. And the way you get that is that first of all, the idea of equal giving excuses of equal participation and that kind of commitment. But another way you do that is to things you make sure that you have a variety of skills on your board. You don’t need six accountants and nine attorneys. You know, you need to spread that around a little bit and then the other pieces, if you look at the constituencies from which you expect to raise money and however you want to identify those, you should have at least one board member that represents those constituents. Each of those constituencies because they’re the person that has the network that you’re looking to to, to to build and then that that individual’s job, one of their jobs is advocacy, is making sure that their network knows who you are as an organization and the great work you’re doing, that. You’re willing to introduce your friends and relatives to this organization, you know, and if a board member isn’t willing to do that, I question their commitment. Why are you on the sport? I mean, if you don’t really feel good enough to tell your friends and relatives and business partners that this is a good thing, why you know what you’re doing that.

[00:29:47.58] spk_0:
I was on a board years ago by the way. Larry. If you need to take a sip of water, please go ahead. I’ll, uh, I’ll make my question. Uh, uh, Loquacious to give you a chance to take a, take a drink and a breath. Um, I was on a board many years ago. Uh, and one of the board members was, was kind of embarrassed to ask for money. He didn’t, he didn’t feel that the organization really merited the support of his friends he was giving personally, But I think that’s because we all have an obligation. But he, he was, he was kind of embarrassed actually. He felt that, yeah, that the organization just was not, wouldn’t be meaningful to his, his colleagues in his, this happened to be an attorney in his, in his law firm wouldn’t be meaningful to them. They wouldn’t be interested without, without ever having talked to him about it. Very, you know, very unfortunate. Um, yeah, it’s just a terrible, unfortunate, sad mindset. You know, why are you on the board? If you don’t think your friends, even your colleagues forget friends, Your professional colleagues are going to have any interest that you serve on the board. I mean, that’s your biggest hook or at least that’s your first hook. Maybe it’s not your biggest hook. That’s your first hook. I spend time with this organization. I go to their performances. I go to the meetings. I’m on the, I’m on a couple of committees. You know, that’s your, that’s your entree and then what good that the, that the community that the organization does, the education program in the elementary schools, the performances, etcetera. But he just had the vastly wrong and very unfortunate mindset.

[00:30:12.95] spk_1:
Well, you see that mindset goes beyond board members and what’s happening there is the person is not comfortable. And so they’ve feel authorized to take the agency away from the other person. They’re making the decision for

[00:30:18.50] spk_0:
them. That’s

[00:30:19.63] spk_1:
what they’re doing. And, and I, it’s like when, you know, you’re doing an awareness meeting or an event

[00:30:24.78] spk_0:
well, and they’re also, they’re also just making everything easier on themselves.

[00:30:28.84] spk_1:
Of course they,

[00:30:29.81] spk_0:
well, my, my, my, my fellow, uh, partners aren’t gonna be interested. So I’m not going to approach them.

[00:31:23.95] spk_1:
So, but it’s the whole idea of awkwardness and you, but they don’t realize they’re taking agency away from these people. They’re not giving them the opportunity to make the decision on. That’s really what they’re doing. Now. There is the flip of this. I’ll tell you a story. Um, I was working with a client up and catch them, which is Sun Valley. I live out in Idaho and Sun Valley is a very wealthy community. It’s not very big, but there’s a lot of, a lot of money there And we were doing an annual fund where this one individual had made a cash gift to $250,000. And so he was assigned to do another to go and solicit one of his board members and this man’s name. Others call him John offered the guy that the other board member will, will you take 50? And where upon the board members said, Bill, don’t embarrass yourself with that. I want the 2 50 that I put put in. I mean, there’s, I mean, I wouldn’t necessarily advise that, but he obviously knew the man well,

[00:31:42.07] spk_0:
right. Talking about peer to peer. Yeah, if you can, if you can get friends, I was gonna say putting pressure on, let’s just say soliciting, uh, if you can get friends like that soliciting each other, Nobody’s gonna walk away disappointed.

[00:31:52.60] spk_1:
No, No. I just love what he said was, don’t embarrass? You

[00:31:58.61] spk_0:
Don’t embarrass yourself 50,000. Yeah, Yeah. That’s, that’s a, that’s a great lesson in peer to peer board board soliciting keep the keep the professionals away and let’s just get the 22 good friends having lunch together. One of them has an agenda to talk to the other about his or her board. Giving all right,

[00:32:17.59] spk_1:
Anything

[00:32:18.22] spk_0:
else you want? I I got admonished on because donors of the drivers, I left that too early. So anything else you want to share on leadership leads before, before we move ahead.

[00:32:33.32] spk_1:
Um, I don’t think so. I just say that, oh, when you in, when you insist, when, when you insist on equal sacrifice, here’s what happens. You get a group of people, of individuals that become accountable to each other.

[00:32:46.92] spk_0:
There’s

[00:32:57.13] spk_1:
the key and they begin to function as a group, not as a collection of individuals. And that’s where the trail, that’s where two plus two equals five, you see is because that synergy of a group functioning as a group, not as a group of it, not as a collection of individuals. And that doesn’t happen very often. But when it does, it really really energizes an organization. You see it make great strides very quickly,

[00:33:20.21] spk_0:
shared sacrifice. If we’re all sacrificing equally. And I don’t mean dollar wise, I mean, I mean, capacity wise, we’re all sacrificing for the good of this organization. Yeah. That’s going to create a cohesion.

[00:33:27.51] spk_1:
That’s what you that’s what you’re looking for. Is that kind of, you know, we’re all in this together. Um and we’re gonna make it we’re gonna make it successful

[00:33:36.03] spk_0:
partnership in sacrifice.

[00:33:38.32] spk_1:
That’s right. That’s exactly what it is. And as I said, it becomes an organic group. It’s not it’s no longer just a collection of individuals.

[00:33:55.30] spk_0:
Good enough. Okay, Let’s talk about principle number six, divide and grow. What’s this? What’s this about?

[00:35:20.41] spk_1:
Well, a divide and grow. Um The shorthand version of that is treat different donors differently. Alright. So that um what you’re essentially doing here is you realize that your donors are not all the same, they’re not all the same age that they don’t have the same situation in life or as the Germans would say, where they are in their lifespan, um, their interests, all of the, they’re all different to some degree. They come from different backgrounds, different places. So that the organization that can allow for these, and that creates a pathway for donors to come closer to you emotionally over time and see, I’m a big believer in really focusing on high retention rates, not cache entry rates. Those organizations are the ones who achieve this transformative giving over time. Uh, and that’s so that when you divide your constituency into these air into these levels of, you know, you know, ages and, and where they are in life and income level and all these kinds of things that, that define, you know, what the person is going to be like when they come to you and you treat them that way. And, and you, you can, of course with today’s technology, even the very smallest organization can do this kind of thing. Uh, it doesn’t, you know, in the old days, you know, three or three or five cards and an army of researchers and, and people making phone calls and you can still do that. But the point is, you don’t have to, but you know, I’ve known this for a long time. But then there was research published about five years ago, I think it was Russell James, I’m sure, you know, russell

[00:35:33.09] spk_0:
Russell Professor Russell James texas Tech University.

[00:36:46.40] spk_1:
Yeah, So and what they discovered was when donors are given a pathway that brings them closer emotionally. And I stress that word, the emotional connection with the organization over time To the point where they make a gift out of an asset, not income. And it doesn’t have to be a large one can be maybe a couple $1000. I mean really it doesn’t have to be huge when that happens. And you can get a core group of people, maybe only 10 or 15% of your donor base that has done that the entire fundraising program in terms of income, just skyrockets. And the reason why is you have a core group of people that are so emotionally committed to you. They come hell or high water they’re gonna, they’re gonna be there for you no matter what happens, you see, and that’s what you’re looking for. Is that core group of people that are so emotionally committed to you and they may not be your top givers financially, but they will drive everything else. That’s the key. Um, and that’s why although I’ve done most of my work in capital fundraising and major gift fundraising in all the conventional terms, I I even sort of steer away from the term major giving anymore because that’s an internal term. It’s reflected on ability. Um, and I really, really focus on emotional commitment because I think the rest will come. And of course in your area, the deferred giving area, that’s those are asset gifts, you know, usually by definition.

