The big ask

A colleague asked me today, “what different strategies would you use to ask someone for $250,000 as opposed to $50,000?”

The first thing to clarify is whether you’re asking the same person for these different amounts of money.  Put another way, are you asking “how do I get someone to shift from making a donation that’s not a big decision to making a donation that is a big decision?”  Or are you asking, “how do I get up the nerve to look someone in the eye and ask them for a quarter of a million dollars (or more!)?”

Regardless of which of these questions you’re really asking, in each case you need the same basic elements.  You need a story that is real, compelling, that has emotional content.  A story that you believe in, that you think is important.  A story that is true for you, for your organization, for its beneficiaries.  A narrative that resonates with and reinforces the world view of the donor.  A narrative that the donor can be a part of – can place themselves in and, in the best of cases, can help write themselves.

The size of the donation (the “ask”)?  It has to come out of this narrative and this truth – you can’t bolt it on afterwards and have any hope of success.

So, going back to the two questions, if someone is giving much less than then can, then the story is not holding true for them on some level.

If you are asking for much less than you should, then the story is not holding true for you on some level.

Which one is it?

Hope, Pakistan, and the power of storytelling

From Acumen Fund’s *spark! event last month.

Getting to work with people like Jawad Aslam gets me out of bed in the morning.

I promise this is worth seeing through to the end.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Sarah Kay, poetry and project V.O.I.C.E.

I don’t know many 21 year olds who can pull this off. Beautiful poetry indeed, and the power of storytelling.

And why slam poetry made Sarah the only happy 14 year old she knew:

Blue Hill – if restaurants were nonprofits

The other night I got to eat dinner at Blue Hill at Stone Barns, easily one of the best restaurants around.  Chef Dan Barber has radically shortened the time and distance food takes to get from the farm to the table, and the tastes that result are simply exquisite.

But more interesting than the tastes, to me, was the meal – and that’s something completely different from the food.  The meal was the experience, the meal was a story about what food could be.

Just one example:  near the end of dinner, to kick off desert, our server came to the table with a full honeycomb, covered with honey, that she placed on the table.  It’s kind of a big, messy, natural thing – honeycomb within a wood frame.  She explained that Blue Hill started harvesting its own honey last year; they started with six hives and are up to twelve.  This was the last of the late fall honey, she said, and it is richer and deeper than the early spring honey.  And it would be part of our next course.

Then she disappeared.  A few minutes later, four waiters, with the precision of synchronized swimmers, simultaneously placed four white bowls in front of the diners.  Each bowl had no more than two tablespoons of a concoction with “homemade tofu, bergamot, and honey.”  Then, for the final flourish, each of the four servers simultaneously whipped out a stainless steel garlic press with a piece of honeycomb inside, and each squeezed the press to drizzle fresh honey over our dessert.  Performance, panache, surprise, story, and a little bit of magic.  And it was delicious.  This was one of a hundred moments that made the meal exceptional and memorable.

After dinner we got to peek into the kitchen, filled with the cooks who make this spectacular food.  No surprise, things feel different when you pull back the curtain…cooks and staff are busily washing dishes, or heads-down prepping and running food.  They’re the engine that makes the magic possible, but the kitchen, of course, isn’t magical.  It’s a shop floor.

The interactions at the “front of the house” (with the maitre d’, the waiters, the sommelier, the honey-squeezers) and the “back of the house” are distinct.  The front of the house is populated by storytellers who are creating an experience.  In the back of the house, amazing food is created.  But the skills required of folks in the front and the back might have very little overlap.  And you need them all to create an exceptional dining experience, and to deliver it night after night.

*                           *                               *                                 *                                 *

So now, with the restaurant story as backdrop, fill in the blanks at your favorite nonprofit.  Who’s who?   You can do your own, magazine-quiz-style “match column 1 with column 2”:

1. Waiter                                                              A. Program staff

2. Line cook                                                        B. Head of Development

3. Chef/owner                                                    C. Fundraiser

4. Maitre d’ / General Manager                   D. CEO

Who creates the reality?  Who is doing “the real work?”  Without whom do you fail? (hint: it’s everyone).

To take the analogy a step further, if restaurants were run like much of the nonprofit sector:

  1. The only job anyone would ever want would be to work in the kitchen
  2. It would be impossible to hire waiters
  3. There’d be no set menu – diners would pick what they want; and over time the kitchen could end up serving tons of dishes that they don’t best know how to cook
  4. Before choosing a restaurant, diners would ask whether the restaurant spends more than 10% of its operating budget on waitstaff.

