Episode 298: Qualification: The Difference Between Interest and Philanthropic Interest
It's another wonderful day right here on this edition of Around with Randall. A deep dive today into the thought process. Way inside. Incredibly detailed conversation around qualification. Today we're going to look at a lot of different opportunities around how do we get to really what we might consider philanthropic interest, differentiating it from just interest. And this is incredibly important and useful that we tend to think about the qualification process as can we figure out what their interests are.
And this goes back to something I've talked about in a myriad of podcast. And you can go look back at, I think, probably 6 or 8 different podcasts on just qualification in a more general sense, or maybe something else within that process. But in this case, we want to talk about the importance of interest and mirror what we've said before.
Much more important than capacity. That ought to all too often, as a general reminder, we tend to think capacity really kind of is the thing we probably focus too much on instead of the interest, the passion. But there's a difference between the idea of philanthropic passion or interest and that of general interest. And we ask questions and we'll talk about this throughout, say things or engage in ways that are more driven towards general interest.
And today we want to pull that that covers back a little bit on this particular area and say, no, we need to maybe be a little bit more sophisticated in the questions we ask and the follow ups that will get us towards a philanthropic connection. So as we tend to do, we'll start at the kind of the big picture work into some of the challenges and then into tactical things that you can do to get better at this, to make it more effective and efficient.
And today we'll have six. We always have some more between 4 and 6, six tactical things that you can do to do this better, more meaningfully, to be more effective at what you do. Let's start with a definition. We tend to think about interest. We talk about capacity and interest and we think of interest. But really interest is what gathers someone's attention.
Philanthropic interest is something that they tend to want to do. And there's a significant differentiation. I'll use me as an example. I love college football. Certainly watch a lot of pro football, but I have a great deal of personal interest into college football. Every Saturday with my son, we will plan out how we're going to watch football that day from going to games, which we tend to do to will we watch a little bit of in the car on the way to and from the, you know, maybe in Nebraska game, or if we're traveling to what we're going to do at night.
We've even got a list of all the games on television that day.
That's different, because I'm not putting any philanthropic dollars to this. Their world, the college football world, has changed the Nil world. And certainly the support that the athletes are getting. I'm not grudging that in any way, shape or form. It's long overdue. But it's not the same game that I grew up with, and I'm not going to put any philanthropic interest.
So if you want to talk to me, if you're qualifying me about and you've got to the subject of Nebraska football or just college football, I'll talk all day about it. Historically, the fact that my birthday is the anniversary of the first college football game ever played. Ironically, all this is to say is I'll talk about it, but that's not philanthropic.
I'm interested in something is different than I'd like to find a way to make it better. That philanthropic intent often involves some kind of personal meaning, not entertainment. A desired impact of value and urgency, some willingness to engage personally and in our case, probably hopefully, what we're looking for financially that the discovery process, the qualification process is that connection.
If we do it really well in figuring out what it is, somebody wants to do what they want to invest in, what they want to change, and the fact that our organization does that in mass, that when people give money to US nonprofit, we do this better than anybody.
The real qualification question that we probably should be trying to figure out, is there enough philanthropic intent or interest to justify building a deeper relationship? Not just interest, not just things to talk about, but philanthropic interest? This requires an understanding both of the relationship between that person and the organization, and what philanthropy means to them in their life and what they support and remember.
Philanthropic opportunity is not just about money. Maybe it's volunteering. It's someone who's passionate about something, does many things that are philanthropic. Heard about one. This morning at church, it was announced that our Celtic band that is been playing every once in a while in service. They're all volunteers. They're not being paid for this. They put it together themselves.
Time, effort, energy is philanthropic, and that's where we get into where people are willing to invest. What's a value to them? Dollars. Time. Effort. Sweat. The biggest challenges we have that fight us in this particular case is, is that we we tend to, first of all, be servant to the metrics that there is a pressure to move people through the moves management process.
Either a self-guided pressure because we're looking at our numbers, or there's a prospect management leadership team or gift officer meetings that really pressure us to say, look, are we moving people towards major gifts? And then we confuse I had a great conversation, and there's general, genuine connection of interest, but we're not asking about philanthropic interest. So pressure is one of those huge changes is number two, we tend to talk about the things all too often that are important to us, to our organization.
We need to do certain things. So we talk about programs and the things that we do because they're comfortable and easy. They're known to us. Instead of repositioning this as an inquiry into what they're the donor prospect, family couple, whatever they're looking to do. Sometimes gift officers confuse enthusiasm for the organization with philanthropic interest. There's a lot of interesting people that, and I'm married to one who and I had a father who was one who will take your passion, your energy and reciprocate it in being excited for you.
But that doesn't mean that they are going to do things that support you or the things that you believe in. It just means that they're happy for you, which is great, but doesn't get us into. Are we talking to the right people about the right things? We can become sometimes overly focused in the organizational priorities, the things those programs or initiatives that we're trying to promulgate into the world to make it a better place.