[00:37:01.29] spk_0:
Yeah, right. You were talking about giving from assets, but

[00:37:16.11] spk_1:
I mean, I had a fun gift be satisfied by the liquidation of a small, a small money market. 10 grand. Okay. I mean, yeah,

[00:37:51.83] spk_0:
sure. That can happen. Um, yeah, the ultimate, you know, the for a lot of folks that their ultimate gift has to come in their estate plan because either they can’t or they believe that they can’t make their ultimate gift while they’re still living. So they put it in their estate plan and there there’s there’s a plan to get in a nutshell. Alright, So, yeah, so, all right. So you want us to, you know, dividing and growing, you want these, you talk about mutual, mutually beneficial relationships.

[00:39:22.17] spk_1:
Yes, these are, these are not one way relationship. These are mutually beneficial relationships. Um, you know, you know, I have something called the, if you read my book or my other stuff, I have something called a donor pipeline pipeline signs kind of commercial and kind of cold, but what it really is, it shows how donors come to you and they come to you through three or four different sources and then over time, how you get to know them and move them closer to you and then you can attach certain kinds of fundraising methods and relationships and things that they do over time and then a capital campaign, which is a very specific, relatively short term way to raise a lot of money for a specific so set of, of things or ideas then what that, how that serves in all this is to kind of goose what I’ll call goose the whole system because it raises everybody’s awareness of what’s going on. And then, you know, for those who understand that the real or that I would think the more significant payoff Quote of of a capital campaign is not the money raised in the immediate, uh, for the immediate, in case it’s how you’ve positioned your, your donor base to continue to give at higher levels over what, 10 or 15 years. And universities, they figured this out 30, 40 years ago when they invented what they called the continual campaign, the continuous campaign. And so, you know, before that, you know, you and I probably have to remember that these universities would hire, you know, couple score of, you know, field officers and run the campaign then fire everybody. And five years later they do the whole thing all over again. That’s a very inefficient way of raising money. And so they realized, oh, we can do this differently. And so that’s, you know, but you can do it even as a small organization.

[00:39:45.82] spk_0:
Yeah. Keep those relationships going rather than trying to renew them every five or seven years on your on your campaign cycle. Yeah. That seems antiquated. Alright.

[00:40:00.38] spk_1:
Yes,

[00:41:36.64] spk_0:
it was, Yeah. My early days. It’s time for Tony’s take two. Make it about your mission. Your work. That’s what you have in common with your supporters. Whether we’re talking about volunteers, donors, other types of supporters, they love your work. You do the work. The mission is what you have in common. So you know, as we’re approaching rapidly, the all important fourth quarter, keep the mission in mind as you’re crafting messages, whatever digital print the mission is what moves your supporters. That’s what they love about you. That’s what they give their money, their time to make it about your mission. It’s special to them. Sort of keep it special in your mind. Don’t let it become routine and mundane and, and un interesting to you or you think what’s interesting to you is not going to be interesting to other folks. Not so not so they love your mission. Your mission is what you have in common with those who are loving you who are supporting you. Make it about the mission. That is Tony’s take two. We’ve got boo koo, but loads more time for sustainable fundraising with larry johnson instead of doing just three of the 8, 3/8. Let’s, let’s talk about four of them. We have, we have a little more time left and then we’ll just tease, you know, all eight of them. But I would like to talk and you’ve, you’ve talked around this one and you’ve alluded to it. Number seven renew and refresh. You know, keeping a high renewal rate, high retention rate. Let’s, let’s just flush that one out as, as our, as our fourth one renew and refresh.

[00:43:27.63] spk_1:
Well, it’s, it’s said, it’s said in that order on purpose, your first goal is to renew the investors you currently have, that’s your first priority. And your second priority is to refresh your base because people die. People change their interest. People go into a different stage of life. I mean will go into bankruptcies or they lose their all sorts of reasons why people will stop giving to you and many, most of them legitimate reasons. You know, you haven’t necessarily quote pissed them off or anything. So that, so that renewing should be your number one priority with your donor pool. Unfortunately it’s not for most people. I can’t believe, I can’t tell you the number of development officers I’ve heard tell me, well, I’d like to renew more, but my executive just wants to get more new donors into the fold. And that just seems to be the, I mean, I’m like, I don’t understand where that comes from quite frankly. I mean, but I mean who am I to say? But anyway, renewing first And the, and there’s, you know, and renewing donors is actually easier now than it was when I was just in this business. And yet it seems that there’s more turning going on than it was when I was first in this business, I think there are a couple of things that are driving that first of demographics we’re dealing with, we’re dealing with younger generations in the boomers whose patience and attention levels, attention spans are quite a bit shorter and their reasons for giving are different. They’re much more impact driven than those in our age range.

[00:43:33.34] spk_0:
This is interesting. Larry, let me, let me let me stop here. Do we know that retention rates, which are, which are quite low, uh, around 20,

[00:43:43.98] spk_1:
pathetic

[00:43:45.38] spk_0:
Part. Yeah. Our retention rates lower than they were 20 years ago.

[00:43:56.38] spk_1:
I think they are. I mean, I would have to check the numbers, but in terms of my experience, excuse me, there seems to be less churn, have

[00:43:59.62] spk_0:
a drink, have a drink while I uh, say that Larry’s having a little sip of water from his yellow yellow water bottle. Very pretty.

[00:44:47.75] spk_1:
Uh, there’s, there’s, there seems to be more turn that may simply because there’s more younger donors. I mean, people send, there’s sort of this false calculus out there that millennials aren’t philanthropic. Well, they are, they’re a very high percent of them give, but they give it a different way than baby boomers do like you and I, but yes, the renewal rate is pathetic. And what I, the, the, the analogy I use is that, you know, I think the, I think, I think it’s like the the first year renewal rates always hovered in the high thirties 30% somewhere in there, the ones I’ve seen. But if you look at the consumer products, Uh, renewal rates, they’re 95 and 96%. So what I say to people is people are more loyal to their toothpaste and they are their charity. This

[00:44:57.24] spk_0:
is a very good example actually.

[00:45:06.18] spk_1:
Mean P and G. Has that figured out tony They got it figured out. So why is it if they can figure it out for something as mundane as toothpaste. Alright. Uh, why is it that nonprofits can’t employ there again? They’re selling the real thing. They’re not selling a pony thing. It’s real. It’s hard. You know, why is it? They can’t get there. Well, because they’re not investing the time and effort to make it happen. It’s just not on their radar screen. Um, that’s, that’s what I’ve seen. And maybe

[00:45:27.48] spk_0:
your advice around increasing retention.

[00:45:49.66] spk_1:
Well, it has to be an organizational mandate number one. We are going to set these goals and they’re gonna go up. I mean, there has to be the board executive. Okay, This is gonna happen. All right. We’re not happy with this. Okay. Number one, we’ve got to make a change and then you go back and you just deconstruct every single piece of what you’re doing and you look at, okay, Is this adding to or or or or taking away from the ability to renew

[00:45:55.38] spk_0:
looking at the donor journey?

[00:45:57.40] spk_1:
Yes, yeah, just

[00:46:10.66] spk_0:
listeners, we recently had um uh, I guess talking about the, the welcome journey, your email welcome journey just within the past month or six weeks or so, So you know, that’s welcoming brand new donors, you do that over the first week to 10 days, so that’s part of what you’re talking about. That’s

[00:46:19.99] spk_1:
just absolutely, that’s

[00:46:21.07] spk_0:
the initial phase of what you’re talking about, that. But the whole journey, let

[00:46:24.43] spk_1:
me give an example of the initial phase why it’s so very important. Um you maybe you’re, I know, I know you’re old enough, I don’t remember a woman with the name of Pearl Mesta.

[00:46:33.82] spk_0:
No

[00:46:35.29] spk_1:
esto was the heiress to the Mesta Machine fortune in Pittsburgh, and they’re the ones that produced a lot of the heavy artillery and guns during World War two.

[00:46:43.25] spk_0:
I went to school at Carnegie Mellon. Uh

[00:46:45.69] spk_1:
there you go. I

[00:46:46.82] spk_0:
knew, so I know. Andrew Carnegie Did you ever

[00:46:50.17] spk_1:
machine in Homestead? It’s still there.

