When most advancement leaders are asked what they need to raise more money or engage more alumni, or do more of anything, the answer usually has something to do with hiring more people.
But, when presidents, Board members, engaged donors, and other non-advancement leaders are asked the same question, they usually start by assessing if the current personnel and programs are being as effective and efficient as they could be.
Here’s a good pathway to help unravel this contradiction.
If there is a current system or program being employed that addresses the “concern for more” (for example, a prospect management system would address the concern for raising more money), and the current advancement team can quantitatively show, through reports, metrics, etc., that this program is at least marginally effective, then hiring more people to add to the effort could be met with unanimity.
If, however, there is no current system or program or the system or program is being inconsistently implemented or is otherwise ineffective, hiring more people will be met with doubts.
The best way to make the case for hiring more advancement personnel is to show that the program or system you are using is working, even minimally, and can scale.