Your board has committed hours to creating the ideal vision for your museum. Your leaders are bursting with new and exciting ideas for programs and initiatives. But then the inevitable question arises- how are you going to pay for it?

Fundraising is increasingly a major source of revenue for museums, and museum administrators are working hard to put the philanthropy of their communities to good use. Unfortunately, even with the best intentions, sometimes gifts fall through the cracks. No museum is immune to the occasional mistake while fundraising, but getting it right can make a tremendous difference in your year-end results.

Many museums have just closed their fiscal-year-end books, so MTA thought this would be a good opportunity to provide strategies to avoid traps as 2018 budgets begin.

In the article below, learn about common faux pas made by even the most successful museums, and discover strategies for recovering from these errors as well as tips for avoiding them altogether.

In a perfect world, every staff member would have the training, resources and time they need to independently and accurately solicit, record and acknowledge each gift to your museum. In reality, administrators are human and can make mistakes. As frustrating as these errors may be, misspelled names, solicitations to donors who have passed and acknowledgements to the wrong giving entity will all happen at some point. Gracious and expedient corrections can help to reassure donors that mistakes will not be repeated.

It is, however, better to avoid these administrative errors altogether. Development committee oversight and personalized solicitations from museum leaders can help. While institutional databases are now charged with the challenge of keeping track of donors, members of the Board can use their connections to keep records up-to-date. Nonetheless, it is important to invest in good donor management software to ensure that giving entities are kept distinct: individuals, donor-advised funds, corporations and foundations can be linked when merited. Good software enables easy access to records. Additionally, providing thorough staff training can ensure administrators are well versed in the proper acknowledgment protocols for each type of gift.

One more tip: I have found that reviewing each solicitation before signing it is a good way to keep track of the giving trends of my high-level donors. Reviewing these appeals can be an opportunity to catch changes that my staff may not know about before mailings are sent, and sometimes are a way for me to keep up-to-date too. Finally, I often add a personal handwritten message to each donor.

Maintaining positive relationships with your donors is one of the most rewarding ways to secure gifts for the future. Building and sustaining relationships with individuals and foundations can mean a great deal of hard work, but alienating these donors through inaction often comes at a heavy cost. That personal connection should start from the first solicitation and continue long after the first gift.

With the increase and improvement of databases and communication methods, donors receive hundreds of requests every year. Do your research; does the donor have a history of giving to arts & cultural organizations? (Click HERE to read more about prospect research). Many of these asks are unsolicited, meaning that a successful request must stand out from the crowd. It is better to cold-call someone than to inundate them with impersonal mailings and emails. Better yet, ask a board member with or without a connection to a giving entity to pick up the phone. In either scenario, invite the prospect to your museum to see programs first hand before making the ask.

Once the initial gift is secured, fundraisers cannot become complacent. The development staff and committee may wrongfully assume that a major donor will give their standard annual gift without a personal solicitation, which can risk alienating a supporter. It is important to consistently demonstrate to donors how much you value their relationship. Invite them on a behind the scenes tour of the museum or to a lecture. Again, personalize these annual appeals and pick-up the phone and say THANK YOU.

So the gift is secured. Your donor is excited about the museum’s mission and has made a multi-year pledge to support your latest project.

Then, the unthinkable happens. Maybe there is a leadership change, or a maintenance emergency. Maybe the program just wasn’t working. For whatever reason, the project is inevitably cancelled, and your relationship with that donor is put at risk.

It is often tempting to silence communications in times of uncertainty or crisis, but keeping quiet makes it increasingly likely that the donor will hear about the change from another source. A face-to-face meeting with the donor is the best approach here, and can provide reassurance at the solidity of the museum. No matter the cause of the change, appearing confident that the museum made the right decision, soliciting advice and feedback from the donor and being prepared with new ideas for use of their gift can reinforce faith in the museum leadership’s ability to achieve its mission.

