[Foundation-l] Three fundraising job openings

[Dan Rosenthal]

I don't disagree with you. Though I think that starting with one and  
slowly work their way might be an alternative, I don't see anything  
wrong with three fundraising staff members. I'm just saying we don't  
even have them yet, so it's a bit early to speculate on them.

-Dan
On Apr 17, 2008, at 10:08 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> Dan, I can't predict the future any better than you can 8-)
>
> However...
>
> The general observations remain.  Other nonprofits use such people, to
> do the same things, to drive large parts of their fundraising.  This
> is normal and par for the course in the organized charity realm.
>
> What the WMF wants to do, what we've asked the foundation to do, do
> require these types of growth.
>
> It's possible that executing on this will not go well, but trying to
> do it seems clearly appropriate.
>
>
> -george
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Dan Rosenthal  
> <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think we're far to early to pass judgment over whether the 3
>> positions are cost effective without a) knowing the salaries, which I
>> doubt we will, and b) seeing how well they perform, and c) actually
>> hiring anyone yet.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2008, at 9:52 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Chad <innocentkiller at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Do we honestly need 3 more employees all doing the same thing? I
>>>> really
>>>> think a dedicated "Donations Coordinator" could accomplish the same
>>>> thing, rather than making 3 positions, at least at this point in
>>>> time.
>>>
>>> These type of employees usually pay for themselves many many times
>>> over in the increased donations.  I have heard of exceptions, and
>>> hopefully Erik, Sue, and the Board will reverse this if the  
>>> donations
>>> don't come through accordingly.
>>>
>>> But... if one looks out there at donating entities, foundations and
>>> rich individuals and companies and the like, there's a lot of
>>> charitable money out there that the Foundation should be going  
>>> after,
>>> and the bandwidth and focused job role of doing so seems like an
>>> excellent idea to me.
>>>
>>> We want the foundation to be stable, growing, build an endowment, be
>>> able to help with creating and encouraging open content not just
>>> within the context of the projects but in society as a whole.  Those
>>> things aren't going to be cheap.  There is donor money out there.   
>>> If
>>> we want to do those things, we need that donor money.
>>>
>>> "Growing up" to the point that we acknowledge that, create the
>>> positions, hire for them, and then execute on chasing and catching
>>> donations of appropriate scope is an important evolution for the
>>> Foundation.  It's a good idea.  It's a necessary set of steps in the
>>> long term.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -george william herbert
>>> george.herbert at gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>> foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l