Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Using "natural philanthropy" in fundraising

218 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Charitable giving is not a modern invention of the industrialized world. It is a natural behavior as old as humankind. In this presentation, Professor James reviews scientific research from a range of disciplines to uncover the natural origins of philanthropy and translates these scientific concepts into effective fundraising strategies. Be prepared to see how theory and science can produce powerful, practical, real-world fundraising success.

  • Acne No More! Cure your acne, end the breakouts and regain your natural inner balance.. Guaranteed! -- Discover how Mike Walden has taught thousands of people to achieve acne freedom faster than they ever thought possible.. Even if you've never succeeded at curing your acne before.. Right here you've found the clear skin success system you've been looking for! ♣♣♣ https://tinyurl.com/ybbtmvh8
       Antworten 
    Sind Sie sicher, dass Sie …  Ja  Nein
    Ihre Nachricht erscheint hier
  • Did You Get Dumped? Do you still want him back? If you act now, I can help you. ♥♥♥ http://goo.gl/FXTq7P
       Antworten 
    Sind Sie sicher, dass Sie …  Ja  Nein
    Ihre Nachricht erscheint hier

Using "natural philanthropy" in fundraising

  1. 1. Natural Philanthropy How the natural origins of donor motivations drive powerful fundraising Professor Russell James III Texas Tech University complete scientific journal article available at https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201750
  2. 2. How do you raise major gifts?
  3. 3. How do you raise major gifts? The standard answer…
  4. 4. How do you raise major gifts? The standard answer… Math
  5. 5. How do you raise major gifts? The standard answer… MathA major gift can be closed after 9 meaningful contacts across 6 months to two years. With a 1/3 ask success rate getting 6 new major gifts requires 3 x 9 x 6 = 162 meaningful contacts.
  6. 6. How do you raise major gifts? The standard answer… MathOK, but the math works for some projects, some fundraisers, and some donors but not others.
  7. 7. How do you raise major gifts? The standard answer… MathOK, but the math works for some projects, some fundraisers, and some donors but not others. Why?
  8. 8. No/low quality ask + no relationship no gifts Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship (with organization/cause/other supporters) Quality ask + no/low quality relationship minor gifts No/low quality ask + quality relationship minor gifts Quality ask + quality relationship major gifts
  9. 9. But, what how do we define, understand, and achieve quality asks and relationships? Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship (with organization/cause/other supporters)
  10. 10. But, what how do we define, understand, and achieve quality asks and relationships? Need Quality Ask + Quality Relationship (with organization/cause/other supporters) By exploring the natural origins of philanthropy
  11. 11. “This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill—the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill—you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.”
  12. 12. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model 2. Natural origins and experimental results underlying the model 3. Using natural philanthropy to build quality relationships and asks Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives
  13. 13. We will get to specific do’s and don’ts but, first, we start with theory
  14. 14. We will get to… EAT THIS NOT THAT!
  15. 15. But first, we need to learn…
  16. 16. Why theory first?
  17. 17. • Can fit new or special circumstances • Works even where results aren’t instant • Allows you to build your own applications Theory based strategies are more flexible than a list of do’s and don’ts
  18. 18. A model of charitable decisions: Let’s start simple
  19. 19. Agree to make a gift Refuse to make a gift Yes No
  20. 20. Agree to make a gift Refuse to make a gift Avoid the giving decision Avoid Yes No
  21. 21. Agree to make a gift Refuse to make a gift Avoid the giving decision Avoid Yes No You have to ask University alumni whose names appeared earlier in the alphabet were more likely to be called with a phone solicitation and, consequently, were more likely to make gifts to the university Meer, J., and H. S. Rosen. 2011. “The ABCs of Charitable Solicitation.” Journal of Public Economics, 95 (5): 363-371.
  22. 22. Choice is based upon the impact of each option… Avoid Yes No Impact
  23. 23. Avoid Yes No Impact Benefitto recipient
  24. 24. Altruism Avoid Yes No Impact Benefitto recipient
  25. 25. Altruism Avoid Yes No ImpactBenefittodonor
  26. 26. Altruism Reciprocity Avoid Yes No ImpactBenefittodonor
  27. 27. Costtodonor Altruism Reciprocity Avoid Yes No Impact
  28. 28. CosttodonorPossessions Altruism Reciprocity Avoid Yes No Impact
  29. 29. Costtodonor Benefittorecipient Benefittodonor So, we just add up the costs and benefits and choose. Instead we use… Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Avoid Yes No Impact Except, we don’t use one of these to calculate impact.
