By ELEANOR YAP

Conjunct Consulting wants to make an impact in the social sector by providing pro-bono consulting to non-profits and social enterprises. It is said to be the first and only organisation in Singapore/Asia offering pro-bono social sector consulting solutions. Not only does Conjunct Consulting help the organisations get much-needed help, but it also encourages students and professionals to continue to volunteer and give back to the community. Even though their efforts deviate from the traditional Community Involvement Programme (CIP) model, the two founders, Jeremy Au and Kwok Jia Chuan, believe they are on the right track. Their work has garnered incredible support, proving that change could be a good thing.

The founders - Jeremy Au, left, and Kwok Jia Chuan.

Started in September 2011, Conjunct Consulting has already assisted four charities and roped in some 120 students from Nanyang Technological University (NTU), National University of Singapore (NUS) and Singapore Management University (SMU) from various fields of study, as well as 20 professionals from different industries. SALT Online speaks to Au (JA) and  Kwok (JC), both 24 years old, about their organisation and their aspirations (Au will be working in Bain & Company in October and Kwok is a civil servant):

What was your motivation behind starting a non-profit organisation to help non-profits and social enterprises in Asia?

JA: During my time in Berkeley, California, I was very fortunate to work with The Berkeley Group, which provides pro-bono consulting services to non-profits in California. I had a wonderful experience with a great group of students who were passionate about making a difference. At the same time, the projects allowed us to understand the challenges of the social sector – the everyday trade-offs and the painful decisions a leader has to make while serving the community and keeping the organisation alive.

I knew that Asia deserved the same opportunity – for volunteers and the social sector to work together better. Every social sector leader deserves the very best – the best strategies, the best information and the best tools needed to make the right decisions for our community. We also needed to revolutionise volunteerism by moving away from the current hours-based paradigm to a system that allows us to use the best of our skills.

JC: For me, my inspiration was the realisation that society has already given me a lot in my life, and that too often I take it for granted. I volunteer my time and efforts so as to contribute a little bit back to society, and to bring happiness to a few more people each day. When Jeremy and I started talking about Conjunct Consulting, I realised it was a way to catalyse and multiply the efforts of many interested volunteers out there and use their different skills and talents in order to impact the social sector beyond the application of time and effort.

In doing the research before you set up the organisation, what were some of the key issues with which non-profits and social enterprises needed help?

JC: A key issue is strategic and management decisions – many non-profits and social enterprises are excellent at their day-to-day operations and core functions, but often want thought partners in planning how to expand and improve their organisations.

JA: Social impact assessment and outcome-based management are issues now coming to the fore. Not everything that is measured today is important, thus stakeholders and managers are increasingly demanding that everything important should be measured and improved upon. The challenge is developing a system of impact metrics that is simultaneously mission-relevant, scientifically rigorous and operationally sustainable.

Why did you decide to set the business up as a non-profit rather than a for-profit business with paid professionals and paid services?

JC: We are a social impact organisation creating a new model of pro-bono service for Asia. By delivering our services with professionally-mentored volunteer teams, we draw on the strengths of experienced professional and passionate student volunteers. As a non-profit, we are thus able to serve as a collaborative platform for individuals and organisations in the private, public and social sector.

What are your views on CIP in schools?

Community Involvement Programme (CIP) helps expose students to the needs of our communities. Many of our early experiences with volunteer services stem from school-led initiatives, and this is evidence of how CIP has exposed us to the social sector. While CIP does expose us to community service, we wanted to ask students to think about how to help the social sector and use their skills that they learn in university to work together as a team to create sustained and impactful results.

What areas do you concentrate on in your consulting of non-profits/social enterprises?

JC: We do not concentrate on specific areas – rather, our model allows us to assemble the best teams to find solutions to different problems in the social sector. Through a process of training students and professionals and then matching them into teams according to their different skill sets and passions, we assemble teams that match the needs of our clients.

How do you choose or get the students and/or professionals to assist in the consulting projects? How much time do they put in per week?

JC: The choice of members in a team is primarily values-driven. We look for three values in a consultant – passion, a focus on impact and collaboration. We care for our communities, deliver social impact rather than processes, and work well in interdisciplinary teams. To sustain this, we have structured a values-driven selection process that enables us to find members that mesh with our values, culture and results. On average, the students put in 10 to 15 hours a week and professionals contribute about three to seven hours a week.

What is your training curriculum like?

JA: We ready our student members for project success and equip them as future social sector leaders with three modes of development ­– trainings, practicums and mentorships.

Our members learn the quantitative and qualitative skills needed to make decisions in the social sector. We incorporate rigorous coverage of core content, intensive group-work directed by trainers, and frank discussions by social sector leaders.

Practicums teach our members how to best use their skills. All members undergo case camps, highly realistic simulations of critical organisational decisions, to learn how to better conduct research, synthesise information and deliver recommendations in a time-sensitive environment.

Mentorships provide individual guidance and feedback. Just as professionals mentor their student counterparts, student leaders mentor their juniors. This is how we equip every single member to be ready for a deeper level of service.

Can you share the process of a project from start to finish in the three-month time of a project?

JA: During the project, the team will deliver at least 700 man-hours of service with the support of our leaders, partner, and networks. To ensure quality outcomes, all projects go through this rigorously structured cycle – assembly, scoping, work planning, data gathering, analysis, progress review, recommendation development and finale.

After being assembled based on capabilities and client needs, the two professionals and five students meet, bond and form the team. The issue is scoped into a statement of work with client-defined deliverables. The challenge is then segmented, prioritised and assigned to team members with an internal work plan. Data is gathered through primary and secondary research, and then analysed to develop a fact base. The team shares its interim findings at an internal progress review and client progress update. Recommendations, action steps and operational details are developed in tandem with the client. Finally, the defined deliverables satisfying the statement of work are presented at the internal and client finale.

Conjunct Consulting then conducts three follow-up sessions to the client after the project cycle – one at the six-month mark, one at the one-year mark and one at the two-year mark. During these sessions, an independent Conjunct Consulting unit conducts a quantitative assessment of increased organisational effectiveness, a qualitative assessment of how our work can be improved, and a discussion on any new action steps to enhance project outcomes.

How do you all volunteer manage?

JC: We operate on a hub-and-spoke system where the central Hub, consisting of the Executive Committee and professionals, coordinates national-level activities such as case camps, client relations, training standards and publicity efforts. At the same time, the student chapters in the different universities conduct the training syllabus and member recruitment, team selection and mentorship programs. This is so they specialise in what they can do best, swiftly make autonomous decisions, and innovate for results in their duties. We further enhance our coordination with knowledge management, file-sharing and task management cloudware.

What challenges have you been facing since you started?

JA: When we first started out, the key obstacle we faced was skepticism. People were questioning how the Conjunct Consulting model worked and their role in it, and they were rightfully concerned about how it would be managed. After all, we are a new model of volunteerism and a new system that changes how the social sector works. The way we went about facing this problem was finding the people who believed in the same cause we did, rather than focusing on the skepticism.