[00:46:52.45] spk_0:
Okay, I know Homestead Homestead works used to be, it was a big Steeltown Homestead. Okay. Mr Works. Alright.

[00:47:33.73] spk_1:
So anyway, Pearl Mesta uh in the 90 the sixties, uh, you know, was the grand dame of Washington social life. Okay. Everybody wanted to be invited to one of Pearl’s parties. Okay, whether you’re Republican democrat, it didn’t, it was the place to be boy and if you don’t wanna pearls list, you’re at the top and everyone came and it was a very congenial group? Well at one point someone asked her pearl, you know, what is it that makes your party? So everyone just can’t wait to get there. And here’s what she said. It’s all about the hellos and the goodbyes.

[00:47:38.65] spk_0:
Mm think

[00:47:43.30] spk_1:
about that. You know how

[00:47:43.71] spk_0:
welcome you feel, coming, coming and going

[00:48:00.93] spk_1:
right, right. And and she saw that as her job when someone crossed her threshold who may not know more than two people in the whole room, okay to make them feel at home and welcome. And that takes

[00:48:02.66] spk_0:
purpose

[00:48:03.63] spk_1:
to welcome them. Call them by name and you know, take care of their coats or whatever it is that you need to do and then introduce them to someone

[00:48:11.00] spk_0:
introduced right and

[00:48:28.66] spk_1:
get them started and break the ice for them. That’s what she did. And then when it was time for someone to leave, she didn’t let them sneak out the front door, the side door. Oh, tony thank you so much for coming. I can’t wait till I can have you here in my home again. See the difference, but that’s the hostess is as an active role then, you know, she’s not over there huddled in the corner with all of her friends,

[00:48:37.18] spk_0:
you

[00:48:37.35] spk_1:
know, and and there’s the difference and I’ve seen this in awareness meetings when I was in universities where you got the administrators all hovered over in the corner talking to themselves. you know, what the hell is this about? Get out there and talk to these other people?

[00:50:10.31] spk_0:
Yeah, I hope. Yeah, I used to see that when we had in person meetings, you know, too many, too many development folks or even it doesn’t, they don’t, it’s not even just the fundraisers, it’s, you know, too many insiders talking to each other because they’re all comfortable with it instead of talking to the donors who they don’t know or maybe just, you know, casually. No, but you know, I’m breaking the ice with those folks and making them feel welcome. Yeah, I hate to see those clusters of employees. Again, not only fundraisers, you know, anybody for any, anybody doing program work, anybody representing the organization at a public event, you shouldn’t be huddled with your fellow employees, you should be out talking to the public, telling them what you do. You it may be mundane to you, but it’s not mundane to them. They, you know, quoting from glengarry glen ross. They don’t step foot on the lot. If they don’t want to pay. If they don’t want to buy, they don’t step foot on the lot. They’re not ready to buy from the, from the alec baldwin, you know, booming iconic speech folks don’t set foot on the lot if they’re not ready to buy, they haven’t come to spend time with your organization, if they don’t want to learn about it. So whether you’re a fundraiser or you’re not, if you don’t have an outward facing job, then, you know, if you don’t want to talk to the public, then don’t come to the event. This is, this is an awareness raising. You

[00:50:15.95] spk_1:
know, just

[00:50:28.82] spk_0:
come to the employee holiday party and then you can huddle with all your fellow employees, but coming to a public event, talk to the public, get away from the folks, you know very well because you work with them and, and get out talking to folks you don’t know, tell them about what you do

[00:50:33.01] spk_1:
when I Years ago.

[00:50:35.31] spk_0:
That was a bit of a,

[00:50:36.67] spk_1:
it was not

[00:50:37.38] spk_0:
sure. I’m sorry. But

[00:50:38.83] spk_1:
you shouldn’t be

[00:50:40.50] spk_0:
years

[00:50:41.34] spk_1:
ago when I was running the major,

[00:50:44.06] spk_0:
when

[00:51:09.56] spk_1:
I was running the good major program at Suny Buffalo. I was very, we were very much mindful of, you know, and this is politically incorrect today. But we were in the Chiefs and indians A’s okay. How many, how many people do we have? We gotta make sure we balance this thing out and, and I, and I made I made it very clear to, to fundraising staff that were there. You know, here’s your assignment. You are not here to suck up free food and booze. Thank you very much. That’s not your role here. In fact, if you get anything to eat or drink at all. That’s, that’s lucky on your part. Okay. That’s not what your

[00:51:15.30] spk_0:
extreme. I like to feed food, I like to see that folks are said and, and uh, you know, plus you can meet people over the buffet table. Oh

[00:51:24.62] spk_1:
yeah, I mean I, I said that, I mean I expect people to enjoy themselves. Uh and I, and I think it’s important that,

[00:51:30.78] spk_0:
but, but there’s a reason that you’re there.

[00:51:32.71] spk_1:
Yeah, you’re not there just to suck up free food. I

[00:51:35.88] spk_0:
used to go to these events with the name, list of pack,

[00:51:38.85] spk_1:
list

[00:51:39.22] spk_0:
of pockets. I’m getting too excited. I used to go to these events like this with a list of names in my pocket, on a piece of paper folded in half. So it would fit in my breast jacket pocket. And these are the folks that I want to talk to who said they’re coming and from time to time I would excuse myself, go in the hall, look at the

[00:51:57.37] spk_1:
list,

[00:52:18.29] spk_0:
check with the front, the registration desk to make sure that these, you know, I can’t find somebody. Did they come or that they didn’t come so I can’t talk to them. But I would check the list, go and talk to folks you should be going with and, and for some of these folks, you know, there were, there were reasons I wanted to talk to them. Some of them, it was just a refresh and renew. But some, you know, I had a specific agenda item to talk to them about. You know, these these events are not, you know, to your point, you’re lucky if you eat and drink, they’re not social, these are work events.

[00:52:29.27] spk_1:
That’s right. You’re not

[00:52:30.01] spk_0:
gonna be, you’re gonna be working in advancing relationships.

[00:52:32.61] spk_1:
You’re not, you’re not just schmoozing, You’re working.

[00:52:36.47] spk_0:
Uh,

[00:52:53.03] spk_1:
this is purposeful. Um, well, and I used to, and I used to have the officers that attended, I used to have them submit the names to me of all the people they have meaningful conversations with. You know, how did we cover the floor? You know, it was left out. Um, that was key cause this, this was a very, of course, if it’s a sit down event, it’s all about strategic seating. Of

[00:52:58.37] spk_0:
course, yes, Yes. Don’t put the employees together. Put the right donors with the right potential donors. Put the right staff with the right donors. Yes. Be very intentional. Very purposeful

[00:53:10.75] spk_1:
or donors who have personal differences. You don’t see them together.

[00:53:16.96] spk_0:
Yes. Um, if it’s not a sit down event or if it’s the cocktail hour, you see somebody standing alone or sitting alone, over in a chair or a sofa, go up and introduce yourself.

[00:53:25.67] spk_1:
Don’t

[00:53:34.44] spk_0:
let people sit by themselves alone and stand alone in the cocktail hour. You know, they’re looking for somebody to come up to them, do it again. If you don’t want to do that kind of work, then just go to the employer employee holiday party.

[00:53:40.85] spk_1:
You

[00:53:41.90] spk_0:
know, you might not have an outward facing job. but if you’re going to an outward facing event representing the organization, then you need to be outward facing and not huddled with your fellow employees.

[00:53:51.68] spk_1:
So

[00:53:52.67] spk_0:
going back

[00:54:24.09] spk_1:
to the premise here of renew, that should be the number one driver in terms of the donor pool focus on renewal and building that relationship over time. Uh, it’s, you know, you know, in terms of, you know, I’m an engineer, I’m a business guy, you know, I’m interested in return on investment. How much does it cost? You know, and it is a cost. It’s much less expensive in dollars and cents to maintain a relationship to get a very large gift than it is to constantly be trying to bring new people into the fold as you know, No,

[00:54:25.71] spk_0:
that’s donor acquisition costs a lot more than donor.