  30. 30. one of these: Consequently, calculating impact is not just a simple mathematical process Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Avoid Yes No Impact
  31. 31. Tangibility In experiments, presenting giving and sharing opportunities in naturalistic, concrete, visualizable forms, such as a story or narrative, increases emotional helping or reciprocity responses Dickert, S., and P. Slovic. 2009. “Attentional Mechanisms in the Generation of Sympathy.” Judgment and Decision Making, 4 (4): 297-306. Schank, Roger C., and R. P. Abelson. 1995. “Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story.” In: Robert S. Wyer, Jr (ed) Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story. Hillsdale, NJ. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1-85. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes NoBehavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data
  32. 32. With each factor there is • a surface version, critical for smaller gifts • a deeper version, critical for major gifts Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No
  33. 33. Direct altruism Giving to support a beneficiary Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Direct
  34. 34. Code altruism Giving to support a code of behavior or set of values Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Direct Code
  35. 35. Transactional reciprocity The conditional transfer of resources Can come from recipients, organizations representing recipients, government, other supporters, or creation of a shared good used by the donor Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional
  36. 36. Friend/family reciprocity A mutual expectation of, to some degree, unconditional aid Relationship vs. quid pro quo with recipients, organizations, or other supporters Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family
  37. 37. Acts of direct or code altruism can also signal to observers that the donor is a high quality partner for future reciprocity relationships by signaling wealth or shared support of beneficiaries and important behavioral codes Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family
  38. 38. Typical gifts come from disposable income Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Income
  39. 39. Typical gifts come from disposable income Major gifts come from wealth Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income
  40. 40. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model 2. Natural origins and experimental results underlying the model 3. Using natural philanthropy to build quality relationships and asks Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  41. 41. c < rb where c is the cost to the donor, b is the benefit to the recipient, and r is the genetic similarity between the donor and recipient r=1/2 r=0 r=1/6 r=1/3 Hamilton (1964) proposed direct altruistic transfers improve inclusive genetic fitness when Hamilton, W. D. (1964) The Genetical Evolution of Social Behaviour. II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7 (1): 17-52. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  42. 42. Transfers are preferred when the recipient is relatively needy, as this indicates high recipient benefit, b, relative to donor cost, c c < rb Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  43. 43. But gifts motivated by cheap impact [high recipient benefit, b, relative to donor cost, c] will be smaller because the need is easily met c < rb Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  44. 44. Motivation from recipient similarity, r, is not limited to small gifts. Similarity in recipient location, behavior, personality, and physical appearance increases altruistic sharing (and also predicts genetic similarity). c < rbRushton, J. P. 1989. “Genetic Similarity, Human Altruism, and Group Selection.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12: 503-559. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  45. 45. But, the power of similarity goes beyond genetic factors. People are more willing to comply with a request when the requester shares a birthday, a first name, or fingerprint similarities Burger, J. M., Messian, N., Patel, S., del Prado, A., and Anderson, C. 2004. “What a Coincidence! The Effects of Incidental Similarity on Compliance.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30 (1): 35-43. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  46. 46. University alumni are more likely to give to a student solicitor who shares a similar field of study or first letter of the first name Bekkers, R. 2010. “George Gives to Geology Jane: The Name Letter Effect and Incidental Similarity Cues in Fundraising.” International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 15 (2): 172-180. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  47. 47. r=1/2 r=0 r=1/6 r=1/3 An individual may also benefit others through support of a code of behavior that improves group outcomes Don’t kill Gintis, H. 2003. “The Hitchhiker's Guide to Altruism: Gene-Culture Coevolution, and The Internalization of Norms.” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 220 (4): 407-418. Gintis, H. (2000) Strong Reciprocity and Human Sociality. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 206 (2): 169-179. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  48. 48. Code support may be expressed by costly rewarding of code followers, costly punishment of code violators, Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  49. 49. and personally internalizing or causing others to internalize a code (i.e., follow the code in the absence of punishment or reward) Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  50. 50. Reminders can increase attention to supporting a code Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  51. 51. Simply reminding people of the concept of love by incidentally displaying the word increases charitable donations Guéguen, N., and L. Lamy. 2011. “The Effect of the Word ‘Love’ on Compliance to a Request for Humanitarian Aid: An Evaluation in A Field Setting.” Social Influence, 6 (4): 249-258. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  52. 52. Priming participants with religious words leads to increased generosity in experimental games Shariff, A. F., and A. Norenzayan. 2007. “God Is Watching You Priming God Concepts Increases Prosocial Behavior in an Anonymous Economic Game.” Psychological Science, 18 (9): 803-809. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  53. 53. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct Code James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Code violations (guilt) also act as reminders. Combining a charitable gift with a product is more effective for guilty products (e.g., a hot fudge sundae or chocolate truffles), than for necessity products (e.g., a box of laundry detergent or a spiral notebook). Strahilevitz, M., and J. G. Myers. 1998. “Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell.” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4): 434-446.