Where is your funding coming from?

JA: We have been pleasantly surprised by the community’s reception and outpouring of support for our model of service. To diversify our funding, our student and professional members make a small contribution to cover baseline operating costs. We are fully committed to financial transparency and allow all members to view our budget, financial information and independent audit reports on our internal knowledge platform.

Our financial sustainability strategy is to solidify our donation base with a donor recognition program, gain seed-funding for several productivity infrastructure investments, and develop a per-project funding model with our private, public and social sector partners.

How do you plan to keep the organisation sustainable?

JC: The key to sustainability is to deliver results. If we provide quality advice to our clients and at the same time manage to deliver a great experience to our volunteers, people will keep coming back to us. At the same time, we are immensely humbled at the support we have received so far and that is a testament of the passion of the volunteers and team we have with us.

Anything you would like to add?

JC: Start now and keep thinking of new ideas to aid the social sector. Be courageous and keep trying – every step makes a difference, no matter how small.

By ELEANOR YAP

Buddies Ivan Chang (left) and Keith Tan.

Ivan Chang and Keith Tan, both 23, have known each other since secondary school. Not only have they stayed good friends, they have also tried their hand in various businesses/projects together including an apparel printing business, an events management business and a flower project. Though some of their businesses have been less than “a disaster”, the fourth time may be the charm, which is what the two are banking on.

They have embarked on a startup that hopes to simplify the volunteer-NGO relationship by providing volunteers with an easy online platform to find service opportunities, and NGOs and other organisations with a simple way to find the volunteers and manage them.

Simple platform

Called Start Now, the startup is being funded with a S$50,000-grant from SPRING Singapore, as well as pro-bono mentoring support and consulting services from the Grameen Creative Lab @ NUS (National University of Singapore). The startup has a number of business professionals on its advisory board, including “Toilet Man” Jack Sim from the World Toilet Organisation.

The idea of the business came when Chang was volunteering at Make-A-Wish Foundation Singapore, which he had been with for six years. He found that there was a much needed gap to be filled in the area of volunteer management. “My main job at Make-A-Wish was administrative, where I certified a flurry of different forms for different student volunteers who had to call repeatedly to get their forms sent back to them,” he said. “The school then had to key in all this data just to produce a certificate for graduation. And I thought, there must definitely be a better way – for all of this to be digitalised and continued beyond school. Shouldn’t there be a certified profile of any volunteer’s work available online that does not stop just because he has ended school – maybe, a LinkedIn for volunteers?”

He added: “There were also other gaps that I noticed. Firstly, there were volunteers who were over-taxed and volunteers that were under-utilised. This was because there was no real ability to track the history of each and every single volunteer. This was what I wanted to change. All this stems from a systemic demand-supply gap caused by an information chasm.

“Organisations didn’t know when the volunteers were free and volunteers were not notified about volunteering events that took place during their free time. So we created a matching engine that would actively notify volunteers of events matching their preferences. We wanted to help volunteer managers know their volunteers better and we think technology can help with that.”

He shared these challenges with his buddy Tan through Skype (while Chang was at the time in Australia) and Start Now was given birth. The platform helps not only volunteers but also NGOs by giving them the tools to manage their volunteers into groups, enabling the organisations to schedule them quickly and without the need for spreadsheets. For the schools, the teachers will be able to manage their CIP programmes through the platform which will connect the students to suitable volunteering opportunities and allow the teachers to track and report easily. Tan mentioned that for the latter, they are looking at partnering the National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC).

The platform.

Companies can also find benefit from the site as it offers tools so they can manage and report on employee volunteering and allow them to build up their strategic partnership programmes. Another highlight to the Start Now platform is it integrates with social media like Facebook, allowing the various stakeholders to notify volunteers of an activity and get them involved.

The service is currently free to the volunteers, non-profits and schools, but companies will need to pay a yearly fee for using the Start Now services that could range from S$3 to S$12 per user account. Start Now will be introducing a feature into its platform called Collages for companies in March 2012 which will also require them to pay for it. It will automatically create a photo and memory collage of stories and volunteer-uploaded photos of the activities the companies have participated in all on the site, instead of them needing to create a new site or having to manually do up a newsletter to showcase their volunteering activities.

Said Tan, who found his passion for social entrepreneurship while developing Singapore Polytechnic’s (SP) award-winning project Mission Sevapur in India (where the SP team would travel to India to initiate schemes that would generate funding for Inba Seva Sangan (ISS), a non-profit organisation that runs a number of programmes in Sevapur to benefit the population): “It will be interactive with companies being able to comment on the site, as well as the non-profits that the companies are working with.”

Start Now has been up-and-running in December of last year with an official launch slated for Social Business Week (organised by Grameen Creative Lab @ NUS) on February 20, and they have already begun using social media to rope volunteers to join in their cause. That was how the third “core” team got roped in – Xinyi Cheng, currently a final-year Mass Communications student from Nanyang Technology University (NTU) and a former classmate of Tan’s, who has been tasked to handle the communications side for the startup. “I took a course on CSR and studied sustainability reports of MNCs. Since then, I have wanted to have control of my time and to do something meaningful,” shared Cheng. (Two other volunteers have joined their cause as of press time – Ang Kar Yong, its creative director and Huey Lin, its head of new media.)

Beyond Singapore

Many non-profits have already come onboard Start Now. Tan shared that in just four days, the team have signed up 42 non-profit organisations in Singapore and they are looking also beyond Singapore’s shores. He added that he would like to see the platform targeted more overseas as “we don’t want to go head-on with NVPC (and its portal SG Cares which does volunteer matching) as they are working on something in the pipeline that is similar to us and they already are doing a good job”.

Next month, Start Now will be working on partnerships with students in universities in Beijing (calling the chapter site kaishi.com starting with the prestigious Peking University) and Manila (University of Philippines, Manila). “We found through our research, Beijing has a low volunteering rate of 4 percent, while Manila with a high volunteering rate of 33 percent to 36 percent. We also already have people on the ground to work out the partnerships with the universities. It is a huge market in Asia – there were 229 million and that doesn’t include India,” said Tan.

By end of this year, Start Now hopes to include Vietnam and Thailand, however, all this would depend on available funding. “Or else, we will have to stay in Singapore and shore up the funding,” said Tan, who has taken a year-off from his architecture studies at NUS to concentrate on Start Now.

And with the injection of funding, the founders’ wish-list is to extend its branding to start several new sites including “Buy Now” for products made by non-profits and “Work Now” showcasing companies with good CSR. Said Tan: “Funding has been a challenge, as well as finding people passionate about social causes to help us.”

The team at Start Now.

However, the team continues ploughing along as they believe wholeheartedly this is a good thing to do and spurred by the positive responses on the ground about Start Now – “The non-profits have been telling us that this is exactly what they need.” The two founders, along with their team, are committed to focusing full-time after all three have graduated.

