The two best pieces of advice you can give to a speaker preparing for a nonprofit fundraising banquet are…

I mentioned in my previous post that I was in SoCal emceeing a banquet for With This Ring last week. While there, I heard the best banquet speaker I’ve yet heard, Stan Patyrak from Living Water International.

I wish I had taped his five minute message (isn’t that why I paid $79 for that Flip Camera for anyway?), but there’s a clip of Stan on YouTube that will give you an idea of the brother’s content and cadence.

Learn two things from Stan:

1. The most powerful part of a speaker’s presentation are the pauses.

When you review a speech ahead of time with the speaker, don’t, um, just review the speech. Help them mark it up to note where they need to pause. Pausing electrifies a room. Stan does it less on the YouTube audio, but at the With This Ring banquet, people were hanging on his every pause…not his every word.

In the words of Sam Harrison, author of ideaselling (thanks for the link, Joanne Fritz of About.com!):

A few years ago, Edward Norton and four other actors participated in a discussion at the Directors Guild in Manhattan. The panel quickly adopted a rotation, with each actor commenting on film-related topics. When Norton’s turn, he would always pause before speaking. The audience awaited his words. Norton’s comments were no more profound than those of fellow panelists, but the pauses positioned him as the group’s sage. For your next pitch, pause before starting. Lock eyes with audience members. Build anticipation. Capture their complete attention–then begin.

And, banquet emcees, this sure beats you saying, “Alright…everybody…we’re gonna start now…if I can just get your attention, please…gonna start now…and, uh…everybody?”

2. Focus your speech on the cause, not the organization

Almost every banquet speech I’ve ever heard ends up being a paean to the organization hosting the banquet, e.g., “And that’s what’s so great about With This Ring”. In contrast, listen to Stan’s YouTube remarks. Note how delightfully little he talks about the organization he represents, Living Water International.

“Living Water,” says Stan, “is just a small part of this bigger thing called the Gospel.” But the main thing I want to talk about, Stan continues, is the question, “Why are people poor?”

Which topic, do you suppose, answers a question Stan’s listeners are asking on an ongoing basis?

  1. What is Living Water International and why are they so wonderful?
  2. Why are people poor?

Fascinatingly, I’ve only ever encountered Stan speaking at other organizations’ banquets. Brother doesn’t focus on promoting Living Water.

What banquet could you be at–what banquet should you be at–to promote the cause of which your organization is “just a small part of this bigger thing called the Gospel”?

Maybe you should call up the nonprofit that does almost exactly the same thing you do and offer to speak at their banquet [editor’s note: not about your organization, ya nut] or record a testimonial about their impact.

When you do, don’t forget to pause.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Mongoliad, the future of nonprofit-as-narrative, and the demise of nonprofit-as-organization

There’s an intriguing piece in Fast Company on Neal Stephenson’s effort to reinvent the novel as a “social media app”. The best and most detailed description of what Stephenson has in mind is found on the Mongoliad’s Facebook page. Let me quote it at length because it doesn’t make much sense unless you can get the whole idea on the table, er, iPad tablet:

The Mongoliad is a rip-roaring adventure tale set 1241, a pivotal year in history, when Europe thought that the Mongol Horde was about to completely destroy their world. The Mongoliad is also the beginning of an experiment in storytelling, technology, and community-driven creativity.

Our story begins with a serial novel of sorts, which we will release over the course of about a year. Neal Stephenson created the world in which The Mongoliad is set, and presides benevolently over it. Our first set of stories is being written by Neal, Greg Bear, Nicole Galland, Mark Teppo, and a number of other authors; we’re also working closely with artists, fight choreographers & other martial artists, programmers, film-makers, game designers, and a bunch of other folks to produce an ongoing stream of nontextual, para-narrative, and extra-narrative stuff which we think brings the story to life in ways that are pleasingly unique, and which can’t be done in any single medium.

Very shortly, once The Mongoliad has developed some mass and momentum, we will be asking fans to join us in creating the rest of the world and telling new stories in it. That’s where the real experiment part comes in. We are building some pretty cool tech to make that easy and fun, and we hope lots of you will use it.

In short, Stephenson is changing the novel from something written by an author and read by a reader to something over which the author “benevolently presides” and the reader uses as a series of tools to make meaning that fills out and completes the author’s original vision.

Believe it or not, I experienced something very similar to this at, of all places, a nonprofit fundraising banquet I emceed last week.

With This Ring was founded by Ali Eastburn in 2007. She was leading worship at a Christian women’s retreat in Orange County, California. As she looked out at all the wealthy worshipers raising their hands in praise, she had this distinct sense that God was calling her–and maybe them, too–to sell their rings and donate the proceeds to drill clean drinking water wells in Africa.

When she finished her worship set, she excitedly told the women what she was thinking. Their response wasn’t nearly so excited, but, undaunted, Ali sold her own ring and drilled a well anyway.