  54. 54. Transactional reciprocity The conditional transfer of resources r=1/2 r=0 r=1/6 r=1/3 Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Purely transactional gifts generate smaller net transfers as they are viewed from a market/exchange mindset
  55. 55. Friend/family reciprocity A mutual expectation of, to some degree, unconditional aid r=1/2 r=0 r=1/6 r=1/3 As need arises As need arises Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  56. 56. In a natural context, mutual “friendship insurance” that generates transactionally unjustified support in a crisis can be more important to survival than simple exchange transactions Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  57. 57. Survival impact from mutual friendship insurance (transactionally unjustified support during crisis or social conflict) has been documented in chimpanzees… Fraser, O.N., G. Schino, and F. Aureli. 2008. “Components of Relationship Quality in Chimpanzees.” Ethology 114: 834-843. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  58. 58. …macaques… Massen, J. J. M. 2010. “'Friendship' in Macaques. Economics and Emotions.” PhD thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  59. 59. …and even ravens Fraser, O.N. and T. Bugnyar. 2010. “The Quality of Social Relationships in Ravens.” Animal Behavior 79: 927-933. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  60. 60. “For hunter-gatherers, illness, injury, bad luck in foraging, or the inability to resist an attack by social antagonists would all have been frequent reversals of fortune with a major selective impact. The ability to attract assistance during such threatening reversals in welfare, where the absence of help might be deadly” would have been critical to survival. Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: p.132. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  61. 61. Friendship insurance “may well have had far more significant selective consequences than the ability to cultivate social exchange relationships that promote marginal increases in returns during times when one is healthy, safe, and well-fed” Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: p.132. Reciprocity Friend/Family Transactional Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Reciprocity >
  62. 62. Although receiving the benefits of friendship insurance was critical, fulfilling the obligations was costly Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  63. 63. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Thus accurately ascertaining a partner as a “true” friend with the ability and willingness to deliver in a crisis was an important and difficult task central to survival probability
  64. 64. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Similarly, projecting oneself as a capable and “true” friend rather than a “fair weather” friend in advance of a crisis was critical
  65. 65. Receiving mutual friendship insurance is critical, but providing it is costly The key survival challenge: Determining and demonstrating – in advance – the ability and willingness to help in a crisis Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  66. 66. 1. Review the natural philanthropy model 2. Natural origins and experimental results underlying the model 3. Using natural philanthropy to build quality relationships and asks Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives
  67. 67. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives No/low quality ask + no relationship no gifts Using natural philanthropy to understand the origins of a quality ask Quality ask + no/low quality relationship minor gifts No/low quality ask + quality relationship minor gifts Quality ask + quality relationship major gifts
  68. 68. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Understanding the gift as a demonstration of friendship insurance reliability, i.e., the ability and willingness to protect my in-group members and values Understanding the relationship as an expectation of friendship insurance reliability, transactionally unjustified support when needed
  69. 69. Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Gifts that advance the donor hero story
  70. 70. A core challenge is to separate true friends, who will actually deliver sufficient help in a crisis, Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: 119-143. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  71. 71. from fair weather friends, who appear helpful in mundane circumstances but fail to deliver in a crisis Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: 119-143. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  72. 72. This is problematic in safe, stable modern environments where crises that could resolve this doubt may be rare Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides. 1996. “Friendship and the Banker's Paradox: Other Pathways to The Evolution of Adaptations for Altruism.” Proceedings of the British Academy, 88: 119-143. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  73. 73. Demonstrating altruistic behavior in extreme or crisis scenarios would thus be particularly important signals Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  74. 74. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance One study found that although women generally prefer altruists for friendships and long-term relationships they more strongly prefer those exhibiting heroic acts of altruism Kelly, S., and R. I. M. Dunbar. 2001. “Who Dares, Wins: Heroism Versus Altruism in Women's Mate Choice.” Human Nature, 12: 89-105. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  75. 75. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Another study found that reading a romantic scenario significantly increased men’s subsequent willingness to engage in heroic, but not mundane, altruism Griskevicius, V., J. M. Tybur, J. M. Sundie, R. B. Cialdini, G. F. Miller, and D. T. Kenrick. 2007. “Blatant Benevolence and Conspicuous Consumption: When Romantic Motives Elicit Strategic Costly Signals.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (1): 85. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  76. 76. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Examples of charitable fundraising efforts requiring extended fasting, plunging into cold water, or walking on burning coals may reflect this preference for heroic giving Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  77. 77. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance One study found that people were willing to donate more if informed that making the donation would require substantial pain or effort such as running five miles or enduring a painful “cold-pressor” [ice bucket] task Olivola, C. Y., and E. Shafir. 2013. “The Martyrdom Effect: When Pain and Effort Increase Prosocial Contributions.” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26 (1): 91-105. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  78. 78. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance A “hero” need not do extreme physical acts, but is any sacrificial protector of group members or ideals meriting lasting social approval Franco, Z. E., Blau, K. and Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Heroism: A Conceptual Analysis and Differentiation between Heroic Action and Altruism. Review of General Psychology, 15(2): 99. • Protecting group members is direct altruism • Protecting group ideals is code altruism • Social norms establish social approval required for reciprocity Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  79. 79. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Advancing the donor hero story rather than the donor hero calculation, reflects the importance of more tangible forms of framing Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  80. 80. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 From a rational accounting perspective, which dollars are spent on which items is irrelevant when total project cost is fixed Money is fungible Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  81. 81. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Gneezy, U., E. A. Keenan, and A. Gneezy. 2014. “Avoiding Overhead Aversion in Charity.” Science, 346 (6209): 632-635.; Portillo, J. E., & Stinn, J. (2018). Overhead aversion: Do some types of overhead matter more than others?. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 72, 40-50. But which makes the better donor hero story? Building a well for a needy village costs 50% for construction and 50% for overhead and administration. Your gift will be used… 1. For construction only [highest donations] 2. For the project overall [middle] 3. For overhead and administration only [lowest] Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  82. 82. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Donors are more likely to give, and give more, if their particular gift is made at or near the fundraising goal completion, even when, in the absence of their gift, someone else would have made the goal completion giftCryder, C. E., G. Loewenstein, and H. Seltman. 2013. “Goal Gradient in Helping Behavior.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49 (6): 1078-1083. Klinowski, D., N. Argo, and T. Krishnamurti. 2015. “The Completion Effect in Charitable Crowdfunding.” http://pitt.edu/~djk59/completion_kak.pdf Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  83. 83. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Emphasizing donor heroism • Expressing gratitude in a way that confirms the heroic nature of the gift [ex: Donor impact booklet] • Sharing heroically-framed stories of others who have made similar gifts • Constructing giving opportunities that advance the donor hero story Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  84. 84. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance “Advancing” rather than “creating” the donor hero story means that the gift should fit within the donor’s existing life narrative Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  85. 85. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance 1. The hero goes forth 2. Struggles with a gatekeeper, enters a horrible place, undergoes an ordeal 3. Then gains reward 4. And returns to his place of beginning 5. With a gift to improve his world Campbell, J. (1949), The Hero with a Thousand Faces. New York: Pantheon. pp. 245-246 Ex: a successful entrepreneur giving to her alma mater, a cancer survivor giving to cancer research Joseph Campbell’s “monomyth” universal hero story Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  86. 86. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Spoiler alert: Every major epic movie ever 1. The hero goes forth 2. Struggles with a gatekeeper, enters a horrible place, undergoes an ordeal 3. Then gains reward 4. And returns to his place of beginning 5. With a gift to improve his world Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  87. 87. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 But, where is the fundraiser in the movie? 1. The hero goes forth 2. Struggles with a gatekeeper, enters a horrible place, undergoes an ordeal 3. Then gains reward 4. And returns to his place of beginning 5. With a gift to improve his world Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  88. 88. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 The sage challenges with a choice Obi-Wan: You must learn the ways of the Force, if you're to come with me to Alderaan. Luke: Alderaan? I'm not going to Alderaan, I've gotta get home, it's late, I'm in for it as it is! Obi-Wan: I need your help, Luke. She needs your help. Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  89. 89. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 The sage challenges with a choice Are you giving someone the opportunity to be part of something bigger than themselves? Understanding this role should impact how you feel about confidently asking big vs. apologetically asking small. Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  90. 