Still Obsessed With This

Till the morning light!!!

The Proposal

No this is not the new Sean Penn movie.

Seriously. As (whatever my job title will be), I want to bring alums closer to Elon and bring callers to their goal of better and more pledges. The guidelines for the blog are below. I think that should go smoothly as long as we understand the albeit small amount of resources that must go into it. We should also talk to the dude/lady who operates the current one and get their take (meaning we will 'take' it from them to save it) on it.

I'm extremely willing to do the compartmentalization; looking back on the post, the categories seem pretty useful if not predictive. We could add two more categories to make it an even ten, maybe relating to the importance of certain programs and the values of connections and networking. In time (meaning I still have yet to think of it), we will be able to give these group cheerful names lest they be called 'AWVCSPOC.' I know, sounds dirty.

Like compartmentalization, I can work on the GPR, and its formula. Both steadilty. Whether this can be done with any celerity that doesn't involve typing steroids, I'm not sure. The point is that it is a project that, as long as I've got the small amount of data I need, won't stop.

So those are the main projects. With regard to the other ideas (and forthcoming ones), I see two choices though I'm actually going to lobby for both so I hope that made sense. As I'm sure the new supervisors have pledged (Ha!), the walls might gain some life or at least new paper. I can both manufacture little quotes or bits to place as reminders or trials for callers. I can also create a little manifesto (a little bit of an oxymoron) and incorporate some of my thoughts (approved by you of course) into the Training Manual. This is a big step (on mother earth) but a good one.

Lastly, I promise a stronger time committment for both the projects and annual giving. I'm going to put my actions where my typed words are. What do you say?

A Little Give and Take

So this is how it works:

We argue in this paper that attention to one's blog is won by paying attention to other bloggers. We derive properties of blogging networks from a model where bloggers trade attention and content. The predictions from the model are then checked against a novel dataset from LiveJournal, a major blogging community. As predicted, the activity of bloggers is found to be related to the size and level of reciprocity within a blogger's relational network. We also find that bloggers who do not adhere to reciprocity norms are sanctioned with a lower number of readers.

It's weird that a spell-check on www.blogger.com doesn't recognize "bloggers" as a word.

Anyways, the back-scratching and all of that looks like a good direction in which to go. Can we at least assume that this isn't working?

The Formula

GPR = (times given/opportunities) + (campus activities/100) + (leadership activities/10) + (off campus activities/25) + (off campus leadership activities/10) + ((increases - (2 x decreases)) / 10)

There are obviously more variables. I am highly dubious of including any sort of personal income statement or career accomplishments, although I'm sure that most alums would list money as a top criterion. I'm also starting to think that the GPR will end up performing more like a rating than a percentage. Again, how this meshes (or doesn't mesh) with Campus Call will be a large obstacle.

More to come.

A Name For The Connection

Take your pick:

Elon-Junct
Ignition
Flickering Ashes
Unmarooned
Elonsoteric
EUphony
EUphoria
Daily Homecoming
Rise & Shine
Big Orange Bird
Floating Eggshells

If I have a better one (which I should), I'll edit the post. Feel free to add input.

A Blog For Elon Alums

I am wrestling with the direction in which this blog should go like Jessica Simpson with spelling.

On one hand, I am approaching it as an idealist. The content should be strictly composed of material that will connect alums to the lifestyle of current Elon students and spark interest in Alumni Participation activities. The blog's growth must be organic meaning that the number of readers increases because the initial, excited alums become part of the fan club and spread the word. At first, only ten alums read and enjoy the blog. Then, in line with the amazing virality of social networks, those first ten will tell their friends many of whom are Elon graduates. In this case, no promotional messages are needed. All you need is a great product that your first ten customers will embrace and spread.

On the other hand, and somewhat in line with the previous paragraph, we need to know exactly what alums want. They are certainly blog readers and maybe bloggers too. But the question is not what kind of blog alums (ones already in the fan club) want to read. The question is: what kinds of words and images can we post to keep alums close? What kind of logs can we throw onto the fire to keep the fire of the university experience burning?

