CharityMatters-NZ Appeals, Charity Sector, Communication, Donor Acquisition, Donor Communication, Donor Retention, Donor Support, Fundraising, Opinions, Regular Giving, Staff Training, Staffing, Supporter Acquisition, Supporter Retention, Telephone Fundraising, Uncategorized

Tele-Fundraising, Big Oops

You may have read the recent news item about how people being called to support an organisation were treated less than would have been “proper”.

I’ve managed several tele-fundraising teams, and as soon as I’ve heard a conversation that was less than ideal, I would pull the person off the phone and have a chat with them about their manner – after all they are representing the organisation, they’re essentially an ambassador for the organisation and every call should leave the recipient feeling good about it.

What’s more, why weren’t the calls referred to in the article picked up by someone who would likely have been doing random call monitoring?

Call monitoring is an important part of tele-fundraising, it helps ensure the right message is being delivered, that the agent is up to date with any new “stories” that can be used, and, yes, it would definitely pick up any agent who was misrepresenting the organisation or being rude to a person they were calling.

As soon as something is picked up, the agent should be pulled off the phone and the issues discussed, perhaps they need some additional training, maybe they have personal issues outside of the workplace they are dealing with; whatever, there should never be any instance where an agent is rude.

I don’t know why this issue wasn’t picked up sooner, it should have been and the organisation has let itself down.

CharityMatters-NZ Charity Sector, Governance, Management, Research, Staffing

Recruitment Challenges, there’s a shortage …

Came across New Zealand’s shortage of fundraisers. A recruiter’s view on Saturn Group’s website.

We all know there’s shortages of skilled people across many sectors, we almost hear it daily; but we seldom hear about the shortage of skilled fundraisers.

Have a read of New Zealand’s shortage of fundraisers. A recruiter’s view, to understand what’s happening.

http://www.saturngroup.co.nz/news/new-zealands-shortage-of-fundraisers-a-recruiters-view/

CharityMatters-NZ Boards, Governance, Management, Staffing

Handing over the Reins

It’s interesting to see organisations grow from being something started at a kitchen table, to something substantial.

In growing though there is always a need to bring in others with more expertise, more experience; but in doing so there is fear of the loss of control.

I recall reading about a charity, I think in the States, where the founder who took on a manger; but with the charity operating in an adjacent building to where the founder lived, he would turn up everyday and staff were unsure as to who they should be listening to the new manager or the founder.

I’ve seen similar happen closer to home, and unless those passing on the reins make an effort to stand back and let the new guard run the organisation, chaos is likely to ensue.

If you are running an organisation and the time has come for you to stand aside, do it. This should all be part of your succession planning; and all staff when the new people at the helm arrive should feel confident that the organisation is in safe hands.

If the old guard remains it is likely to only case confusion, weakened trust in the new guard and, the focus of what the organisation is there for will be lost, opportunities could be missed and the beneficiaries of the organisation will ultimately suffer.

The new manager needs to know they can get on with what they have been appointed to do, this won’t happen quickly or smoothly if the old guard is always ‘hovering’ around, staff will remain confused and if allocated new tasks, if systems change they may feel as though they are betraying their former ”boss”.

Change isn’t always easy, it’s not easy on those standing aside and it’s not easy on the new people. But change sometimes has to happen and the more planning for it the better.

CharityMatters-NZ Articles, Communication, Governance, Management, Social Media, Staffing

Social Media Fallout

You may have seen the article on Stuff.co.nz about the hotel employee who was dismissed for making disparaging comments on Facebook about a blogger; how would you handle something like this, do you have a policy about what staff (and volunteers) can say and do with their personal time, their person social media posts?

Have a read of the article, then have a think about how you would handle such a situation.

Hotel worker sacked over abusive Facebook post to columnist

A Sydney hotel supervisor has lost his job after making a sexist and offensive comment on the Facebook page of Fairfax Media columnist Clementine Ford.

The Meriton Group confirmed that Michael Nolan was no longer employed by the company, after he labelled Ford a “slut” when she spoke out publicly against misogyny and online harassment.

Ford, a weekly columnist for Daily Life, made a number of posts on her Facebook page on White Ribbon Day, which aims to prevent men’s violence against women, in which she highlighted recent examples of online harassment she had received.

Ford included screenshots of a number of abusive messages that had been sent to her, including images Ford said were a “little violent in theme”, and included unsolicited images of male genitalia.

Continue reading  the full article here

There are organisations that have internal social media policies, these generally state that an employee/volunteer won’t say or do anything that will bring the organisation into disrepute. They often will also point out the consequences should someone say or do something that could tarnish the reputation of the organisation.