[00:54:28.83] spk_1:
Yeah, it’s so much more expensive

[00:54:32.09] spk_0:
multiples.

[00:55:10.77] spk_1:
And so then from a financial point of view, it’s makes sense. Everything, It just makes sense. But you, but you’re really working on this relationship over time and then you do have an acquisition program that, that drops people in at various levels when they come in, but that’s where the focus should be every and so people aren’t doing that. As I said, the first step is to go back and deconstruct the entire program and begin to rebuild it with renewal as the number one focus. And then, and of course that’s gonna really, um, give some executives heartburn because they’re so dependent on these small first time gifts to make, to make a budget, you know, which is, you know, that’s an exercise in futility. But it happens all the time because that will absolutely give them heartburn. But what’s gonna happen here? What’s gonna happen there? But

[00:55:20.51] spk_0:
over time you’ll have a more sustainable fundraising revenue when you retain your donors and grow them

[00:55:27.41] spk_1:
well, not only sustainable, but a lot more money. Pure and simple. And I would go so far as to suggest that you could probably do this in a way that it wouldn’t even affect your current income levels. I think you get enough replacement from your acquisition in your renewal’s

[00:56:22.00] spk_0:
maybe maybe. But even if you don’t, it’s still worth, it’s still worth investing in the long term retention or renewal and growth of your existing donors. All right. That was # seven renew and refresh. Alright, so Larry, give us the rundown. Uh, are you able to recite them? Okay. Okay. Okay. So we’re gonna go through the eight. We, we touched on 4/8. So we did half the other half are at the eight principles dot com. Larry, please just run down your, your eight principles of sustainable fundraising.

[01:00:11.58] spk_1:
The a principles are principal one donors are the drivers donors dr philanthropy, but they drive it with their dreams, not their money principle. To begin at the beginning, you need to be able to know your mission and be able to communicate it in a way and in language and in areas and places where your prospective investors will receive it and understand it. Clearly three leadership leads, Your leadership leads, sets the tone for everything else and they will lead. Everybody else will follow their lead, whatever whether that’s good or bad principle for learning plan. You need to first learn who would naturally support you because not everyone will even philanthropic people, Not everyone will and then construct a plan or a program. And how do you reach those people? Where are they? What do they read? What do they do? Who are their friends? All this sort of thing. Principle five. Work from the inside out. Begin with those people closest to you, both in terms of, of affinity and to your mission but also closeness to your organization. That’s why I’m a big believer in doing board campaigns, annual campaigns and doing employee campaigns because it’s you begin and you move out in concentric circles, it’s like building that network. Principle six divide and grow simply treat different donors differently And you’re constructing a pathway that over time will bring your donors closer to you emotionally. Principles seven renew and refresh. Your first focus should be to renew your current investors, the other people who have already voted with their money. You know, they’ve already told you, hey, we support you and oftentimes they’re ignored or simply given you know, whatever. Quick, quick Thank you and then Principal eight integrate, evaluate, integrate, invest, integrate and evaluate. I get that. Right. Okay. So you, you tricked me up. Okay. First of all you have to invest in your program. It costs money to raise money. But this is the role of the board to understand what these general guidelines are in terms of what it takes to raise money over what length of time, you know, how much of investment do we have to make for it begin to pay off over time? Um, integrate. Now this can be, this can be a problem with small organizations or large organizations. And integration is simply understanding that you need to make sure that you, as you communicate as you solicit as you focus on your donor constituency. It needs to come across as a uniform message to the receiver. And what I mean by that is in the case of a big university. You, we have all these different appeals and their college and their this and plan giving and major giving and all this sort of thing. And you know, if, if those things aren’t coordinated the effect on the donor, it, it’s like they’re coming at them. They don’t know, you know, and we’ve all had the horror stories of that sort of thing. Um, you know, one in particular was, I was running again this back at Sunni and a major gift officer called me up. They were in California and they said, I just had a very interesting experience. And I said, what’s that? He said when I was in there visiting the couple, the doorbell rang and it was a plan giving officer. Well in the university’s wisdom, you know, our two organizations were silo where you see the result that God and so and then on the other end of the spectrum, another kind of offender of this kind of thing are the independent schools where they are soliciting parents left and right for every little ding dong thing on the face of the earth and people get worn out with that really quickly. And so you know, when I worked with independent schools, I say, hey, we need to budget as much as this is possible and have a uniform appeal to these donors and organizations schools that have done that the donor satisfaction goes up and they raise a lot more money. Okay,

[01:00:26.41] spk_0:
that’s integrate. So invest, integrate and evaluate,

[01:00:38.64] spk_1:
evaluate. You know, how many times have I heard? What we’ve always done it that way. What do you mean? You’ve always done it that way. That’s prescription for death in most places. And so every year there ought to be an evaluation of the plan evaluation. How do we perform, what do we do well, what we do not do well, what do we need to change? What do we need to tweet? What

[01:00:48.80] spk_0:
are the important, what are the real meaningful metrics?

[01:00:55.09] spk_1:
That’s right. And then how do we make those better larry

[01:00:55.64] spk_0:
johnson. The Eight Principles, You find the principles at the Eight Principles dot com. His book is the Eight principles of sustainable fundraising. You’ll find larry on linkedin Larry, thank you very, very much for sharing.

[01:01:08.53] spk_1:
Oh, it’s my pleasure, tony This was a lot of fun,

[01:02:18.43] spk_0:
I’m glad. Thank you. Thank you very much for being with me. Next week planned giving with eastern donors. I learned a lot in this one. If you missed any part of this week’s show, I beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com were sponsored by Turn to communications. Pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turned life into dot C. O. And by fourth dimension technologies i Tion for in a box, they’re affordable tech solution for nonprofits at tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant for d just like three D But as you know, they go one dimension deeper and they’ve got the free offer. Our creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff. The shows, social media is by Susan Chavez. Marc Silverman is our web guy. And this music is by scott Stein, thank you for that. Affirmation Scottie with me next week for nonprofit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great

Nonprofit Radio for August 29, 2022: Your Tech Problem Is Actually A People Problem

 

Ananda Robie & Sam Dorman: Your Tech Problem Is Actually A People Problem

Wrapping up our #22NTC coverage, Ananda Robie and Sam Dorman sort out why your nonprofit’s technology problem is very likely a people problem. And they share their roadmap to better technology tomorrow. Ananda is with the Center for Action and Contemplation and Sam is from The Build Tank.

 

 

 

 

Listen to the podcast

Get Nonprofit Radio insider alerts!

I love our sponsors!

Turn Two Communications: PR and content for nonprofits. Your story is our mission.

Fourth Dimension Technologies: IT Infra In a Box. The Affordable Tech Solution for Nonprofits.

Apple Podcast button

 

 

 

We’re the #1 Podcast for Nonprofits, With 13,000+ Weekly Listeners

Board relations. Fundraising. Volunteer management. Prospect research. Legal compliance. Accounting. Finance. Investments. Donor relations. Public relations. Marketing. Technology. Social media.

Every nonprofit struggles with these issues. Big nonprofits hire experts. The other 95% listen to Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio. Trusted experts and leading thinkers join me each week to tackle the tough issues. If you have big dreams but a small budget, you have a home at Tony Martignetti Nonprofit Radio.
View Full Transcript

Transcript for 606_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220829.mp3

Processed on: 2022-08-26T19:11:13.159Z
S3 bucket containing transcription results: transcript.results
Link to bucket: s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/transcript.results
Path to JSON: 2022…08…606_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220829.mp3.463558328.json
Path to text: transcripts/2022/08/606_tony_martignetti_nonprofit_radio_20220829.txt

[00:02:02.70] spk_0:
and welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95%. I’m your aptly named host of your favorite abdominal podcast. Oh I’m glad you’re with me. I’d be stricken with cause Elijah if you burned me up with the idea that you missed this week’s show your tech problem is actually a people problem wrapping up our 22 Ntc coverage. Ananda roby and Sam dorman sort out why you’re nonprofits. Technology problem is very likely a people problem and they share their roadmap to better technology tomorrow. Ananda is with the Center for Action and Contemplation and SAM is from the build tank on Tony’s take to wrapping up national make a will month we’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot c o. And by fourth dimension technologies I. T. Infra in a box. The affordable tech solution for nonprofits. tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D Just like 3D but they go one dimension deeper. Here is your tech problem is actually a people problem. Welcome to tony-martignetti non profit radio coverage of 22 N. T. C. You know what that is by now through all the interviews we’ve been doing, it’s the 2022 nonprofit technology conference and you know that it’s hosted by N 10. The smart folks who help you use technology as you’re doing your important work with me now are Ananda robi and SAm dorman. Ananda is digital Managing Director of digital products at center for Action and contemplation Sam dorman is co founder At the build tank Ananda Sam welcome to nonprofit radio

[00:02:23.64] spk_1:
Thanks tony

[00:02:24.87] spk_2:
Yeah, thank you so much for having us.