90. Death reminders (e.g., planned giving and aging) increase attraction to personal heroism H Pursuit of symbolic immortality: something reflecting the person’s life story (community and values) will live beyond them Death reminders increase self-reported similarity with a hero; describing one’s own hero (but not another’s) reduces death- related thoughts as does reading of a heroic act but only when the hero shared the participant’s birthdate McCabe, S., Carpenter, R. W., & Arndt, J. (2016). The role of mortality awareness in hero identification. Self and Identity, 15(6), 707-726. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  91. 91. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance In neuroimaging experiments, as “visualized autobiography” brain activity increased, so did the willingness to make a gift to charity in a will In qualitative interviews with bequest donors “when discussing which charities they had chosen to remember, there was a clear link with the life narratives of many respondents” Routley, C.J. (2011) Leaving a charitable legacy: Social influence, the self and symbolic immortality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of the West of England, Bristol. p. 220 James, R. N., III & O’Boyle, M. W. (2014). Charitable estate planning as visualized autobiography: An fMRI study of its neural correlates. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43(2), 355-373 Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  92. 92. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Are the donors just an ATM for the heroic administrators? Are the administrators just following the heroic donor’s orders? Who is the hero? Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  93. 93. Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Share the donor hero story
  94. 94. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Reciprocity benefits can come directly from the charity or, if the gift is publicized, can come from other observers Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  95. 95. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Accordingly, increasing the public visibility of a gift usually increases giving behavior Andreoni, J., and R. Petrie. 2004. “Public Goods Experiments Without Confidentiality: A Glimpse into Fund-Raising.” Journal of Public Economics, 88 (7): 1605-1623. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  96. 96. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance 96 Charitable giving generated greater activation in brain reward centers (ventral striatum) when observers were present Izuma, K., Saito, D. N., & Sadato, N. (2010). Processing of the Incentive for Social Approval in the Ventral Striatum during Charitable Donation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22 (4), 621-631. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  97. 97. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Donations also increase with reminders that increase only the feeling of being observed, such as printing eye spots on an appeal letter response device. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Krupka, E. L., and R. T. Croson. 2016. “The Differential Impact of Social Norms Cues on Charitable Contributions.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 128: 149-158. Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  98. 98. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Two groups with two computer backgrounds. Each person receives a payment and is asked: Do you want to share any of it with another (anonymous) participant? Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  99. 99. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidanceSharing 55% Not Sharing 45% Normal Screen Sharing 88% Not Sharing 12% Eyes Screen K. J. Haley (UCLA), D.M.T. Fessler (UCLA). 2005. Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 245–256 Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  100. 100. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Donors give more when placed in a “leadership” position of publicly giving prior to (rather than after) other donors’ decisions Reinstein, D., and G. Riener. 2012. “Reputation and Influence in Charitable Giving: An experiment.” Theory and Decision, 72 (2): 221-243. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  101. 101. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance The importance of publicity Altruism may display qualities important in a future transactional or friendship/family reciprocity partner (resources, values, similarity, reliability in a crisis) Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  102. 102. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance When experimental participants choose their partner for a joint profit making game, the most generous participants were the most frequently chosen Hardy, C. L., and M. Van Vugt. 2006. “Nice Guys Finish First: The Competitive Altruism Hypothesis.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32 (10): 1402-1413. Barclay, P., and R. Willer. 2007. “Partner Choice Creates Competitive Altruism in Humans.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 274 (1610): 749-753, p. 752. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  103. 103. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Including small hints of philanthropic tendencies in descriptions of potential dates increased women’s ratings of the described men’s desirability for friendship or long-term relationships Barclay, P., and R. Willer. 2007. “Partner Choice Creates Competitive Altruism in Humans.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 274 (1610): 749- 753. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Friend/Family Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  104. 104. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Correspondingly, men contribute more to charity when observed by a woman rather than a man Iredale, W., M. Van Vugt, and R. Dunbar. 2008. “Showing Off in Humans: Male Generosity as a Mating Signal.” Evolutionary Psychology, 6 (3): 386-392. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives DirectIf seen James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Friend/Family Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  105. 105. If seen 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Compatible publicity • Requesting or even desiring publicity appears self-interested and anti-heroic • Re-framing publicity as a means to influence others to give (a second, sacrificial gift by allowing undesired publicity to spur additional gifts) • Publicize automatically (“opt out”) Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  106. 106. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives No/low quality ask + no relationship no gifts Using natural philanthropy to understand the origins of a quality relationship Quality ask + no/low quality relationship minor gifts No/low quality ask + quality relationship minor gifts Quality ask + quality relationship major gifts
  107. 107. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Understanding the gift as a demonstration of friendship insurance reliability, i.e., the ability and willingness to protect my in-group members and values Understanding the relationship as an expectation of friendship insurance reliability, transactionally unjustified support when needed
  108. 108. In a natural context, mutual “friendship insurance” generating transactionally unjustified support in a crisis is more important to survival than simple exchange transactions Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  109. 109. Make the charity like family Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12
  110. 110. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Philanthropy uses family bonding mechanisms • Charitable giving is rewarding (like receiving money) • But uniquely involves oxytocin-rich social attachment brain regions (used in maternal and romantic love) “donating to societal causes recruited two types of reward systems: the VTA– striatum mesolimbic network, which also was involved in pure monetary rewards, and the subgenual area, which was specific for donations and plays key roles in social attachment and affiliative reward mechanisms in humans and other animals.” Moll, et al (2006) PNAS 103(42), p. 156234. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  111. 111. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Injecting oxytocin – a family bonding hormone – increased giving Zak, P. J., Stanton, A. A., & Ahmadi, S. (2007). Oxytocin increases generosity in humans. PLoS ONE, 11, e1128 Philanthropy uses family bonding mechanisms Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  112. 112. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Human touch, when followed by a small gift, elevated oxytocin levels AND subsequent charitable giving Morhenn, V. B., Park, J. W., Piper, E., Zak, P. J. (2008). Monetary sacrifice among strangers is mediated by endogenous oxytocin release after physical contact. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 375-383. Philanthropy uses family bonding mechanisms Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  113. 113. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Build family-social relationships, not market-contract relationships Do you call? Do you write? Do you visit? Are you closer to extended family members who do these things? Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  114. 114. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 One study found that a distinguishing characteristic of successful fundraisers is that they tend to excel at friendship-related skills such as emotional intelligence or memory for personal details Pudelek, J. 2014. “Eleven Characteristics of Successful Fundraisers Revealed at IoF National Convention.” July 10. http://www.civilsociety.co.uk/fundraising/news/content/17819/eleven_chara cteristics_of_successful_fundraisers_revealed_at_iof_national_convention Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  115. 115. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Projecting unconditional (not transactional) social support Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  116. 116. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Projecting unconditional (not transactional) social support • Empathetic and engaged listening • Demonstrating empathy during a crisis • Providing a small gift reflecting a deep understanding of the donor’s preferences • Advising against interest • Expressing gratitude for the relationship • Non-ask social engagements • Identifying personal similarities Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  117. 117. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Projecting purely transactional relationship Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  118. 118. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Projecting purely transactional relationship Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income • Using formal/ technical/contract words not “family” words • Meetings are only about the donor’s money not the donor’s life story • “Always be closing” and never advising against interest • Talking only about my “product” not compassionate listening
  119. 119. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Market Frame transaction I engage in transactions by formal contract Social Frame relationship I help people because of who I am Use family language Stories and simple words Avoid market language Formal, legal, or contract terms
  120. 120. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Make a gift and in exchange receive a guaranteed lifetime income from the charity. and in exchange receive a guaranteed lifetime income from the charity. Enter into a contract with a charity where you transfer your cash or property
  121. 121. 13% 44% 44% 29% 48% 23% Interested now Not now, but in future Will never be interested Contract Gift Makeagiftand in exchange receive a guaranteed lifetime income from the charity receive a guaranteed lifetime income from the charity Enterintoacontractwithacharitywhereyou transferyourcashorpropertyand in exchange 2014 Survey (A/B) 1,101 Respondents
  122. 122. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance If a university violates friendship expectations, such as by refusing to admit the donor’s child, donations cease Meer, J. and Rosen, H.S. (2009) Altruism and the Child Cycle of Alumni Donations. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1): 258-286. Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  123. 123. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Encouraging interaction and support among donors builds a community analogous to an extended family Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  124. 124. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 The nonprofit can foster the development of powerful and supportive friends from other wealthy benefactors who share common values and support common beneficiaries Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  125. 125. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance “Honor a family member by making a tribute gift to charity in my will” • Increased interest in gift for many, especially if first asked about family members who care about the cause • In an fMRI study also increased memory and emotion engaged in the charitable bequest decision James, R. N., III (2015). The family tribute in charitable bequest giving: An experimental test of the effect of reminders on giving intentions. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 26(1), 73-89. Charity that represents a loved one: The power of family tribute bequests Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  126. 126. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Framing and context changes perception of cost Tangibility of Impact Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  127. 127. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Asking for the same gift from assets (where it constitutes a tiny share) rather than from income (where it constitutes a much larger share) can reduce the perceived cost Tangibility of Impact Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  128. 128. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Tangibility of Impact Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Wealth is not held in cash. It is held in noncash assets. If you are asking from the cash bucket, you are asking from the small bucket
  129. 129. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Direct James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income Ask for gifts of wealth, not disposable income 97%-99% 1%-3% Financial assets held by families (U.S. Census 2017) https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/wealth/2013/wealth-asset-ownership/wealth-tables-2013.xlsx Other financial assets (stocks, bonds, retirement accounts, life insurance, mutual funds) Cash: Checking, savings, money market deposit accounts, and similar
  130. 130. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Asset gifts remind us of our wealth Morewedge, C. K., Holtzman, L., & Epley, N. (2007). Unfixed resources: Perceived costs, consumption, and the accessible account effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 459-467. What’s in your wallet/purse? Cash? Credit cards? … Do you own stocks? Bonds? Certificates of deposit?... Spent 36% more Tangibility of Impact Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  131. 131. 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance People who feel wealthy act charitably The strongest predictor of donations is subjective feelings about one’s wealth, not it’s objective adequacy. Making college students feel richer by having them report their savings on a scale ranging from $0 to $500 rather than $0 to $50,000 increased subsequent donations. Wiepking, P., & Breeze, B. (2012). Feeling poor, acting stingy: The effect of money perceptions on charitable giving. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 17(1), 13-24. Herzenstein, M., & Small, D. (2012). Donating in recessionary times: Resource scarcity, social distance, and charitable giving. ACR North American Advances. Tangibility of Impact Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  132. 132. Tangibility of Impact 1. Advance the donor hero story 2. Make the charity like family 3. Provide compatible publicity 4. Minimize perceived loss 5. Manage decision avoidance Windfalls promote giving (1) Irregular (2) Unearned (3) Gains Konow, J. (2010). Mixed feelings: Theories of and evidence on giving. Journal of Public Economics, 94(3-4), 279-297.; O’Curry, S. (1999). Consumer budgeting and mental accounting. In P.E. Earl & S. Kemp (Eds.) The Elger companion to consumer research and economic psychology. Northhampton, MA: Cheltenham.; Reinstein, D. & Riener, G. (2012) Decomposing desert and tangibility effects in a charitable giving experiment. Experimental Economics, 15(1): 229-240.; Sussman, A. B., Sharma, E., & Alter, A. L. (2015). Framing charitable donations as exceptional expenses increases giving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(2), 130. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., (1991) Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106 (4): 1039-1061. Framing a gift as an exceptional event removes it from comparison with regular budget items Giving part of a gain is easier than taking a loss It is easier to give “Appreciated Investments” Possessions Altruism Reciprocity If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives Behavioraleconomics Relativev.Absolute Elephantv.Rider Storyv.Data James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income
  133. 133. 5-year average growth in total fundraising NONPROFITS receiving ONLY CASH gifts 2,548 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported only cash gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 GROWTH NONPROFITS receiving ANY NONCASH gifts 4,236 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported noncash gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 GROWTH NONPROFITS receiving SECURITIES NONCASH gifts 2,143 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported securities gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 GROWTH (2010 to 2015)