And what we figure out is, is that we've gone too early into those detailed discussions because we've not bothered to figure out what they're trying to accomplish.
Then there's the issue of capacity, which we've talked about moment ago. But I'll reiterate here that all too often we think about capacity as the driving force about what we do, what we're trying to get to. And this goes into where I think artificial intelligence can actually help us instead of just, well, screening. Who are the people that are the most engaged who would give you their last penny?
But they're only making $150 gifts, $500 gifts. But they're every month, every quarter, every year. They're signaling that they believe that they want to give of themselves to the things they want to be philanthropically connected to you, to your organization.
We might leave a good conversation, one full of enthusiasm and connection with extensive notes, but we're unable to explain why that person would make a meaningful gift to our mission. And that's the crux of the issue. And that brings us to our tactical solutions. What can we do to not leave that qualification meeting, that qualification conversation, and not be able to answer and explain why a person would give to us?
How can we make sure we can do that? And that brings us to our tactical answers. Six things you can do to think about as you're having qualification meetings. The questions, the responses that you can pose in a 15 to 20 25 minute meeting that will get you to the fact of whether or not this is worth more of your time.
So number one is enter into your qualification visit conversation with questions, not a pitch. The first mistake that I see all too often is back to what I was saying about. One of the challenges is, is that we tend to want to talk about what we're doing, rather than figuring out what they're trying to to objectively obtain. And actually, they may not even know what they're objectively trying to obtain.
Sometimes we help them figure that out when we go into it. Looking at it from our perspective, we start talking about organizational information capacity, you know, initiatives, strategic plan. Right off the bat, what we get is a very strong understanding of who we are and what we do as a nonprofit. But if you were to enter into it with questions, what you end up with at the end of the discussion, if you ask the right ones, and if you'll just listen in a minute, I might give you some ways to think about this.
What you'll get is a discovery of their motivation, their experiences, their values, and most importantly, their desired impact. And that's what great qualification really is all about. So the first tactical solution is enter in with questions, not with a pitch.
Number two is use a three letter word as often as possible, maybe not 50 times as reasonably possible. Three letter word that will help you dramatically figure out motivation, experience, values, and impact. And that's the word. Why? When a donor identifies an interest, or a passion, or a connection or an experience.
Why is that important to you? Where does that interest come from? Was there a particular experience that shaped how you might think about this? I'll give you a personal example, which isn't really philanthropic, but we'll make the point. When I graduated high school, having played on the golf team for four years, my sister, who was a golfer in high school and still is to this day, played for she was four years behind me.
Exactly. She came in as a freshman. As I was a freshman in college. We were pretty good. We won state title our senior year and were pretty close to the other two of the three, but we had sweatshirts, golf bags, golf balls, a team uniform. We had everything. My sister played at the same high school, was a better golfer, and they got nothing.
Nothing. Maybe a ball or a sleeve of balls. And it was at that moment I realized the importance to me of the concept of gender equity in athletics, that when you treat someone differently based on their gender, there's just something implicitly wrong with it. And it was a very personal experience. Now, I could talk about now that I wrote my legal dissertation, law school dissertation on gender equity, and actually did lecturing with the NCAA.
But I could talk about the principles of it. But it's the second and third qualification question. Why is that important to you on a personal level, that you begin to hear the story that I just told you? The same is true of qualification. Dig deeper into what moved them, which will reveal more than an original answer, a deeper answer.
There's a story to be told that the donor the prospect may be looking to tell. That's how we begin to figure out. And if you use the word why or where does that come from? Or was there a particular experience? You will elevate the idea of qualification to an incredibly high level and be able to figure out what moves them.
That's number two. Use why or dig deeper.
Third. Third. Tactical move from interest to impact. Ask the donor what they would like to see change improve what outcome? In an area of passion are they most interested in? Who are they wanting to really help in all of this? What we're looking for are language cues about outcomes rather than simple programs.
We start repositioning the thought process on what they're trying to accomplish rather than what we offer. Now on the back side, we may try to match that eventually, but we're just qualifying. We're not trying to close a $10 million gift in the first or second meeting. At least I hope you're not. If it happens, great. Email me at podcast at and tell me all about it.
I'll tell you a story, but that's not what happens. The impact language is often stronger as an indicator of what their philanthropic interest is, rather than program enthusiasm. Think about the difference between finding a solution for a cancer that their mother had, rather than just cancer research. There's a significant emotional difference between the two. So number three, tactical is move past interest into what they're trying to accomplish.
Impact number four, be willing to ask about their philanthropic history. Where have you made. Where have been the most important charitable gifts you've made in the past? Why did they make you feel that way? What was meaningful about them? Was there anything that connected them together? Past philanthropic behavior can reveal really what donors decisions will be and what they expect from you in terms of outcome impact.