And so far nearly 300 others have followed her lead and donated rings through With This Ring.

What all of this has to do with The Mongoliad:

After last year’s banquet, Ali spent the night in the Anaheim Marriott (where the banquet had been held) because she was too tired to head home, and they had comped her a room anyway. The hotel clerk, Lindsay, who checked Ali in inquired what all this With This Ring stuff was about…and promptly got wrapped up in the story, too:

Her fiance bought Ali’s original ring, re-set with a cubic zirconium in it, and the two pledged to use their wedding as the means to raise money for an additional drinking water well.

So Lindsay and her husband spoke at the banquet the other night.

I told the banquet attendees that With This Ring was less like a nonprofit than you supported and more like a story you got drawn into. And, as if to underscore that message, Ali surprised everyone by taking a $14,000 Tiffany bracelet donated by a woman named Tracy and loaning it from now until the next With This Ring banquet to one of the banquet attendees.

There was no prior announcement of this to anyone who was coming–just a little note in the evening’s program that said “The Bracelet”. After showing a video of Tracy’s story, Ali noted that rather than selling the bracelet right away, Tracy wanted to “gift” it temporarily to one of the women at the banquet–someone chosen the evening of the banquet by prayerful discernment–who would commit to wearing it every day wherever she went over the course of the next year and sharing the story of the bracelet and of With This Ring.

A woman named Brianna (whom no one knew prior to the moment she was called up on stage) was selected as the recipient. She had just been married five weeks before and said to me, “When you all announced about the bracelet, I knew it wouldn’t be me who got to wear it.”

It was riveting stuff.

There’s a part of my nonprofit psyche (the institutionally oriented part) that was going crazy thinking of every possible thing that could go wrong. Was the bracelet insured? (Yes.) What if the person selected turned down the offer? (Trust the Holy Spirit, Ali said.)  What if she walked out of the banquet and was never heard from again? (Interesting plot twist in the story, I’d say.)

What materialized was something very different.

A bunch of the banquet attendees went up and talked to her afterwards. A bunch more said to me, “When’s the next banquet? I need to be there so I can hear what happens with Brianna.” I would be shocked if less than 50% of the attendees failed to tell their friends the story the next day. (I’m doing so now through this post, for example.)

What happens when a nonprofit moves from being an organization to a narrative? What happens when the executive director moves from being the “leader” to being the “benevolent presider” over co-creation of meaning built around a cause?

We presently lack even the vocabulary to talk about these things in our nonprofit-as-organization world. We do, however, have a pretty good precedent on which we can draw:

The New Testament.

Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

What is The Great Commission if not the most powerful social media app ever created?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

From our Stats Don’t Lie Department, shocking proof of the effectiveness of TG

As regular visitors to this blog know, we love Joanne Fritz’s About.com column and we read it assiduously.

We love Joanne’s column even more after her recent post, No Money for Donor Acquisition? Focus on Retention, where she recaps comments from a Fundraising Success Magazine conference keynote by Roger Craver of The Agitator.

There’s TG gold in them thar hills.

Read the whole post, paying special attention to three particular stats/notes that have special relevance to core principles of Transformational Giving:

1. 84% of all donors prefer to be solicited by folks they know.

Humor me by reading that just one more time, please. It does not say, “84% of all donors prefer to be solicited by a smoove operator trained in professional solicitation strategies and techniques.”

It underscores the potency of TG Principle 6: “The champion, not the organization, is called to be the primary means of advancing the cause within the champion’s sphere of influence.”

Not only is that the biblical approach. It turns out it’s also the most effective approach. Go figure.

*

2. 20% of the typical donor database are missionaries who will communicate with others about your cause.

I’ve always said 10% of champions will move to the O (Owner) level. And to think I’ve been understating it all these years.

*

3. “We need to be just as passionate at identifying the missionaries on our lists as they are about promoting our cause. Design a recruiting plan to enlist them in focused efforts, and provide them with the tools to help spread the word and draw more donors from their spheres of influence.”

[Editor’s side note: It’s amazing to me that we Christian nonprofits try to borrow our fundraising terms from secular fundraisiers (e.g., “donor”, “acquisition”, “cultivation”), but secular fundraisers are increasingly borrowing their fundraising terms from general Christian practice (e.g., “missionary”, “evangelist”). We never quite do know how much treasure we have until it ends up in someone else’s treasure chest, do we?]

In any case, Joanne (paraphrasing Roger, I think) makes a great point here. To paraphrase it using language from a previous post, missionaries need to be equipped, not just encouraged, to share the cause. It takes tools, plans, training–the whole works. Precious, precious few nonprofits–Christian or otherwise–make their top development priority the equipping of their missionary champions.

Given the statistics Joanne and Roger have shared here, don’t you think that should change?

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments