Here are the top three trends to watch for in the charitable world in 2013.
1. Fundraising will see a renewed focus on major gifts and individual donations in 2013.
The last few years have seen (and even demanded that) organizations seek new and innovative funding models. The phrase "revenue diversification" has become overused as charities have sought more corporate funding, initiated social enterprise and enhanced their on-line campaigns, sometimes all at the same time. But the fact remains that the majority of charities still raise the majority of their funds through individual gifts, including major gifts. 2013 started off with a great example: the biggest-ever private gift for cancer research in Canadian history. My prediction is that we'll see a "return to basics" as charities prune back some the less successful initiatives of the last few years.
2. Fundraising will see significant innovation in terms of leveraging technology and on-line giving in 2013.
I remember the first time I received an e-mail from a friend that had a link to an individualized site where I could donate to support them in climbing the CN Tower. At the time it seems quite remarkable... But that was many years ago. My own Movember campaign raised a bit less this year than last, and others I know had the same experience. Yet the web and on-line giving is nothing if not flexible and innovative. My first prediction notwithstanding, I believe that we'll see memorable and innovative new ways to leverage technology in support of philanthropic efforts in 2013.
3. There will be even more new faces leading charities in 2013.
Partly due to demographics, partly due to the ever-increasing challenges facing charities, and partly due to new and more complex expectations of leaders of charities (ONCA, CNCA, AODA, etc.), I have the sense that new leadership will be a theme this year. This isn't a new trend, just one that I believe will accelerate, and a quick review of the Charity Village and LinkedIn job postings would seem to support this belief. My prediction is that we'll see even more postings and a number of long-standing roles change in 2013.
I’ll keep you updated on examples and stories behind these trends all year, and check back in 12 months to let you know how accurate I was.
Musings about life, management and leadership in both the for-profit and charitable worlds - and how they all come together.
Showing posts with label Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Change. Show all posts
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Saturday, May 26, 2012
One of the Best Ways to Minimize the Pain of Change
At a committee meeting last week of an organization where I volunteer, it was announced that a key part of their Government funding had been cut. It's a wonderful organization that does important work, but that unfortunate impact is not what most struck me. What leapt out at me was that much of the pain could have been minimized by doing one simple thing: communicating better.
In this particular case better communications would have manifest itself in several ways.
In this particular case better communications would have manifest itself in several ways.
- Better timed communications. Making the announcement about the cuts on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend understandably panicked many people who wanted to know if they were affected and what the plan was. And whether true or not, this timing left the taste in everyone's mouth that this "story" was being buried or timed so as to avoid media scrutiny. Obviously this only heightened the upset of the unexpected news.
- More lead-time in communicating. If key leaders (for example, the Executive Directors of the affected agencies) had been given a bit of lead-time they could have prepared for the phone calls from their staff, who instead found out through the media and their peers.
- Communicating a "message track". Since it fell to the various Executive Directors to communicate this change, it would have helped them to have key points to convey, specific reasons and messages to convey even if all the details weren't quite clear yet.
- Communicating before deadlines. The affected organizations were expecting news on this funding quite a while ago (a March 31 deadline had already passed nearly 2 months ago), and delays in confirmation of these funds has not been unusual over the years. So, rather than shut down their programs, they went ahead and renewed contracts and incurred costs just as they have in the past. If this communication had happened before the deadline the organizations could have more effectively (and at less cost) wound down these programs.
In brief, having a communications plan that considers who knows what and when, and what details need to be communicated are all critical components of any change. Whether you're in the charitable world or the for-profit world, sweating the small details of communications can save time, money and pain for everyone.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Change for the Better?
In November of 2000 (exactly 11 years ago), a newsletter from one of Canada's largest health care foundations included a variety of observations about "changes that are occurring in the not-for-profit sector." It struck me as I read them that we've come a long way on many of these topics, but in several cases actually gone in the wrong direction. I invite you to consider whether we as a sector have addressed these items, and if so, have things gotten better or worse? On on macro scale, how have we as a society fared with respect to some of these concerns? Here is a shortened (but otherwise unedited) version of the newsletter.
Donations are up, but the donor base is shrinking: In 1998, 202,000 fewer Canadians reported charitable donations to Revenue Canada than in 1991.
More Canadians are volunteering, but time is at a premium: In 1997, 72 percent of all volunteer hours in Canada came from only eight percent of Canadian adults, and average hours per volunteer had dropped 22 percent from 1987.
Fund raising competition is growing: More and bigger fund raising campaigns raise fears about 'crowding out' small charities. Do all boats rise on a high tide, or will some be swamped?
Values are shifting: Globalization seems to place competition ahead of communities, and consumers ahead of citizens - are compassion and sharing passe?
Our sense of community is fracturing: 'I'm OK, and you're not.' Rich and poor are growing farther apart, as poverty grows while the economy booms.
Charities have an identity crisis: Some are becoming more like businesses in order to 'earn' revenue; others are assuming the traditional roles of government.
'Impact' and 'outcomes' are in doubt: It's considered bad to be a 'do-gooder' who only applies band-aids, yet charities that work for structural, social or attitudinal change are branded as 'political'.
So, how far have we come in over a decade? Clearly the view from a major foundation in 2000 was that our sector and those we serve were under stress. I'm particularly concerned that rich and poor have only grown further apart over the 11 years, and now the economy is not booming. In the end, this only underscores the vital nature of charitable work in all its forms.
Donations are up, but the donor base is shrinking: In 1998, 202,000 fewer Canadians reported charitable donations to Revenue Canada than in 1991.
More Canadians are volunteering, but time is at a premium: In 1997, 72 percent of all volunteer hours in Canada came from only eight percent of Canadian adults, and average hours per volunteer had dropped 22 percent from 1987.
Fund raising competition is growing: More and bigger fund raising campaigns raise fears about 'crowding out' small charities. Do all boats rise on a high tide, or will some be swamped?
Values are shifting: Globalization seems to place competition ahead of communities, and consumers ahead of citizens - are compassion and sharing passe?
Our sense of community is fracturing: 'I'm OK, and you're not.' Rich and poor are growing farther apart, as poverty grows while the economy booms.
Charities have an identity crisis: Some are becoming more like businesses in order to 'earn' revenue; others are assuming the traditional roles of government.
'Impact' and 'outcomes' are in doubt: It's considered bad to be a 'do-gooder' who only applies band-aids, yet charities that work for structural, social or attitudinal change are branded as 'political'.
So, how far have we come in over a decade? Clearly the view from a major foundation in 2000 was that our sector and those we serve were under stress. I'm particularly concerned that rich and poor have only grown further apart over the 11 years, and now the economy is not booming. In the end, this only underscores the vital nature of charitable work in all its forms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)