In the face of a “generational time bomb”, the recent ‘Tomorrow’s Donor, Today’ research challenges fundraising norms and advocates for radical changes. However, Giles Pegram takes issue with the research’s fundamental assumption, and asks if it risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
There couldn’t be a more significant and existential issue faced by all fundraisers as how will donors act and behave in the future. And if we can work that out, we maximise our chances of being able to engage with them now.
So I welcome the new two-part research series from the GOOD Agency, Eden Stanley and the Chartered Institute of Fundraising that’s aptly entitled Tomorrow’s Donor, Today. You can download the report here, and read a news item about it in Third Sector here.
The report starts by pointing out that the number of people giving to charity continues to decline, with the added challenge that younger people are giving less, something the report describes as a “generational time bomb”.
In trying to avoid this time bomb going off, the research seeks to answer two “burning questions”:
- What does ‘doing good’ look like for 18-50s? (The research comprised qualitive interviews among 26 people aged 18-50, none of whom, incidentally, had donated in the previous three months.)
- And how can charities tap into this to generate future income?
And in answering these questions, the researchers say they have “left research clichés behind”, and focused on “actionable findings that will benefit the entire sector”.
So, a pretty ambitious goal they have set themselves. And some of the findings and recommendations are revolutionary, as befits such an ambitious goal.
One key finding is that the people they interviewed considered charities to be ‘old fashioned’, and outdated, and fundraising as monotonous, uninspiring, cheesy and poor quality.
To engage with the people who think like this, the Tomorrow’s Donors, Today report offers up the idea that charities should ‘productise their knowledge’ in ways that they can then provide to donors in return for their donations
As Rogare director Ian MacQuillin argued in Third Sector, this changes the notion of philanthropy from one of giving in which a warm glow is a by-product of making a donation, to one in which the receipt of some kind of reward is the whole point. Ian says it’s been changed into a market exchange in which the ‘warm glow’ is actually being offered for sale – it’s no longer philanthropy, and neither is selling the warm glow fundraising any more.
“This might well be the future that we should all embrace,” Ian concludes. “I’ve got to be honest though. The thought of it makes me shiver a bit.”
Me too.
Are people’s attitudes now a reliable guide to what they will become?
There is so much of value in this report. The qualitative views, even of only 26 people, should be listened to very carefully. They are real, interesting and relevant.
But there is one fundamental assumption underpinning this research that I would challenge. It is that people’s feelings now will continue into the future. There is no evidence to support this. Indeed, the evidence is against it.
Let’s start with politics. In Britain, people move to the right as they grow older. Age is a strong predictor of how someone will vote in an election. This is not a recent phenomenon.
Then let’s turn to giving. We know that the way people feel, think and act re their charitable support changes as they get older. CAF’s UK Giving Report 2023 shows that more people aged over 45 donated to charity than people aged 16-24 (65 per cent compared to 42 per cent). And, although only over one year, this report seems to show that the gulf between younger and older is growing, because the comparable figures in the 2022 report were 62 per cent of 44 per cent.
The ‘generational time bomb’ referred to – the differences in approach to charity between baby boomers, Gen X, Millennials, Gen Z and, in another 20 years or so, Gen Alpha – will be a factor, but isn’t the whole answer. We have seen these age-related approaches to philanthropy 2,000 years ago, in biblical times, in the 16th century when Troyes Cathedral was re-built, and in the 1960s when I started my fundraising career: People start their philanthropy and charity support when they’re older.
‘The first place to look for ‘Tomorrow’s Donor, Today’ is among 50-year-olds with the best part of another half century to both live and give.’
It seems unsurprising that younger generations will view traditional forms of charity as old-fashioned. Indeed, a youthful idealist might well think that many of the functions of the third sector could and should be provided by the state. What is more, young people’s priorities are more likely to be focused on immediate needs or personal development. However, we know that as individuals progress through life stages and potentially achieve more stability, they may become more open to philanthropy and giving back to society.
Who tomorrow’s donors really will be?
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs suggests that once basic needs are met, individuals seek higher-level needs such as esteem, recognition and status, and, after that, love, friendship and intimacy.
But the highest level, self-actualisation – the ‘desire to be the most that one can be’, or, in Maslow’s own words, the desire to “become everything one is capable of becoming” (you can find that quote on p382 of Maslow’s original 1943 paper) – is the need that will drive many people’s desire to be truly philanthropic. And it is likely to be stronger only once someone is on the housing ladder and has the wherewithal to bring up a family.
I am not suggesting this is absolute, just relative.
It’s also worth considering that societal trends and values can evolve, too. While younger generations may express scepticism or exhibit different preferences now, these attitudes will be shaped by social norms over time.
None of this means that we take their future support for granted. Offering younger donors innovative, transactional benefits could be a step towards bridging the gap. Finding ways to connect with younger donors on a personal level and demonstrating the tangible impact of their contributions may help cultivate philanthropic behaviour and foster a culture of giving.
‘The ‘generational time bomb’ will be a factor, but isn’t the whole answer. We have seen these age-related approaches to philanthropy before. People start their philanthropy and charity support when they’re older.’
This report is extremely interesting and needs to be taken seriously. It is a picture of the views of charity, and fundraising, of one cohort of a younger age group, today. But evidence suggests that those views will change as they grow into the age range of typical charity donors.
Meanwhile…
A healthy 50-year-old, having entered the group of (historically) philanthropic individuals, has a life expectancy of 97½ years. That’s another 47½ years. (Check our own life expectancy here.)
This might be where our greatest potential lies – 50-year-olds with nearly half their lives ahead of them.
Personally, I would like to see some thorough and comprehensive research analysing these people – their perceptions of charities and fundraising, their giving intentions, and what would inspire them to give more.
So, while the researchers should continue with rigour their research into the views of 18-50-year-olds towards philanthropy, charity, giving and their own intentions, I would say that the first place to look for ‘Tomorrow’s Donor, Today’ is among 50-year-olds with the best part of another half century to both live and give.
The very real danger of a self-fulfilling prophesy
The researchers of this report posit that the upcoming generation of donors requires a transformation of fundraising from a selfless act of philanthropy into a transactional market exchange.
In response, organisations should adapt their thinking, structures, activities, training, and resource allocation to align with this new preference.
However, there is no reason to think that, as these donors age and mature, they, like previous generations, won’t revert to the traditional model of charitable giving, rendering the any such changes unnecessary. Unfortunately, by the time this happens, the altered approach persists, resulting in a decline in funds raised through traditional fundraising methods.
And fundraisers will interpret that by saying say they were right all along, and that donors have changed their attitude and approach to making the world a better place by giving money – which, of course, they won’t have done.
It will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. And there is a very real danger that we will make it come true.
- Giles Pegram CBE is a consultant who has been a member of the fundraising profession for more than 50 years, including 31 as director of fundraising at NSPCC. He was vice chair of the Commission on the Donor Experience and is a holder of the CIoF’s Lifetime Contribution Award. Visit Giles’ website.
