“Form follows function.” – Architect (and father of skyscrapers) Louis Sullivan

A principal of modernist design is that new creations and inventions are imagined and created in order to fulfill a particular purpose or function. This idea is commonplace in industrial design and architecture – but is it so with fundraising and philanthropy?

When I think of the way we in the sector designed planned giving, we either weren’t thinking too much about function – or we identified the wrong function in the first place. I suspect that it’s the latter.

Here’s my take: I think that the type of planned giving operation many of us work in or near was conceived and designed around transactions involving money. In addition, we chose to call it planned giving in order to describe an activity rather than an outcome.

In my twenty years as a legacy fundraiser, I reject the idea of a money-based, transactional approach with a focus on financial planning. Rather, I subscribe to the idea that legacy giving (isn’t that a more elegant name?) is all about relationships and a deeply human act of love from the legacy donor to the future.

Let’s stop and ask a couple of questions:

1. What ARE the key functions in what we consider to be planned giving?
2. Do we NEED a planned giving department at all? (Spoiler: I’m not convinced that we do.)

But, let’s start with the first question.

I often get approached by fundraiser peers who ask if I know anyone who might apply for a planned giving officer position at their organization. In response, I always ask them what it is that this person would most need to do. I do this because I think that there are three different functions that most planned giving departments take responsibility for.

• Some planned giving is still done in a very “retail” manner. By that I mean that prospects are cultivated, solicited and stewarded face-to face and one-on-one. This approach is very similar (if not identical) to the role played by major gift officers all over the country.
• Increasingly (and I’ll take my share of responsibility for this), we’ve moved beyond the “sitting on the sofa” method in order to reach larger numbers of prospects. In order to reach thousands of loyal direct mail and monthly donors for example, the charity would be looking for someone with a data-driven marketing skill set.
• Finally, there is the whole function of gift administration. This is a sometimes highly complex role that involves a deeper knowledge of accounting, law and finance and is critical in ensuring that complex gifts get realized. For this function, you don’t need the major gift salesperson or the data-driven, copywriting marketer. You need someone who is a really good number cruncher.

Now, if I asked if you knew of a planned giving officer who possessed all three of these skill sets, would you be able to recommend anyone? To take it a step further, have you ever known a fundraiser who was good at one-on-one charisma, data-driven marketing strategy, creative copywriting and finance and accounting?

I don’t know about you, but I’ve never met this fundraiser – and I’ve met A LOT of fundraisers in my time! I’ll bet the farm that there aren’t many of these people in the whole wide world!

Now, the second question: Does your organization need to have a planned giving department at all? 

My guess is probably not and before you start losing your mind with the preposterousness of my thinking, consider this; if your organization already has an annual giving or direct response team, a major gifts officer or team and finance staff of any kind – why not farm the appropriate functions out to those folks? Why not let people perform functions that they’re really good at, and give the donor a better philanthropic experience at the same time?

Why can’t major gift officers blend planned giving conversations into what they’re already doing—and/or explore major gift potential when cultivating a planned giving prospect. Also, what’s stopping your direct mail and digital fundraising staff from weaving legacy campaigns into their annual project management calendars. And finally, what if someone in your finance department took on gift administration—a function that they’d probably become very comfortable with?

One organization I know, has distributed its planned giving functions across almost everyone in its staff team. Another one negotiated that the gift administration role would be transferred to the finance department when budget constraints cut a planned giving fundraising position. 

The kind of thinking that came up with the planned giving department (another silo!) dates back to military management circa WW2 and industrial management in the 1950s and 1960s. In the mid-1980s, we began leaving the industrial economy and migrating to what’s been called the information age, the digital marketplace and the creative economy. The mid-80s were almost 40 years ago! It’s time we blew the dust off the old machine and came up with something better that’s focused on the relationship with the donor and not the gift transaction.

At the end of the day my friends, our work is about the donor’s heart and soul much more than it’s about her money.

Fraser Green will be co-presenting “The Big Re-Think” at the CAGP conference in Vancouver on Wednesday April 19 along with Rory Green from Simon Fraser University and Ingrid Gingras from The Ottawa Hospital Foundation. If you would like a copy of the deck from this session, email Fraser at fraser@goodworksco.ca. He’d be happy to send it to you.