Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this article is to reinforce that library staff can be critical to development activities. Design/methodology/approach: This is a discussion of issues involving personal giving and a case study example. Findings: Several factors are discussed related to staff behaviors about giving

Michael A Crumpton

CiteSeerX

Updating Staff Involvement with Development 
By: Michael A. Crumpton 
Crumpton, M.A. (2014). Updating staff involvement with development. The Bottom Line: 
Managing library finances, 27(4), 132 – 135. doi: 10.1108/BL-10-2014-0024 
This article is (c) Emerald Group Publishing and permission has been granted for this 
version to appear here http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/. Emerald does not grant permission 
for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express 
permission from Emerald Group Publishing Limited. 
Made available courtesy of Emerald Group Publishing Limited: 
http://www.dx.doi.org/10.1108/BL-10-2014-0024  
 
***© Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Reprinted with permission. No further 
reproduction is authorized without written permission from Emerald Group Publishing 
Limited. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures 
may be missing from this format of the document. *** 
Abstract: 
Purpose: The purpose of this article is to reinforce that library staff can be critical to 
development activities. 
Design/methodology/approach: This is a discussion of issues involving personal giving and a 
case study example. 
Findings: Several factors are discussed related to staff behaviors about giving. 
Originality/value: This is the author’s own experiences and research, the author was involved in 
the case study. 
 Trust | Development | Support | Behaviors | Philanthropic Keywords:
Article: 
Two years ago in this column, we discussed the importance of staff involvement with activities 
surrounding Development and Fundraising in the libraries (Crumpton, 2012). What has changed 
in two years that warrants another look? Budgets certainly are not better and overall 
philanthropic giving is flat across the country. Competition for donors is at an all-time high, and 
donors are becoming more strategic. Has donor activity become more difficult? Are your staff 
members aware of these challenges and are they helping the library as an organization find new 
ways to reach donors and promote the needs of the organization? And what about your staff, are 
they willing to be part of the fundraising effort? 
Actually not much has changed. Because the economy has recovered sluggishly, needs for 
philanthropic support have never been higher, especially in non-profit organizations such as 
libraries. And many library staff members have also had flat or decreasing disposable incomes, 
which make personal giving efforts and support to others harder. But employee support is still a 
critical component to successful fundraising efforts and should continue to be a consideration of 
development officers and senior administrators. 
A good example of having staffs invest in an organization’s philanthropy efforts comes from the 
Greater New York YMCA. Their Chief Development Officer, Laermer (2013), gives advice on 
their success with fundraising efforts but also insight into how donors are becoming more 
strategic and how the YMCA staff, volunteers and members are part of the effort. According 
to Laermer (2013), donors give where they can see the impact of their contributions, and 
employees telling their stories are a significant and successful strategy to follow. 
But employees can be skeptical, as it relates to giving themselves. Corporate scandals, such as 
Enron, can cause people to hesitate over making contributions to organizations that they do not 
know, it is a trust factor (USA Today, 2004). Organizations such as libraries should already be 
deemed trustworthy, so library employees have a venue for philanthropic activities, the question 
is are they being asked. Employees who find their libraries trustworthy will not only donate 
themselves but also be in a better position to support external activities of Development Officers. 
Case study 
We decided to find out what encourages employees to donate, to our libraries or externally to 
organizations of their choice, so we invited employee donors to a focus group to discuss their 
motivations. The goals included not only understanding better, their sense of giving and why, but 
also to determine how they feel about development activities engaged by the libraries. The 
following questions were developed to get the conversation started. 
Focus group questions 
Focus Group goal: To gain appropriate feedback from volunteers regarding content on 
development activities of the library and the perceptions of the role that staff can play. This 
information is intended to provide context for a larger staff presentation/activity in the spring: 
• What is your personal view and activity level regarding philanthropic activity, i.e. giving 
at the workplace, church, community organizations, etc.? How does it make you feel, 
what is your motivation? 
• What benefits can you see to the organizations in which you donate time, money or other 
support? 
• What is your understanding of development activities within the university and within the 
University Libraries? Why do you feel it is necessary? 
• What benefits to you see from donor support within the University Libraries? How do 
you feel such investment in donor relations helps the libraries? 
• The libraries are a service oriented profession and donor relations is part of the total 
scope of activities that we embrace, how can you as individuals be a part of that? 
• What terminology do you find confusing? What activities do you not understand? What 
format of communication regarding development activities is most effective? 
The demographics of the focus group were mixed, librarians, staff and supervisors, as well as 
multiple departments and folks with different levels of primary responsibilities. As a 
