Not only did the Presidents club dinner highlight inappropriate behavior by men against women generally, it also raised the more specific question of how fundraisers respond to such behaviour by donors. Heather McGinness says we need to start this conversation.
The can of worms opened at the annual Presidents Club dinner might be bigger than we think. Ian MacQuillin explores some of the questions raised.
American blogger and commentator on the nonprofit sector Vu Le kicked off a small storm earlier this year when he challenged the concept of donor-centred fundraising. Critical Fundraising collates some or the debate engendered by Vu Le’s arguments.
Responding to the debate around donorcentrism, Ashley Scott asks whether fundraisers should look to anthropology to better understand what donorcentrism means, and how it could generate completely new insights into their donors.
‘Donorcentric’ fundraising could claim to be the dominant philosophy in fundraising. But, asks Ian MacQuillin, can anyone actually describe what it really is?
In the first part of this blog, Ian MacQuillin argued many fundraisers don’t have a consistent idea of what they mean by ‘donorcentric’ fundraising. In part 2, he explores some of the issues this can lead to.
Each month, the Critical Fundraising blog presents a digest of the best fundraising-related blogs and articles that have adopted a critical fundraising mode of thought. Inclusion in this digest does not indicate that Rogare agrees with any arguments presented, only…
If it’s beneficiaries, rather than donors, who are actually charities’ ‘consumers’, Ian MacQuillin asks if this changes how fundraising ought to be regulated.
Fundraising regulation is often predicated on the assumption that donors require the same degree of ‘protection’ as consumers. In the first of a two-part blog, Ian MacQuillin argues that it’s beneficiaries, not donors, who are a charity’s true consumers