Shared Cheng: “For us, it is really about doing good, but doing it well enough that it can be a sustainable business that carries on and expands to do better things for more people. While finances are still a challenge for now, we believe we will soon find our balance as we learn along the way.”

By ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR LAM SWEE SUM & GABRIEL HENRY JACOB

With favourable policies and increasing interest in the local philanthropic scene, donations to Singapore charities have increased significantly over the past decade. Total donations to charities with Institution of a Public Character (IPC) status grew at an average rate of 11 percent per annum, from S$381 million in 2001 to S$776 million in 2010. To better understand this phenomenon, we conducted a landscape study on donations in Singapore. 

Donations to IPCs are made by corporate and individual donors. Our study showed that although corporations are the major donors of IPCs, the relative contribution of individual giving is increasing. In 2001, 22 percent of donations to IPCs were made by individuals. In 2010, individual donations increased to 35 percent. From 2001 to 2010, individual donations grew at an annual rate of 17 percent per annum, a higher rate than that of corporate donations, which grew at nine percent. 

Our study also gives us a better insight into individual donors in Singapore. First, we found that individual giving tends to be more resilient than corporate giving. The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008 caused both individual and corporate giving to dip substantially. But, post-GFC, individual giving recovered faster than corporate giving. From 2008 to 2010, individual giving registered an annual growth rate of three percent while corporate giving declined by three percent per annum. This suggests that while corporate giving is muted by the global uncertainty, individual donors are more than willing to pick up the slack.

Second, we found individual donations to be closely associated with economic growth. Interestingly, as individual giving increases, its channel of giving also changes. We analysed the total funds raised by Community Chest by Singapore’s GDP. This ratio declined over the past five years. Our analysis suggests that individual donors are becoming more sensitive to the charitable causes they support and prefer to give directly to charities.

Third, our study showed that per capita individual giving is increasing. While one may argue that total individual donations have increased due to the growth in population, our analysis points to another factor. Analysing total individual giving by the corresponding year population, we find that per capita individual giving is on an uptrend (see chart below). We infer that Singapore donors are becoming more generous and are giving more. It seems that even the non-residents are supporting local charities.

We credit the growth of individual donations to the favourable tax policy in Singapore. Studies have shown that tax policies are effective in promoting individual giving. Tax shields reduce the tax price of giving and motivate donors to give more. In Singapore, donors will receive a 250 percent tax deduction for donations to IPCs. This benefit is very attractive to donors, especially the high net-worth individuals. Universities in Singapore are some of the major beneficiaries. Besides receiving tax shield, donations to universities attract matching grants from the Singapore Government, which further decreases the price of giving. However, we note that the reach of this tax benefit is limited as only 21 percent of the population in Singapore pays income tax.

The landscape study points to the growing importance and contribution of individual giving in Singapore’s philanthropic scene. This is a timely reminder for local charities to scale up their engagements with individual donors. We foresee such endeavours to be rewarding in the near future.  

Dr Lam Swee Sum is an associate professor of finance and director of the Asia Centre for Social Entrepreneurship and Philanthropy (ACSEP) at the National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School. Gabriel Henry Jacob is a graduate student at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy and a research associate with ACSEP at the NUS Business School.

By DR TAN LAI YONG

Leadership is tough anyway; at non-profit organisations, it is uniquely difficult.

Sometimes we see non-profits fade away. Others explode into the media with stories of unwelcome leadership squabbles. One way to ensure long-term sustainability and a healthy organisation is to face the tough, but needed, task of grooming new leaders. Volunteers are hard to come by and it can be overwhelming for present leaders to even think about the idea of grooming leaders from amongst the volunteers. However, we should always be planning to handover leadership.

Leadership transition and handover is not an event but a process. We need to identify good people and in our “routine” daily work, empower them to take over areas of responsibility. We also need to be mindful that we do not micro-manage. The 26^th US President Theodore Roosevelt once said, “The best executive is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done, and self-restraint to keep from meddling with them while they do it.”

In the popular TV series, “Crime Scene Investigation” (CSI), we see that the police always use yellow tape to cordon off the crime scene. That allows the scene to be untouched and experts to work undisturbed. In leadership, we should draw up some parameters that will help handover and allow incoming leaders to flourish. I found it helpful to think of three points in non-profit leadership changes:

C – Cut the budget

S – Settle the quarrels

I – Introduce the leader

Cut the budget

It is tough to get new leaders for non-profit organisations. But it is next to impossible to find a new leader who is willing to inherit a project or a department with an inflated budget deficit. Even if he or she is willing, it is a lousy start to a leadership experience to come into a team or project and have the ugly task of slashing budgets; this invariably upsets people. In order to prepare for leadership handover especially in non-profits, VWOs and other volunteer groups, the outgoing leadership must work on giving the new leader a trim budget.

Settle the quarrels

We are humans and face people-to-people friction. The tensions and friction may be heightened in non-profits as we work with people with big ideals and great passion. The outgoing leadership must settle the quarrels and rifts within the core community. We have to bite the bullet and listen to our people, heal the wounds, and apologise where apologies are due. This allows the new leader to come in with a clean slate and not inherit messy interpersonal relationships.

The 18^th century English author and inventor, Thomas Paine, who was involved in the French and American Revolution wrote, “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.” What is true for parenting is also true for leadership – existing leadership should settle the trouble of the day – the office quarrels and interpersonal conflicts – before thinking about handing over to new leaders. (I find it instructive that as an inventor, Paine designed bridges and was given the patent for the single span iron bridge.)

Introduce the (new) leader

Introducing the new leaders sounds like an obvious task, but remember, it takes time and effort to bring a new leader into the inner circle. Leadership transition is not just about handing over accounts and budgets. The outgoing leader(s) should bring the new leader(s) to meet people. This is very important in our Asian society. For transition to take place, we must know our incoming people. We go beyond the perfunctory task of handing out name cards to a process of getting to know our people stakeholders – such as the board of governors, grassroot volunteers and administrative staff – so as to share his or her heartbeat with them. We should set the stage for a meeting of hearts and minds as this is the lifeblood of volunteerism. 

As mentioned, leadership handover is not an event but a process. Messy handovers are often laced with money and interpersonal issues. The best handover occurs when we pass on a trim platform to a new leader who is well-trained, confident, empowered and knowledgeable of the key stakeholders. The new leader can then carry out the vision and mission of the organisation and be free to take off with new energies. After all, the point of handing over leadership is so that they carry out the task with fresh vigour and not come in to just clean up the mess that we leave behind. Good leadership handover therefore requires good leadership during the process.

From 1996 to 2010, Dr Tan Lai Yong lived in Yunnan, China, as part of a community development team working with poverty affected villages. Dr Tan established a village “barefoot” doctors training programme and helped with some village toilet projects. He also arranged for volunteer teams from Singaporean schools and hospitals to visit Yunnan. In November 2010, Tan returned to Singapore. He is now a full-time student at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (NUS). His work in Yunnan has been taken over by a group of younger and more dynamic doctors – from Singapore and China. 