representative group, all participants in the focus group felt that giving was an important 
component in their life, as a way to give back or support others. There was agreement that 
everyone should contribute somehow, even as a volunteer if they cannot afford financial support. 
It was also generally agreed to by all, that motivation as to where to give, was related to the 
perceived need and common interest that might be shared by them as a donor and the 
organization. Trust was also a big factor, as it informs expectations on how financial donations 
are spent, and having a clear understanding of the benefits that donations made, was very 
important to future opportunities. Many comments were related to family values and good 
citizenship as a motivation for giving. This included giving to the church and community 
organizations that they interacted with. 
This translated from folks in the group, who had given to our library, as a sense of “employer as 
family”, giving to support the workplace like they would as family members. This indicates that 
employees feel that what we do as the “library” is important, and sometimes it just takes the right 
opportunity or situation to encourage people to give or support the activities. Some ideas for 
future giving that surfaced included; targeting a project in which everyone could participate in by 
donating, creating an opportunity to support on a small-scale more frequently and providing 
choices, so that people could choose something of interest or that had meaning. 
Focus group participants understood the value and necessity of development activities for the 
libraries, especially in times of decreasing budgets and rising costs. They also recognized the 
changes to traditional funding sources and why philanthropic activities were needed to continue 
projects certain operations. When they as employees give, they do not expect rewards or 
attention, just appreciation that it meant something. 
But they did not have a clear understanding of terminology being used or how some gifts would 
benefit the library in the future. There was discussion over meeting donor expectations and 
questions over whether some situations were inappropriate for the library to accept. 
Communicating to the library staff what happens to monies donated was an important concern as 
well as how any particular donation contributed to the organizational vision or identity. 
We learned from library staff donors that giving for them has personal meaning and that 
supporting the organizational efforts in other ways depended on the perceived value of the gift, 
as it related to satisfying an organizational need. Smith (2012) in her article “All Good Works 
Are Not Created Equal: Employee Sensemaking of Corporate Philanthropy” discusses how 
members of an organization, in learning to understand the benefits of philanthropic activity, will 
do so in terms of their own values and beliefs. She also discussed how in some cases, employees 
give “legs” or actions to charitable commitments made by the organization, which makes 
employee support even more critical for smooth execution of actions resulting from a donation. 
Smith’s (2012) article also addresses the social aspect of giving and how recognizing the social 
context between employees could be important for overall success. As charitable giving is often 
considered ethically and socially desirable behavior, there can also exist a form of peer pressure 
to “join in” or share in that positive behavior. This might be best utilized by publicly 
acknowledging or recognizing staff contributions so as to encourage others to do so as well. 
Joyaux is a non-profit consultant for fund development and strategic planning. She talks about 
building a culture of philanthropy into your organization individual employee by individual 
employee. By developing an understanding of the vision, for organizational needs and the value 
of donor support, positive attitudes can be developed that help shape the desired behaviors for 
staff in dealing with potential contributors. This makes employees ambassadors for the 
organization and invests them in the outcomes that shape future activities. Joyaux states that 
once the culture is firmly established, then fund development is easier and more productive. 
Conclusion 
Library employees, who contribute to the organization, do so for personnel reasons. Reasons that 
can influence others and be broadened to also influence external donor candidates. By 
understanding the critical role that development activities can mean to the organizational health 
of the library, library staff can make a huge difference in the success or philanthropic activities 
and events. Talk to your folks; find out what their motivations are and how much more they are 
willing to help influence and support others. Sometimes, all you have to do is ask. 
References and Readings 
1. Crumpton, M.A. (2012), “Development: what’s in it for you?”, The Bottom Line: Managing 
Library Finances, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 29-32.   
2. USA Today (2004), “Employee giving in an age of skepticism”, USA Today, April. 
3. Joyaux, S. available at: www.simonejoyaux.com/ 
4. Laermer, G. (2013), “Show, tell and involve: fundraising fundamentals for a new era of 
philanthropy”, Huffington Post, 3 January. 
5. Smith, J.M. (2012), “All good works are not created equal: employee sensemaking of 
corporate philanthropy”, Southern Communication Journal, Vol. 77 No. 5, pp. 369-388.   
Further reading 
1. Chardon, M. (2013), “Peering into the nonprofit crystal ball”, Huffington Post, 8 January. 
2. DeBoskey, B. (2013), “Season for giving: nine tips for effective philanthropy”, The Costco 
Connection,December. 
 
 


Updating staff involvement with development. The Bottom Line: Managing library finances

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=8A6DF90E7AE60E6926382265BA5311ED?doi=10.1.1.1053.903&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Updating staff involvement with development. The Bottom Line: Managing library finances

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CiteSeerX