The current alumni blog is on the verge of becoming a wasteland. Unless there's something fantastic that I'm missing regarding its features, it is more or less the antithesis of what I've been preaching. It does not allow comments. Worse yet, there is a form to fill out to even qualify to become featured. Don't get me wrong, the posts are terrific. They are detailed, interesting, and relevant. Know about something cool...check out the form??? You must be joking. This is the opposite of engaging. In the new blog, these lengthy and informative reads would be guest posts rather than just an alum who posts. There would also have to be other messaging opportunities like advertising, but must have to do with alums' lives. We must feature certain messages, while encouraging others to prepare their own (just like this).

Another thing that is absolutely important and will require some university support: getting current students involved. Current students will also have to be involved. Instead of current campus news, it's going to be personal student news. We want to encourage participation and engagement. Make alums feel like they are still are Elon, even if they are viewing the blog at that new job.

While other Phonathon or Annual Giving employees are encouraged (we might need a weekly Joz-Post) to offer their thoughts, I will have to carry the non-Guest posts. This will require me to develop a little as a blogger, becoming highly comfortable with linking, quoting, and finding interesting news and notes. With no obvious external source for links, I will have to become more familiar with websites and blogs that post information that might interest alums.

Consider doing some light market research. Or let me do it. Just give me ten contacts across different alum demos and have them answer a short questionnaire. From there, we recruit contributors. As nice as it is to have strong guest posts, a short roster of consistent posters is necessary. Let's stop the silliness of 'comments off' and bring alums a daily blog that will spread like the swine flu.

Too soon?

Speaking of Looking (or Hearing) Towards the Future

Tyler Cowen, one of the greatest bloggers in the sphere, posted this:

Such a safeguard could one day be commonplace, if a new biometric technique designed to identify the person on the other end of a phone line proves successful. The concept relies on the fact that the ear not only senses sound but also makes noises of its own, albeit at a level only detectable by supersensitive microphones.

If those noises prove unique to each individual, it could boost the security of call-centre and telephone-banking transactions and reduce the need for people to remember numerous identification codes. Stolen cellphones could also be rendered useless by programming them to disable themselves if they detect that the user of the phone is not the legitimate owner.

This is more like science leading change. That's fine and dandy but it isn't worth a damn if we aren't leading change as well.

"Men Don't Follow Titles, They Follow Courage"

Let's assume William Wallace is wrong about this one.

When you get a form to fill out, you usually have to fill in a space for occupation. It's a simple procedure. What is your job identity? What is it that you do?

A writer writes. A police officer polices. A fisherman gets drunk in a boat.

Some people have the title of 'Grand Poo Bah' and 'Chief Fun Officer.' Others are called 'customer service liaisons.' And some people just wash dishes. And others take way too long to get to the point.

Jozi mentioned 'consultant.' Some companies would scoff at the traditional term and prefer to use 'Intelligence Advisor' or 'The Brains Behind.' Other companies scan resumes with the intention of sorting through hundreds of similar applicants; here, 'Head Of Happiness' might sound more like a psychedelic experience than a worthwhile employee. So many things to think about besides what you actually do. Or maybe your job title explains you better than anything.

In marketing terms, I might be a market analyst, media coordinator, or copywriter. I would try to help callers by collecting and interpreting information and I would try to engage alums with a revamp of the current blog. I would also still be a caller, albeit one with higher expectations (and the ability to purchase alcohol). I would preferably be more involved with the university experience and Annual Giving in general.

If I got the name 'Marketing Consultant,' I would be proud. It would mean something to me. It would convince me that what I was doing was worthwhile and worth putting my heart into. But it would be unfair. Especially since the position that I originally applied for has only one word in it, 'Supervisor.' Those four individuals would have to get new names (which would actually be pretty cool since specialization is the key to business success). Either way, I'm sure this will be sorted out perfectly by the time we have to fill out the aforementioned forms.