[00:02:36.99] spk_0:
The pleasure. Pleasure to have both of you. Your session topic is your technology problem is actually a people problem. Sam can you, can you give us an overview of what folks are often, uh, misconstruing about the real problem perhaps at at their smaller, mid sized non profit

[00:03:30.65] spk_1:
Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. My partner chris and I, we, you know, founded the bill tank to try to help organizations resolve their pervasive technology pain, which is, um, which is really common. It’s just about every organization is struggling under these, these same restrictions where they just don’t have the technology that allows them to do what they want to do and it’s holding everybody back and it’s creating all all kinds of pain points. And so what I think that people don’t realize is so often it’s not actually a problem with the technology, the symptoms, you know, feel like their problems with technology, but it’s a gap in a certain kind of technology capacity. Um, and it’s about actually getting the right internal team doing the right types of things, which is sometimes not what people expect it should be. And Ananda is a perfect example of that kind of person. And the team she has built at C A C is a perfect example of what it looks like to go from those sorts of pervasive technology Pain points to actually really using leveraging technology to its potential to help increase the organization’s impact

[00:03:58.76] spk_0:
ananda what are some of the symptoms that you were you were feeling at center for action and contemplation?

[00:04:54.00] spk_2:
Yeah. Well, luckily I was so blessed that by the time I came to the C a C, they had already met chris and SAm and gotten bought in on the digital product team model and investing in structuring technology Well. But prior to coming to see a C in previous roles, I’ve had, I did experience that other nonprofits or in higher ed, which has been my kind of career path. That really what’s most common is you hire folks to do a job and then technology is treated like off the side of their desk. So you might hire a development director who’s responsible for fundraising for your organization, but then they’re also responsible for, you know, keeping the donation platform up and running and troubleshooting issues or if you need a new platform going and finding it and uh, you know, putting it into place. And so it’s just means that people a have too much work on their plate. So their workload is too much and then you don’t have the right people with the right kind of interests and skills doing the work. And so there’s a whole model for how we kind of have distributed ownership and break down the ownership between content folks and technology folks.

[00:05:10.36] spk_0:
Okay. You say there’s a whole model, Is that, is that part of what your your session was about?

[00:05:51.03] spk_1:
Yeah, exactly. So, so, we, you know, we pulled together this thing called the road map to a better technology tomorrow. So chris and I were always trying to share everything we can as resources. We can work with some organizations like the CDC, but we can’t work with every organization. But it also feels like a lot of these things, once you understand the concepts there not that hard, they’re pretty based on common sense. They’re definitely not common practice, but uh, we try to share everything freely. So we put together this roadmap with just sort of six key steps about, here’s how you go from where you’re, where you are now to building this kind of capacity that’s gonna be able to supercharge you. So, in the, in, in the session, we just walked through those six steps.

[00:05:54.01] spk_0:
Okay. And this is the road map to better technology tomorrow. Like something from the 1950s,

[00:06:01.43] spk_1:
your

[00:06:02.85] spk_0:
new electric stove is the the kitchen of tomorrow for the happy homemaker.

[00:06:09.47] spk_1:
We kinda did. It’s a little bit tongue in cheek. We, we like to have a lot of fun with the work that we do. And so we sort of, it felt a little bit like it was like mad men branding the road to a better technology. Yeah,

[00:06:37.24] spk_0:
that’s what I think of it immediately, but before we All right. So, we’ll go through the roadmap Sounds, uh, sounds very exploratory what sam, but why why are we defaulting to blaming, uh, faulting technology? Is that, is that because it’s easier than looking introspectively at our team and our skills and gaps there in? Well,

[00:06:44.52] spk_1:
it’s hard to

[00:06:45.16] spk_0:
blame technology.

[00:07:49.02] spk_1:
Well, it’s understandable. That’s where you feel in the pain. So people just don’t have the basic tools that they need. If you’re trying to accomplish anything, you’re trying to, you know, not to use the example of a fundraiser. You’re trying to raise money if you’re a communicator, if you’re a program person, if you’re an executive trying to understand what things are working, the pain point is focused on. We don’t have a system that helps us track our donors well, or understand their journeys with us. Or a lot of pain is felt with websites, you know, like everybody needs to use the website as a key. It’s like your front door. It’s also your engagement pathways. It’s a key property. And very rarely do organizations have it where everybody who has needs with those properties, with those, with those technology platforms, is actually getting those needs addressed. And so, you know, they, that’s where you feel the pain. But what people don’t understand is it’s because there’s a lack of ownership and lack of stewardship and it’s not a highly technical kind of lack of ownership and stewardship that’s missing. It’s a highly strategic, highly communication based set of skills that needed to steward these platforms and make sure that everybody’s getting what they need out of them and have sort of a long term oriented view. It’s exactly the kind of stuff that Ananda is so strong at.

[00:08:08.05] spk_0:
Okay, okay, so it sounds like the shortcomings uh manifest themselves in people’s performance because we don’t have the kind of tools we need, you know, the things you ticked off saying that you’re you’re more eloquent in describing that I’m going than I would be, so I’m not gonna bother, but I’ll just say it’s everything you just said, but it manifests itself in poor performance or overworked or

[00:08:57.22] spk_1:
Yeah. And I’ll just say, you know, it’s sort of like you have, you you you you wanna you get great people around you in an organization, you have a really inspiring um mission and you get great people around you and it’s like getting a bunch of expert chefs in your kitchen and then all you give them is a bunch of wooden spoons and you say cook a gourmet meal, they just don’t have the tools, they need to make their amazing, you know, and so what you wanna do is you want a situation where you have someone whose job it is to just make const consistently enable their colleagues to do better and greater work via those sort of technology systems. So promise of technology is just not commonly realized for most organizations, it’s just paying up and down the up and down the books

[00:09:06.58] spk_0:
because the people at that dining table are gonna say these chefs suck

[00:09:10.08] spk_1:
right?

[00:09:10.81] spk_0:
Yeah, you’re gonna say something

[00:09:12.73] spk_1:
back.

[00:09:13.80] spk_0:
I’m sorry. But

[00:09:15.34] spk_2:
no, I was just gonna say, I think um

[00:09:17.99] spk_0:
when

[00:10:12.60] spk_2:
we say it’s a people problem, it’s that’s not to be misconstrued that it’s a problem with the people currently in the organization having a deficit or something. It’s usually a people problem because the right staffing to steward your technology has not been put in place. So it’s really a people problem often in terms of a gap in people for the technology. So it’s a misconstrued notion that, you know, when you get technology, it would be false to think that good technology is just plug and play, you get it off the shelf, you plug it in, you play, it works for your org forever more. Um, that’s not the case for anything. Your organization is growing and developing and adapting and evolving. Um your technology needs to do so as well. But in order to stay on top of that, you have to have the staffing of the folks like me who are responsible for treating that technology almost like a product. So we’re gonna make sure it stays up to date, it gets um serviced and updated and replaced as needed. So I just want to make sure no one is hearing this as it’s a people problem within your org. I’m sure the people within existing orders are phenomenal and they likely have too much to do and a full time job in addition to potentially looking and focusing on technology, you should have a specific stripe within your org that is focused on the technology much like you have stripes focused on your programs.

[00:10:40.30] spk_0:
Okay, thank you. Alright, banana. Are you, are you familiar enough with this too to launch our journey on the, on the road map to a better technology tomorrow?

