Fundraisers are 'right to ask', and the Institute of Fundraising needs to take this message to the public, says Adrian Beney .

So, the Institute of Fundraising is having a brainstorming session on whether we are 'Right to Ask' or 'Right to Give'. Here's my 2p worth for their meeting.

Of course, the answer is that it's both, but to my mind there are different audiences for each message. 'Right to Give' is uncontroversial - unless you're either a Fascist in which case I guess you don't care, or a Marxist, in which case you probably think the state should do everything.

But seriously, the wide middle ground would not argue with 'Right to Give' whether the audience is fundraisers or donors or potential donors. But isn't this stating the obvious?  There have been generic initiatives to get people to give before, most notably the Giving Campaign.  I am not sure this was the point of the idea of 'Right to Ask'.

I detect a timidity amongst trustees, executives and even fundraisers about whether or not it's Right to Ask. And the general public personified by 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' is rumoured to think it's 'Wrong to Ask'. It could be argued that the very existence of the FRSB is a response to fears that the public thinks asking is somehow aggressive, intrusive, dirty and inappropriate. But where is the origin of these fears?

I suspect it's a combination of adversity to risk and a culture of always having to find someone to blame. I can not be the only fundraiser who had to reassure his chief exec that the three complaining letters we received when we started telephone fundraising were not representative and should not be allowed to infuence decision making. Few donors write to the chief exec when they are happy to have been solicited - why would they? The silent majority are happy - that's why they are silent.
 
So we have senior staff and trustees become increasingly timid, the FRSB comes into existence, and there is an insidious slide away from rejoicing in the noble job we do as fundraisers for charities which transform the lives of people all over the planet into wondering whether actually we are no better than Del Boy selling dodgy second hand goods out of the back of his Reliant Robin.
 
We are 'Right to Ask', and the first audience for this message is Trustees and Executive Boards.  The second audience is the fundraisers themselves.  Finally, there's the general public, and I am not sure how important that last audience really is in this debate. If we as fundraisers had confidence in themselves, and the 100% backing of their boards and senior management team, then we'd just get on with asking anyway.
 
Ultimately, no-one can be forced into giving and it is not in a charity's interest to annoy the hell out of its supporters and potential supporters. I think the whole system is essentially self-regulating. There will always be the mavericks, and this is where the FRSB and bodies like PFRA may be useful. And when people feel over-asked let's stay true to our causes, and respect their opinions at the same time.

We have a 'Right to Ask' because the country, through the Charity Commission (or OSCR etc) has agreed we operate for the Public Benefit.  In return we must completely respect their 'Right to Say No'.

So, Institute, stay true to your guns, but please aim the message first at Trustees, Boards and at ourselves. Let's get back to believing in what we do.