Experimenting

January’s issue of The Chronicle of Philanthropy featured a story that could be considered disorienting  - “Fundraisers Who Experiment and Why the Future of Non-Profits Depend on Them”. Technological advancements, specifically in communications, are forcing charitable organizations to find news ways to engage with donors. Experimentation is not built into the DNA of most non-profits, but as the article suggests, experimentation is essential. This is a problem for most.

To be open to experimentation means today’s non-profits need to be open to failure. As the article rightly points out, finances can be tight for some and traditional definitions of financial stewardship demand that every donated dollar funds programs or at minimum, administration. The possibility of failure is not very fundable, however essential it might be in the evolution of the charity.

Leadership teams and staff are going to need to learn how to fail well. This will be no easy task. Leaders aren’t usually excited to share with the Board of Directors the numerous ways the organization failed in the last quarter. Wanting to avoid sharing a laundry list of shortcomings, however, might just be the best place to start.   

Start small, but with an activity that is consequential. A mailing, or segment of a mailing. A communications piece, perhaps web based to keep costs low. A cultivation event for a small group of dedicated donors.

Disrupt one thing at a time. Experimenting broadly makes people nervous and unsure. How about starting with that one thing you do that everyone knows isn’t working. It’s cliche, but with these activities there is nowhere to go but up.

There is too much at stake to live with your organizational head in the sand. Change is here. Not experimenting avoids failure in the short-term, but ironically, guarantees failure in the future.

If you want to learn how to fail well, you're already on your way towards DOING GOODER.