Donor feedback. Sometimes, we seek it; other times, it comes to us unsolicited, and usually, when we least expect it. Feedback—regardless of the delivery and timing—can be formidable in shaping a plan of action. Here are some personal examples of how solicited (and unsolicited!) feedback affected my strategy around a few types of reporting.
Let's start with the unsolicited feedback. While working away in my office one day, I got a call. THAT call. On the other end of the line was the VP's admin asking if I had a few minutes to come to the VP's office, and no, she wasn't sure what was behind the request. Gulp.
My mind was moving in a million directions as I made my way to the office. Thoughts like what in the world could this be about?? Why is the direct request sent to me and not via my AVP? I got to the office late this morning but not THAT late, and so on.
The VP had just returned from a meeting with the university president, who, it seems, had a meeting with a trustee earlier in the day. The trustee arrived armed with an endowment report from another university he supported and proceeded to highlight all of its strengths and point out our endowment report's shortcomings. Oof.
While it wasn't an apples-to-apples comparison, the other school's report was a bit of a hybrid annual report and endowed fund report. Ours focused only on financial reporting. This was NOT the time to explain why we were doing what we had always done or point out how early I was in my tenure as director of donor relations. It was the time to say I would explore ways we could improve and expand our financial reports. While I wasn't given the mandate to move toward something like the other school was doing—the VP knew why impact reporting occurred on a different schedule than a financial report—I was given the directive to find ways to make ours better.
It's important to note that this was before the age of digital delivery. The other school's report was a bound booklet full of high-res imagery, pull quotes, and other eye-catching aspects. Conversely, our reports essentially were bank statements preceded by a way-too-long cover letter. The only unique thing that separated the letter and statement from any other 8 ½ x 11 sheets of paper was a custom letterhead for endowment reporting. Fancy, right? Hardly!
So, what do I do, and where do I start? I started with the letter that was too long to even keep my attention and asked myself the following questions:
What were we really trying to communicate?
What facts and examples of the endowment's impact could become infographics instead of sentences buried in the third paragraph that no one would read?
How could we give this information—important information—better curb appeal?
Though impact reporting would occur later in the year, where could we weave in impact statements?
Preparing endowment reports was a team effort. I had shared with my team to keep in mind that each report they proofed was the ONLY report that a particular donor would receive—meaning, we needed to stay sharp and attentive with each. So, while we were actively looking at the reports from the donor's lens regarding accuracy, I had never looked at the messaging and presentation from the donor's perspective. (Side note: if you've ever prepared endowment reports, you know why I never had—because getting the reports DONE and out the door is all you can see when you're in the thick of it!)
It was time to change our strategy from endowment reports must be sent each year in a timely manner, to endowment reports are an important tool in being transparent with donors and displaying the impact of their support. And this change in strategy wouldn't have to break the budget. Using information from the reports we just completed, we worked with our comms and marketing team to mock up infographics and create a sample for leadership to review. This way, we would have a road map to follow for the coming year's reports—instead of waiting until then to vet design ideas with leadership. (The specifics of the infographics would obviously change, but the concept of their presentation would be known and approved.)
Another sudden realization from the unexpected feedback was the obvious need to survey our endowment donors. A survey had not been sent in several years; reformatting the reports would be a great time to get their feedback on the changes, the report content, and the reports in general.
Mentioning a survey to collect feedback leads to my example of how seeking feedback can shape strategy. Thanks to an investment in software by our campus scholarship office, we were presented with an opportunity to steward scholarships in a new way. The software provided the mechanism to collect information to create scholarship recipient profiles versus chasing down thank-you notes from students. The software would also help us centralize a very decentralized stewardship process, creating a "standard" experience for scholarship donors across campus. The timing was perfect with the public phase of a campaign on the no-too-distant horizon. But where and how to start? The amount of work on the front end would be daunting to connect scholarship funds in one system to donors in another system, not to mention the inevitable push-pull between central and the units in a centralized/decentralized hybrid fundraising model. Whew!
Instead of tackling it all at once, we focused on a group of scholarships we were already stewarding centrally. Think several hundred funds instead of a couple of thousand funds. It was interesting to note that the donors associated with these funds represented different segments of our donor pyramid, with varying levels of engagement. So, we did the legwork to build out the questionnaire for students to complete, made sure we could pair the student responses to the correct funds and donors, and then went to work designing the format for the profiles. We carefully prepared the profiles for mailing (again, this was before the digital age). Each mailing included a note from me introducing the new format and asking the donors for feedback. We put them all in the mail, and then we waited. I don't recall the day the packages dropped in the mail, but I do recall walking into my office the following Monday morning. There it was—the light on my phone indicating I had voice messages. Yikes. First thing on a Monday morning. Was it another unexpected call from the VP's admin?
It turned out the messages were from donors who had received the scholarship profiles over the weekend. My direct office line was included on the note they received from me, in case they preferred to call versus answer our questions (I know, I know—a risky move! Plus, now they ALL had my number for better or worse—haha!). But guess what? The feedback was fantastic! Messages expressing sentiments like how much they enjoyed reading the profiles, hoping we would continue to do this year after year, and even a few wondering why we hadn't done this sooner. I turned my attention to our department email account, where even more responses awaited. We were on to something after all, and now we had the feedback to prove it.
The feedback collected from this group of donors was compiled and shared with leadership for their awareness. Of course, our leadership already knew what we had done, but now, we wanted to share the response. The feedback helped us shape the case for support in implementing the new form of stewardship campus-wide, which leadership was now 100% behind. It also helped us overcome the inevitable obstacles from a few units, who thought "their donors" would prefer a handwritten note.
To summarize, here are a few key points to remember when it comes to donor feedback:
Be open to feedback, especially when you didn't ask for it. It may help shake things up you didn't even realize you needed to shake.
You don't have to reinvent everything based on one comment—that's a bit too reactionary! But don't toss it aside as a one-off if it's constructive.
Use less than favorable feedback as an opportunity to consider improvements. In my first example, we didn't move from endowment reports to an all-encompassing annual report or even change our core content. Instead, we changed our presentation, making the information more digestible and eye-catching, and improved the report's tone to reflect impact.
There are times when you can implement change gradually. There are also times to rip the bandaid off and go all in, and still, other times when you can start with a segment of a potentially larger audience. Getting feedback from your pilot group can help solidify your strategy and assist you in making any necessary pivots.
We should all be regularly seeking feedback. This will lessen the likelihood of an unexpected summons to the VP's office. And when you ask for feedback, be prepared to accept it all—the good, the bad, and the (hopefully not too) ugly.
Written by Jan McGuire