[00:10:45.91] spk_2:
Well I’ve had the benefit of truly like working under chris and SAm’s mentorship for the last six years. So I like to think that I’m very familiar

[00:10:53.79] spk_0:
with it.

[00:10:54.46] spk_2:
Yeah, SAm and I have kind of been on a little bit of a publicity tour lately. I feel like where Sam you know because he and chris is brilliant minds are what came up with the kind of road map and then I get to offer a bit of the color commentary about what it looks like in like implementation and actuality versus

[00:12:51.20] spk_0:
theory. Turn to communications media relationships and thought leadership. First comes the relationships then comes the leaderships leadership but I couldn’t pass up the rhyme. You gotta have the relationships before you can get the leadership the thought leadership because you need those relationships so that when an opportunity for thought leadership emerges either because there’s some big news hook or you just have something that is compelling that you need folks to hear. You gotta have uh you gotta have the journalists and the other content creators in a position where they’re gonna pick up the phone when you call, they’re gonna reply when you email. That takes relationships turn to knows how to build those relationships. So you gotta have the relationships, then you can get heard. Then you become a thought leader in your field, turn to communications, they can help you build those relationships. And while you’re working on your messaging, that can help you craft that also so that you become the thought leader, you ought to be, you deserve to be turn to communications. Your story is their mission turned hyphen two dot c o. Now, back to your tech problem is actually a people problem. And what about buying leadership by in Ananda? Was was was was C A C beyond that. When you got there, you said they had already bought in. So, had you, like, had you passed that phase, Is that something you didn’t have to deal with?

[00:13:32.75] spk_2:
I mean, I think it’s always ongoing. I’m always telling the stories that it takes to make sure we’re investing in technology properly from a capacity and funding in time perspective. But I really was fortunate when I joined the Sea a sea, that our executive director, Michael Michael Poffenberger had attended one of chris and SAm’s talks and really just connected with their approach to technology and wanted them to support the C A c is really up upping our game when it came to tech. Um but one of chris and SAM’s requirements was that if you want to partner with them, you’ve got to have internal staffing to kind of fill that gap that is all too common when it comes to tech. Um, so hiring my position was basically the organization’s response to this is the direction we’re gonna head when it comes to structuring our technology and this is the first position we’re gonna hire to make that happen.

[00:15:11.64] spk_1:
tony maybe I’ll add. It’s also really important to note that a non as part of the leadership team now at C A. C as the chief of this team and that’s one of the things that we really emphasize is important. You know, the actually the first step in the road map we were going to talk about is you must be willing to invest and it’s about investing, not only resources, but time and care and focus. If technology is not part of what your leadership knows and understands, then you’re making decisions sort of devoid of what you can actually do in the world. You know, it’s like technology nowadays as your arms and legs to do almost anything in the world as an organization. And so if you have a bunch of people at leadership level, making decisions about programs and what you’re capable of or timelines or anything like that without that strong back and forth communication with those arms and legs and you have an organization that sort of lurches forward and can’t walk straight. And so it really makes a huge difference when you see a situation like CSC where nana is there as part of the leadership team, able to say yes organization. This is what we’re capable of. And also, um yeah, we can we can do these tradeoffs that we’re talking about at a leadership level, but here’s what we’re gonna have to dip prioritize and here’s what we’re going to prioritize. So it’s just sort of a whole different approach of, of investing in technology is a key skill set for the organization.

[00:15:17.61] spk_0:
Okay. And you said that’s our first, our first of the six steps is investing, but not only in the technology, but also in in the organization the people

[00:15:48.39] spk_1:
well. And that’s why we start with saying, you have to invest as, you know, you have to be willing to to hire people in this certain type of uh, you know, a certain type of capability and that means salary and that means head count and that’s one of the most expensive things. There are, so a lot of times we say, you know, that’s, you got to hear the bad news first, which is, it’s gonna cost a lot, most organizations are woefully under invested in internally internal technology capacity. And that’s just the truth of it. So when, when people come to us and say, you know, is there an affordable way we can do a B and C. We say no. If you want to be good with your technology and good good meaningful impactful outputs, you have to invest in terms of resources in terms of development, in terms of external experts and in terms of your internal team

[00:16:13.51] spk_0:
ananda what what’s the annual budget at Center for Action and Contemplation and and how many employees?

[00:16:20.30] spk_2:
Yeah. Great question. I believe our annual budget is close to about nine million and we have about 55 employees.

[00:16:35.89] spk_0:
Okay. All right. I want listeners to understand the context of what investment means. Why is at the center for action and shouldn’t contemplation come first and then comes action after you’ve given after you’ve thought about what it is you might be acting on, you

[00:16:51.54] spk_2:
know, one of my favorite things that our founder father Richard moore says is that actually the most important word in our title is the word. And because what is good action without sufficient contemplation? And what is the point of contemplation if it doesn’t result in good action? So and is the most important regardless of which order? Those words come in.

[00:17:08.97] spk_0:
Okay. All right, thank you. And thank you Father Also. Alright. All right. So, um Sam is there a place for folks who have you know have a smaller organization like uh suppose it’s like half the size of of C a C s annual budget like it’s 4, 4.5 5 million

[00:17:22.95] spk_1:
dollars is still

[00:17:24.56] spk_0:
a place that that they can improve their relationship. I’m gonna say their relationship with technology.

[00:17:31.79] spk_1:
It’s a great question. You know we have done this with very large sort of

[00:17:38.48] spk_0:
two great questions in a row. It’s all downhill. Yeah

[00:17:39.66] spk_1:
pretty much

[00:17:41.58] spk_0:
batting

[00:18:54.94] spk_1:
average, batting average is solid so far that we’ve done some very large sort of enterprise scale organizations. We’ve done it with tiny organizations and people ask me that often like well you have to be a certain size and I think the answer is no you don’t have to be a certain size. So I used to work out of an office where there was social enterprises that were being incubated. And so like people starting uh you know, triple bottom line businesses as they used to call them. And what they would do is either the founder uh would be someone with great technical sort of oversight capability or your first hire was sort of a C. T. O. Or a technical co founder. And so nowadays it scales down to I think the size of two, if your organization has a headcount to half of that capacity is probably focused on your technology because anyone starting an organization today understands how essential that is to be able to do anything in the modern day world. The problem is a lot of old organizations are trying to get away from this really old model of like the tech person in the back corner who just thinks of all things tech and everything. Tech goes through that person. We often say that’s like having a department of paper where everything on paper goes through one person in the back room. It just doesn’t make any sense. Everything is technology at these days and you have to be more sophisticated about what who you’re putting on what there’s a lot of different skill sets that you need at the table. Most organizations have their traditional I. T. Covered. Most organizations have their super users of technology covered. And almost no organizations have this particular gap which is technology stewardship

[00:19:15.10] spk_0:
Amanda. What were your credentials before you came to see A. C.

[00:19:55.68] spk_2:
Yeah so I um I actually studied film in college and I think that’s really comes from, I had an inkling towards technology. I really loved editing, I loved editing software and afterwards I went to work for a nonprofit. My goal was to actually be in the creative team. But but as a part of working there, a part of my job was using salesforce. Um And I was kind of what is traditionally called an accidental admin. So using salesforce for a couple of years they’re like, hey you’re really good at this, Would you be interested in doing this more full time learning more, taking on more responsibility. Um And I said yes and I think it’s one of the best decisions I ever made. Unfortunately our nonprofit went through a pretty massive downsizing. Um So they kind of kept on people who were like the jack of all trades and could do a lot. So I was kept on kept on as primarily the technologist but I’ve been working in Salesforce now for about

[00:20:16.08] spk_0:
12

[00:20:16.66] spk_2:
years. Uh So now certified Salesforce admin and focus on our digital product team. So I oversee our Crm Web and I. T. Teams for the C. A.

[00:20:24.93] spk_0:
C.