Bon appetit.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

The 17 second story

Twice in the last two weeks I’ve had 30 minute calls with people who are exploring interesting new vehicles for raising capital in the nonprofit sector.  Yet in both cases, it took 17 minutes (I counted) to get to the core of what the opportunity was.  We lost more than half the time in the lead-up, and this with the people whose job it is to sell the story.  (And whether you’re a CEO or a job-seeker, it is your job to sell the story).

This is an easy trap to fall in to, because you want to dig in to the nuts and bolts so much.  But when you lose the headline, you lose the inspiring vision, you lose the thing that’s going to give this thing legs.  You don’t have 17 minutes, you have 17 seconds.

This isn’t a post about nailing the 17-second elevator pitch for your organization – who you are, what you do, why it matters – although everyone from your Board to your CEO to each employee must be able to articulate this effectively.  In a world where you’re constantly leading and innovating, where you’re tearing through projects because you’re getting so much done, you have to keep on developing and refining and changing your 17-second story.  Nailing this consistently is one of the arts of leadership.

It’s about having, at your fingertips, the answer to the same question in many guises: “What is the most pressing question you’re facing right now?” or “what’s your greatest need?” or “what keeps you up at night?” or “what’s new”?

Any of these in 17 seconds.

So, what’s new?

Is “fundraising” a dirty word?

Continuing yesterday’s thread, I think we might need a new job title.  “Fundraising” is stigmatized – it sounds transaction-y and narrow and kind of like something you don’t want to do.  (If there’s a job out there that no one can fill, then I probably don’t want it, right?)  “Development” is not so great either – too euphemistic.

One approach is to borrow known words from the for-profit sector.  Personally I have no problem with “sales” because I’ve gotten to know lots of incredible salespeople, and I’m not hung up on the “have-I-got-a-deal-for-you” used car salesman baggage (it is so outdated that it’s lost its power).  “Business Development” seems equally OK, since it implies a level of partnership and co-creation that actually captures a lot of what this work really is about.

Everything else seems a little too clever by half, things like:

  • Head of Resource Mobilization
  • Chief Rainmaker
  • Director of Strategic Alliances
  • Capital Raiser Extraordinaire
  • Head Storyteller
  • Philanthropic Adviser (taken)
  • Etc.

If you ask the best fundraisers (and salespeople) what they do they will say things like: “build partnerships,” “steward relationships,” “mobilize resources,” “make connections,” “build networks and tribes,” “tell stories,” and “translate across lines of difference.”  Of course you “raise funds,” but the word has no moxie and I’m skeptical that we’ll succeed in resuscitating it anytime soon.

Maybe this isn’t all that important, but if we know that there’s a need for a new model of “fundraiser,” one with a broader remit, a deeper connection to the mission of the organization, and a defined role of bringing the voice of top stakeholders into strategic decision-making…  well we’ve got a branding problem on our hands.

Any ideas?

1-4-5-2-3

Here’s a reasonable-sounding process to go through when prepping for a big presentation:

  1. Figure out what you want to say
  2. Write this up in slides, with some combination of words, charts, and images
  3. Refine those slides
  4. Rehearse the presentation
  5. Present

Unfortunately this doesn’t work.

What happens is that slides that were going to become better, the slides that had too many words that you were going to fix….they make their way into your “draft” presentation.  Then you fall into the trap of presenting your slides instead of presenting your story – the slides start to win.  Unless you have the gumption to throw out half or all of these slides at this point, your goose is cooked.

Another approach is 1-4-5-2-3.  That is, figure out what you’re going to say, work on that (no slides), and then rehearse it with your colleagues.  You can even stand up like everyone else does in rehearsals, and have a single slide projected, with the title of your presentation and nothing else.  Use the rehearsal to refine the story, and then create slides that support your story.

The reason the first approach seems like it will work  is because we think writing slides is a shorthand version of writing a Word doc, but it’s not.  We also get so distracted by slide creation that we underplay the value of standing in front of people and telling them, very simply, the story we want to tell.

Slides are nothing more and nothing less than a visual aid to support your story.  If you go about creating them the normal way, you’ll end up with a story to support your slides, instead of the other way around.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

David Weprin and the other 19

The other day on my way to work I passed a campaign volunteer for David Weprin, candidate for NYC Comptroller.   During the time I was within her earshot, I probably heard her say “Weprin for NYC Comptroller!!” about 10 times.  From what I observed, around 1 in 20 people stopped to get the flier she was handing out, which left 19 people just hearing what she said as they walked by.