But, is this acceptable, can an organisation state what an employee can or can’t do in their own time?

What’s your take?

Note: I don’t condone bullying, trolling or any such behaviour, so I am not defending the guys actions, merely raising a point of discussion.

CharityMatters-NZ Governance, Management, Other, Staffing

Know What You’re Good At

We all have strengths and weaknesses, the important thing is to recognise them and acknowledge that sometimes we need to call on others to help.

Asking and accepting help is a good thing and doesn’t mean you’re a lesser person for asking.

This is true not only in our personal lives, but also in our roles organisations, and perhaps even more so within some organisations in the non-profit sector.

Some people starting out with a non-profit will have the skills for the job they are doing, but they may not have the understanding of the sector, how things can be very different to the for-profit world. And, this can also be true for those overseeing an organisation.

If you have doubts about anything to do with your organisation, your role or the sector in general, don’t be afraid to put your hand up and ask for help. Something I remember being told years ago, was there’s only one dumb question – the one you didn’t ask.

So ask ask and ask some more if you have any doubts about your organisation, your role or your organisation. People will respect you for asking.

CharityMatters-NZ Communication, Governance, Management, Planning, Staffing

Who’s making the Decisions?

It never ceases to amaze me that senior management in an organisation make the decision to change a campaign message, campaign objectives and more without any discussion from those on the frontline doing the work.

Sometimes the first the frontline staff know about a change is when it has occurred and, if they the fundraising team this can have a big impact not only on how they do their work, but also on their morale.

If management are thinking about changing course, modifying the message (and delivery) they are giving to supporters, wouldn’t it make sense to have your staff involved in the decision making process?

Those doing the day-to-day fundraising are likely to have a better picture of what is and what isn’t working, they will have an idea of how your message is being received and, as such have valuable information that could help you make the decision/s about whether change is needed.

Often frontline staff will feel resentment if decisions are made without any consultation and this can have negative impact on how they do their job; is this something you can afford in this competitive sector?

Any organisation, non-profit or for profit needs to have two way communication, if staff aren’t feeling engaged with what’s happening, if their views are being sought and aren’t valued; you run the risk of having a disenfranchised team – is this something you can afford?

When you make decisions, what discussion do you have with your frontline staff; or are you just doing what you think is needed?

What do you do when staff come to you and suggest changes to a campaign, is this something you take seriously, or do yo just shrug it off?

See also

Staff Morale – Is it a reflection on the Organisation?

Do you appreciate your staff?

CharityMatters-NZ Communication, Governance, Management, Staffing

Are your Staff Interested?

Who in your organisation is watching what’s happening in the community, particularly in the area your organisation works in?

It is surprising to hear from people employed in some organisations say “It’s not my job to look at what’s happening”.

I would have thought, like others in any role that staff in general would have some interest in knowing what others are doing, what’s in the news and what people are talking about on social media.

If staff are truly engaged with what the organisation they work with then, surely they would have an interest in what is happening in the sector, what people are talking about and more.

Are you encouraging your staff to look and learn?

When people work in fashion, they show an interest in what’s happening, what the trends are; it should be the same with your staff.

If your staff (you) aren’t interested in the bigger picture, it could be seen that they perhaps are only interested in the pay cheque; hopefully I’m wrong about this, but from what I’ve seen and heard lately I think I maybe right – I’m happy to be proven wrong.

I’ve previously written on topics such as:

Are you supported by your board and staff?

What’s Happening – are You Watching?

And think it’s timely to start the conversation, again, about having a team of people in your organisation, who do more than just go through the motion of raising funds; they need to be engaged with the organisation, they need to be interested in the bigger picture. If they’re not then you could be missing out on opportunities.

What are you doing to get your staff engaged, what could you be doing differently to get them engaged?

Do you talk with your staff about the bigger picture, about what’s happening, do you share relevant articles you come across; are you even reading them yourself?

I’d be keen to know what happens in your organisation, please let me know in the comments below.

CharityMatters-NZ Donor Communication, Donor Support, Management, Staffing, Supporter Retention

When Something goes Wrong

Negative feedback about staff interaction with donors can impact on the reputation of your organisation, how do you deal with it?

Every now and then someone doing work for your organisation may say or do something that causes donors to be left with a sour taste in their mouth.

How this is dealt with by you is important, you need to retain supporters and the best way to do this when someone upsets them, is to let the supporter know that you hear what they are saying, that you will talk to the staff member about their actions and that you will let the supporter know what action you have taken.

It doesn’t matter how long or the value of support you receive from a supporter, they are all equal and should be treated as such, respect is universal.

It’s important to remember that any sour taste left in the mouth of a supporter will soon spread, they will talk with family, friends and colleagues about the treatment they received. This could put others off supporting your cause.

It’s hard enough as it is gaining and maintaining support, you can’t afford to lose supporters.

Perhaps the errant staff member needs some time out, retraining in communicating with supporters, whatever cause of action you take ensure it is followed up on, that the staff member is monitored.

Have you had a bad experience where a staff member has caused issues for your organisation – how did you handle it?

If you’ve had a bad experience with someone from an organisation you support, did you tell the organisation about it, or did you walk away from the organisation?

CharityMatters-NZ Donor Support, Fundraising, Management, Staffing

To Incentivise or Not?

Fundraising isn’t an easy job, ask anyone who has been doing it for some time; they’ll say they enjoy the work, the challenge and like the fact that what they are doing is helping someone else.

But, are fundraisers missing out. People in sales and marketing roles in the private sector receive not only their salary but also performance bonuses; often in the non-profit sector this doesn’t happen.

The reason why there’s no performance incentive is often because of perception that money given for charitable purposes is being redirected to pay over inflated wages; as anyone in the non-profit sector knows, wages, pay are not over inflated; actually often the pay scale in the non-profit sector is below what someone would earn in the private sector.

Staff turnover in the fundraising area of charities can be high, and it could be that those who are performing well are feeling frustrated and feel that their efforts aren’t being recognised (or rewarded).

It’s recognised that organsations have some hesitation in giving rewards, or paying any form of commission due to either public perception of charity money being “misused” or due to other restrictions (such as sector organisations not permitting such payments); that’s understandable. However, there are ways that fundraisers can be recognised, as said early, an extra day off or similar.

What we need to ask is, is it wrong for people to be rewarded for doing well in ensuring funds are available for the beneficiaries of an organisation?

If fundraisers can’t be recognised or rewarded for doing well, organisations could run the risk of having empty desks and empty bank accounts; that would be more harmful to the organisation and its beneficiaries than some small acknowledgement of a job well done.

I have seen some fundraisers being rewarded through special gifts from major supporters; supporters who acknowledge the hard (and stressful) job of fundraising; such as a hotel that would make a room available once a year for an extended weekend to be used by the fundraiser who brought in the most new donor support.

There are ways fundraisers can be rewarded, often it only needs some lateral thinking to come up with a method.

Do you incentivise your fundraisers?

Should fundraisers be rewarded?

CharityMatters-NZ Management, Staffing

Background Checks

Background checks are a necessity for many organisations but, when the cost of checks starts to eat away at finances needed for the core functions of an organisation things need to change. Either charities could be given an exemption from having to pay a proposed fee or the fee could be reduced to a token amount.

It would appear from article in the NZHerald that many organisations (and the people they assist) will suffer …

Charities and volunteer groups are warning the Government they will have to cut back on their services if a proposed charge on criminal checks goes ahead.

Non-profit organisations such as the Cancer Society, Age Concern, the Blind Foundation and others have asked to be exempted from a proposed $5 to $7 charge for police vetting, which is currently provided at no cost.

They say organisations which provide a public good, depend solely on donations and have a large proportion of volunteer staff should not have to cough up for the service.

A parliamentary select committee began hearing submissions last week on the law change which would allow the Government to charge for police services. Ministers have promised that vetting will be the only service to incur a charge.

Some cash-strapped groups estimated new costs of $5000 to $10,000 a year if they needed to pay for criminal checks.

The Blind Foundation said it looked after a large number of children, and under a law change last year it was required to vet all its staff. It estimated a new bill of at least $2500 a year.

The Police Association agreed with the groups. Its members supported moves to reduce the strain on the frozen police budget but believed cost recovery should be limited to private commercial interests.

The bill would give powers to the minister to make exemptions but it’s not yet clear how these will be used.

Police Minister Michael Woodhouse could not be reached yesterday, but his predecessor, Anne Tolley, emphasised that the proposed charge was much lower than the $50 to $60 paid for criminal checks in parts of Australia.

The Teachers Council, which is legally required to vet teachers and makes 40,000 checks a year, also opposed the bill.

Acting director Rob McIntosh said vetting was one of the police’s core functions and it should not be considered an additional service such as dealing with lost and found property or running the Police Museum.

He said police vetting of teachers was one of the key tools for protecting children and young people.

Criminal checks

• Between 450,000 and 500,000 criminal checks a year

• Estimated cost to police of $2.2 million

• Some organisations, such as those that work with children, legally required to vet staff

• Government wants to charge $5 to $7 for checks.

From NZHerald Monday 16 Feb 2015

Does your organisation do police background checks, what impact will a proposed fee have on your organisation?