[00:21:30.54] spk_1:
Maybe tony I might add that. It’s like a perfect background. So you know one of the things we say is when you’re looking for technology people a lot of people think that means oh we gotta we gotta hire a bunch of developers um And that’s usually the worst thing you can do. Usually development is something that’s not easy um to hire for to manage to to evaluate the quality of work. And it’s one of the best things that you can outsource because there are firms that that’s their job, that’s what they do, that’s what their specialty is. But this sort of this sort of skill set that Ananda is such a master of this sort of like this communication based sort of ally ship based strategic layer of technology stewardship that comes from all all kinds of backgrounds and so oftentimes in an organization, people already have people like this that could be amazing stewards of their technology but they’re just not tapped for that, They’re not put in the right roles. So it really is, it really opens the floodgates for who can come in and help as opposed to sort of competing for the same highly technical, um, you know, people with, with, with depth in a, in a technical area. You’re really looking for people who are just, you know, great communicators and understanding of the big picture and allies, natural allies and uh for for their colleagues to help them do everything they do better.

[00:21:55.43] spk_0:
I think big picture big picture technologist is is valuable the way you, the way you described it. Let’s let’s move on to our let’s continue on our journey. Sam what you and your partner have, uh, what’s your next, what our next stop? What’s our next stop on the

[00:22:40.26] spk_1:
journey? We’ve already been hopping around in a few of these and you can, you can see them on on the road map. But I’ll mention one piece that Ananda referred to earlier, which is this, this we have this model of trying to separate out the just because of a chart we we created long ago, it was the Blue team and the gold team. The Blue team was this sort of tool. Optimizers like Ananda and the gold team was the people who are trying to use their tools to accomplish their work. So most, most of the people on our chart an organization, they might be like fundraisers communicators, program. People, executives, any number of things. They need tools but they need them to accomplish their work. And like said what often happens is they don’t have the tools they need. So they sort of finally go out and they’re like, I’m gonna build a Crm or I’m gonna build us a new website

[00:22:49.66] spk_0:
and

[00:23:02.20] spk_1:
now they’re on the phone with developers and talking about platforms and all the stuff that pulls them out of what their strength is instead of work focusing on their areas of expertise, which could be fundraising or anything else. And you’ve got these other people like who are just natural tool optimizers who can sit down with those people here, what they’re trying to do and say, okay, I can go figure out how we do that in technology land. Let me spend all my time on all these crazy paths that that takes. And then we come back together, have a meeting and I can tell you the three options and we go from there. So it’s it allows people to focus on their areas of expertise and and when you see that all of a sudden the machine really starts humming a lot more.

[00:23:32.29] spk_0:
So uh summarize the second stop for us. How would you, I mean if if the first one was invest, nothing has to be a single word. I don’t

[00:23:59.21] spk_1:
know that’s fine. The second one is differentiate three key areas of technology. So that’s where I was talking about, not just the sort of everything goes through tech but you’ve got traditional I. T. Which is something else which is setting up your computer’s security and software and hardware and all that. That’s a different set of skills. You’ve got your content users, your your super users and then you’ve got the the team that Ananda leads which is actually your your tool optimizer team, your digital product team

[00:24:09.47] spk_0:
stewardship to you call technology stewardship

[00:24:12.73] spk_1:
technology stewardship. Exactly.

[00:24:14.58] spk_0:
Alright.

[00:24:45.49] spk_2:
Yeah. I think one of the um you know chris and SAm have a great one liner that I always love to mention when we’re talking about this part of the road map which is that everyone likes to geek out somewhere. And I think that’s the importance here is like are the folks that you have hired within your organization able to focus the majority of their job on what they were hired to do that they’re likely experts and excellent in or are they getting distracted by having to work on tech or technical people having to contribute more to content. So the idea is making sure that folks who like to geek out on development or marketing or creative customer service program execution really get a partner that then is responsible for making sure that we find and build and train on, allowing them to have the best tools possible to do their jobs well. Um and that will just alleviate a lot of dysfunction and a lot of missed opportunity for um, just prioritizing capacity.

[00:28:50.81] spk_0:
It’s time for a break. 4th dimension technologies. They still have the free offer exclusively for nonprofit radio listeners. You get the complimentary 24/7 monitoring of your IT assets. It lasts for three months. They’ll be monitoring your servers, your network and your cloud performance. They’ll monitor your backup performance as well all 24 7. If there are any issues, they will let you know ASAP at the end of the three months, you’ll get a comprehensive report telling you how all of this is doing against different benchmarks that are standard. You know, you want to know how you’re, how you’re faring compared to where you ought to be faring. And they promised to throw in a few surprises as well. It’s all complementary. It’s on the listener landing page, tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant D just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. It’s time for Tony to take two national maker will month is coming to an end. So sad. But I am celebrating to the bitter end. We’re not letting any of national make a will month go away, leave us without full celebration. And to that end I’ve got more ideas, more reasons really. They’re not just there. They are. My ideas, they’re my thinking. But these are, these are reasons, this is not in the abstract reasons why wills are the place to start your plan to giving, I’ve done 13 through 15 already. I’m gonna do 15 through 13 through 15 already. I’m gonna do 16, 17 and 18, the last week of August and you can see the compendium of reasons at linkedin so far. Eventually they’ll be on my blog. But right now you go to linkedin through the month of august, you will see the cornucopia of reasons why planned giving should be started with Will’s simple charitable bequests. So go to my linkedin and you will see the vast array of reasons That is Tony’s take two. We’ve got just about a butt load more time for your tech problem is actually a people problem with ananda roby and sam dorman. I’m thinking about fundraising, which is what I do. I do plan giving fundraising consulting and thinking about how the supplies and fundraising, like there are people who are great at relationships but not so good about the simple, the simple, very simple user task of documenting the relationships and the activity and the steps and things. So, you know, like for them, if there could be some smoother way, like maybe they could dictate instead of having to type or you know, maybe give them a portable device, you know, they can, they can do it on a, on a on a pad or a service, you know, instead of having to carry their laptop or feel like they have to go back to their desktop to to preserve things like that. I think that’s a simple example. It’s a

[00:29:20.61] spk_2:
simple example but it’s perfect. I mean that’s the epitome of my job is like what do you need to do in order to do your job well and if one of those things is documenting your interactions and there seems to be a roadblock to doing that well let’s find out why is it like that you are constantly maybe out in the field doing your work and there’s not a good mobile app in order to complete that. So you’re having to wait till you get back to your desk is the platform, you’re using the UX UI really clunky to use are you just not trained? Have we now not provided the reporting that then shows the return on your investment. So you have this incentive to see how all of your work is paying off. There’s not necessarily a single or simple answer. So the trick is understanding the need and the reason and the why behind that need, understanding what the roadblock is and then alleviating that and that’s different for different people, some people that might be a technology use equal issue and other people that might be not understanding the need or the reward behind doing it

[00:29:49.06] spk_0:
well

[00:30:16.31] spk_1:
so well said and you know when you hear a non to talk, you can just imagine the power of having a colleague like that who’s just sort of a heat seeking missile for problem solving and knocking knocking hurdles out of people’s way. It’s completely flips the sort of traditional dynamic that you have for technology which is if you got a problem submit a ticket and we’ll get to it when we can, you know, that’s like the opposite of what anna and her team are doing. They’re out there being like tony your we you know, you’re out there trying to fundraise for us. We want you to succeed your our colleague, your ally. Like how can we help you do that better? And what you find is that once people realize they have that kind of a team on board, those sort of that kind of allies in place. The ideas just come fast and furious and then the R. O. I. Just sort of spikes where all of a sudden everybody is more powerful and more effective with the hours in their day, the R. O. I. And it’s just unbelievable. But it starts with that upfront investment

[00:30:48.00] spk_0:
see all right, continue us on the road map.

[00:31:53.81] spk_1:
Well yeah, we’ve been getting a lot of this. So we differentiate those areas of technology, you build this team, a technology accelerator team or a digital product team like talked about and then it’s all about hiring the right kinds of people which we’ve talked about that sort of strategic stewardship level layer and then one thing we didn’t talk about is insourcing and outsourcing the right things. I did mention this idea that you don’t want to generally in source uh development, you want to hire, you want to work with external partners. Actually, the last step of our road map, we call make magic with external partners. And even though that’s sort of flowery language, we chose that on purpose because when you have the right dynamic, you have, you know, sort of a superhero internally, like Ananda working with a really skilled external developer or external firm giving sort of depth of strategic and technical expertise. Well that will take us on a certain, you know, certain type of work that they’re doing, but also for their, for their web work. They working with a terrific web firm and for their Crm work, they’re working with a terrific crm firm and not just, you know, the traditional thing is just handing the work out to somebody and then they do whatever they do and they deliver it and good luck. And on day one, you know, you figure out whether you can use it or not, it’s the opposite of that. It’s, it’s very much an ongoing partnership, just probably not to talk about this because that’s where you see a lot of the power, it’s not about building a team internally, that’s going to do everything, It’s about building a team that’s going to steward it, figure out who are the right players that you need on the field.

[00:33:53.49] spk_2:
Yeah, I think often like this part of what the roadmap that we talk about can be very surprising to folks, especially if you’re saying like, hey build a technology team and the first thing is maybe not to hire like an extra under the hood. Super incredible. 10 times certified developer. Um that’s not what we would look for as the first hire doesn’t mean you’re not going to grow and expand into meeting that kind of expertise within your org um but for me, technical knowledge is one of the easiest things to learn and like SaM said the contract for so yeah, what we want to ensure we’re not doing is outsourcing the brains because if you do that then you really risk making bad investments and bad prioritization so you might be doing the wrong work or not actually getting at the root of what’s needed because truly like no one has better knowledge of the needs and nuances and changes of your organization than someone internally. So you need someone internally who is truly tasked with owning and stewarding, you know, the strategy, technical work and investments for your platform. The way that we do that is like, you know, we do all of our own admin work inside and then we have a phenomenal partner for our sales force team that if we need any coding or high level development, there’s not enough of that work for us to need to staff a full time position, but we have a great partner that we can outsource that work to um but again, like sam saying it’s not just an outsourcing, we don’t have a partner that’s just an order taker. They’re not just like, yes, we’ll do it. They really come to the table and we expect and ask of them to bring their wisdom and their critical thinking and their partnership so that they up our game, so they’re just not execute ear’s, they’re actually asking questions and giving advice about how we’re investing in our technology as well. So we get an additional phenomenal external partner on our

[00:34:18.62] spk_0:
work. And I can see why you said earlier that you’re constantly making the case for a particular technology investment, you know, what’s the, what’s the return gonna be, how is this gonna improve our efficiency? You know, I can see how your regularly making this case these cases all

[00:34:47.30] spk_2:
the time. Yeah. You know, and we started with moving the air, creating a Crm team internally and advocating for this type of investment on crm structuring the team in this way, finding the external partners in, you know, replacing old platforms that were not performing well with newer technology. Um, and then a few years down the road, you know, went back to chris and SAm, I think our executive director went back and said, hey, we’re experiencing a lot of pain on the web, like what’s going on over here, and they’re like, it’s the same issue you’ve got to treat and staff your web technology like you have crm. So we’ve brought web into the fold and made the same kind of advocacy and same kind of investment for internal staffing, Internal stewardship and external partners.

[00:36:03.20] spk_1:
Yeah. And you know, Tony. I think you see the same sort of like when there’s pain, there’s turf penis because people are just fighting to get the basics of what they need to do their work. So they say, no, this is ours, we’re gonna hold on to this is, you know, I had to go build a new web site. So I’m gonna hold onto this with everything I got, once you have a team like Ananda hired this amazing uh, product manager for web jesse jones. Once Jessie’s in there, people are only too happy to sort of let go of control because they know that she is gonna look out for their needs and do it 10 times better than they could have done it themselves. And meanwhile they get to do their fundraising or communications or program work and focus on that. So it’s just this process of getting everybody optimized onto the skills that they are best suited for and the things they love to wake up in the morning and geek out on, you know, what better option is there, that one, you’ve got the tools all that, that you need and two, you get to do the work, you’re excited about with them. It’s, you know, a lot of it is common sense, but it’s about bringing the right types of people in

[00:36:28.82] spk_0:
ananda? What have we not talked about yet that you want folks to know about this the process or the investment maybe questions that came during your session that you think are were valuable.

[00:36:33.03] spk_2:
Yeah let’s see what have we not covered yet. We’ve covered a lot.

[00:36:38.04] spk_0:
Well non profit radio is a comprehensive podcast. I hope I hope you’re not surprised by that.

[00:36:43.06] spk_2:
I expected nothing less.

[00:36:44.64] spk_0:
Thank you very much. Thank you that’s the validation I’m looking for. Thank

[00:36:48.60] spk_1:
you very

[00:36:49.47] spk_0:
important to me it’s very important

[00:37:59.95] spk_2:
um I would just say I think the only other thing that um I have discovered in my work here that um is important is often people can start conflating um digital product team members with more like traditional I. T. And so one of the things that has become important about my role is really protecting my team’s time in their remit so often you know when you put these really ally oriented folks onto your staff and they start fixing all of these pain points or debacles and make things run smoothly and get improved and partner with your gold team members, your content members. Um you can start to develop a reputation as almost like a fixer and so one of the things is then all of a sudden you’re getting all kinds of questions like hey can you fix this printer, can you work on my computer, Can you do this? So I think you know we touched on it earlier about the three different areas of technology but really keeping that distinction and not letting you know I. T. And digital products kind of become one in people’s minds because then all of a sudden you have folks who re we have the potential to be force multipliers for your organization whose time ends up getting eaten up by you know fixing that are important but they’re not really what the remit of this

[00:38:14.17] spk_0:
exactly

[00:38:24.51] spk_2:
which is so important if you need to print that’s important to your job. But that’s not a force multiplication for the productive nous. And the mission of your organization said it’s a different skill set and they should be treated and maintained separately.

[00:38:34.04] spk_0:
Sam same question for you. Anything you’d like to uh I’d like to add that we haven’t talked about yet.

[00:39:26.23] spk_1:
No it indeed it has been very comprehensive and I appreciate the time to talk about it. I guess I would just say um that the the this path is very possible. Organizations can make this transition and like we say it there’s no shortcut you have to put in the time to focus on the resources you have to care enough uh to really invest and to invest in all those ways but you can walk down this path that’s why we’ve tried to share these resources as as openly as we have. It’s all there like the bill tank dot com slash roadmap you can read through it. Um it’s just about the sort of common sense of things are not going to be great unless you have great people stewarding them, just like every area of your organization. So I guess the thing I want to, I just want to offer some hope to people who are struggling under the burden of systems that hold them back instead of supercharge them that it is possible, you know, it’s not possible without investment but with the right investment in the right structures it is possible that everybody has the tools they need to work more effectively to be more happy at their work, to be more effective at the end of the day and to have more impact

[00:39:46.44] spk_0:
and you’ll find the resource at the build tank dot com slash resource map source roadmap of course that’s roadmap. The build tank build tank dot com slash

[00:39:58.45] spk_1:
roadmap which

[00:40:00.13] spk_0:
is the roadmap to better technology tomorrow for our happy homemakers

[00:40:04.77] spk_1:
19

[00:40:11.24] spk_0:
50s. Alright, that’s Sam Dorman, he’s co founder at the build tank and also Ananda robi, managing Director of digital Products at Center for Action and Contemplation. Ananda SAm thank you very very much for sharing. Thanks

[00:40:22.10] spk_1:
tony

[00:40:24.06] spk_2:
pleasure,

[00:41:45.33] spk_0:
thank you and thank you listeners for being with tony-martignetti non profit radio coverage of 22 N. T. C. Next week. We now return to our regularly scheduled non 22 N. T. C. Programming principles of sustained fundraising with larry johnson. If you missed any part of this week’s show, I Beseech you find it at tony-martignetti dot com. We’re sponsored by turn to communications pr and content for nonprofits. Your story is their mission turn hyphen two dot C o and by fourth dimension technologies Yes, I Tion for in a box, the affordable tech solution for non profits but also get the free offer, the listener offer all of its at tony-dot-M.A.-slash-Pursuant four D. You know, just like three D. But they go one dimension deeper. Our creative producer is Claire Meyerhoff shows, social media is by Susan Chavez. Marc Silverman is our web guy and this music is by scott stein, thank you for that. Affirmation Scottie with me next week for nonprofit radio big non profit ideas for the other 95% go out and be great