Finding agreeable voices can feel affirming. Whether from our team members, from our supervisors, or from donors.
We believe in our proposed strategy to grow the number of consecutive year givers and now 3 other colleagues agree with us.
We are convinced that our proposed tactic to raise more major gifts will work and now the advancement committee of the Board concurs.
But what are the downsides of our proposed approach? Perhaps it will mean we will have less time to invite donors to increase their giving to our annual giving leadership level.
Or, perhaps our approach just isn’t the most efficacious strategy to raising major gifts.
What if, in other words, we are wrong? What if we’ve misjudged? What if we are not seeing a bigger, more important picture?
When done well, advancement work is personalized, thoughtful, and nuanced. Rarely is there a single strategy or tactic or initiative that will work consistently.
The best advancement team members are not those who are completely certain that their proposed approach is the best one.
The best advancement team members are those who have multiple approaches from which to choose and are able to discern based on a variety of circumstances which one provides the best opportunity for success at that moment.