Meanwhile, I'll take back what I said. Wallace is, er, was right. Doing this right is going to take some fortitude. It's also going to require patience and humility.

No matter what our job titles are, they will never take away OUR FREEDOM!

(I suddenly want to kill the English.)

Is it MC Shan or is it MC Ren?

NYC or LA?

Ben Stiller or Will Ferrell?

Most alums live in the Eastern time zone. The top eight states that students arrive from are located in the Eastern time zone. So, most calls ring bells along the seaboard.

But that's if alums have moved back home or near home. Look, callers already know that it ain't where you from, it's where you at. (I think it's next to the Jimmy Valvano quote.) And where you're at tends to be more exotic than where you're from. Also, don't forget the alums who are from way out yonder and remain in those parts post graduation.

The point is that, as more students come from California, Nevada, and wherever Utah is, we will be calling more alums who might not give you the right time if you ask for it. This is particularly disconcerting because dinner time in New York is still work time in Los Angeles. What's more? There's also this state that is some six hours to the left.

We can't shrink the Earth. The treadmill would be too expensive. But we can shrink the distances. But it won't be us who does it. For Phonathon, there is very limited chance that we will talk to West Coasters between six and nine unless we catch them (doing nothing) at work. I think this is going to be one of the drastic changes that occurs in Annual Giving over the next ten years. People in general will have better understandings and controls over their time and money. That's good since that is what callers require. Tax deductability will be a pro. Forms won't have ink. And time zones will be as restrictive as no-call zones. (Yeah, we've got the annoying Verizon guy.)

Soon, those prospects will get in touch with us. They'll be starting the conversation...and ending it too. But until then, I'm not sure what to do. Just keep at it I suppose. Let them know that we know they're there, all the way over there. And keep them close. Make sure that the Ignite Nites outnumber the earthquakes (easier said than shaken).

And realize that there are some we just won't reach on the phone (this goes for all time zones). But that doesn't mean we won't reach them.

So You're Saying There's A Chance?

Yeah, I know it's a cliched joke.

Here's a very involved idea that might not pay off. There's some risk and some uncertainty. A lot of people won't like it, won't buy into it, and might end up scorning it even though it may have seemed rational at one point.

Create a system that measures a caller's chance of getting a particular pledge. No, not for the caller, for the prospect. Call it the GPR: the gift probability rating. It will be the primary measure of how well a caller is doing, how tough the caller's assignments are, and which callers are getting the short end of the stick. It may also aid in group specialization for callers and individual training.

It must first be said that this system would require a huge investment. I mean, HUGE. Like REALLY HUGE!!! Did you get that? Good, because here it goes. Calling will take longer initially, as will every other job going up the ladder. There will be some numbers that help but there will also have to be some guessing. And a lot of those guesses will be wrong: too high or too low. Wrong when you think they're right. Right when you think they're wrong. The system is not likely to mesh with CampusCall. You probably won't even realize until the burden of the system starts to kick in how tough this is going to be.

I haven't quite worked this out yet. I'm not good enough. A CIS major might have a shot at it. But the GPR's can't be made arbitrarily, so here are some inputs, some easy and some tough:

• percent of years given (times given over years since graduation)
• number of activities involved on campus
• number of activities involved post-graduation (think small on this one)
  
• current career/income
• Times gift amount has increased
• Toughest part: someone has to put a figure on how "happy" the student was on campus and how much she generally liked the university experience
• Addendum: if there is any reasonable circumstance during which a caller can ask a prospect for this kind of number, go for it!

Obviously, this isn't the complete formula. This isn't the complete equation. Some of these ideas may not even work or be correct. It will take some trial and error. There is no exact science of getting into the heads of alums. (Well, there is but we need their consent.) But callers need to know their chances and Annual Giving needs to know that callers are measuring up. This system is NOT an excuse, but rather an opportunity. But it's an investment...and something to talk about.

Get Increases or Bring In New Fish?

It's an interesting question. Is there more money trying to get increases from current donors or new gifts from previous non-donors? I want to argue for the former.

