donor's engagement crosses the line into unwelcome or inappropriate territory can be difficult (see Chapter 2). Organizations may choose to diversify their revenue sources, including fees, dues, or commercial activities in order to lessen their dependence on any one funding source, and in so doing potentially diminish threats to control over financial and programmatic decision‐making (Carroll and Stater 2009).
Social Exchanges: Gift Theory and Reciprocity
Gift theory recognizes that giving gifts is a universal aspect of social human behavior, and, further, that receiving a gift generally prompts a social obligation to reciprocate in some manner (Adloff 2016). The gifts may vary greatly – they may include money or physical items; favors such as use of resources like a boat or equipment, helping with yard work or childcare, or preferential treatment; or appreciation expressed through a thoughtful note, loyalty, or even prayers. Thus, giving is rarely one‐way, but is instead a social exchange of some type. Many factors affect what is considered an appropriate gift: cultural traditions, the relationship and relative social status of each party, and time and place. These social considerations apply whether one is considering an initial gift, or a reciprocal expression (Adloff 2016; Mauss 1990). Breaking the social norm of reciprocity is viewed as a lack of appreciation and makes future giving less likely (Lindahl 2010). Gift theory tells us that giving results in reciprocal obligations, and that these create and maintain webs of both mutual interest and mutual responsibility (Gouldner 1960; Mauss 1990).
One implication of this theory is stewardship. Demonstrating to donors that their generosity is appreciated and impactful fulfills the expectations of reciprocity. When fundraisers acknowledge gifts and demonstrate stewardship, they are speaking to the social exchange aspect of giving, fulfilling the social norm of reciprocity, and maintaining a relationship of mutual interest (Alborough 2017). Gift theory explicitly recognizes the importance of relationship building in fundraising.
A second implication of gift theory concerns donor status. As noted by Lindahl (2010), “… making generous donations confers high status on the donor and benefits the recipient organization and the community at the same time” (93–94). The norms of reciprocity between peers suggest that the gift or favor eventually reciprocated should be of similar value. However, those of high status are often perceived as having higher social obligations to their communities (noblesse oblige), while those of lower status are required to reciprocate with their appreciation, which might take the form of loyalty. Thus, gift theory explains instances of conspicuous generosity, in which a person might give significantly to a cause to be recognized publicly as a member of a socially elite group.
Positive Identification: The Identification Theory of Care and Social Identity Theory
The identification theory of care focuses on relationships and meaning to explain why people give (Schervish and Havens 1997; 2002). Its attention to encouraging the process of engagement makes it highly applicable to the work of fundraising. The essential idea is that “voluntary assistance derives from identification, identification derives from encounter, encounter derives from relationship, and relationship derives from participation” (Schervish and Havens 2002, 50). This process is illustrated in Figure 4.1.
FIGURE 4.1. MODEL OF IDENTIFICATION THEORY
Source: Adapted from Schervish and Havens 1997; 2002.
The core of this model is the idea of communities of participation – that people care most about family members, friends, and those they know well from the communities in which they participate. This may include those joined in attendance at religious services, or shared membership in formal and informal groups. The social relationships formed in these communities prompt shared frameworks, or ways of thinking about the world. These frameworks influence preferences and commitment to causes. When a person identifies with others – that is, they view others as being similar to them, part of “us,” or similar to those they care for – they are likely to help the others by volunteering money, time, or resources (Schervish and Havens 1997; 2002). The first important implication of this idea is that generosity is born not of selflessness, but instead of acting in accordance with values and priorities that are essential to self‐identity. The second implication, and one of direct significance to fundraisers, is that encouraging an expansion of generosity means recognizing and encouraging people's current expressions of care, broadly construed (Schervish and Havens 2002). Another major implication for fundraisers is the importance of engaging potential donors with a cause and with others who support the cause.
Related to this idea, social identity theory helps explain how people identify as members of groups (Turner and Oakes 1986). The tendency to categorize people into groups is a heuristic – a mental shortcut that helps in navigating a complex world. If people see themselves as belonging to a group, that group is an “in‐group”; other groups are “outgroups.” People tend to favor others whom they see as sharing a social identity – belonging to the same “in‐group” (Tajfel and Turner 1979). Applying this idea to fundraising, fundraisers may activate prospective donors' social identities that overlap with others affiliated with the organization. These might include mentioning other donors with similar identities, such as gender (Shang, Reed, and Croson 2008); mentioning a tie to an organization, such as alumni status (Drezner 2009); reminding the donor of their past giving history, and therefore, their status as a donor to the organization (Kessler and Milkman 2018); or encouraging the individual to identify with the group or cause that will directly benefit from the donation (Garvey and Drezner 2013; James III 2017). Fundraisers can also encourage identification with moral identities, such as someone who is “helpful” or “generous.” If these adjectives already describe how an individual would like to think of themselves, a fundraiser can encourage behavior that reflects that identity by recognizing that attribute in the donor (Aquino, Freeman, Reed, Lim, and Felps 2009).
Encouraging prospective donors to identify with a group can make them more willing to help that in‐group, and to support what others within that group also support (Duclos and Barasch 2014; Hysenbelli, Rubaltelli, and Rumiati 2013). On the downside, this identity activation can also make people more aware of who is not a member of that group and depress their willingness to help outsiders. However, as donors and volunteers become more involved with an organization, their affiliation with the group will become a greater part of how they view their own personal identity (Oyakawa 2015).
People who spend time together and value their relationship tend to find points of agreement and to share many priorities. Co‐orientation theory explains how people who are within a community of participation will tend to either come to share views and priorities, or step back and spend less time and energy on their mutual relationship (Newcomb 1953, cited in Lindahl 2010). As applied to fundraising, this suggests that peer solicitation – that is, asking an existing donor to help solicit their friends and acquaintances for a cause – is likely to encourage serious consideration on the part of the prospective donor. However, this should not be done lightly. If the gift opportunity is not a good match for the prospective donor, then involving the peer solicitor can potentially damage the friendship.
Setting the Scene: Symbolic Interactionism and Dramaturgy
Symbolic interactionism, a framework derived from American pragmatism, has ties to both social psychology and microsociology. It focuses on how people interpret meaning from the objects, people, and situations of life, which then influences their decisions
