Is it better to pay for advocacy by supporting the fund or take a chance by letting the decision makers use their own judgement?

That judgement can be influenced by money, aligned with personal motives, or based on the overall merit of the situation and impact on its constituents.

In a world where the good prevent the bad and poorly constructed decisions are made by others around our influence, the question that is on the top of most in association and organizational management is…

“Who pays for advocacy?”


Let’s pretend there were no philanthropic organizations aimed at serving special causes.

  • There would be less blood donated to the Red Cross every year that would save lives.
  • There would be no scientific research at developing ways to beat cancer.
  • And, there would be more laws aimed at special interests, rather than protecting the overall good.

Constituents pay when they contribute to a political fund.

Constituents also pay when they don’t contribute, just you don’t see the direct impact.

We pay if we advocate and pay if we don’t…

So whose responsibility is it to pay?

A church can sustain itself when contributions exceed the cost.  Members donate because it’s not just the right thing to do, but because their congregation wouldn’t survive if they didn’t.  Some members donate more.  Some don’t at all.

In my opinion it is the responsibility of the sponsoring organization who is advocating cause to influence the beliefs of their constituents.  They do this by creating more value appealing to logic, conjuring up emotions, and invoking fear by using the right language in their communications.  This is the organizations’ payment in advance to solicit the funds required to advocate for the cause.


Business owners and skill professionals can be influenced on the tangible summation of metrics.  A good read on this topic is How to Measure Anything: Finding the Value of Intangibles in Business by Douglas Hubbard.

These metrics can provide some language for value declaration.

  • # of individuals affected
  • # of families/homes affected
  • # of jobs affected
  • # of voters
  • Commercial square footage affected
  • Time saved
  • Time wasted
  • Revenue generated
  • Revenue lost
  • Revenue anticipated vs actual
  • Customer satisfaction
  • Customer trust

Watch this video to learn how to make some calculations.


Fundraising goes straight to ground zero to capture how people are affected from tragedy, loss, or sufferance. A heart warming cause called operation smile which helps raise money for children have surgery on their cleft lip.  When I watched the video it made me cry and excited both at the same time.


The fear of loss, heartache, or shame is a powerful motivator however is primarily associated with changing behaviors which have a short term effect.  In other words you a fear invoking message will won’t last until the constiuent can associate the negative consequences with an emotion.


Organizations bring in Doug Devitre from St. Louis, Missouri USA when they want to dramatically increase operational performance, create breakthrough value propositions, and serve customers beyond geographical constraints on a minimal budget. For more than a decade he has been setting trends with how organizations engage customers with social media, video marketing, and custom-built software applications. Doug’s book Screen to Screen Selling published by McGraw Hill pioneered the way sales professionals sold homes without being physically present before the COVID-19 pandemic. He is one of a select few who have earned the Certified Speaking Professional Designation from the National Speakers Association and has experience as a REALTOR.

View all posts

Add comment