Trends v. Fundamentals in Nonprofit Funding
Nick Fellers | November 26, 2008
We’re asked to talk about ‘trends in philanthropy’ or ‘trends in fundraising’ which troubles me because the social sector needs more discussion about fundamentals – not trends. If you ask me to talk about ‘trends’ I will use this as a lens to highlight the lack of fundamentals – think of it as me spinning the conversation – it’s all good.
Every business in and sector lives and breaths by fundamentals, first.
- A clear vision/direction (illustrated a clear MESSAGE).
- A clear revenue MODEL.
- A clear PLAN including an understanding of the MATH (impact math and income math) to get there (e.g. goals, levels, etc.)
As I’m writing this to compare and contrast trends and fundamentals I realize most of the trends (that get discussed) are really fads because too often they’re ‘the next big thing’ and don’t have staying power. These could include:
- Earned Income (Social Enterprise)
- Lance Armstrong’s bracelets
- 5K races
- Social Networking Funding (The Obama effect)
Maybe if they were backed on a case-by-case basis with fundamentals they would be true trends and not fads.
Example – Earned Income: I went to a Social Enterprise Alliance gathering four years ago. What I witnessed were some orgs starting earned income ventures without attention to fundamentals, no clear plan and no willingness to do the math to see that they were losing $50 on every widget they produced. On top of that, one speaker cautioned, “It’s hard enough to start a business with people that have their lives together let alone those that don’t.” Four years later 16 out of 17 orgs I interviewed abandoned the earned income stream – each for the lack the fundamentals outlined above.
The reason most small businesses fail is because they don’t have a grasp on fundamentals. Nonprofits often don’t ‘fail’ in the same sense that for-profit businesses do [running out of money]. Instead, they limp along for years longer, subsidized by passion, volunteerism and employees on the fast-track to burnout (human capital model)… this unique resource model is often a masking agent for a lack of fundamentals.
If you’re a board member, a senior staff person or development officer you can do a great service to your organization, your team and your cause by leading a discussion on the fundamentals… by leading a discussion to clarify the direction or purpose of the organization, by clarifying the model and by working through the math. This discussion is simple, not easy.
2 Comments So Far
-
About For Impact
We help "nonprofits" fund their visions through training, coaching and consulting based on 25+ years of experience and $1Billion+ raised directly and $1Billion via coaching/training. For Impact is also our message, our commitment and a movement.
 |
 |
 |
Theresa - February 1st, 2009 8:09 pm
The organization is a start up and we are seeking funding 501c3 company contact person is Ms Hamilton ( 281)300-0667
Reply
James Hodge - October 7th, 2011 7:35 am
Thanks for your comments on trends, fads and foundamentals.
Couldn’t agree with you more about the need to enhance fundamentals…there is also a need to identify best practices of those fundamentals outside of our selective niches in philanthropy.
Couldn’t agree with you less about what you define as fads. There is a difference between new practices or models and fads. the last time I checked fundraisng walks and social enterprise and social media were climbing not trending down. At nearly sixty years of age and a technopeasant, I am still willing to bet social media will be with us for a very long time. Just because an organization poorly executes in new models and does not focus on fundamentals doesn’t mean the models are fads…it eans the execution is flawed. Not sure if I have articulated that to my liking?
I think leadership in our work needs fundamentals (best thinking in the box) and novel, evidence-based thinking about innovation in our work…thinking outside the box. Your fad becomes my fundamental.
The next level of our work I thnk will be a creative merging of philanthropy-social enterprise-business sectors along with a general “trend” to collaborative sector blending and sector bending initiatives rather than a competitive scarcity model approach. We just have to find the bright spots in these ‘fads’, develop best practices and constantly, as you say, revisit the purpose in our work.
Have a feeling we are very close in our mutal thinking…but these are merely early morning musings towards the dialogue.
Best regards.
Jim
Reply