A donor has offered your museum a part of their collection. Your curator supports the gift, but your conservator realizes that there will be significant expense to prepare the objects for display. Meanwhile, the donor is used to seeing the objects in their home, and sees his or her gift as ready for installation. Months pass, and the donor is disappointed not to see their collection on view. Rather than leave the donor feeling like their gift was inadequate or underappreciated, the museum could have been honest in creating a reasonable timetable for display within the Conservation Department’s existing budget, or asked for additional monetary support to conserve these objects.

We have all heard the maxim before: It isn’t definite until it’s in writing. I have heard from many museums with the following experience: the museum receives a verbal pledge from the donor, but fails to create a contract in writing. The donor passes away in the interim and the children have no record of the gift. Naturally, the best way to keep these situations from happening is to have the supporting data on hand. Unfortunately there isn’t much to be done without that signed agreement, though your museum may have an opportunity to build a relationship with a new generation of potential donors. Instead of mourning the loss of the gift, turn lemons into lemonade by showing the children their parent’s vision and passion.

The same rules apply when cultivating a new board member. Financial expectations need to be specifically addressed upfront during the cultivation process. Many successful museums share their Board Contract that enumerates these expectations with board candidates, so there is no misunderstanding down the road. With clear giving expectations, boards can avoid alienating their newest members at that crucial time.

Each new fiscal year presents new opportunities and challenges for museums across the Americas. Do you have any strategies for avoiding or recovering from Fundraising Faux Pas? Share them in the comment section below!

That was the question Keynote Speaker Paul G. Schervish, Director, Center on Wealth and Philanthropy, Boston College posed to attendees at MTA's Spring forum at the North Carolina Museum of Art. He cited the dental model - "floss or die" and "drill, fill and bill" give donors the sense of not giving enough, not giving at the right time or giving to the wrong projects. He advocated that museums invoke another model of mobilizing donors based on experiences and using an Inclination/invitation model." Ask, don't tell - is there anything you want to do that meets the true needs of others, that you wish to do that uses your interests, talents and competencies or that allows you to identify to with the fate of others as if they were members of your family?"
           
What are the experiences that lead you to wanting to make this donation? TMM- tell me more.

Schervish cited 5 possible approaches to donors:

1. Identification with the Museum: Skip selflessness and Altruism and discuss mutual benefits for your donor and your museum. 
   
2. Gratitude: Holding biographical conversations can help potential donors to follow their emotional connection to the museum.
3. Hyper-Agency: Appeal to a donor's ability to make a substantial gift that single-handedly achieves one of your museum's priorities. 
4. Build an Experience: Focus the donor on his or her ability to provide a mutually enriching experience for others. 
5. Satisfaction/Happiness: The draw of these qualities is rich, enduring and potent.
   

​That was the question Keynote Speaker Paul G. Schervish, Director, Center on Wealth and Philanthropy, Boston College posed to attendees at MTA's Spring forum at the North Carolina Museum of Art. He cited the dental model - "floss or die" and "drill, fill and bill" give donors the sense of not giving enough, not giving at the right time or giving to the wrong projects. He advocated that museums invoke another model of mobilizing donors based on experiences and using an Inclination/invitation model." Ask, don't tell - is there anything you want to do that meets the true needs of others, that you wish to do that uses your interests, talents and competencies or that allows you to identify to with the fate of others as if they were members of your family?"
What are the experiences that lead you to wanting to make this donation? TMM- tell me more.
Schervish cited 5 possible approaches to donors:
1 - Identification with the Museum: Skip selflessness and Altruism and discuss mutual benefits for your donor and your museum.
2 - Gratitude: Holding biographical conversations can help potential donors to follow their emotional connection to the museum.
3 - Hyper-Agency: Appeal to a donor's ability to make a substantial gift that single-handedly achieves one of your museum's priorities.
4 - Build an Experience: Focus the donor on his or her ability to provide a mutually enriching experience for others.
5 - Satisfaction/Happiness: The draw of these qualities is rich, enduring and potent.