One of the things when we do well, screening, if you look at the full screen, but most people don't, is inside at least what I see in donor search is, is that there are places where you can go and see where have they given by sector or general sector in the nonprofit space? Did they give education versus research?
Did they give to social service versus religion? That's actually more useful information than just an overall rating, because it tells you they're putting dollars or a number of gifts into certain areas, and they're choosing to do so because they feel a connection or need to do to just that. So figure out in the conversation how to ask generically, how do you make your philanthropic decisions?
When do you make them? What's most important to you? Where have been the best places you've given, where you felt like it was a value? And maybe because I have some experience, but you still give to them, and if they don't? How'd they mess that up? Because you might learn some foibles you want to avoid. Number five is test intent before declaring qualification.
Think about the difference in the notes you would bring back in the next steps that you would have if you ask the questions. Not all of them, maybe all of them, not in this order. But think about what you get out of you. Ask these questions. Can I explain why this donor might give? Can I tell in a moves management meeting why I think they might choose to give?
Can I describe what they hope with their philanthropic accomplishments? What is their goals in all of this? Have they demonstrated a willingness to continue the conversation, not just in general, but about what's important to them and the impact that they can make? And do I understand enough about their philanthropic behavior to know what the next move might, what it could be or should be?
If the answers to these are unclear, you probably haven't really qualified them. You've discovered them. But are they really the right person to move forward? And you can't answer that because you don't know the answers to these. So discuss test intent in the qualification process. And then finally, because I talk about it all the time. Number six and the a donor with a centered next step next step next step next step.
What are you going to do next. Don't invent it after the meeting. Come up with it at the end of the meeting, the end of the conversation. I would love to introduce you to so-and-so so that they could show you what kind of research they're doing, or the things that they do every day that make a difference in life.
And being of our are the people who use our nonprofit or utilize the mission that we believe in. I'd like to show you something that is very specific to what they're looking to do. The next step should be part of the discovery or qualification process, because it tests whether the donor wants to go forward. Don't assume it. Ask them.
They will tell you, no, I'm good. And that's also okay because that means we can move on to the next person. So next step. What is it you physically can do to make sure? Again, more likely than not, this is major gifts, but you could be dealing with $1,000 donor who wants to go to 2500. You think you should use this step in all of these steps because you can elevate them in the same way it's requalify and higher levels.
Six tactical things. Number one, start with questions, not a pitch. Number two, use why or questions like what does? Or was there a moment? Number three can you move from interest away from interest to impact. Number four, can you explore their philanthropic history? Can you find out what else they've done, what's been meaningful to them? Number five, can you test that intent before declaring them being qualified?
Meaning can I explain what the what why they want to move forward, what their values are, what they're trying to accomplish, and how we can help them do that. And number six, can you explain what the next step is going to be when you walk away because you've laid it out? If you do these six things, you will qualify at a much higher level.
And in doing so, you'll make yourself much more efficient. You'll have much more fun because you'll be talking to people who want to do something, and that will make your metrics numbers better. It'll make your success and efficiency better. It will mean more to your nonprofit, but most importantly, it's going to be the most to that prospect, your donor, because you're going to help them, which is the word sherpa, help carry their load to where they want to go.
And your organization is going to be able to do that. But you're the sherpa between the two and the qualifications, the key. Can we work with the people who actually want to do something and do so in a meaningful way? And if we do that, then we become a much greater asset because our ROI will go up. But most importantly, we're really helping donors do what they want to do in the first place.
That's real joy of the relationship based process, don't forget. Check out the blogs at how it felt to be two per week. Just you get them. Tuesday Thursday, the RSS feed, backslash blogs, things I see 92nd reads. I'm really surprised how many people read, but they give you something to think about maybe twice a week. Leadership nonprofit, you know, maybe a sector or something.
But it gives you a chance to think about things a little bit differently. Probably don't reach the level of a podcast in detail, but there are 90s for read 500 or so words if you'd like to reach out to me, it's podcast@hallettphilanthropy.com.
This world needs you. More importantly, there are people in this world that need you. I don't care if you're a board member or CEO, a gift officer, leadership giving officer, plan giving officer, infrastructure database volunteer board member. I don't care because my old adage I really, as I get older, truly believe that it's so true. Some people make things happen.
Some people watch things happen. Then there are those who wondered what happened. You're someone who's making things happen, and you partner with other people in your organization and in the community who are the same, who want to do things for the people, the places, and the things, the organizations that are wondering what happened. And we need this. What you do every day is a game changer, and I hope you get a sense of that at least once every day, so that you can come back the next day with a little pep in your step and a smile on your face, knowing that you're doing some pretty cool things.
And if no one says thank you, that's okay, I'll say thank you. Even though most likely you're not in my community, you're taking care of someone's community and someone's needs, and you are someone who makes things happen. For those who are wondering what happened. Pretty cool way to spend a life. I look forward to seeing you the next time, right back here on the next edition of Around with Randall.
And don't forget. Make it a great day.