Answering well

Your report can only be as useful as the answers behind it. Below are a few habits that help, with examples.

Write for honesty

Nobody outside your organisation will read your answers except us. There's no prize for a good-looking response. A polished answer that hides a problem gets you a report that misses it.

Most people who take a Self Audit already know where things get stuck, so write it down plainly. The report looks at the system, and naming a gap is just describing how the system works.

Short and specific

Two or three sentences with a real example will do more than a long paragraph of general points. Name the meeting, the document, the team or the month. "Our appeals are planned about six weeks out" tells us far more than "we plan our appeals carefully".

Say when you don't know

"We don't know" is a good answer when it's true. It tells us that information isn't reaching the person who sees most of fundraising, which is a finding in itself.

Guessing does more harm. A guess reads as fact, and the score follows it.

Describe what happens

Tell us how things work on a normal week, with the people you have, even if that's different from how they're meant to work.

It helps to think of the last time it happened and what people actually did.

Policies and practices

Where you have a written policy, tell us whether people follow it. The gap between the two is often the most telling part of an answer.

If you have a gift acceptance policy that nobody has opened in two years, say that it exists and that nobody opens it. Then the report can tell what's written down from what actually happens.

Some examples

These are illustrative. They're written for a fictional charity, the Red Panda Protection Group (opens in a new tab), and the questions are paraphrased.

On how fundraising priorities are set

Before: "Priorities are set collaboratively by the senior team in line with our strategic objectives."

After: "The fundraising plan goes to the senior team each March. In practice, priorities change when a large grant comes in or falls through. This year that happened twice, and the plan wasn't updated."

On how data is used

Before: "We use data to drive decisions across the team."

After: "We get a monthly income report from finance. It shows totals by stream. We don't look at retention or cost per pound raised. I'm not sure anyone could pull those numbers without asking our CRM supplier."

On how the board sees fundraising

Before: "The board is supportive of fundraising."

After: "Trustees ask about the income number at every meeting. We haven't had a board discussion about fundraising strategy in the last two years. Two trustees help with major donor introductions."

Each "after" answer swaps adjectives for facts, and facts are what the scoring can use.

One respondent, one view

When one person answers, the report sees the system through their eyes. Everyone has blind spots. We all tend to notice what fits our own view and miss what doesn't. That's called confirmation bias, and it applies to experienced leaders as much as anyone.

It's the reason page 1 of your report carries a note about reading one person's view.

You can reduce it before you submit. Pick five or six answers you feel most sure about, and five or six you found hardest. Show them to a colleague who sees fundraising from a different angle, such as someone in finance or in a service team. Ask one question: "Is this how it looks from where you sit?"

Change an answer if they show you something you missed, and leave it if you still think you're right.

Your next step

Before you start answering, agree with one colleague that they'll give you 20 minutes to read a handful of your answers.