Blogs

Can insight be the difference between surviving and thriving?

Fundraising | 5 Dec 2008

Being Pareto Fundraising’s International Woman of Mystery is a tough job. Just the other week I was in Toronto attending the AFP’s Congress there.

It was my first visit to Toronto and I highly recommend it (I’m sure the Canadian Tourist Board have just been waiting for my seal of approval).  The fundraisers I met at the conference were universally lovely.  They were open, friendly and really keen to share and learn from each other.  The sessions were full of the debates and questions I’m part of wherever I go in the fundraising world at the moment: What is the impact of the recession on giving?  What should we be asking our donors to do right now?  Where do we draw the line between safeguarding donor relationships and making the case passionately and strongly on behalf of our beneficiaries?

Not all, but some, of these questions were answered by two of the sessions which featured benchmarked charity data.  Now I prize my integrity highly, so I need to declare an interest and say at the outset that one session was presented by my Pareto Fundraising colleague and fellow PF blogger Jonathon Grapsas wherein he showed the results of the benchmarking collaboration between seven Canadian charities that Pareto Fundraising just facilitated.  But the other was a larger exercise carried out a year or two ago by a Canadian agency called Cornerstone.  

From my perspective, I don’t care which agency does the analysis – I’m simply thrilled to see charities sharing and comparing real, live data and not relying on anecdotal (and often highly unreliable) information about what donors are doing in their country.

The results were fascinating.  So many similarities to the UK and Australia in terms of what is driving growth (regular gifts, major gifts and bequests), but also differences due to specific programs and how they run: for example in Canada the benchmarking exercises showed a first year retention rate for newly acquired cash donors of 30-35%.  Way below the anecdotal 50% figure we often hear bandied about.  And even below the 45% or so first year cash donor retention we’ve been seeing in Australian benchmarking.  Just one measure yet it leads you to think about what are the differences in approach in those countries and then want to look at which organisations are leading the field and how are they achieving results so much better than their peers.   

And most of the benchmarking exercises I’ve seen have over 50 such measures.  Each one potentially giving you insight into how your program is performing and where you could be focusing extra effort in order to deliver even more net income for your beneficiaries. 

In uncertain times I take my hat off to those charities worldwide who have taken part in an inter-charity database benchmarking exercise. They are going to be the ones with a finger on the pulse of what is actually happening across their sectors over the coming months and years.  They are informed and in control.  Could that be the difference between surviving and thriving?

Tweet

Directory: Pareto