The Legal Responsibility of Trustees

Marc Broderick of US Trust cited that the legal responsibilities of Board members have changed greatly over the last 15 years. Acts such as Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank stress that today’s trustees are expected to have a level of competence and to exercise reasonable care in making decisions. In addition, trustees must be knowledgeable about state and local laws, IRS Code, Fair Labor Standards, anti-discrimination laws and Investor Act UPMIFA. Museums need to articulate guidelines for serving on the board and to familiarize the members with its mission, strategic plan and regular presentation of financial reports. A well-organized Board Orientation program would also include a review of the museum’s by-laws, internal policies and procedures and staff roles and responsibilities.

Building an Effective University Museum Advisory Board

Our Four-University-Director panel concluded that their role required “Secretary of State level diplomacy”. University Directors have to navigate among a variety of constituencies: National Advisory Board, University Advisory Board, Student Advisory Board and Community Advisory Board. Additionally, the issue of development can be highly political, and ownership of donors can be hotly contested. However, a university museum also needs to celebrate the association and the support that the university development operations provide. One director cited the heartache of having to negotiate university development priorities versus museum priorities with donors. Changes of university Presidents are brutal and make this an extremely complex position.
When asked about the best qualities of an Advisory Board member, one director stated;

Another panelist commented that Advisory Boards do not have fiduciary responsibility, but he encourages them to,"act as if they do." The best board members get into a hybrid sense of responsibility and ownership of the museum. People who can manage that "split personality" are the most effective Board Members and have the maturity to go beyond their personal interest, "even though it's not their thing".
​
Executive Leadership Change

Marilyn Hoffman, Principal, Museum Search & Reference led our panel on Executive Leadership Change. Key steps to successful search were drawn from the recent executive transitions at The Nasher Museum at Duke University and The Chrysler Museumin Norfolk, VA. Nasher was only 10 years old and went through a change from its inaugural director. Having a strategic plan in place was helpful; The Search Co. was seeking a candidate who understood the importance of connection to the local Durham and university community, who could handle that complexity of national and international Advisory Board members and had fundraising skills to help complete Duke’s $3.2 billion campaign.

With a long-standing Director retiring, the Chrysler board started with a 2-3 month visioning process to identify “who we were and where we wanted to go.” An outside consultant interviewed 100 stakeholders. The Search Committee traveled to other museums for ideas as well. The Committee determined that the most important candidate qualities were the abilities to project leadership and to commanded respect during personal meetings with the Committee.
Chrysler used a Predictive Index Survey for its finalists, but wouldn't use it again. "It was difficult to interpret and candidates resented the tests as being developed for corporate sector and not reflective of a museum director’s job.” All agreed that the best information comes from reference conversations- people often know who to ask for necessary information. Search Firms can be helpful with questions to ask to get into deeper issues. One of the key challenges is maintaining confidentiality.

Onboarding of a new Director is the final component of a successful transition process. All members of the discussion stressed the need for introductions to the community via board-led dinners, one on one meetings and more public events as members are curious and eager to meet the new Director. One audience member recommended that a Transition Committee be formed to orchestrate this process separate from the Search Committee and that a 1 year calendar of events be created.

Lessons in Leadership

Three experienced Board Chairs shared their perspectives on qualities needed to run a board, how to engage board members, and what makes a board member effective. They determined that a good board leader creates an atmosphere of openness on the Board and with the director. He or she goes into a Board meeting knowing what outcomes he or she wants but also listens, makes each member feel valued, and remembers that they are volunteers with other lives and Boards. Effective Board Leaders form a relationship of trust between the Director and Board. Another key lesson;

​Qualities of an ideal Board member – One board Chair cited the 3 Gs – “give it, get it or get off" and added a 4th- "give until it hurts". Make the museum your priority. Not showing up at board meetings is demoralizing to other board members. 100% Board participation in giving is crucial. Another panelist explained:

​This panel also brought up several tips on how to keep board member engaged and enthusiastic. Make sure board meetings are not just business by presenting components of the museum to each meeting. In other words, keep educating! Meeting agendas should demonstrate that board leadership has "as much regard for our ideas as for our pocketbooks," so do things that appeal to their imaginations and brains. Never allow a board member to feel meetings are a wasted effort - they have an intellectual contribution to make.