Dear Subscribers,

We are pleased to bring you the April issue of "Bright Ideas." This month, Cynthia Woolbright discusses the difficult issue of trustees who lack training and/or interest in the area of fundraising. Citing a benchmark study recently released by CASE and CIC, it is noted that “Only one percent of college leaders surveyed believe their board members are well-grounded in the fundamentals of fundraising.” This is a growing issue, particularly among smaller colleges, that merits all our attention. Our Q&A this month is with Mike Archibald, Vice President for University Advancement at St. Lawrence University, who addresses the question: What makes a good trustee? We think you will find his responses thoughtful and thought provoking.

In February we added a fun new feature to our newsletter: reading recommendations from our subscribers and contributors. We've received lots of input, as you'll see below. Remember, you are invited to share the title of any book, article, blog, etc. — it doesn't have to be strictly work-related—that you have recently enjoyed. Happy reading!

Again, we invite you to submit ideas for future articles. We want to know: what's on your mind? Please send your article ideas to: info@woolbrightgroup.com  

Best regards,

The Woolbright Group

Board Development: Raising Philanthropic Support
By Cynthia Woolbright

In a recently published survey “Advancing Small Colleges: A Benchmarking Survey Update,” (March 2008) from CASE and the Council of Independent Colleges (CIC), presidents reported unsatisfactory performance from trustees in regard to fundraising. Only one percent of presidents found boards to be well grounded in their development work. This is down from 13% in 1997-98.

A 2006 survey conducted by Maguire Associates with input from trustees from 1,082 colleges, found that only 14.5% of the respondents believed they were well prepared for service. The trustees rated themselves on a 1-5 scale at 3.5. While this may be a “balanced” perspective, they then rate their own fundraising experience at six of nine, or only 9.3% with such experience.

To prepare for two sessions at recent CASE district conferences on board development, trustees, presidents and chief advancement officers completed several surveys. The results revealed that 70% of the chief advancement officers surveyed do not staff the trustees committees; only 40% provide outside counsel; and just 14% of the CAOs attend such meetings.

From these surveys, we might conclude that board preparedness in raising philanthropic support for their colleges is sorely lacking. Such preparedness begins with the identification and recruitment of board members. The results of these surveys suggest that discussion around the critical responsibility of raising private support is not adequately discussed with potential members, nor is the chief advancement officer engaged or involved in a significant manner.

According to the project leader of the CASE/CIC survey, Wesley Willmer, vice president of university advancement at Biola University in La Mirada, California, suggests that presidents and development staff should provide training for board members around good fundraising practices.

Today's colleges, especially small, private liberal arts colleges, rely heavily on private support to meet their annual budgets. Thus, it is even more important that board members should understand, before accepting their positions, the expectations for their own giving and the manner in which they will be engaged in identifying and soliciting donors and prospects. It can no longer be acceptable for a potential board member to declare: “I will do anything but fundraising.” To fully accept the responsibilities of board service, members must be actively engaged in the development cycle – from identifying, cultivating, and soliciting to stewarding. How each member is engaged will vary; however, the understanding and willingness to participate is critical. Without it, boards will fail in their responsibilities to their institutions.

*  *  *

The Woolbright Group provides comprehensive consulting services in the areas of Board and staff development. For more information, please call Cynthia Woolbright at 585.787.0325, or e-mail us at info@woolbrightgroup.com.

What Makes a Good Trustee? Part 1
Q&A with Michael P. Archibald
Vice President for University Advancement St. Lawrence University

•  Tell us a little about the make-up of your Board of Trustees (number, who they are—parents, alumni, term of service, other)

St. Lawrence has 40 trustees and 17 emeriti (non voting) trustees. Within the 40, there are two non-alumni parents and four young alumni (graduates of the last decade, four positions specifically allocated for young alumni representation). Trustees serve a six-year term. Maybe 60-70 % serve two terms, and a few serve more than two terms. We don't have term limits but a rigorous trustee evaluation process after the first year and at the mid-point (3 years) of each term. The board elects trustees; we don't have a general alumni election of trustees.  

•  How would you define the role of your Board of Trustees?

First, and perhaps most critical, the St. Lawrence Board of Trustees recruits and manages the President. Beyond that, our trustee statement of commitment and responsibilities reads, “members of the Board of Trustees of St. Lawrence University serve as ultimate fiduciaries of the University in their oversight of institutional affairs in accord with the charter and bylaws of the University and as implemented through periodic statements of mission and purpose and institutional plans.” Later in the document, a critical addition reads, “Trustees should recognize that the board is a corporate body approving University policies and monitoring the implementation of those policies while deferring to the administration of the University for the management of daily business.” Our board has a very helpful saying that was introduced to us by a former Chair, E.B. Wilson '53, which is: “noses in, fingers out.”

•  In general, what do you see as the role of the board related to raising philanthropic support for their respective institutions?