There’s no doubt that from the volunteer’s perspective, “Weprin for NYC Comptroller” is the right message.  She knows all the candidates and firmly believes that Mr. Weprin is the best of those candidates.

I suspect, though, that the other 19 people, like me, have a different starting point.  Not only don’t we know anything about Mr. Weprin and how he compares to the other candidates, we probably didn’t even remember that a Comptroller race is underway.  To get us, you need to start the story from the beginning.

The questions in my mind when I heard her say, “Weprin for NYC Comptroller” were:

  1. “There’s an election for Comptroller?”
  2. “When is it?”
  3. “Who’s Weprin and why would I vote for him?”

She’s neck-deep in the race, so it’s understandable that she’s started at Question 3.  But she’s losing 95% of the people who don’t even know that race is going on, and for whom “Weprin for Comptroller” is a useless message.

The battle she needs to win on the street corner isn’t just about the 1 out of 20 people who already care enough about the race to stop and take a flier (many of whom may also have made a decision about whom they will vote for); it’s also about the other 19 people and getting them tuned in to the face that an election is going on, and getting them to go to the polls.

If you’re engaged in advocacy around a certain issue, or you work for a social sector organization that’s trying to solve a specific problem, it’s easy to fall into this same trap: explaining why what you do is the best, without remembering that nearly everyone you’re talking to knows less about the issue than you do, and many of them aren’t even away of the problem you’re working so hard to address.

Even worse, most of the people who hear your message won’t bother to stop to tell you the real truth, which might be, “I didn’t really know there was a _______ (race for Comptroller; catastrophic issue around deforestation; huge malnutrition problem in India; global epidemic of maternal mortality).”

Unless you’re speaking to your rabid fans, the place to start isn’t “let me tell you why our intervention is the best,” it’s “let me tell you about a problem that matters, and one that you can do something about.”

It’s so easy to start where YOU are, because that’s what’s exciting and what motivates you every day.  Instead try starting where the other 19 people are.  Even person 20 will appreciate seeing the big picture and where you fit in.

“Weprin for NYC Comptroller” is OK.

Much better is: “Comptroller elections on November 3rd.  Vote for Democrat David Weprin.”

Before iPod Genius, there was Shuffle…and it was good enough

One of the many clever iPod/iPhone features is “Genius,” which automatically creates a playlist of related songs based on a song that you pick. You pick a song by the Police and you’ll get a playlist with U2 and Sting and Bob Marley.

Apparently, Genius is pretty sophisticated, but I don’t think it has to be.  The first 10% of accuracy would be enough, because our minds would tell the story that would do the rest of the work.  Need proof?  Back when we all had to settle for Shuffle – a completely random playlist created from songs from your music library – people would inevitably claim that their iPod was psychic, somehow “knowing” the right song to play at the exact right moment.

The point?  Our minds (specifically, our right brains) are constantly trying to make sense of information by telling a story that’s consistent with whatever we’re seeing.  You cannot walk through the woods and make sense of every individual tree…you’d go crazy.  So you process a few trees until your mind tells you, “This is a forest.”

In the same way, it’s enchanting to think that a mindless iPod knows the perfect song to play at the party.  It’s your mind picking out what it wants to see.

For you left-brain, analytical people out there, who are persuaded by (and want to persuade others using) mostly facts and logic, it’s easy to forget how much your audience needs a story.   By imagining your own mind and how you process information – and the sequence of facts that would make sense to you – you completely abandon something powerful that is working in your favor: that the person sitting across from you, hearing these facts for the very first time, wants nothing more than to tell themselves a story.  It’s the best way for them to make sense of what you are saying.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Reason number 45

A few months ago I blogged a list of 44 reasons I blog.  I just stumbled across reason number 45 as I prepare for a speech.

My job (your job, anyone’s job who talks to customers or donors or board members or the media or just about anyone) is to create and to tell stories.  Stories that get people to act – to give or to buy or to stand up for something they believe in.

It should go without saying that if I’m going to be an effective storyteller, I need stories to tell.  MY stories.  Not just for big speeches – though I need them for those too – but for conversations and for media interviews and for talking to colleagues and giving feedback and of course for presentations.

Turns out I’ve got a blog full of these things – some better, some worse, but it’s there: a catalogue of stories and vignettes and thoughts and hopefully some insights every now and again.  Blogging puts a pretty high bar on what makes the cut and also forces me to develop ideas beyond my initial reflection.

I’m 100% sure I wouldn’t have the discipline to do this without the blog.  So thanks to all of you for reading, because I wouldn’t keep at it without you.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook