{"id":82,"date":"2024-12-03T13:01:00","date_gmt":"2024-12-03T13:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/scenechange\/?p=82"},"modified":"2024-12-03T07:34:33","modified_gmt":"2024-12-03T07:34:33","slug":"giving-tuesday-is-coming-just-another-gimmick","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/scenechange\/2024\/12\/03\/giving-tuesday-is-coming-just-another-gimmick\/","title":{"rendered":"Giving Tuesday Is Here Once Again, As Is This Popular Little Article\u200a-\u200aJust Another Gimmick?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

(Originally posted October 2022.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I know. The latest data shows that Giving Tuesday<\/a> is responsible for about\u00a0.056% of your donations this year. And while that doesn\u2019t sound like much, if it were multiplied by 365, you find that it is 20 times the daily rate necessary to reach your contributed revenue goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let\u2019s take another look at that data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Your organization already has days where donations are higher and lower. And you\u2019re not open for business 365 days a year, despite the fact that your website begs for donations 365 days a year. So let\u2019s do as most businesses do: split the year into \u201cworking days\u201d instead of \u201cdays.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If your company has a 70-hour week (7 days x 10 open-to-the-public hours per day) and you subtract 11 national holidays in the US, you end up with the equivalent of about 147 working days per year. At that rate, Giving Tuesday still promises to gives your organization 8 times the daily rate necessary to reach your goals. In a vacuum, of course.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

National data here are irrelevant to you. What is your <\/em>data telling you? Is Giving Tuesday worth the gimmick? Possibly not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Hopping on the over-solicitation bandwagon can make your donors sick and tired\u2026of\u00a0you.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

You should wonder about the cost of the Giving Tuesday return\u2014extra time spent, additional asks, and whatever actual costs you incur. And, given its extremely close proximity to any end-of-year campaign, might you raise that amount in December instead of November? Or are your people giving twice in two months? And how many times are they being asked during those months?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What happened to last year\u2019s donors? Are they likely to give this year, just on Giving Tuesday? Might they give more if you spent the time to have a relationship with them that was not transactional? Have you kept them abreast of what happened to their money after they gave it to you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you even know <\/em>what happened to their money after they gave it to you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I am biased. You probably need to know that I hate gimmickry in nonprofit fundraising. Arbitrary campaigns make me cringe. And by \u201carbitrary,\u201d that includes such ingrained campaigns such as \u201cYear-End,\u201d \u201cFiscal Year-End,\u201d \u201cGiving Tuesday,\u201d and \u201cGive Big\u201d (not to be confused with Giving Tuesday), which is another day of giving in April, at least in my state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All of these campaigns share the same issue. You ask the donor to give when it\u2019s most convenient for you.<\/em> At no time is there a personal relationship with the donor in which they are asked to give when it\u2019s most convenient for them.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dumb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do you want Safeway to charge you now, before you\u2019ve even shopped, because they\u2019re having cash flow problems? Or would you be insulted by that and only pay them after you shop?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which brings us to the ultimate in gimmickry in fundraising, the annual gala, a giant-sized, completely impersonal ask that goes on for months at a time (from committees to procurement to development to invitations to attendance to thank-you notes).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before you get all upset that I want to cancel your gala, think about these things:<\/p>\n\n\n\n