1. Not Making Target? Four of the Most Common Mistakes Made by Advancement Offices at Institutions of Higher Learning in South Africa

2.  15 Years ago…  1999: OCPD, the “final” studies, 60 cigarettes pd later and the vow  The fascination: three women and an awakening  But then, the visits… and spotting the trends, similarities and recurring themes  Commission to undertake an investigation into the State of M, A & C at HE Institutions in SA during the merger period  Since then – covering approximately a 10-year period – a realisation on 2 levels: observations pertaining to Advancement practice – the Reluctant Researcher… now crystalized into some publications  One such element relates to the most common mistakes made/ problems faced by Advancement Offices at educational institutions in the country  Let’s deal with them in 4 categories: Context & Background

3.  The Skills and Confidence Levels of Advancement Staff: A Shortage of Fish or a Matter of Shallow Waters?  When Performance Does Not Matter: The World’s Only Non-incentivized Sales Team  Eish! Sometimes, Excellence can be Punishing  This Machine is Broken: Institutional Obstacles and Systems Failure The 4 Most Common Mistakes & Problems

4.  The Musical Chairs phenomenon  The Catch 22: “Can’t find any experienced fundraisers” vs “They can’t pay me” –fuelled by transformation agenda  Young/decreasing levels of solid experience at several institutions – industry contacts restricted  The depth of experience at most institutions – including FET colleges – is alarmingly low, exacerbated by high levels of staff turn-over (“Why train the new ones – they come and go!”)  Where have all the (proposal-) writing skills gone?  Looking for a business opportunity? The opposite of “tata ma chance” has to be: intelligent “match-making”  “I am in a hurry/under pressure”: the most common mistake – the inability to build relationships (chasing target is the top priority)  Inadequate levels of donor involvement, based on incorrect power balance perceptions, even low self-esteem – shying away  Question: Reminders of another profession of ill repute ?… The Skills and Confidence Levels of Advancement Staff: A Shortage of Fish or a Matter of Shallow Waters?

5.  It is naive to believe that, in the absence of rewards and penalties, performance will consistently meet Management expectations  The SAIF will probably be most unimpressed…  Let’s get real – you choose: 2 scenario’s  Incentives need not function like a commission-based % does – a business plan with appropriate financial provision is required  Not all incentives need to be monetary in nature… but some do!  Inflexible institutional systems and mind-sets prohibit innovation  The problem cuts both ways: a lack of consequences both for exceeding expectations and likewise for under-achievement  Shorter term/fixed-term contracts are not the solution to this problem – serial failures simply facilitate job-hopping  Recognition has to be linked directly to a scale-based incentive scheme, budgeted for by the institution, operating at 2 levels: individual and team When Performance Does Not Matter: The World’s Only Non-incentivized Sales Team

6.  The unscientific way in which targets are arrived at – mostly the result of thumb-sucking  Common methodologies applied include mechanistic (simple) increases on previous year’s budget, a pressurised “voice from above” or an irrelevant comparison to (mostly unlike) “competitors” – sometimes even abroad  Constantly “raising the bar” with year-on-year increases eventually become demotivating  Variable budgets (between years), linked to specific project targets within the Advancement plan would be slightly more intelligent  Unrealistic expectations only serve to discourage (and in the absence of sanctions, are of no significance any way)  Star performers in already imbalanced teams are sometimes “punished” for performing well, “carrying” the rest of the team (and the better they perform, the more they are expected to do)  Far greater investment required in terms of training/skills development Eish! Sometimes, Excellence can be Punishing

7.  Where enough mountains are high enough, the team will sit (down) and eventually will complain (even publically), but generally will simply wait = immobilized teams  The misconception that a strategy and a target are synonymous – without an Integrated Advancement Strategy, directly linked to the institutional plan, mobilising any resources is the result of pure luck  The “capital campaign cures all”-approach, and “the only model is the American model”-belief are fables and fantasies at best  The VC/Principal is “an academic who does not enjoy asking for money” mind-set secures an up-hill battle, right from the start  Outdated perceptions that raising funds, mobilising resources and advancing the institution do not require real monetary investment (yet warrants a handsome ROI)  A serious underestimation of the importance of the potential contribution of prospect researchers This Machine is Broken: Institutional Obstacles and Systems Failure

8.  Poor data-base management/garbage information – eg, Alumni Relations Management  Lack of trust/collaboration (even competition/suspicion) between Faculties/project “owners”/leaders and the Advancement Office, as well as their “inappropriate” proposal-writing skills/style  The quality/appropriateness of projects presented to potential funders for funding – that is, the “product” that is being promoted  The correlation between human resources and Advancement performance/output  The “missing link” : an undefined institutional strategy and the consequentially vague Advancement plan, replaced by a monetary target  The strategic positioning of the Advancement function  A lack of understanding of what “mutual benefit” in a “business partnership” really entails – 3-way impact  The preference for short term gratification, or the inability to invest in/build longer-term relationships with funders Thank you …