There are many different theories about who donors are and how they can be categorized. This research has stemmed mostly from work around soliciting major donors and trying to maximize their gifts. More recently, the industry is interested in the Millennials and how they fit into the fundraising landscape.

In the church, donors are not that much different, and the basic strategy is the same. You need to tailor your ask to who you are asking. In every other aspect of the church’s work we have become very effective at tailoring our ministry to the need of the person. We target specific programs to youth, the married, singles, and seniors. We have tailored our response to the need of the person in every area of church life … except in giving and stewardship.

In stewardship we continue to assume that our congregations are a homogenous whole, that all these donors think the same, and that they respond to the same things and give for the same reasons. Much as in industry, however, that simply isn’t true. Our congregational donors consist of a series of subgroups, quite different from each other with respect to giving motivation and giving methodology. Demographics are probably the most useful classification for the purposes of stewardship. There are other levels of course but it makes sense to start by looking at simple generational differences with respect to giving patterns.

Giving Motivation

Older members think institutionally. The Church (and many nonprofits) have been fortunate to benefit from the unbridled generosity and loyalty of the older generations. They have an institutional mindset and can always be counted on to do their part. They believe that as members of the church, they need to carry their fair share of the financial load.

This is why older donors gravitate to budget and maintenance issues in the church. They want to see the church maintained and are determined to keep it in good repair. They understand that we need to support the building in which we do ministry. Often endowment funds are created by the older generations to maintain church buildings through their estates. To them, the building is synonymous with the institution, and its preservation takes high priority for this generation.

Membership Matters

Have you ever heard anyone say, “Once an Anglican, always an Anglican?” Or wondered why churches of Christian faith are built near each other? It is because membership mattered to the older generations; they were loyal to their churches, their service clubs and their teams. 

Further, because of this loyalty in the church setting, it can often be assumed that these older members have a solid understanding of stewardship issues, and likely a biblical understanding as well from teaching in their younger years. They would be very familiar with the terms of “time, talent and treasure” and would understand the concept of the tithe, even if they do not do so. Older members are motivated to give by institutional loyalty, maintaining tradition, and perhaps a basic sense of biblical responsibility.

Consumer Mentality

Younger members, in contrast, are consumers, and not as loyal long term to the brand. They are loyal to a brand, but only for as long as it is sought after by everyone else. Or in other words, until the next great brand comes along. In our churches, these people ask, “what’s in it for me?” They are joiners, not belongers, and if you are not appealing to them and meeting their needs, they will move along to the next church, because the label doesn’t matter. They are looking for certain key factors that will meet their spiritual and social needs.

For these people, you not only need an entertaining Sunday morning service, but you need to make sure you have a dynamic children’s ministry to keep their kids entertained. Many consume church the same as they consume any other institution or brand in their lives … casually. Younger members though are easily inspired and to give to vision. They give emotively and impulsively to ministry, vision and greater societal causes. They do, however, often struggle to commit financially to the church; they are more about the “experience.”

The envelope system came into the church in the 1930s. Originally introduced to create efficiency in identifying and recording donations, and to increase giving, it succeeded in doing both. it was designed, however, on the premise that everyone who went to church, attended weekly and of course would give weekly, and that people received a weekly paycheck and thus would/should tithe weekly. The envelope system simply accommodated that, but times have changed, and much of our giving now is monthly, or irregular, and has moved online. The weekly model doesn’t fit so well anymore, and we need to adapt our methods for giving.

Monthly giving, originally called pre-authorized remittance, or PAR, has now taken a firm hold as an important option for donors. Some organizations — and churches — were quicker to adopt this strategy than others. The United Church of Canada, one of, if not the first denomination to offer this service nationally to churches for a transaction fee, made it available for other denominations as well. We recommend this strategy for several reasons, only one of which is to encourage regular giving. Some of the more progressive churches also have giving stations available where people can give an electronic offering with their debit or credit card, a great example of offering your congregation various methods in which to donate.

The Seven Myths of Church Fundraising Conclusion

Most churches are likely not really tapping into their true potential. The maintenance mentality unfortunately prevails in many churches, and when it does, it is very easy to say, “all of the material here sounds good, but we’re past saving.”

It’s not true! You probably still have significant potential even if in the past many of your church’s dreams died away because you assumed there wasn’t money to fund them anyway. But once you accept the premise that you have potential, how do you know where to start? Select one or two things you can implement as a starting point. Don’t try to do everything and hope it will all work. Do a few of the most important things well, and build on that success.

Maybe the starting point for you will be to clarify your sense of purpose. Perhaps it will be to formalize stewardship responsibility and commission specific people to work in this area. Or you could do the financial assessment to gain an accurate idea of what is happening in your donor database. Perhaps it will be to identify which of the myths applied to you and develop programs and strategies to counter them in your congregational life.

Where you begin is not as important as starting somewhere. Being proactive is the key. In my upcoming book, you will find effective and proven strategies and ideas you will be able to implement in your church or organization. Do these as well as you can; evaluate them; and build on that success with additional strategies.