But the first thought you have is obvious: aren't there about a thousand new non-donors produced every year that will end up having a pretty high GPR (Giving Potential Rating)? Yes, sort of. Granted, many of these individuals who will give once they get their feet on the ground (the only group of people you actually trust when such topics arise) will already have given Senior Gifts or the like. Let's not consider these people. They have a really high chance of being part of the fan club.

This is one kind of non-donor. The other kind strikes demoralization into the hearts of callers. You wish they'd have said "no phone" years ago. Instead we call them every year, even though they haven't given in the fifteen years since graduation. You want to say, "Look, calling you every year is a waste of time. If you're not going to give, just leave me alone." There is something to this situation, but let's save it for another post.

Usually, these new fish takes themselves off of the list because, after a few years, they get tired of the calls. But what about the alums who gave a couple times after graduation and haven't given in thirteen years. Their GPR is about as low as the woman above. That's going to be a pretty low GPR (once we get it up). Meanwhile, someone who's been giving somewhat consistently has a much higher GPR. He is very much inclined to remain a part of the fan club and give his thirty bucks a year.

But how much is it worth to ask for an increase? Well, he could say 'no'. Or, worse, he could be offended and not give. What if he never gives again? Then, he's probably not much of a fan. Small increases should work. To ensure that such offense is not taken, let's use the Tip rule. Fifteen percent. Twenty if he sounds happy. Ten if he's...you know.

Don't get it twisted. New club members are great. Adding potentially excited individuals to our group of alumni who appreciate the university experience is great. It's amazing. But strengthening the core is better. It makes for a stronger tribe and, probably, more money. The big dough lies in increasing gifts from current donors, getting them a little more enthused with a little more reason to be happy. It's there: we just need to grab a hold of it.

Working On Closings For Refusals

Openings are pretty tough. They require just the right amount of politeness, determination, and persuasion to work. They require a caller to demonstrate an understanding of what is appropriate and what is acceptably risky. It would be nice if openings were easier.

Closings, on the other hand, are simple, maybe even easy. Remember to thank the prospect; remember to restate the gift amount; and remember to tell the prospect when to send in the check. A lot of remembering and not a lot of doing. Until now.

Just as we try to have a cordial, confident, and persuasive beginning to a call, we should have a strong finish. Getting a refusal is never fun. And it rarely results in a caller being very positive. But I think there could be information on the end of that call as valuable as the information on the end of the simple gift-get. Firstly, it's really important to know why alums who keep getting calls won't give. That information goes towards helping current and future calls. Also, the 'no phone's' are more important than you may think. Remember the fan club? I'll try to script a refusal closing.

Well, Mr. ______, since you aren't planning to make a gift this year, may I ask why?
May I also ask, "what kinds of efforts can Elon make in the future to make you proud to be an alum?"
Can I also make a request of you sir? Could you at any point in the next year take some time to consider your experience at Elon? To think about whether you are proud of being an alum and about what it would be like if you were a student now?
I appreciate your feedback on our program here at Phonathon. It was a pleasure talking to you about Elon.

Instead of getting refusals out of the way, which is what we all do, let's use them. Refusals are as much of an opportunity as pledges. (All we have to do now is figure out what to do with those damn 'Maybes') We can get good, honest feedback, find out the issues that have alums least positive towards Giving, and reposition for next time. We'll also figure out which 'refusals' are real REFUSALS, prospects with no intention of giving and not enough energy to ask not to be called again.

The politeness and persuasion are still there. They are just reaching the same end through a different means. The end is helping current and future students. The means is a plethora of new information at Phonathon's disposal.

And I didn't use the word 'remarkable.' Sort of.

Whoops, My Bad!

It's Phon - A - thon! What have I been thinking?

Phonothon Should Be The BEST Program On Campus!

There is no doubt in my mind. There should be no doubt in any of the workers' minds. Jozi, narcissism is bad but this is a no-brainer.

