I don't know about you, but my experience as a customer in many stores lately has been truly deplorable. It seems that customer service, and sometimes even simple human decency, is not common sense anymore, let alone part of the training package for employees. When did businesses forget that good service is the key to loyal customers?
It got me thinking, have we gotten lax with donor service as well? With our hectic work schedules and increasingly gigantic goals and responsibilities, are we remembering to be truly donor centered? Sometimes, especially for front-line fundraisers, it can get buried behind the need to do everything possible to secure donations in time for the performance review. Yet we know that just like customer loyalty, donor loyalty is dependent upon great product and service.
So I thought I would review some of the lessons I learned back when I was a student and working part-time in the retail industry:
1. Listen, don't sell. I asked questions to understand my customers' need and gave them the product that fit. Similarly, I need to ask questions to understand my donors' values, desires and passions to be able to suggest an option or project to invest in that will make them feel proud.
2. Put myself in their shoes. By anticipating their needs, I could quickly accommodate customers and give them a pleasant shopping experience. If I understand my donors, I can anticipate the things that will make them feel very comfortable with me and the organization.
3. Be competent. I needed to know my stuff so I didn't recommend a product that turned a customer's hair blue and lose her business. If I don't know my organization and project inside and out and feel passionate about it, I can't expect donors to be moved to action.
4. Be helpful. I would never have said to a customer looking for something in the store "I don't know." I made it my business to know my store and guide the customer to the aisle they needed. Therefore I must never stare blankly at a donor who asks me about details on their tax receipt or about a planned gift simply because that is not my field of expertise.
5. Be modest. I didn't sell a lipstick by telling a customer that it won the most awards for pigment innovation. I sold it by telling her it would make her look and feel ten years younger. In the same way, I can't make donors part with their dollars because the school has the highest rankings. Of course product credibility is important, but the donor will only ultimately give because they understand that supporting this project will make them feel great because they are improving the world.
6. Enjoy helping people. I was happiest when the store was incredibly busy and I was helping people and making them smile in the midst of chaos. So why should I feel irritated by an interruption phone call from an alumnus that was put through to me by the reception desk? That may be my chance to make someone's day by answering a question and getting them involved with the school. Hmm...must remember that the next time the phone rings.
7. Say thank you. I may have thrown a free gift in the customer's bag, but if I didn't say thank you, she still would not have had a great experience. Simply saying thank you in a direct, timely and meaningful way is all a donor needs, and it goes such a long way.
Happy donors = loyal donors. Right? Now if only I could buy a pair of shoes without getting attitude.
social media: the best thing to happen to university advancement since the invention of homecoming
That's right. While companies are struggling to adapt to social media marketing, university advancement teams are (or should be) rejoicing that we now have tools to enhance what we've always done best: build real relationships and make connections.
Bill Lee, in this HBR article, rightly states: "traditional marketing is dead." However, peer-based, community-oriented marketing is now thriving because of social media. Lee reminds us to focus on two important things: 1. find influencers; and 2. give them social capital.
The influencers we've traditionally identified will likely be different than social media influencers. And that's a good thing, as we certainly need to focus on building more and better relationships with our stakeholders that don't have gray hair. We can give them social capital by empowering them with information and knowledge that will help them with their careers, their bosses, their employees, their businesses, their peers and their resumes. And then they can share this info and help others as well. We can provide them with value that will make them not only want to promote us, but also solidify a lifelong connection.
Mark Bonchek backs this up by stating that social media is a gift economy, unlike our traditional market economy. In a gift economy organizations must create social currencies related to our brand, and also earn status, not buy it. If we enable our constituents to connect with each other and with us in this way, we will build deep engagement with them that goes far beyond what traditional marketing could ever do.
Advancement teams at universities have long known that sustained growth is built through authentic customer relationships. We must therefore take advantage of every social media tool that makes sense in cultivating those alumni/student/donor relationships we've already begun. And we can reach so many more with social media marketing.