By ELEANOR YAP

Twelve years ago, Filipina Celmar Palao (left) had very little confidence when she came to Singapore to work as a domestic helper. She was not very serious and had no clue what her future would hold. She shared: “I didn’t know how to behave in front of people; I was afraid of making a mess of things such as saying the wrong things and hurting people.”

Over the years, she has worked with two employers, with the most current being a French couple (Anne Genetet and her husband who have four grown-up boys (three of which live in France)) whom she has worked now for seven years. Today, at 39 years old, she is a different person, all thanks to Genetet, her own determination and non-profit organisation, aidha, which focuses on financial education for domestic workers.

Introduction to aidha

Palao’s story started all the way back to the year 2007 when Genetet found out about aidha and that it offered a one-year course consisting of up to five workshops covering entrepreneurship, building self-esteem and managing money. Genetet wanted more from her even at the beginning. She shared: “From the first day she started in my home, it was very clear to me that I wanted the years that she was going to spend with us to be useful for her. I didn’t want that after working with us, she just transfers to another family. I wanted her to gain experience, skills, talent, know-how, anything that would make her more valuable than before. … I want her one day return to the Philippines to be a success, not a failure.”

On Palao’s 32^nd birthday, she was given a “surprise” gift of a full sponsorship to the course and the opportunities it would later bring. Shared Palao, “My employer is really supportive. If it is a good thing, she would support me on doing it.”

After she graduated from the course in April 2008, she was impressed by Dr Sarah Mavrinac, president of aidha and her lecturer in the entrepreneurship workshop. “I really admire her and what she is trying to do at aidha.” Dr Mavrinac spoke of an idea of a canteen at aidha’s premises where volunteers would sell food that they could make for other volunteers and students who would come on Sundays to attend aidha’s workshops. The money would then go back to aidha and be injected into its programmes. In May, the idea took shape and was called ‘Project Makan’ but Dr Mavrinac needed volunteers to help out. She was getting a shortfall as on Sundays, most volunteers would head to church.

Palao loved the idea of volunteering and she explained, she could always go to church on Saturdays if she had duty on Sundays or even after her volunteer work. “I felt that Sarah and her team give up their Sundays at times to be with their families to do this work and help us [domestic helpers]. Why shouldn’t we also help out? We should consider giving back,” said Palao.

The initiative was a very informal and not as organised when it started, however, it has grown and now the band of eight volunteers who are domestic workers cook on the premises. “This opportunity is very good for them. We are not using them. They are really gaining something as they get to learn more about business,” explained Palao. The eight of them take on various tasks including purchasing food ingredients, inventory as well as sales. They are also responsible for being creative on their table designs where they place the food to sell. For the past eight months, Palao has been the manager of Project Makan and she proudly revealed that they collect $500 each month from sales.

On alternate Sundays, she is involved in Project Makan from 9am to 2pm, and on the rest of the other Sundays, she volunteers at the aidha office doing anything from operations, client servicing, information, technology or registration. The team of volunteers rotate on the various areas of responsibilities. She either takes the morning shift which is between 8.30am to 1pm or opt for the afternoon shift which is from 1pm to 5pm.

She happily shared all the knowledge she has gained from her volunteering responsibilities: “If you are in registration, you get to do accounting which I never learned before. You also have to be in charge of cash as it has to be safe at all times. In information, you have to explain the workshops to students and you need to know how to answer their questions. In technology, you need to set up the computers for the workshops and if there is a problem, you need to step in. In attendance, you need to check and add to the database and in operations, you need to do logistics.”

Employer support

She stressed the importance of doing this volunteer work – “The students need us as sometimes they are afraid to ask or discuss things. It is much easier for them to connect with us as we are also domestic helpers. We are able to relate.” According to Palao, there are less than 30 domestic helpers who help in various ways at aidha. However, she realises that all this work she is doing would not be possible without her employer’s support.

“It would be very hard if I didn’t have this support. Sometimes when aidha has events on a weekday, my employer lets me attend,” said Palao.

From Palao’s volunteering work at the organisation, it further inspired Genetet to start a help agency for domestic helpers and their expat families where they offer services such as to how to interview a domestic helper and how to have a successful hire. The agency also provides a hotline in times of crisis such as an accident or sickness of a helper, poor quality of work, loss of trustworthiness, etc. Said Palao: “In the past, my employer didn’t understand what a helper usually goes through.”

She added: “She and her family treat me with respect and as part of the family. I feel a sense of responsibility to them and I don’t want to get my employer into any trouble as I care about them.”

This care has extended to her “family” paying for her to go to French school so she can immerse herself in the culture and the language. “I can now write and speak fluently. I used to go twice a week but it has been reduced to once a week as my employer felt that with my aidha volunteering work it would be too much for me to handle.” Her employer is also supportive of her new independence and her dream to one day own a café in her home country. Plans are afoot on getting a location, however, she refrained on putting an exact date on when she will leave Singapore. “It is quite hard knowing that one day I will leave but my employer wants something for me. … If I don’t go after my dreams, all the effort and knowledge gained through aidha would have been a waste.”

She added: “I have now gained more ideas on how to run my business; I am more confident in myself and serious about planning a future. Before starting at aidha, I couldn’t say no to my own family in the Philippines. Today, I am stronger and I know what I want. Volunteering has allowed me to relate to people and to have more insight into a person and how to behave in public.”

Agreed Genetet about Palao: “She used to be invisible as like most foreign domestic workers in Singapore. … When Celmar started with us, she used to look down at her feet when talking to me with a voice that I could barely hear. Today, she holds her head up, she speaks clearly so we can communicate better and understand each other.”

Palao’s story has not only inspired her employer to get involved in the plight of domestic helpers but she has along the way, convinced a few others at her French school to volunteer at aidha. Asked what she would like to share with her own peers, Palao said: “As domestic helpers, we should do our part too. Respect of others, be responsible, know your limitations, put your heart in your work and the people around you, think first before you say some words, focus on what you want for your life, your dreams and never give up. Do your best on your work and always think of the outcome if you make mistakes, never harm others, and use your off-days on a good cause that will guide and motivate you, inspire you, and make you feel that you are contented and happy about what you are doing.” 

By MABEL WONG

Corporations and NPOs are starting to rethink and change their relationships with each other, and are finding ways to work together to meet both social and business goals. For companies, the move away from corporate philanthropy towards partnerships with NPOs and a strategic and long-term purpose to both social development and business objectives seem to be the way to go. In traditional corporate philanthropy, there is typically little interaction or exchange of knowledge and resources between the donor and recipient. More significantly, there is a lack of strategic business interest for the company. Without a business rationale, philanthropic donations may be relegated to just a “do good” effort, which may be reduced or even suspended during difficult economic times.

With the concept of partnership changing and evolving over time, what do we mean by partnership and what is strategic partnership? McKeown & Brown (2000), one of the many studies defining partnerships, talks about four models of partnership in increasing order of commitment: Consultative or advisory; contributory; operational; and, collaborative. Each partnership is different and has its own characteristics, functions, jurisdictions and parameters. Partnerships can be categorised along any number of dimensions such as time (short- vs long-term), structure (separate vs integrated), and intended audience (targeted vs broad). Partnerships are also not static and should involve a cycle of ongoing monitoring to evaluate impacts and review to decide on the future of the partnership (i.e., will end or scale-up). In short, partnerships are not neat and tidy.

Making the partnership a win-win

We are often told the story of positive partnerships and what they look like – the win-win situation of combining the best of businesses (capabilities, technology and expertise) with that of other organisations to meet global development challenges. But are partnerships always the way to go?

Some development agencies would argue that a partnership is not always the best approach; sometimes, traditional philanthropy is a better option. Similarly, we have seen instances of companies deciding to ‘go at it alone’ and implement community development projects directly. The terms under which each partnership takes place (and continues) should be clearly discussed and agreed upon. Each partnership is unique and requires careful planning and clear communication of expectations. Partnerships work when both parties are clear on what they are getting out of it and offer the other partner something in return. 

Fundamentally, partnership is not a single one-time event but an ongoing journey, during which the partners build trust over time and with effort. Some of the key suggestions to ensure successful partnerships include:

• Manage expectations: Communicating clear expectations by both parties is an important first step to ensure successful partnerships. Partnerships break down when misconceptions arise stemming from a lack of understanding of each partner’s expectations or sometimes an overly simplistic understanding of the other’s values, philosophy, constraints, resources, expectations and objectives. Therefore, each partner must be aware of what the other partner is expecting to gain from the experience. For example, companies must recognise that NPOs often want to further their cause without compromising their positions. At the same time, NPOs need to understand that companies may want recognition from the partnership or are looking to include employee engagement in the programme.  Some corporate community investment programmes are designed to attract, motivate and retain staff. However, companies need to realise that many NPOs struggle to manage employee volunteers. Partners need to recognise the importance of having an exit strategy and manage each other’s expectations by communicating the conditions under which this exit strategy will be implemented.

• Appropriately estimate time and effort required for an effective partnership: Partners consistently underestimate the time and effort required to launch and maintain a partnership. The misallocation of time and resources can sometimes happen when one partner perceives that the benefits of the alliance is too low and thus give less time and resources to make the partnership work. Sometimes an imbalance arises when a stronger partner emerges and decides on the project’s timeline and process, which may not fit with the other partner’s resources. Partners should also be aware that turnover of key people is a possibility that would cost both sides more time to re-build rapport and relationship to get the project going again.

• Find a good match: Several best-practice reviews mention the importance of a good fit between partners. Mismatches can occur when NPOs and corporations have conflicting organisational structures or cultures, different decision-making styles, and different constituencies. For example, some companies are more hierarchical and have faster, more authoritarian approaches to decision making while voluntary organisations tend to have slower, more consensual approaches. Finding a good fit requires diligence by each partner to recognise and work through these differences.

Here are two examples of good partnerships –

1) PepsiCo’s partnership with Water.org and WaterCredit to facilitate microcredit loans for water and sanitation in India­ – Working together with Water.org (a US non-profit organisation with a mission to provide safe drinking water and sanitation to people in developing countries), PepsiCo Foundation has committed to accelerating greater access to safe water and sanitation for those currently living without these basic necessities in India. This goal will be met through programmes delivered via grants and WaterCredit, an innovative initiative that facilitates microcredit loans for water and sanitation. Core elements of the programme include delivering safe water systems, providing access to improved sanitation, providing health and hygiene education, establishing a revolving loan fund of over US$1 million for water and sanitation projects, and facilitating the growth of a commercial market for microcredit loans for water and sanitation.

The WaterCredit initiative is much needed given the current water and sanitation situation in India. More than 120 million people lack access to safe water in India – a figure that is larger than the population of all but 10 countries worldwide. In addition, 800 million people in India do not have access to a hygienic toilet. The World Health Organization reports that, in low-income countries, unsafe water and sanitation are associated with three of the 10 leading causes of death. At any given time, patients suffering from a water-related disease occupy half of the world’s hospital beds. Current methods of addressing India’s water and sanitation crisis are not scalable, as they rely on philanthropy alone.

PepsiCo and Water.org’s partnership will not only provide safe water for people living in India, but it will also create a sustainable and scalable model to accelerate access to safe water and sanitation for millions of people throughout the developing world. For more information, see: www.pepsico.com/Purpose/PepsiCo-Foundation/Programs.html.

2) Hospitality Group Accor partners with ECPAT (End Child Prostitution, Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes) to combat child sex tourism ­– As a responsible actor in the tourist industry, Accor formed a partnership with ECPAT (an international NPO that brings together a network of 77 organisations based in more than 70 countries) to train its employees in preventing child sex tourism and raise the awareness of its customers of child sex trafficking. In addition to implementing programmes, the Accor Group has signed the “Code of Conduct for the protection of children against sexual exploitation”, a document, drawn up by ECPAT and the World Tourism Organization, which sets out the principles for an active policy to fight this scourge. In March 2008, Accor was appointed to the Executive Committee responsible for applying the Code. At the end of 2009, Accor was a signatory to the Code of Conduct in more than 30 countries where the Group operates. For more information, see: www.accor.com/en/sustainable-development/ego-priorities/child-protection.html.

Whilst partnerships are not without its own set of challenges, a partnership that focuses on joint objectives and addresses the larger community needs, a partnership that is invested into more tangible long-term projects with a measurable impact on the local communities, this when managed well, can bring together many of the objectives of a community investment programme and can also introduce new ways of working, and can perhaps realise the win-win situation.

Mabel Wong is a senior project manager at CSR Asia. In her last three years with CSR Asia, her responsibilities included facilitating CSR Asia’s Community Investment Roundtable in Singapore and Malaysia. She has also advised and worked with companies including Accor, Citi, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, DHL and others. Prior to CSR Asia, Wong worked in the NGO sector for over seven years focusing on children’s issues, in particular, children in need of special protection such as street children, children in conflict with the law (juvenile justice) and child soldiers.

By ELEANOR YAP

Leona Leong is a minority amongst the handful of hearing-impaired individuals. “I know what it feels like to be the person who is deaf in a hearing-impaired world!” she remarked. This 28-year-old runs her own social enterprise called Aii which sells all things sweet, and she hires hearing-impaired to help grow her business. Currently, she has one full-time staff and six part-timers, and hopes to add more.

A fighting chance

Previously an air stewardess like her mother, Leong has also tried her hand in running a wholesale women’s clothing business online about 10 years ago, at the time, one of the pioneers retailing on the Net. She has also dabbled in marketing at Marriott Hotel’s Bar None. “I ran out of ideas on what to do next and decided to do something with sweets as my Chinese name has the word ‘sweet’ in it ­– Leong Sweet Yee!” she shared.

She was not afraid to go down a different path as she knew the corporate contacts she picked up from her work in her previous job and business would come in handy. In February 2011, Leong started Aii or 愛 (the traditional Chinese or Japanese character for love, which was chosen because she believes that, in the eyes of love, everybody is equal) with just S$2,000, and a strong determination and beliefs.

She added: “I am not a university graduate. I have never been interested in studies. However, my previous boss in Bar None gave me the opportunity to excel and I did just that. I believe a certificate doesn’t mean anything; it is really about one’s attitude to do well. I believe everyone is capable; they just may not have been given the chance to shine.”

With this in the back of her mind, she wanted to give others also that same fighting chance she had received and decided to hire the hearing-impaired. “I have never volunteered before and I have never worked with people with disabilities. I reckoned that they would be the best group to start to work with as I also didn’t mind writing lengthy conversations to communicate to them or learn a new language – sign language.”

Her first hire (and currently the only full-time employee) is Hina Liang, a 28-year-old with aspirations to own a photography business in two years. Leong explained that the Singapore Association for the Deaf (SADeaf) introduced Liang to her in May last year and that she really wanted a job. Liang lamented that it is often difficult getting a job as beyond having an impairment, she is further hindered by not being able to pick up the phone as sometimes people might not be able to understand her and she cannot speak Chinese. Aii is her third job and as Leong’s “personal assistant” (as Leong loosely called it), she handles packing, administration, selling at bazaars or at companies’ locations (when invited), graphic design and photography.

Added Leong: “I feel there is not much being done for the hearing-impaired and I wanted to treat them equally. At Aii, I would push them as I would with any able-bodied staff as I want them to know that they are as capable as any able-bodied person and should not allow their disability to slow them down or hold them back.” Also, her own company culture is there is no boss or subordinate; everyone including Leong picks up the rubbish.

Asked where she got the desire to reach out to the marginalised in society, she credited her father for showing her the way. “My dad is a Singapore Airlines’ pilot and he is very kind. When he goes to various countries, he often buys sweets for the poor children and he also helps the elderly cross the road. I love my dad and want to be like him.”

A little stubbornness always helps

Aii sells its sweets at bazaars and other places.

Now close to a year in business, Leong said in the two months she has already made back what she has put in and she is turning a profit, thanks to Christmas and soon, Chinese New Year. She has also moved to a new office with a space of 110 sq ft on the east side. The bulk of her income comes from hampers ordered by corporates, and she has big names as clients like DBS, SingHealth, The Body Shop and Microsoft.

“I am not worried about the impending economic crisis as I believe everyone eats sweets and my sweets are not expensive.” Her sweet varieties, which come from all parts of the world, can also be found in goodie bags and given as wedding favours. Most of her part-time staff, who come in when they are free, are roped in to handle the packing.

Leong is looking to hire more hearing-impaired as well as other marginalised groups like seniors to help with the packing and to sell the sweets at bazaars. “I will help people who really want to help themselves and who are discriminated from working.” Asked what the challenges are working with the hearing-impaired, she shared: “I don’t treat them as challenges or even problems. Anything that happens, I will deal with it. My mentality is always like that. If I want to hire them, I will do so and deal with it. I am very stubborn in that way.”

She laughed that there are times when she would have to ask them to stop “signing” and to do their work but this is a really a happy problem. “I am happy because it really feels like home for them. This is what I want to achieve in my company.”

In turning her sweet enterprise to help others, it in turn has given her many learning lessons. “I understand more now about the hearing-impaired. I hope to continue breaking down the myth especially the fact that being hearing-impaired also means that they are mute which is untrue.”

“I really want to add a little more happiness to the world and I think I am doing this one step at a time,” said Leong. When one has a sweet, it sure makes one want to smile!

By LAURENCE LIEN

National Environment Agency walking for their cause at International Volunteer Day 2011.

Civil society needs to step up and do much more to help meet the increasingly complex needs of the Singaporean community. Since independence, Singapore’s progress ­­– including its social development as measured by key social indicators – has been nothing short of dramatic.

The state has been the dominant authority in bringing this about while civil society and the non-profit sector have mostly played a supporting role in state-directed programmes. (I’ve deliberately used both “civil society” and “non-profit sector” because in Singapore’s context, the former term is uncommonly used and connotes something more political and adversarial, which need not be the case.)

Civil society in Singapore can and should learn to do more: Non-profit organisations (NPOs) need to play a complementary role in society, and be innovative in their own right. NPOs can uniquely help create an environment where Singaporeans feel empowered to start new ground-up endeavours, where civil society is able to do things that the Government cannot do. The non-profit sector is able to do some things better, and the state should not do everything.

It may not be self-evident in a state where the Government is so dominant that there are indeed areas of social and community interventions that the Government simply cannot take on. Humans are more than material beings, and NPOs can provide for social, spiritual and emotional needs better. For example, halfway houses which treat recovering drug addicts use religion for rehabilitation, which would be prohibited in state-run establishments (as most are religion-based).

NPOs are better placed to provide customised solutions to heterogeneous needs. Government programmes are like big stones filling a container, while NPO programmes, with their closeness to the ground are like small stones filling the remaining gaps. The Government’s subsidy and income redistribution schemes can’t precisely meet the unique needs of each recipient, nor be too broadly generous – it would be too administratively costly, inefficient and unsustainable to operate.

Government schemes tend to provide subsidies to individuals based on criteria related to income or implied wealth (for example, dwelling type), and aren’t typically based on actual needs. Yet we know there are many who fall through the cracks, such as those with unavoidably high household expenses, taking care of a sickly parent or a disabled child.

NPOs can be a rich source of innovation and experimentation. The state is sometimes not in the best position to develop new policies and services, or to drive innovation. In social policy, Government programmes once adopted tend to have to be deployed nationally. Citizens don’t take kindly to beneficiaries being a narrow pilot group. Moreover, there can be heavy political costs in withdrawing a programme even if it proves ineffective.

Governments are typically conservative in implementing new interventions, and there’s a tendency in policy-making to value stability over radical innovation. On the other hand, the non-profit sector can attract the contributions of people, including private sector entrepreneurs and philanthropists, who can deploy their entrepreneurial know-how, long-term focus, initiative and instinct for risk-taking. Closer to the ground, NPOs are better able to identify opportunities for innovative intervention.

The public sector should welcome and even encourage the proliferation of new ideas from this sector – competition can lead to better approaches and models for Singapore.

Finally, there’s power in civil society organisations (CSOs) that Governments don’t have. CSOs have more moral authority in dealing with one another and with beneficiaries than Government agencies may have. In Government programmes, entitlement sets in more quickly. For example, philanthropic organisations can have a higher degree of convening power in bringing NPOs together to work collaboratively towards a common cause, as they are seen as more neutral and having less of a specific agenda than Government agencies.

If the Government gives a dollar, there’s little appreciation from the recipients, as they would consider it their right to receive that benefit as citizens and taxpayers. But if a neighbour helps out and gives a dollar, there’s deep gratitude and even shame, as it’s voluntarily donated out of goodwill and compassion.

The National Youth Council at International Volunteer Day 2011.

Similarly, a volunteer might succeed with a difficult patient where a professional nurse might not, through diversionary therapy efforts. Appreciated as a compassionate person rather than someone who is only doing their job, the volunteer can offer reassurance and comfort, convincing the patient to comply with their medication or therapeutic regimens. The prescription may be the same but the results achieved can be starkly different.

The Government should refrain from undertaking activities that the community, the family and the individuals can take on, stepping in only when these initiatives exceed the capacity of individuals or private groups. The Government can play the important primary role of empowering civil society efforts to fulfil these needs in the community.

We need to emphasise the importance of smaller communities or institutions, such as the family, religious organisations and voluntary associations, as mediating structures which empower individual action and link the individual to society as a whole. Each of these social groups has something unique to offer to the community.

It’s only when individuals are able to exercise self-determination and contribute meaningfully to the communities they live in, that they feel they’re fully human – and fully citizens of this country. This is when a place becomes a home. The Government plays a strong role in supporting NPOs by substantially funding many community-based services. The reality in Singapore is that NPOs have in most cases become subcontractors, delivering social services on behalf of the Government.

The brains and heart of social intervention remain with the state, while NPOs simply follow the piper’s tune and those with competing models of intervention are often viewed as threats. Many NPOs lose their own sense of aspiration, and some, for example, would typically not take on new programmes – no matter how socially beneficial – if they don’t get the green light and funding from a Government agency to do so. For example, family service centres (FSCs) are part of a national system running mostly core, homogeneous, funded programmes.

We are severely under-delivering on the promise of civil society. Civil society will only truly thrive when it serves a complementary function, not when NPOs are vendors and substitutes for Government funding and provisioning.

We urgently need to encourage more civic-minded individuals to express their values, interests and visions of the public good, and inject energies and creativity into how society solves its problems. So what can we do to build up the non-profit sector?

First, we need to expand the organisational capacity of NPOs. Nurturing leadership and talent are key. Effective, committed and passionate leadership – both at the board and management levels – can transform the sector and their organisations. Talented young people need to see the non-profit sector as a viable career.

NPOs also need to make the conditions conducive to attract talent. While the sector’s wages are a significant discount against private sector salaries, this “passion” discount cannot be so large as to grossly disadvantage the individual and his family.

There’s also a need for NPOs to move upstream to tackle root causes rather than the symptoms of social problems; to pursue justice, not just charity; to be impact-driven, and not output-driven; be willing to take risks and adopt new business models, rather than look to the Government for solutions. NPOs should strengthen their organisations by being clear on their strategies, institutionalising processes, seeking strategic relationships, mobilising community resources, and improving their productivity through technology.

The Government, on the other hand, needs to focus more on enabling and empowering the sector. Enabling means building capability, particularly in developing leadership and soft infrastructure, such as technology development and process improvements. Empowering means a real ceding of power, decision-making and ownership of projects, with a tolerance for a degree of messiness and inefficiency. NPOs should be equal partners and co-creators; for example, information and knowledge from the Government’s vast database of administrative and survey data need to be made more readily available to NPOs.

Apart from letting NPOs do their own strategic planning and research, and to interpret their own sense of reality, it’s a concrete demonstration of co-ownership. Instead of leaving many small gaps across the funding spectrum, the Government should plug the gaps in their retained areas of priority and fund those areas more generously.

As Singapore matures, civil society too must mature. Rather than being omnipresent, the Government should be prepared to cede control in some areas – particularly where new thinking is required – while allowing civil society to flourish. And civil society must step up to the plate.

Laurence Lien is the chairman of Lien Foundation, the chief executive of the National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) and the acting CEO of the Community Foundation of Singapore. He previously served in the Singapore Administrative Service for 14 years.

A version of this article appeared in the latest issue of Ethos, a journal of the Centre for Governance and Leadership under the Civil Service College.

By ELEANOR YAP

The Singapore Children's Society's old logo being used at its Toa Payoh Centre.

Image is everything in the non-profit world. It is no surprise then that Singapore Children’s Society decided to undertake a re-branding exercise when its brand was not amongst the top most recalled non-profit brands in Singapore in 2004 (it was in the top 20). (So what organisation was in the top place? No surprise – the National Kidney Foundation.)

In its 59 years of existence, the Society has done a number of small scale re-branding exercises, tweaking its mission and vision statements along the way. However, its 2006 re-branding exercise was by far its largest exercise to date. The exercise started with a strategic planning meeting in early 2005. The Society then consolidated all the necessary information as well as input from vendors, spent a year developing a new brand, and completed the implementation of the new brand by 2007.

Alfred Tan, executive director of the Society, explained the goals of the re-branding exercise: “We looked at our nine service centres island-wide and we wanted a more consistent branding at those centres. Secondly, we wanted to improve and share more publicly our vision and mission, which we created in 2001. The goal was to allow more ownership by staff and volunteers.”

Buy-in from stakeholders

He shared that the re-branding exercise was not all smooth sailing. “[Implementing the new brand] involved changing the way we worked in those days. Therefore, we had to get a buy-in from staff and volunteers on why we needed to do it. They felt we were getting too commercialised with corporate colours, font sizes being the same, consistent PowerPoint slides, and such,” said Tan.

The Society overcame this buy-in challenge by having internal group discussions for six months with volunteers and various staff – from clerks to social workers. The group discussions really helped get the buy-in and support.

Asked how much the 2006 re-branding exercise cost, Tan said that, even though they brought in a branding consultant to talk about the processes, the incremental cost of re-branding was minimal: “Most of these things would have to be spent anyway whether it was a re-branding exercise or not.”

The most time consuming components of the process were brainstorming ideas with staff and channeling the staff to work on the new brand. Tan advised, “You must have someone to champion this.” He was the champion of the re-branding exercise and had a corporate communications team member to support the re-branding committee. Also, he shared that it was vital to get board members’ support. “Board members should really endorse the re-branding exercise as it involves an image change. If they are not aware, they would be shocked if it was suddenly changed! They also have to approve a ballpark budget, agree on having a consultant, and agree on the specifics on what can and cannot be changed.”

A more consistent image

The Society's new logo at its Youth Centre in Jurong.

The Society’s end result was a more consistent colour tone, which is blue, throughout its publicity materials, letterhead, and centre signages. The Society also introduced six new service categories including caregiving, community, developmental, preventive, public education and remedial. It also renamed its centres by including the Society’s name in the title and focusing less on the location. “[The new centre names] provided a clearer identity and communicated what our centres are about,” said Tan.

