To aid in the success of giving discussions with donors, gift officers have been taught for decades to use questions or statements they believe the donor will respond favorably to. For example:
“Since we agree that the mass spectrometer is critical to the future of the chemistry program. . . ” or,
“Because the impact of our youth program has been so substantial to so many over the years. . .”
The concept is that asking questions or making statements that donors agree with is a productive way to get them to agree to the gift we are proposing. It’s the “little yeses lead to big yeses” strategy.
But – perhaps oddly enough – seeking “no” also has it’s place in successful donor engagement.
For example:
“Is now a bad time to talk?” (as opposed to, “Is now a good time to talk?”), or,
“My sense is that this gift proposal hits all your interest areas – is there anything about this proposal that doesn’t make sense for you?”
When we ask questions seeking the challenge, or the rebuttal, or the refutation, we actually provide people with a sense of control and autonomy. Saying, “no” can feel safer sometimes than saying, “yes.” And humans are wired to seek safety.
Saying, “yes,” can feel like a commitment of sorts (or leading to a commitment) and that can feel pushy or even, final.
But saying, “no,” can feel permission-based and more comfortable and adjustable.
So, during an upcoming conversation with a donor, instead of always seeking the, “yes,” try seeking some “no” responses.
I mean, “It wouldn’t hurt to try. . .would it?”
