The Next Generation of Donors

The Seven Faces of Philanthropy is an interesting book. The authors talk to major donors about their movitations for giving, pore over the responses, and identify seven personalities.

As a higher education professional, the one personality that seems to fit most of our donors (many of whom are alumni) is the Repayer. Repayers tend to have been constituents first and partners second. A typical Repayer has benefited from some institution and now supports that institution from a feeling of loyalty or obligation.

Most of our donors are also 55 and older. Most colleges struggle to get millenials to give; but just because they are paying off student debt doesn't mean they can't give something. It's more likely that they don't see themselves as Repayers.

Millenials don't trust institutions. Ergo, they won't support them. So asking them to support the annual fund so a college can go on college-ing is a lost cause.

However, they will support causes. They won't support the Red Cross because they believe in their mission but they will support the Red Cross' efforts to help Hurricane Harvey victims. Then they move on to the next cause, regardless of the charity doing the work.

This is where The Seven Faces of Philanthropy can help. When millenials give, they see themselves as (mostly) Altruists. Altruists give out of generosity and empathy to urgent causes and who modestly wish to remain anonymous.

The challenge for higher education is to market giving opportunities as causes. Talk to millenials as Altruists, people who's gift can directly improve someone's life.

My journey with Better Angels

When I first read about Better Angels—a non profit group whose goal is to depolarize America by, among other things, hosting workshops with 7 liberals and 7 conservatives to get people talking again and forming community-based alliances—my reaction was that this was similar to an idea I had percolating in the back of my mind.

The other similar group was Living Room Conversations. Although they had similar missions, their approach couldn't be more different. Living Room Conversations was very libertarian. Their message is: "Talk to a friend in your house. Here are some discussion points. Let us know how it goes."

BA's message is "Here is what you need to do and how you need to do it. Follow this blueprint."

I ultimately chose BA because I wanted to work off of a blueprint. I know I wanted to get people from my community together with opposing views so we could find common ground. But I wanted some sort of direction.

I became a dues-paying member, reached out to some people from my town about starting a workshop (with little success), and haven't done much since. While I love BA and their mission, I have a few concerns.

First, to sign up they make you chose a side: red or blue. I don't identify either way and don't like being put into a camp. Plus, this crowds out libertarians, greens, and other independents, who should have a voice as well.

Second, the few people I have talked to who have shown interest have the same problems that I do. We're all in our thirties, have young children, and are consumed by our expanding responsibilities. The workshop is a full seven-hour day. I have trouble finding a sitter for a two-hour stretch.

I attended a group meeting with local BA members and was struck by how relatively-young I was compared to everyone else; mostly empty-nesters and retirees. In other words, people who have time for a day-long workshop and recruiting local members. I'll return to this in a moment.

Thirdly, BA seems to have a goal of creating BA red-blue alliances all across the country. I think that is a shallow goal. They mention "depolarizing" and "getting people talking again" but I think it should be more ambitious.

My goal is to solve problems. Immigration, healthcare, guns, terrorism; these are all issues we want to solve but cannot without coming to a mutual understanding with our political opponents. In that respect, I view BA is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

For millenials, such as myself and the other young fathers I spoke to about BA, trust in institutions is at an all-time low. That is why the book New Power shows how young people are drawn to movements that allow for their own customization, like the Ice Bucket Challenge or AirBNB.

BA does not allow such customization; it's structure is top-down. As such, I worry that it's very nature will crowd-out millenials. Based on my own observations; it already has.

Why I read

Justin Theroux, not reading. Trust me, it will make sense.

At the beginning of Season 2 of The Leftovers, you see the protagonist Kevin Garvey constantly wearing earbuds and playing loud music.

The narration keeps you in the dark before the big reveal: Kevin is experiencing hallucinations of a women for whose death he feels responsible. The music is his solution for drowning out the hallucinations.

I mention this because it is the best metaphor for explaining why I am always reading a book, particularly nonfiction.

My mind's natural state is untethered, and will invariably drift toward depression. A good book— particularly a complicated one in which I am learning something new, something that, for a moment, makes the world a little more sensible—drowns out the noise of my depression.

Unlike medication, there are no side effects. Unlike therapy, there is no cost (as long as I can find the book in a library). My only vulnerability would be running out of books to read.