A recent article in The Nonprofit Quarterly asks What Do Donors Want?
The question mainly being "How much do donors want performance metrics about the charities they support?"
The article says they don't want a lot:
... human beings make philanthropic decisions, not mathematical models or formulae. These human beings bring to the philanthropic process values and feelings and historical experiences that no data set or analytical technique can replace. Perhaps our greatest challenge, then, is less about finding ways to measure and codify philanthropy and more about determining where that practice fits within the larger goal of encouraging more philanthropy among a more diverse group of donors.
I agree. If you're into metrics because you think there's a new kind of all-rational, non-emotional donor out there, you're going to be badly disappointed.
Donors of all ages and all generations want stories and heart-connections. In fact, if you over-rely on metrics, assuming that an iron-clad case is your best case, you're likely to drive donors away. (Note that I'm talking about individual donors. For institutional donors, the situation is usually different.)
Even so, I'm all in favor of rigorous, quantifiable metrics. Not because they'll make your fundraising better, but for these two reasons:
- You'll be more effective. If you're measuring what you do, I guarantee you're doing a better job than if you're not measuring. I've worked with organizations that are metrics obsessed and others that run by intuition and/or consensus. The metrics organizations are incredibly more effective. We owe effectiveness to donors (and everyone else).
- You'll get better stories. A system of gathering metrics will put you in contact of what donors really want: stories. And that leads to better fundraising.