What else can I say? How can you relay that the function the program serves far surpasses any efforts that the others on campus performs? The Pendulum (an object best known for doing an imitation of Nancy Reagan's head) won this past school year. Let's do everything we can to change that, to get the performance we need and the recognition we deserve.

Let's be remarkable. Let's be special. Let's be different. Let's be worth taking about.

Let's be the BEST.

Quick Thought on the "Great Deception"

That's what Justin Wolfers likes as the name for the current economic calamity the world faces FYI.

In the face of economic hardship, cost-cutting, budget-slashing, and general acrimony towards spending dough, the great companies see opportunity. If everything looks like it's going to hell, the CMO says, "Thank God. Now I can really start implementing my plan." In a good way.

As an organization targeting individuals with disposable income, the Phonothon's best opportunity seems to be looking ahead. People don't like to talk about it. Obviously. People don't like to think about it. Obviously. They don't want 100% tax-deductible solicitations during it. Obviously. But it's here. The good and the bad. Even the ugly. What would be really ugly would be ignoring the future, ignoring the growth that the school will go through and the program will go through.

The sun will come out tomorrow. Donate your bottom dollar. Especially if you're freaking out about your top dollar. Things are going to get better. AIG was too big to fail. Phonothon and Annual Giving are too good to fail. Forget Obama; we've got the hope.

A New Approach to "The Game"

What is the Phonothon game for? The conventional idea is that the game provides incentive, an economic concept that explains that someone will offer more effort for a perceived increase in utility. There is also the idea of a reward. There are many things to consider on this subject, i.e. I might post on this again. Here it goes.

Should "the game" be sparking competition between good workers (we'll get to this later)? Hell, yes. Undoubtedly. You get a prize! Should the prize be uniform or given based on its winner? Tougher question. I would say to vary it but that would be a cop out. Make it uniform. That doesn't mean the prize should be unremarkable. You should want to come home to your roommates and say, "look what I got!" Just as commission pay works for Billy Mays, prize incentives work for Phonothon callers.

Is that the only reason to play "the game"? Of course not. If only one person 'won', it would not be a game. It would be a jealousy contest. So what can be fun about "the game" if you are not winning? The experience. It's enjoyable. You like guessing the letters or shouting names of states (maybe). But is this fun going along with the job experience or taking a break from the job experience? Chances are...the latter. Sorry, but that's just the way it is (things will never be the same). So make the game more engaging without making it more distracting. Move where the board is. Bring in darts, balls, a balloonist (ok, maybe that's pushing it). Re-scripting the work environment is one of the main things that keeps workers from going postal.

It's not time to think of new games. It's time to think of new ways to play the games. It's time to think of new ways to incentivize performance. It's time to keep both the callers and the supervisors accountable. And, lastly, it's time to think of revitalizing the "job experience." Just because the Phonothon is not your career doesn't mean that it has to be just another job. "The game" has been a staple of the Phonothon working place. Tweaking it a little makes it a remarkable and essential part of the experience.

Becoming A Leader In Annual Giving

This technologically-savvy thought has already become the conventional one. Go online. Develop online social networking. Take away the envelopes and the stamps, and gift giving becomes remarkable. Well, Mr. Seth Godin has other plans:

The Internet is not...direct mail with free stamps. It is something much bigger than that...The big win is in turning donors into patrons and activists and participants. The biggest donors are the ones who not only give, but also do the work....The Internet...allows some organizations to flip the funnel, not through some simple hand waving, but by reorganizing around the idea of engagement online. It means opening yourself up to volunteers, encouraging them to network, to connect with each other, and yes, even to mutiny.

So it's not JUST the Internet. The blog is a great idea. Compartmentalizing donors into networks is a great idea. Using the Web to boost participation and interest will be great ideas for years to come. But that's not IT. It's about ARM: alumni relationship management. And it's going to be a lot harder than CRM. Well, they're probably exactly the same, but let's pretend that we've got the big challenge.