We're already ahead of the game. Let's keep the momentum going.
 |
| source |
The influencers we've traditionally identified will likely be different than social media influencers. And that's a good thing, as we certainly need to focus on building more and better relationships with our stakeholders that don't have gray hair. We can give them social capital by empowering them with information and knowledge that will help them with their careers, their bosses, their employees, their businesses, their peers and their resumes. And then they can share this info and help others as well. We can provide them with value that will make them not only want to promote us, but also solidify a lifelong connection.
Mark Bonchek backs this up by stating that social media is a gift economy, unlike our traditional market economy. In a gift economy organizations must create social currencies related to our brand, and also earn status, not buy it. If we enable our constituents to connect with each other and with us in this way, we will build deep engagement with them that goes far beyond what traditional marketing could ever do.
Advancement teams at universities have long known that sustained growth is built through authentic customer relationships. We must therefore take advantage of every social media tool that makes sense in cultivating those alumni/student/donor relationships we've already begun. And we can reach so many more with social media marketing.
We're already ahead of the game. Let's keep the momentum going.
fuel engagement in your organization
I've been hearing a lot about how the London2012 Olympics have been such a success due to the throngs of engaged volunteers. A recent post on the Harvard Business Review explored how enthusiasm from the volunteers spilled over to all kinds of other workers around the city and resulted in productivity above the normal expectations of a typical unengaged workforce. The argument is that if organizations do more every day to draw on and fuel enthusiasms, and less to
maximize efficiency, the problem of disengagement would be gone
forever.
We talk a lot about engagement in university advancement, but we usually focus it on alumni and donors. We inherently understand that for our stakeholders to be engaged, we must fuel their enthusiasm and earn their trust. But do we behave the same way with our staff and colleagues?
Unfortunately, high turnover exists in the advancement industry and can hurt relationships that are building between the institution and a stakeholder. Hopefully, the engagement officer has done a good job in creating a broad relationship between the stakeholder and the school in the area in which they hold interest so that their departure has minimal effect. Then again, good work is done by engaged employees, and disengagement is the number one reason why employees leave.
Why don't we use the same approach with our staff and colleagues as we do with our stakeholders? We know it works. We know that if we build mutually profitable long-term relationships, they will lead to satisfaction, trust and results. In fact, Tony Schwartz and his firm The Energy Project are proving it. He works with companies to "shift their paradigm from getting more out of people by pushing them harder, to investing more systematically in meeting their needs, so they're freed, fueled, and inspired to bring more of themselves to work every day." In an interesting HBR article he reasons that workers (and possibly women in particular) are so busy in today's fast-paced world that if they are given the flexibility to do their work when and how they need to, they will have the focus and energy to do a better quality job.
The advancement world is filled with a high percentage of women doing high-energy jobs like development and alumni front-line work. Schwartz's theory makes a lot of sense in this space. After all, we want to build quality, fulfilling relationships with our stakeholders, and constantly fuel them, inspire them and meet their needs so that they will give back. We naturally then need equally engaged, loyal and passionate front-line people to make those connections and achieve that goal for us.
Taking the time to fully engage and trust our staff will deliver extraordinary value to the institution that is measurable and sustainable. In the end, that's what we all want.
We talk a lot about engagement in university advancement, but we usually focus it on alumni and donors. We inherently understand that for our stakeholders to be engaged, we must fuel their enthusiasm and earn their trust. But do we behave the same way with our staff and colleagues?
Unfortunately, high turnover exists in the advancement industry and can hurt relationships that are building between the institution and a stakeholder. Hopefully, the engagement officer has done a good job in creating a broad relationship between the stakeholder and the school in the area in which they hold interest so that their departure has minimal effect. Then again, good work is done by engaged employees, and disengagement is the number one reason why employees leave.
Why don't we use the same approach with our staff and colleagues as we do with our stakeholders? We know it works. We know that if we build mutually profitable long-term relationships, they will lead to satisfaction, trust and results. In fact, Tony Schwartz and his firm The Energy Project are proving it. He works with companies to "shift their paradigm from getting more out of people by pushing them harder, to investing more systematically in meeting their needs, so they're freed, fueled, and inspired to bring more of themselves to work every day." In an interesting HBR article he reasons that workers (and possibly women in particular) are so busy in today's fast-paced world that if they are given the flexibility to do their work when and how they need to, they will have the focus and energy to do a better quality job.
The advancement world is filled with a high percentage of women doing high-energy jobs like development and alumni front-line work. Schwartz's theory makes a lot of sense in this space. After all, we want to build quality, fulfilling relationships with our stakeholders, and constantly fuel them, inspire them and meet their needs so that they will give back. We naturally then need equally engaged, loyal and passionate front-line people to make those connections and achieve that goal for us.
Taking the time to fully engage and trust our staff will deliver extraordinary value to the institution that is measurable and sustainable. In the end, that's what we all want.
focusing on the right hero
Ever watch those interviews with Olympic athletes who give you a glimpse into who they really are? They remind us of what a hero really is. It's the person behind the headlines, the one who has shown us that their drive, determination and hard work has allowed them to expend their talents. It's the person who inspires others to be the best they can be.
So who should we be celebrating as the heroes of our own institutions? If you're thinking students and researchers, you've got it backwards. It's our supporters.
Too often we take our story out to the community and market our product- that being our students and our faculty. All well and good, but to inspire someone to support us, we need to tell their story, not ours. They are the hero - someone who makes a real difference. They are the ones who are doing life-changing work by enabling and inspiring us. Therefore, our message should be: we make the work of our supporters possible, not vice-versa.
Let's make our supporters central to our story as the heroes in the change we are seeking to make.
So who should we be celebrating as the heroes of our own institutions? If you're thinking students and researchers, you've got it backwards. It's our supporters.
Too often we take our story out to the community and market our product- that being our students and our faculty. All well and good, but to inspire someone to support us, we need to tell their story, not ours. They are the hero - someone who makes a real difference. They are the ones who are doing life-changing work by enabling and inspiring us. Therefore, our message should be: we make the work of our supporters possible, not vice-versa.
Let's make our supporters central to our story as the heroes in the change we are seeking to make.
advancing university advancement: breaking down silos
We can't deny it any longer: times have changed. Gone are the days when homecoming events were all it took for alumni engagement. Gone are traditional campaigns that ramped up and wrapped up in five years. Gone are the budgets to build staff in advancement offices. So what can we do to get ahead of this transition?
Use what we already have.
The largest and most valuable resources on a university campus are the students and the faculty. We have energy and expertise in these two groups that we can and should use to build stronger relationships with our stakeholders - without hiring more staff. But university departments often work in silos, and that tradition is tough to break. The advancement team should work across campus to help tear down the walls and build relationships within the institution in order to grow relationships outside of it.
Let's start with faculty. Every school holds an enormous amount of knowledge and interesting work being produced through faculty members and researchers. If advancement professionals build relationships with these individuals and educate them on the benefits of engaging alumni and friends, faculty will become our best advocates. Encourage them to come out to events and talk about their work. Bring the media to them as subject matter experts. Bring alumni to campus to meet with them in their labs and classrooms. They will be be grateful for the interest in their work and alumni and community members will know the cool things happening on campus.
OK, now for our students. Some schools do a good job of getting students involved with advancing the institution, but often we are so focused on engaging alumni that we forget to include our students, who are also part of that distinguished group. At every alumni, donor and community event make sure to seat students at tables with alumni and professionals in order to build networks. Work closely with Career Centre offices in order to build innovative programs that benefit both students and alumni mentors. Work with student clubs to help them with events and finding guest speakers - a great engagement opportunity.
Let's face it: our stakeholders are sophisticated, busy and expect more from us if they are to become involved. Engagement needs to be the focus across all parts of campus, not just the Advancement Office. When all participants understand the impact that this will have, we'll be able to get them on board.
But...
if we want to break down silos across campus, we need to start with our own shop. Integration is key to achieving our goals.
The Alumni and Outreach group needs to step up and play the lead role in building and maintaining meaningful networks. This will mean getting alumni and volunteers involved in ways that they tell us will be meaningful to them, not the other way around. It will most likely involve working closely with career services offices and also with executive education programs. Alumni officers should be front and centre as the go-to for alumni, students and faculty who want to help advance their institution and create reciprocal relationships.
The Communications group needs to back these efforts up with consistent and disciplined messaging and help with social media technology and strategies. Marketing should create an environment of listening to stakeholder needs, and responding to them and giving them content that will add value to their lives' And marketing should also should be constantly and strategically sharing all of the good things that our faculty and students are doing. The community wants to know who we are and what impact we make on society.
All of this should pave the way for the Development group to then visit with engaged alumni and friends who are ready to give to the area within the school that they feel will help make a significant impact in the school and in the world. If Alumni Officers have done their jobs, Development Officers will need to spend less time on building a relationship and more time on listening to what an individual is passionate about and therefore include them in a project with a faculty member or student early on, so that there can be joint ownership.
Notice I say alumni and friends, not donors. I think that is one more silo that we must break down: all of our donors remain alumni and friends, whether they are giving in a particular year or not. Labeling them donors infers that we are conditionally interested in them. We are not. Alumni, through their years of giving time, talent, treasure or advocacy will always be valuable to the institution, and we must always treat them as such.
So, what are you doing to break down your silos?
Use what we already have.
The largest and most valuable resources on a university campus are the students and the faculty. We have energy and expertise in these two groups that we can and should use to build stronger relationships with our stakeholders - without hiring more staff. But university departments often work in silos, and that tradition is tough to break. The advancement team should work across campus to help tear down the walls and build relationships within the institution in order to grow relationships outside of it.
Let's start with faculty. Every school holds an enormous amount of knowledge and interesting work being produced through faculty members and researchers. If advancement professionals build relationships with these individuals and educate them on the benefits of engaging alumni and friends, faculty will become our best advocates. Encourage them to come out to events and talk about their work. Bring the media to them as subject matter experts. Bring alumni to campus to meet with them in their labs and classrooms. They will be be grateful for the interest in their work and alumni and community members will know the cool things happening on campus.
OK, now for our students. Some schools do a good job of getting students involved with advancing the institution, but often we are so focused on engaging alumni that we forget to include our students, who are also part of that distinguished group. At every alumni, donor and community event make sure to seat students at tables with alumni and professionals in order to build networks. Work closely with Career Centre offices in order to build innovative programs that benefit both students and alumni mentors. Work with student clubs to help them with events and finding guest speakers - a great engagement opportunity.
Let's face it: our stakeholders are sophisticated, busy and expect more from us if they are to become involved. Engagement needs to be the focus across all parts of campus, not just the Advancement Office. When all participants understand the impact that this will have, we'll be able to get them on board.
But...
if we want to break down silos across campus, we need to start with our own shop. Integration is key to achieving our goals.
The Alumni and Outreach group needs to step up and play the lead role in building and maintaining meaningful networks. This will mean getting alumni and volunteers involved in ways that they tell us will be meaningful to them, not the other way around. It will most likely involve working closely with career services offices and also with executive education programs. Alumni officers should be front and centre as the go-to for alumni, students and faculty who want to help advance their institution and create reciprocal relationships.
The Communications group needs to back these efforts up with consistent and disciplined messaging and help with social media technology and strategies. Marketing should create an environment of listening to stakeholder needs, and responding to them and giving them content that will add value to their lives' And marketing should also should be constantly and strategically sharing all of the good things that our faculty and students are doing. The community wants to know who we are and what impact we make on society.
All of this should pave the way for the Development group to then visit with engaged alumni and friends who are ready to give to the area within the school that they feel will help make a significant impact in the school and in the world. If Alumni Officers have done their jobs, Development Officers will need to spend less time on building a relationship and more time on listening to what an individual is passionate about and therefore include them in a project with a faculty member or student early on, so that there can be joint ownership.
Notice I say alumni and friends, not donors. I think that is one more silo that we must break down: all of our donors remain alumni and friends, whether they are giving in a particular year or not. Labeling them donors infers that we are conditionally interested in them. We are not. Alumni, through their years of giving time, talent, treasure or advocacy will always be valuable to the institution, and we must always treat them as such.
So, what are you doing to break down your silos?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)