Our future with A.I. is being touted as everything from a life-giving tool that will supercharge human innovation and creativity to a menacing, globally-connected machine that will learn how to master and subdue humanity. At this point, we don’t have a clear view of which path we find ourselves.
People holding the more pessimistic view of A.I. already are concerned about agentic technology dramatically reducing the need for human donor engagement professionals. With virtual engagement officers already gaining traction, perhaps this view has merit.
Perhaps.
My view, though, is that A.I. will dramatically reduce the need for humans to do mediocre and superficial donor-engagement work. Meaning that A.I. will reduce the need for humans to ask basic, unrefined questions of donors. A.I. will lessen the role for humans to engage with donors on common issues and concerns. A.I. will reduce the number of humans needed to thank donors generically.
It’s not the creative, artful, and thoughtful advancement professionals who will be replaced by A.I. In fact, they will be enhanced by the technology’s abilities.
A.I. is already teaching us this – if we are willing to learn.
For example, we are learning that prompt writing is a creative, time-consuming, and sometimes difficult skill. A.I. is teaching us that the better we frame questions, the more precise we are when posing prompts, the more context and specificity we add to our queries, the more helpful and productive outcomes we receive. This work takes patience. It takes deep thought. And, it is not easy to do well.
Yes, we are learning this skill so that A.I. can help us solve problems and answer questions.
But, that same lesson is especially applicable with our donors.
Ultimately, A.I. may do away with humans engaging donors on mundane, basic, and elementary-level interactions.
But, A.I. is also teaching us the path to engaging donors deeply and personally.
If we are willing to learn.
