Yesterday America voted to keep President Obama in office.
Like many American's, I stayed up late into the night to watch his acceptance
speak and went to bed with the peace of mind that I would not have to suffer
through another political ad for at least another two years. I am a fan of
politics. I like to keep myself informed and involved, and I love to conclude
my night by watching an episode of the Daily Show; however this year's
campaigns were so ugly that my desire to stay informed was almost being
outweighed by my desire to stay sane. But there is one thing I managed to take
away from all those negative campaign ads and that little gem is that we should
always run on the platform of what we do well, and not what our opponent does
not do well.
In the nonprofit sector, we are in the market of working to
put ourselves out of a job. Ideally, one day our organization's mission will be
accomplished and we will cease to be needed (in which case you should redefine
your mission statement, but I will save that for another post). But our mission
is not always defined by one opponent, or one enemy. We are not just work
against someone else, we are working as a standalone organization to accomplish
something. If we get caught in the trap of, "You should donate because
that company is doing bad things and we need to stop them!" then your
organization will cease to be relevant when you stop the company, and not when
you accomplish your mission. Example: Nonprofit X has a mission of cleaning up
river X. River X has a lot of issues like shoreline erosion, and water quality,
but the one Nonprofit X has focused all of its energy on is the pollution being
generated by Company Y. If Company Y is either shut down, fined by the EPA, or
have a change of heart and decides to stop polluting, Nonprofit X will have an
issue getting donors who gave on the basis of, "Help us stop company
Y!" to renew their funding. Instead of focusing on the mission of the
organization, they got lost putting all of their energy and resources into
combating an opponent.
In general I believe that all people are inherently good, and
part of this to me means people would much rather hear about what you are accomplishing
and not how you view someone else is wrong. It is the role of a fundraiser to
connect people with issues they care about. Once that alignment occurs, then
people will be willing to give to support your work. But if you have wasted all
your time with them about how bad or wrong someone else is, they are no longer
donating to the good work you do and are instead donating against someone else.
Our organizations are strong enough (or at least they should be) to inspire
giving based on their own merits. We as fundraisers should not have to resort
to attack ads to generate funding. If this is the case, than your organization
as a whole needs to reevaluate its mission statement and visions statement to
make them more relevant.
We are in the business of doing good and being change
agents. Please do your profession justice by keeping your campaign ads
positive. There is enough ugliness in this world; we don't need our nonprofit
organizations adding to it.