  134. 134. NONPROFITS receiving ONLY CASH gifts 2,548 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported only cash gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 11% GROWTH NONPROFITS receiving ANY NONCASH gifts 4,236 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported noncash gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 50% GROWTH NONPROFITS receiving SECURITIES NONCASH gifts 2,143 nonprofits raising $1MM+ in 2010 reported securities gifts in 2010 & 2015 on e-file IRS-990 66% GROWTH (2010 to 2015) 5-year average growth in total fundraising
  135. 135. 3-year average growth in total fundraising NONPROFITS receiving ONLY CASH Average Total Fundraising Years Growth ‘10-‘13 = 5% ‘11-‘14 = 1% ‘12-‘15 = 2% ‘13-‘16 = 0% NONPROFITS receiving ANY NONCASH Average Total Fundraising Years Growth ‘10-‘13 = 34% ‘11-‘14 = 30% ‘12-‘15 = 30% ‘13-‘16 = 25% NONPROFITS receiving SECURITIES NONCASH Average Total Fundraising Years Growth ‘10-‘13 = 44% ‘11-‘14 = 42% ‘12-‘15 = 39% ‘13-‘16 = 33% (2010 to 2013; 2011 to 2014; 2012 to 2015; 2013 to 2016)
  136. 136. $100K to <$500K $500K to <$1MM $1MM to <$2MM $2MM to <$3MM $3MM to <$5MM $5MM to <$10MM $10MM+ Nonprofits reporting only cashcontributions in 2010 & 2015 on e-IRS 990s 56% [n=9168] 25% [n=2397] 14% [n=1343] 18% [n=478] 0% [n=358] 0% [n=223] 26% [n=146] Nonprofits reporting any noncashcontributions in 2010 & 2015 on e-IRS 990s 137% [n=2278] 71% [n=1373] 60% [n=1215] 58% [n=652] 48% [n=728] 36% [n=679] 35% [n=962] Nonprofits reporting securitiescontributions in 2010 & 2015 on e-IRS 990s 400% [n=114] 176% [n=187] 103% [n=340] 94% [n=284] 68% [n=385] 50% [n=427] 43% [n=707] 5-year total fundraising growth by initial level of total contributions
  137. 137. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift from cash to assets? Fixed effects regression analysis of the 761,876 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting positive contribution amounts from 205,696 organizations in 2010-2016. When share from SECURITIES GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +18% When share from REAL ESTATE GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +26% When share from CASH GROWS by +10% total contributions fall by -13%
  138. 138. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift from cash to assets at large, $50MM+, fundraising NPOs? Fixed effects regression analysis of the 2,566 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution amounts of $50MM+ from 723 organizations in 2010-2016. When share from SECURITIES GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +28% When share from REAL ESTATE GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +13% When share from CASH GROWS by +10% total contributions fall by -6%
  139. 139. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift from cash to assets at large, $500MM+, fundraising NPOs? Fixed effects regression analysis of the 142 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution amounts of $500MM+ from 46 organizations in 2010-2016. When share from SECURITIES GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +13% When share from REAL ESTATE GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +4% When share from CASH GROWS by +10% total contributions fall by -14%
  140. 140. What happens IN THE SAME YEAR when gifts shift from cash to assets at Colleges & Universities? Fixed effects regression analysis of the 20,447 e-filed IRS Form 990s reporting contribution amounts of $500MM+ from 4,361 organizations in 2010-2016. When share from SECURITIES GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +10% When share from REAL ESTATE GROWS by +10% total contributions grow by +18% When share from CASH GROWS by +10% total contributions fall by -9%
  141. 141. Gifts from larger asset types have more impact Same year effect of a 10% ratio shift (asset type/total giving) for nonprofits already reporting substantial noncash gifts Doesn't help none/minimal Books, Food, Collectibles, Uncategorized Helps a little +2% to +3% Cars, Boats, Household goods, Art, Drugs Definitely helps +7% Publicly-traded securities, Historical art & artifacts Helps a lot +14% to +18% Real estate, Non-publicly-traded securities
  142. 142. Tax deduction + Avoid capital gains tax Tax deduction only Appreciated asset gifts are objectively cheaper
  143. 143. Donor Nonprofit Donor Nonprofit + Avoid capital gains ($90,000 x 23.8%) $21,240fed ($90,000 x 13.3%) –($90,000 x 5.27%) $7,227state Income tax deduct. ($100,000 x 39.6%) $39,600fed ($100,000 x 13.3%) –($100,000 x 5.27%) $8,030state Income tax deduct. ($100,000 x 37%) $37,000fed ($100,000 x 13.3%) –($100,000 x 5.27%) $13,300 state + Avoid capital gains ($90,000 x 23.8%) $21,240fed ($90,000 x 13.3%) –($90,000 x 5.27%) $11,970state Asset gifts just got EVEN cheaper for many 2017 2018 Net cost $16,490 in ‘18 vs. $23,903 in ‘17 $100k Cash $100k Stock Net cost $52,370 in ‘18 vs. $49,700 in ‘17
  144. 144. Donor Nonprofit $100K old stock (low basis) immediately buy identical stock (100% basis) No need to change your portfolio! The Charitable Swap No “wash sale” rule because this is gain property, not loss property $100K cash
  145. 145. Natural Philanthropy How the natural origins of donor motivations drive powerful fundraising Professor Russell James III Texas Tech University peer-reviewed academic journal article available at https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201750 Possessions Altruism Reciprocity Tangibility of Impact If seen Avoid Yes No Direct Code Transactional Friend/Family Wealth Income Givingdependsupon thetangibilityofa gift’simpactonaltruism (directorcode),reciprocity (transactionalorfriendship), andpossessionsrelativeto itsalternatives James III, R. N. (2017). Natural philanthropy. Palgrave Communications, 3, 17050, 1-12 Applying Natural Philanthropy Better Asks: Gifts that advance the donor hero story Better Relationships: Make the charity like family (relational vs. transactional) Bigger Asks: Gifts of wealth, not disposable income

×