Becoming a leader in Annual Giving is not the same as becoming a leader in market share of cereal foods or batteries. It's so cerebral. It's about reputation and memory and experience and happiness. It's about embracing the future, holding on to the present, and getting pretty far from the past. It's about getting that extra minute on the phone with a pledge asking them to spread the word or read the blog. It's about looking at the refusals with an analytical rather than an acerbic mind, bearing in mind that there is a reason she is not giving and that it's Annual Giving's fault.

We can't afford to be indirect with our consumers. We can't put Phoenix-shaped furniture in their living rooms or the letters "EU" in their kitchens. (If this doesn't make sense, check this out.) If they aren't doing that themselves, we have to go head-first. The dominoes are already set up. Let's knock 'em down!

With Whom Are We Competing

This is something I just don't know about. It would take a lot more understanding on the dynamics of non-profit organization operations and marketing approaches. From a fundamental approach (the one I've been taking), Annual Giving is kind of competing with itself in that the only real competitor orientation it could take is one that demonizes itself, thus creating a hypothetical circumstance wherein measurement and response is possible. In other words, Annual Giving is its own worst enemy. But that explanation does not help anybody.

So let's try something else. Say the competition is made up of other schools. Wake Forest has a hell of an Annual Giving program. The numbers are climbing. And fast. So what Elon Alums are thinking is, "Elon is not the best school. It does not have the best Giving program. I should not give." Hmm. That does not sound right. Unless the family gives to Wake because the children attend. Then, forget about that family Remember, we need the fans. They spread the word. They initiate conversation. And they feel and understand the connection.

So say the competition is made up of other non-profits. Other direct-mail or direct-phone payment companies that support funding for AIDS awareness or home building. The prospect has meaningful connections to Habitat for Humanity (those bastards!) and forks over the 100% tax deductible disposible income to HFH. What do you do in this case? Conventional Phonathon wisdom says, "play up the Fund, play up how important IT is." The caller really should just try to establish how firmly entrenched the individual is into the HFH fan club. If she does not have time for Elon alumniship, she certainly does not have money for it. Last thought: HFH is here on campus. There's a way to give to both causes. At that point, the prospect is lost. Thanks for your support.

The last idea here is controversial. It goes against the time-old mantra that businesspersons must embrace and make love to. The customer is always right. If the alum says that he does not want to give, what else can you say? [Well, you're supposed to run off a list that includes tax deductibility, gift size, and begging] Anyways, Annual Giving is competing with the alum's lack of knowledge or understanding. The alum does not know what the Fund is for and/or does not truly understand the reason for giving. The only way to affect change into the program will be to embrace this concept. We have to take the Buy-ology approach (link) and assume that our market research is faulty and largely untrue. We have to believe that alums wants to give deep down inside and just have not found the motivation to do so. We need to remind them why the University gives them a warm and fuzzy feeling. Or at least figure out if it still does.

Just A Bunch Of Ideas (the first of many posts)

• When someone gives a gift, offer to place their name (or whatever they like) in a new blog post. People love being given credit. No one is truly humble. Better yet, maybe they're outrageously narcissistic.
• Oh yeah, write a continuous blog fusing with the current (pretty lame) one about what various alums are up to with traveling and careers and such. Might need to do some research on this i.e. not do too many "relating Elon alumniship with this silly link or video" and "here's an alum, there's a city, unremarkable, non conversation-inducing" clutter. This must be a unique experience for alums that sparks conversation and starts alum participation.
• Not exactly implementable: change the idea of alumni participation. A couple may have dated all throughout their time at Elon and gotten married and had 15 kids but if their connection to the university withered away years ago, then they're useless. They're not part of the fan club. Participation doesn't just mean that you gave ten bucks last year. That's almost the opposite of participation. That's nearly emancipation. Participation is constant introspective thought on the university experience and consistent external engagement with the continuing post-Elon existence. I.E. if an alum has that degree posted up on the wall in the den or the office and looks at it, constantly remembering what it took to get there and how she made it, that's the thought. If an alum utilizes something from the experience to LIVE LIFE (if there's a bloody connection!), that's the engagement. This is all very inapplicable and for the most part surreal. But it certainly does happen.
• Everyone needs to come to a realization:Phonothon callers don't sell Annual Giving. And it's unfair that they can take a rap for that. Sure someone with a pleasant voice, a friendly disposition, and practiced monologue can open some purse strings. Hell, all strippers have to do is bend over. Annual Giving is sold for four entire years. It is sold within the memories that take place during those years; it is sold during the periods of reflection that take place concerning those years; and it is sold in the continuing connection and engagement that occurs after those years.
• The alumni are the consumers. The product is the university experience. The opportunity cost is the time, the thought, the energy, and the slight tip over of the money jar. The facilitator is the gift. Phonothon callers, pledge cards, online web pages, events, etc. are the oils that lubricate the facilitator that allow the consumers to remember and understand the value of the product. Together, the consumers and the school create the product though the school must be the one that improves the product though not without the aid of the consumer.
  
