Apolitical Incorrectness: Evolving as fundraisers in a country divided

It’s election day! And if you’re like most Americans…you’re not participating. Off-year elections (neither Presidential nor mid-term elections) don’t usually inspire Americans to flock to the polls. Yes, we’re generally quite apathetic when it comes to pulling the lever for the local city council or town justice race. As someone who is locally elected, this is where I tell you that your local governments are the most impactful on your day to day lives, but I’m going to save that lecture for another day. However, I’m still going to climb on to my soapbox and attempt to motivate my fundraising colleagues to become more proactive in understanding the various viewpoints or our most electrifying third rail issues.?

I am less than 2 months in as a new major gift officer. As a new employee, I had every intention of taking advantage of a generous grace period in which I have endless onboarding meetings and expectations to close gifts are modest at best. However, human conflict within the nation and abroad, and the response to it, has created tumultuous conditions on the frontlines of institutional advancement. Alumni are angry. Parents are worried. Students are disruptive. Like many of you, I’ve received emails informing me that not only should I NOT expect more gifts, but in some cases, a planned bequest is now off the table entirely.?

The current conflict in the Middle East is the most recent example of this, but the increased political polarization seen across our country has been nipping at the heels of fundraisers for at least a decade now. We’ve analyzed the complaints. We’ve developed talking points. We’ve even created events and committees to try and satisfy the various concerns expressed across our constituency. These are important steps to maintain our reputation as places where learning is not compromised by any one political ideology. However, this is public relations work that, while crucial, often does little to convince individual, high capacity, donors to drop their sword and pick up their checkbook.?

As previously stated, I am a locally-elected public servant. I sit on a town board where we discuss inspiring topics such as: zoning, water/sewage, stormwater, emergency services, sidewalk construction, and code enforcement. While these subjects are more likely to cure insomnia than they are to attract a stimulating discussion, my position has pushed me to understand the opinions, experiences, and demands of the people I represent. One thing I like about local politics is that party identity rarely matters. I get yelled at by the left and the right with some regularity. Before being elected, I was very interested in politics and the debates that came out of it. Like most people, I was guilty of fighting from within the bubble I built during my most “enlightened” decade…my 20s. Representing a community pushed me to do more investigating than pontificating. The more I dug into hot-button issues, the more I came to respect their complexity and gained an understanding as to where various opinions about the topic come from. Some of my closest friends could be considered “political adversaries” but it doesn’t stop us from being friends. Life’s too short. I’m done with that.

Why does any of this matter to frontline fundraisers? Because we are relied upon to sit down with angry donors and make them feel heard. That’s different from trying to change their mind or correct their misconceptions. Working within the walls of higher ed, we know what really goes on. I don’t know anyone who believes their school is in the business of indoctrinating students on behalf of one political ideology. Between that and the typical perspectives of those choosing to work in academia, it can be very easy to roll our eyes at the feedback we hear and dismiss it as out of touch or even bigoted. We know we have to TRY and salvage these relationships for the good of the institution, but often our natural inclination is to write them off as lost souls. I’m asking you not to.?

Sure, there is only so much a gift officer can do to talk a donor off the ledge. Sometimes the anger is too much to overcome. But most of the angry emails I receive have something in common: there is usually a sentence or two where they speak to the great experience they had as a student. As long as that sentiment is present, there’s hope. I believe the key to keeping that hope alive is to be equipped to have a nuanced conversation around these issues. We all know the talking points, but that often just creates a stalemate. Consider the idea that even those who you passionately disagree with, are deserving of empathy. That can be difficult when you’re sitting across from someone criticizing the very values you hold dear. In those moments, a professional meeting can turn personal. But I have found, doing a little bit of objective due diligence around these issues can help you maintain a healthy blood pressure and position you to have a legitimate conversation.?

I believe the time has passed where we can maintain an apolitical approach to our jobs. We never want to unnecessarily bring politics into a discussion, but nor should we aim to be politically naive as if to maintain some sort of Switzerland-like status of neutrality. This is a tight-rope walk for sure. We’re searching for an area between “thank you, I’ll share that feedback with my superiors. Good day” and having it out like guests on Bill Maher. I actually think finding that space isn’t as hard as it may appear and it can be found without compromising any personal or professional integrity. Whether it’s a different kind of internal training, like a “Plus Delta for political discourse” or making a concerted effort to explore the various opinions that dominate our inboxes, there are ways to get there.?

It’s important to acknowledge that not all “opinions” should be weighed the same. There are hot-takes from the fringe, and there are intellectual points and counterpoints. The latter really aren’t that hard to find if you’re looking for them. There are podcasts and books featuring hosts from different “sides of the aisle” who have calm, educational discussions. Unfortunately, such a thing has become a unicorn in our time and describing someone as a “centrist” is more of a scarlet letter than a term of endearment. Many of us don’t trust those “on the other side” to converse politely so we don’t put the effort into doing it ourselves. We also cling so tightly to our identity as conservative/liberal that we’re unwilling to publicly disagree with someone from “our team” even though we believe it to be wrong. For the most part, we can operate like this from behind a keyboard or perhaps at an unnecessarily intense holiday meal with family, but for gift officers, we’re required to have “old school” face to face discussions and I sincerely believe that is a blessing not a curse.

As a politician, I’m reminded time and time again how in-person conversation is so much more productive than online or digital communication. For those of you who get to spend your working hours sitting down with donors for a meal or coffee, cherish it. Embrace the opportunity to speak eye to eye with other humans and recognize the power of it. Typically, we’re much better to one another in these situations and it offers a real opportunity to find common ground. Don’t avoid a hostile prospect, invite them to coffee. Political intensity is not going to die down anytime soon. It has been here for several years and it will continue for the foreseeable future. If we hope to continue to succeed in securing transformative gifts for our esteemed institutions, we’ll need to evolve our conservation skills and that means evolving how we understand the polarizing issues around us.?

There is an almost 0% chance you’ll ever change someone’s mind or have your own mind changed. I feel lucky that I have changed my opinion on several issues, but I know that makes me an outlier. But we don’t need to change a donor's mind to be good fundraisers, we just need to be savvy enough to redirect their energy.?

I have received multiple “thank you for your thoughtful response” replies from disgruntled alumni. In these replies I often talk about myself, open up to them, and expose a bit of my own humanity. These responses are not designed to restore or inspire their philanthropy, they simply aim to deliver empathy, make them feel heard, and keep the relationship at a mild simmer until the time comes to turn up the heat. You should never feel pressure to conform to someone’s opinions, but by developing a better understanding of where the opinion comes from, and being able to speak to that, you can converse in good faith and hopefully reach a mutually beneficial conclusion.?

I’m not saying it’s easy, but it sure is a timely thing to write about :)