I think our approach at St. Lawrence to this sensitive topic would apply well to many other non-profit boards. While obviously some trustees are more active in fund raising than others, it is made clear the role of every trustee is to:

1. Make the institution their top philanthropic priority during their term.

2. Give to capacity, and stretch.

3. Support the annual fund generously first before supporting restricted projects.

4. Encourage financial support from individuals and organizations in any way possible.

•  Please describe the specific requirements of your individual Board members.

In addition to philanthropy, this is what St. Lawrence's list would look like:

1. Dedication to and understanding of the institution and the liberal arts.

2. Regularly attend all meetings and plenary meetings of the board.

3. Actively participate through the board committee structure.

4. Promote the University favorably to alumni, potential applicants, donors and other friends within their communities and sphere of influence.  

5. Serve the interests of the institution as a whole, rather than a particular constituency interest.

6. Maintain confidentiality and avoid any personal conflicts of interest.  

7. Not speak publicly on behalf of the board or the University, allowing that role to be filled by the board chair and the president.  

•  In general, what do you think are the three biggest challenges (or issues) facing boards today?

There are many, but here are three:  

It takes a commitment from trustees to pay attention to critical and fast changing issues in higher education, for example: student loans, athletics, tuition costs and financing higher education, ratings, and tenure. Trustees must invest the time and energy necessary to stay abreast of many issues, and I worry some trustees at some institutions don't value this “education” enough.  

It is a challenge for trustees coming from the corporate world to adjust to the pace and culture of higher education, including for example a shared governance model with the faculty.

The best trustees are often those with the least time (they are busy effectively running other organizations). The ability to engage new trustees sufficiently early in the development of their leadership, while still retaining institutional continuity and a connection to history and culture, is a critical challenge for colleges and universities.

•  In your own experience, how has the board regularly evaluated itself? Its members? What is the process?

It is essential to have a strong trustee evaluation process in place, especially if your trustee bylaws don't include term limits.   We evaluate trustees (and in turn they evaluate their board experience) after the first and third years of each six-year term. The board chair and chair of the committee on trustees conducts these interviews jointly, and it has become an important mentoring tool for up and coming leaders on the board. In addition, our board goes through a periodic self-assessment as a trustee body, using the Association of Governing Boards (AGB) resources as an effective evaluation tool.  

•  How would you describe the ideal relationship between Board members and staff?  

Board members and staff have an essential partnership, but each must recognize his or her role in the relationship. A trustee must provide input and ideas, help to set and review goals, build a partnership with staff in establishing the vision for an institution or a function within it. The staff implements the program on the ground, using trustees as leverage to build relationships and to strengthen the donor base. The Presidents staff must be sure to keep the President informed of progress and issues; it is much better for the President to hear good or bad news from the staff than from trustees directly. Staff must also remember to recognize what drives the trustee/staff relationship; it is not a peer relationship and though we become close with the trustees with whom we work we must always remember the professional role that defines the relationship. Respecting these lines keeps roles clearly understood.  

•  In some cases, there may be instances whereby an ethical breach on the part of a Board member may occur. If this were to happen, how do you imagine it should be managed?

First, ideally trustees must surface the potential for these problems regularly and often; it's always easier to deal with them in the hypothetical. If a breach does happen, the board chair or another senior trustee should deal with it, damage must be assessed, and a plan is devised form there. There are some modest ethical breaches, lesson learned, from which trustees can recover and continue their service effectively. Other more serious breaches require immediate transparency and appropriate action. If the balance of the board sees ethical breaches remaining unaddressed, it can diminish overall board confidence and effectiveness.

•  Do you and/or your staff utilize any outside resources related to governance matters (i.e., websites, workshops, journals, blogs, consultants, etc.)?

We provide AGB (Association of Governing Boards) materials as part of new trustee orientation, and have used AGB resources several times in the last decade to help us with board self-assessment issues. New presidents and board chairs attend the AGB board/presidents seminar; trustees all have subscriptions to the Chronicle of Higher Education; and finally we're fortunate to have a former board chair E.B. Wilson '53 as one of AGB's top consultants.  

•  Recently, a survey by CASE (Council for the Advancement and Support of Education) and CIC (Council of Independent Colleges) reported their findings from small and mid-size American colleges. It was reported that only one percent of college leaders believe their boards are well grounded in the basics of fundraising. To what to you attribute such results? What role might Chief Advancement Officers play in educating board members? What steps have you taken to address this topic with members of your board?

I'd agree that very few trustees enter their trustee experience sufficiently informed on fund raising matters, but what they do have is the devotion, intelligence, energy, and relationships necessary to ramp up their effectiveness quickly. The key is to spend time training trustees in the art and the science of fund raising. A strong trustee orientation program, and an active volunteer role in your Campaign or fund raising program, can make this possible. Of our forty trustees, frankly probably 25-50 % of them are engaged almost every week in some fund raising matter, and that is plenty. For the others, I want them to be advocates for philanthropy to our institution when they can but every trustee does not have to list fund raising as their number one expertise. I'd rather work closely with a manageable number of trustees who love raising money for St. Lawrence, who join the staff and the President in the noble and prideful work we do for our institutions. Ultimately they find the experience wonderfully enriching because they see the difference they can make when they understand what to do and how to do it.

Discussion Forum Thorny Issues: Solutions to Your Most Perplexing Problems

As fundraising professionals, we are often faced with challenging issues that can consume a disproportionate amount of time and energy. Sometimes these are the issues of our “real” work; however the way in which our time is spent may not be the most productive. Beginning in this issue of Bright Ideas, we will discuss some of the concerns shared by many of our colleagues. This column is intended as a forum for discussion. We invite your input-- whether you would like to submit a topic for discussion, share an experience, or propose a solution that worked for you.  

This month, we'll start with two issues about which we've heard quite a lot in recent months: 1) presidents/heads of school who don't—or won't—make the final ask, and 2) trustees who push for campaign goals that exceed recommendations from feasibility studies.  

The comments that follow are not the defining solutions to these problems. We want to hear from you! Please post your comments, solutions, or new topic ideas to us at: info@woolbrightgroup.com

Be assured we will only post your confidential comments (no names, just the text of your recommendations!).

1. Presidents/heads of school who won't make “the ask” for the gift.

Proposed Solution

• While this is challenging, there are ways to collaborate including the president/head making the case for support, while a vice president or trustee makes the actual ask. If the pre-solicitation visit is completed well, the actual ask comes much more naturally. It's this preparatory phase that is often not handled as effectively as possible. For the vice president to set the solicitation visit, it is imperative that he/she ask the prospective donor if this is the time for the president/head to visit, knowing that the amount has been previously discussed.

It is essential that the strategic questions be asked in advance, so that it is mutually understood by both president/head and donor when the solicitation will take place. Making the move to answering the 4Rs (including right amount, time, project and solicitor) is key to a successful solicitation.

• Another approach also requires sound preparation wherein, the president/head receives a monthly call/note list of a select group of donors to be reached, and it includes any strategic questions to be asked/answered. Again, this pre-solicitation strategy will assist in the actual solicitation, including enhancing the comfort level of the president/head ---and the donor!

Trustees who push for campaign goals that exceed recommendations from feasibility studies.

Proposed Solution

• Conducting a board readiness survey is one of the best strategies to help board members recognize where the institution is in their overall readiness for a campaign. (Check AGB's Comprehensive Campaigns, 2000, publication).

Also, it is recommended to benchmark with other institutions on campaigns, and specifically, to inquire about the average/mean gift of board members to their respective campaign, and what percentage these gifts represent relative to the overall campaign goal.

In many cases, this can be an eye-opener for boards that want to push ahead without the philanthropic support to sustain such a campaign (unless it will all come from them). However, that is not always good either. There must be a balance in gifts from board members and all other donors.

*  *  *

What are your thorny issues? Let us know and we will include it in the next issue of Bright Ideas.

The Reading File: Reader’s Recommendations and Reviews

Welcome to The Reading File, a regular feature of Bright Ideas where our readers share their reading recommendations. We invite you to share the title of something you found worthwhile. It doesn't have to be a book and it doesn't have to be strictly work related! Feel free to submit just the basics (title, author), or include a brief review. We'd love to hear from you–thank you in advance for your participation!

Faith and Politics after the Religious Right
By E.J. Dionne

The book purports to demonstrate that “the end of the Religious Right doesn't signal the decline of evangelical Christianity but rather its disentanglement from a political machine that sold it out to a narrow electoral agenda.”  

I also just dug out my copy of “John Adams,” by David McCullough. The new HBO series enticed me to begin re-reading this wonderful book.

Bob Sullivan
Vice President for University Development
The Catholic University of America

---

Made to Stick
By Chip Heath and Dan Heath

The Heaths identify six components of “stickiness” (Success: simple, unexpected, concrete, credible, emotional, story) as well as some of the obstacles that get in our way of creating compelling and memorable messages, including the Curse of Knowledge. This book provides valuable insight for anyone—from public relations and donor relations staff to gift officers and institutional leadership.

Joanne Singh
Associate Vice President for Development
Berea College

---

The Hungry Ocean: A Swordboat Captain's Journey
By Linda Greenlaw

Greenlaw is known best as the captain of the Hannah Boden, sister ship to the Andrea Gail, that was immortalized in the book and movie “The Perfect Storm.” Greenlaw offers real-life adventures, oftentimes with historic references.

Unleash Your Dreams: Tame Your Hidden Fears and Live the Life You Were Meant to Live
By Michael E. Silverman

Strategies for recognizing and overcoming latent fears about success, failure, mediocrity. Silverman's strategies are provided with scientific reasoning and a sure, sensitive clinical/experientially based touch.

Robert M. Caldwell
Assistant Head of School
Advancement & External Relations
Hebron Academy