• The main problem with the approaching I am taking is that although the current alums may be today's consumers, they are yesterday's graduates. They have no experience with considering these ideas and their application. All of this is based on either hypothetical or subconscious premonitions. This does not, however, excuse anyone who may be thinking that these ideas should not be implemented. The school will continue to produce alums, smarter, more affluent, and more future-orientated ones. Setting this up right now will pay dividends down the road.
  

Experience Compartmentalization

The next few posts are going to illustrate various thoughts I have on improving either the Annual Giving or Phonothon programs. This first one is with regards to creating several distinct categories in which to place different alumni groups. One of the important points of this procedure is to ensure that there are not too many different categories, rather that should there be opportunities to combine categories that those occasions be expounded upon. The final understanding regarding this concept is that the reference points for the categories must have relation to the product on which we are focused (which will be discussed in a coming post): the University Experience.

For example, a category could be "alums valuing science and technology." Although the obvious precognition is that the participants in this group hold degrees in biology or chemistry or must have done laboratory research work, such is not so. In general many alums will end up valuing science and technology. For Xenu's sake, if you own an Ipod or are trying to get your middle schooler into typing, you VALUE the technology. That's not the point. The point is that there must be value of the subject on campus for a current university attendee. The whole reason for these categorizations is to link and to connect alums with current campus life and study. This understanding of value has not come from the alum's time at school but from the time after school during which reflection has taken place and the understanding formed.

But, seriously, this sounds way too hypothetical. The categories are going to be too broad. You're not going to be able to help anyone why they should give money in this vein let alone motivate them to do so. Well not quite yet. Let's throw some categories out there (obviously, there will be time for further contributions). Alumni who:

• Value science and technology
• Value the dedication involved in athletic participation
• Value opportunities provided by social circumstances
• Value opportunities provided by financial aid
• Value the application of academia
• Value the concept of college
• Value philanthropic efforts
• Value specific memories

Well, at least we can add to that list as we go on. There are approaches here in Phonothon terms. Obviously, a caller has the opportunity to understand her prospect more fully and can apply these understandings. Also, this will lead to more effective specialization, more efficiency, and skill improvement. In Annual Giving terms, it helps us to map out our consumers. It helps us to be more honest with them and ourselves. It allows us to specialize as well, to the point where further and more remarkable specialization can take place.

Finally, this is about networking. Don't take this the wrong way. Not everyone in category #4 is going to have cocktails with each other just based on the segments that we have pre-programmed. This is not what networking is. Networking is I know you, you know me; now that this connection has been established, let's discuss or become affiliated in something that interests the two of us. That second interest or category is much more difficult to discover and probably is not in our job title. Hell, it might take an entirely new media altogether.

Sometimes categorization and doing inventory and stacking boxes in piles is OK. It's almost always great when it's trying something that you've never done before. In order to lead Annual Giving to become the best in the country (yeah, set that goal really high!), we are going to have to rearrange things. This is one of those small things that could have major results down the line.