In a post-pandemic world, donor recognition is changing. It’s time to give supporter stewardship a shake up because one size does not fit all.

You can never thank enough. That’s best practice fundraising.

Our job as fundraisers is to find creative and meaningful ways to thank our donors and keep our organisation at the top of their minds so that they renew, and even increase, their gift next time.

Simple! Thank, thank and thank. What more is there to talk about? Well… there is actually a lot to talk about. In an ever-changing environment we, as fundraisers, should be adapting our best practice fundraising techniques to change with society and what donors want.

Since COVID-19, we are seeing a shift away from a society wanting self-gratification to more attention on impact, community-focused efforts and who is doing the ‘giving’. Traditionally, donor stewardship is a nonprofit’s practice dedicated to engaging donors post-do-nation. For many it can be the start of forming long-lasting relationships and getting to know what drives donors to support the organisation.

A good stewardship strategy should move donors to deeper involvement with the organisation, especially once we show them the impact their gift had.

It is surprising how many nonprofits in Australia still do not have a stewardship plan in place. One of the questions I always ask is if a donor were to walk in the door right now with a donation of $500, how would you treat them?

What about $5000 or $50,000? Most organisations don’t have an answer.

All about the impact

Now is the time to develop or review your plans, make the plan more inclusive and shift your thinking. It’s not about the organisation or the donor, but about the impact of the gift.

The current donor stewardship model is to glorify the donor. But what if we challenged that model and focused purely on impact? Sure, some donors give because they want their name in lights or like to feel they have the ear of the CEO, but maybe it’s time we change the narrative and operate in a model where naming is the exception, not an automatic offering.

“Women are driving philanthropic decisions in their households and are now leading men in giving.”

Why, you ask? Because who gives and why they give is changing and as fundraisers we need to change, or we risk being out of touch. Our practices need to reflect societal changes. If we continue doing what we have always done because it worked ‘back in the day’, we will become a sector that is out of tune with our communities. I’m not suggesting we don’t thank our donors. We must thank them and thank them quickly! But how we then steward them should change.

So many Australians don’t identify with the word ‘philanthropist’ because it conjures images of an old white male smoking a cigar. Today’s modern philanthropists are our neighbours who volunteer their time, serve on committees and donate — no matter the amount.

Australia has the wealth and capacity to give a lot more than is currently being donated but tall poppy syndrome keeps people from talking about their giving and sometimes it stops them donating. So, let’s NOT make it about the donor and focus on the change that their gift is making.

Giving motivations 

Why do people give? Since COVID, where and why people give has changed. We’ve seen a shift to giving to more community-based organisations and organisations that are providing on-the-ground services. Donors want to see change not just hear how it might happen.

Gender matters in philanthropy. It’s not a bad thing that there are gender differences between men and women’s philanthropy. After all, gender differences in men and women are prevalent in all parts of our lives, so why not philanthropy? Men and women have different motivations and patterns of giving and have different relationships with money.

Research tells us that men are mainly driven to give because of ego, tax incentives and being asked by their peers, whereas women give to see impact and out of a sense of obligation. Women have a biological understanding of helping and are leveraging their resources and family to make the changes they want to see in the community. Women also like to give collaboratively; we are seeing a rise in giving circles as women come together to make a bigger impact.

Research from the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy in 2021 shares that women want a relationship with a charity when giving, whilst their male counterparts practice more transactional giving. With men it is important who asks, but with women the cause and the impact are more important.

As men were traditionally the bread-winners and seen as the decision makers it makes sense that charities focused their attention on approaching men and that the men where the ones being hailed as the philanthropists. In Australia, women have played a quiet, humble yet influential role in philanthropy. Their philanthropy has been private and a topic discussed only within their families. Research shows that whilst most women who give collaborate with their partners and/or families when making their giving decisions, they are the main driver of their family philanthropy.

Our society is becoming more inclu-sive. Women are driving philanthropic decisions in their households and are now leading men in giving. And there are new generations of givers with different needs. Millennials, for example, are asking more of NFPs – they want involvement and impact.

Are we changing our models to suit these shifts? Because they are going to change how we fundraise.

What fundraisers need to do

What if we were to play with the donor pyramid? Are we considering giving circle gifts at the major gift level? Should we? Yes, we should! Should we be treating our regular givers any differently to our major donors? In a society of inclusiveness and equality, maybe not. After all, every gift is meaningful and important for the donor.

If you haven’t already, it’s time to shift your best practice fundraising to listen to what your donors want and to show that you aren’t wasting money on donor recognition.

You may argue that staff time is better used to steward a $25,000 donor compared to $25. I would argue that both donors are important because you don’t know what the future will bring.

Ask yourself this — when given a prospective couple to research, where do you start? With the male? Do you even research the female? Research tells us that if women are excluded in conversa-tions about philanthropy, you probably won’t receive the gift you had hoped to receive.

Women want to see change but not have the attention focused on them. As primary prospects may increasingly want less or different recognition, our steward-ship needs to change.

Stewardship needs to be more meaningful, collaborative and about the community you are impacting.

The main purpose of stewardship is to inspire donors to give again. So, ensure they feel connected to your organisation and that they know you are listening to them.

Kimberly Downes is a fundraiser with over 30 years’ experience across both nonprofit and consultant roles.