The Society has not conducted an assessment survey or focus group to determine if its re-branding exercise was a success. However, Tan said it did an informal survey on its donations and found that donations had increased by 36 percent since the implementation. “We believe this contributed to our consistent brand image,” said Tan. He added that its income from 2009 to 2010 exceeded $10 million.

Tan reiterated that the re-branding exercise was not about earning more donations (though a nice icing on the cake nonetheless); it was done to ensure that employees and volunteers felt they were working for an organisation that had a good identity. The Society did a “volunteer climate survey” in 2008 and again in 2010 and found it was rated high and people were proud of the organisation.

The Society is considering a smaller scale re-branding exercise soon. Said Tan, “A re-branding exercise is key – it is about re-visiting your image. It makes sure you are projecting the right image to the right group of people and it ensures you are keeping up with the trends in the marketplace.”

He added, “A major re-branding exercise should be done at least every five to seven years with smaller re-branding exercises periodically if the need arises.”

The Society's publicity materials showing its evolution from the old to the new.

But involvement of staff and volunteers in the process is key: “Make sure you involve your staff and volunteers. It should be a team effort rather than a top-down approach and it doesn’t have to be an expensive exercise. It has to be intentional and you need to know what you want out of it.”

Smaller exercise

For Samaritans of Singapore (SOS), re-branding exercises have been small scale since the organisation started in 1969. In 2006, SOS changed its logo and updated its mission statement. In 2010, the website was revamped and collaterals were given a modern and consistent image. “The 2010 re-branding was in response to feedback from the public and volunteers telling us that the website was not user-friendly. We also decided to review information on all our collaterals to ensure relevance and consistency,” explained Christine Wong, SOS executive director.

“Due to our limited financial resources, we had to fundraise for the 2010 exercise and to search for a Web design agency that understood our services and could offer creative ideas in line with competitive pricing.” (Wong declined to reveal the cost.)

According to Wong, the recent exercise included several discussions with relevant staff members, board members and selected volunteers to gather feedback. She added: “The rationale behind the changes was communicated to staff, board members and volunteers, and the new website and collaterals were shown to them so that they could share their views before the final phase of the implementation.”

SOS's new revamped website.

Work on the new website and collaterals started sometime in 2009, and were completed within a year. The new SOS website sports beefed-up and updated contents and easier navigation among other stakeholder-requested improvements.

After the re-branding, SOS also conducted an informal survey among stakeholders and received positive feedback. “It is important to get feedback whenever changes are implemented,” shared Wong.

She reiterated the importance of re-branding: “An organisation needs to be constantly aware of the ever-changing needs of its target audience. With the fast-changing trends in technology, the organisation also needs to keep up in order to reach out to the younger generation, to maintain relations with its stakeholders, and to reflect its commitment to its cause. Through re-branding, the charitable organisation can aim to project a relevant image as well as provide a professional and approachable platform for stakeholders.”

By RALPH LEONARD

Every fundraising organisation should consider instituting a system for thanking each of their donors at least seven times for each gift. If you plan your “thank you’s” accordingly, you can – and should – communicate them as naturally as you communicate with your friends and family. In our business, there are few things more important than recognising our donors!

So, what are seven ways you can thank a donor? You should try to do all of them.

1. A personalised thank-you note from the person who asked for the gift. When was the last time you received a handwritten, stamped letter in the post? Give your donor an extra surprise in this increasingly online, digital world of ours!
2. A personalised thank-you message from the board chair/president on behalf of the organisation. A personalised message should definitely not be delivered to each and every donor; it should be reserved for certain donors and specific donation levels and the board members’ time should be used judiciously. Make sure your fundraising policies and procedures clearly denote at what donation levels senior people should be involved and communicate those policies to their supporting staff.
3. A personalised thank-you note from the organisation’s executive director or CEO. The same rules as Point 2 above apply here.
4. A personal telephone call from a senior organisation’s staff member within two days of receiving the gift. A call lets your donor know the organisation has received the donation, it appreciates the gift and it gives him or her a brief timeline for future communications.
5. A personal telephone call, within 30 days of receiving the gift, from a board member. While the same rules as Point 2 above applies, this is an extra thank-you that can and should be coming from someone your donor respects and who will welcome the call – plus it should help your donor feel he or she is becoming “part” of your team.
6. A thank-you acknowledgement in your organisation’s publications (including website, newsletter, etc). Actually, these are more ways for your organisation to say “thank you”. To add further value, you can then share the hardcopy or the Web link with the donor to indirectly say thank-you again.
7. Send a thank-you message through regular follow-up reports on the progress of the fundraising effort (each individual organisation may have different reporting requirements but updating donors every six months is a good rule of thumb). These progress reports not only acknowledge your donors, but are also a good way to keep donors informed of their “return-on-investment return” (i.e. what their donation has helped accomplish). With progress reports, donors will be well-prepared for a second or third ask in your fundraising efforts.

    

More ideas on how to say thank-you

1. Invite your supporters to a donor recognition event. These events can take many different forms, depending on the nature of your organisation and the giving level(s) being recognised. Orienting the event around some aspect of your organisation’s work or enabling donors to meet your organisation’s beneficiaries can help to remind the donors of the work their gifts support.
2. A public “thank-you” display within your organisation’s offices and/or at one of your events, activities or facilities.
3. A thank-you message at the start of the next solicitation. One of the first sentences of any presentation, letter or phone call with your donor should include an acknowledgement of the donor’s previous support. For example, start your letter with, “Thank you so much for your gift of last year. That was a tremendous help to us.” And be sure to conclude the letter with, “For this year, can we count on you to increase your donation?”

As the above points hopefully illustrate, thanking donors seven times is not an insurmountable task. Common sense says that these thank-you messages should not go out on the same day. If you pace the timing of your thank-you messages, you can almost continually thank your donors and remind them of what and how their support is helping throughout the year. However, be careful not to overwhelm them either with too many thank you’s.

It is vital to have a formal system in place (including fundraising policies and procedures) to generate these various responses. All of your communications (whether letter, e-mail or telephone call) should be drafted and reviewed beforehand, with designated staff and/or volunteers approving the content. In this way the process can be automated, a necessary aspect for an organisation with potentially hundreds if not thousands of donors.

If you have flown in any commercial airliner, you will have heard the pilot telling their passengers, “We recognise that you have a choice when choosing airlines, and we thank you for choosing ours.” Your donors also have a choice. Recognising their donations as often as possible and in as many ways as possible ensures that they will continue to choose (by investing their time, interest and funds) your organisation when making their charitable decisions.

Ralph Leonard is the vice-president of the Association of Fundraising Professionals Singapore. He has spent his entire career in Asia as a charity fundraiser for a wide variety of causes and has also actively trained and taught those new to the field.