Hello. Good morning everybody and thank you for joining us today for Creative Partnerships Australia's Knowledge Series webinar, Development and the Board with Louise Walsh. My name is James Boyd and I'm the State Manager of Western Australia for Creative Partnerships Australia. 

This is the fourth in a series of five professional development webinars for the arts and cultural sector. I would first like to make an acknowledgement of Country. Creative Partnerships Australia acknowledges Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as the traditional custodians of the land on which you live, work and learn. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present and to our shared future together. 

Briefly, some housekeeping for today's session. Please keep your computers on mute and you are welcome to keep your cameras on throughout the webinar. The presenter would prefer to respond to questions at the end of the presentation. There will be plenty of time for discussion, but please type any questions into the chat box as we go along, either generally or directly to me, and I will facilitate Q&A at the end of the session. 

If you experience any technical issues, please direct message Katherine at Creative Partnerships via the chat. She is the meeting convenor. We are recording today's session, so you will be able to view the webinar again afterwards, and the PowerPoint slides will be sent to you next week. 

To today's topic, Development and the Board. It is a hot topic. We have had more registrations for this webinar than any other in this series. It is also a topic that is regularly in the media. Even this week in ArtsHub, Kate Larsen stated about boards, “Australia's not-for-profit governance model takes a team of unpaid or low-paid volunteers and puts them in charge of a team of paid experts.” Kate suggests the whole issue of boards sits within a far bigger governance debate around whether organisations even need a board. 

Creative Partnerships works with a lot of boards. Some certainly do prove challenging, but others are incredible changemakers, led by inspiring chairs who achieve great things during their tenure. How can we be so lucky? I am not sure we will reach a consensus on Kate Larsen's question today, but Louise Walsh has as much experience as anyone on this topic. So, let’s introduce Louise. 

Louise Walsh is the founder and CEO of Walsh Capital, a bespoke third-party capital raising business whose clients are boutique investment managers. She also has a development background. She is widely regarded as a fundraising expert, with vast experience including sponsorship and philanthropy as Head of Sponsorship for the Sydney Olympics in 2000, Director of Development for the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, CEO of Artsupport Australia, and then Philanthropy Australia. Louise also sits on the boards of the Snow Foundation and St Vincent’s Curran Foundation, which raises about $50 million a year. Prior to founding Walsh Capital, she was CEO of Future Generation Investment. 

Louise, welcome, and thank you for tackling this tricky topic for us. 

Thank you very much, James. It is fantastic to be here this morning. It is a topic I feel very passionate about. When I finished as the founding director of Artsupport Australia, which is really the precursor to CPA, I did feel there was a lot of unfinished business on this particular topic. 

I have been in the trenches, actually doing the roles that each of you have done, whether you are a head of fundraising, in a fundraising team, a CEO, or a board member. I feel as though I have covered those three areas. It is interesting in my current role because my day job, my own business, is not fundraising for donor programs in the not-for-profit sector. I am doing it for investment managers. It is fascinating because some of what I have learned in the not-for-profit and arts sectors over the years, I have applied into this business and into my previous role as CEO of the Future Generation investment companies. Sometimes people think the not-for-profit sector should be learning all the time from the corporate sector, but this is a case where it has been the reverse. 

What I would like to do is get into the topic. I have divided it into three sections, as per the overview. The first section, which is really important, is the recruitment of development-ready board members. It sounds like such an easy task, but we all know it is one of the toughest things. How do I build a board, or change my board, so I have more development-ready board members? 

The first and obvious thing is that the leadership of the chair is absolutely crucial to the success of a successful development-related board. I have seen this over the years. One of the single hardest things to do is to find the right chair. The second biggest challenge is, if you have found someone you think would be a better chair, how do you exit the existing chair so that you can bring in a better chair? 

We might save that for question time, but it is a challenge. For obvious reasons, the leadership of the chair is absolutely crucial, and I will talk about this a little more further down the track. The other thing that makes it easier to recruit more development-ready board members is a fantastic chair, but also a charismatic, true leader in a CEO and/or artistic director. That means you will find it easier to recruit better board members, and the right board members who can help with fundraising, if you have the right chair. Ideally, you also have the right CEO and artistic director, if that is what your organisation has. 

The important message in this section is that it is about building the confidence of board members and training them so they become better at this topic. You will never come into a role like this and find a board where all members are development-ready. That is too good to be true. The first thing you are looking for is to work with them and your CEO to build the confidence of the directors, so that less experienced directors in development or fundraising can help. 

What you are looking for upfront is directors who are willing to actively engage. They may not necessarily understand it. They may not necessarily have a lot of experience in the fundraising space, but you want them to be willing to actively engage. 

Some fundraising experience is helpful if you can get it. If you have a board of six or eight people, which is probably average, it may be ideal if a couple of them have some fundraising experience from previous boards or roles they have done. One of them may even have been a head of fundraising at a larger organisation that is not competitive. That is ideal, because if you are training everyone up from scratch, that is tricky. 

When you are recruiting board members, ideally you want a skills-based board for obvious reasons. If one or two members have some form of fundraising experience, and it may not necessarily be in the arts, that is not a prerequisite, but it does help. 

The other thing I look for when recruiting board members is the power of different networks. You do not want board members who are too friendly with each other, or who have networks that are too similar. You are looking for a group of people on a board who have different networks. For instance, there could be a local accountant and a local lawyer. There might be some crossover in their clients, but ideally you are looking for different networks. 

You are not necessarily looking for people on your board who have the best networks with the wealthiest people in your area, region, city, or town. That is not necessarily a prerequisite at all. From my experience, people too quickly judge someone’s capacity to donate by what suburb they live in, what car they drive, what clothes they wear, or what job they have. That can be a big mistake. I have learned that over many years. 

I had a major shareholder or investor in my previous role who would turn up in the office in shorts and a shaggy shirt. You would not think he had two bob to his name, but he was an investor with over one or two million dollars in both of the companies I used to run. You do have to be careful about misjudging someone’s capacity to donate by where they live, work, or the car they drive. But you do want people on your board who have different networks and will contribute. 

The other thing I am very keen on is board members who are all willing to donate. I mean every single one. The first point here is that it is important that when a chair is having a conversation with a potential board member about joining, and is trying to persuade them and talk to them about what it will entail, the chair has a very open conversation about what is required. 

I am not necessarily suggesting that every board member needs to give the same amount. I do not even care if every board member gives $50 each. It is not the amount they give, but the fact that they all give. I will touch on this subject a little later. 

In my time at Artsupport Australia, when I spent a lot of time mentoring and coaching boards of arts organisations on how to be better at this topic, we did have some challenges with boards where we could not get everyone to donate. Sometimes board members would say, “I am giving so much time, I do not necessarily need to donate money.” My view is they should be doing both. It all comes back to the leadership of the chair. 

The chair should do the asking here, not the CEO and not the head of fundraising. It has to be led by the chair. That role is crucial when it comes to development. 

If you have some pushback from a chair on a topic like this, or from the board, and the CEO or general manager, maybe the artistic director, a finance manager, and the head of fundraising all agree, you can persuade those senior executives to donate. Again, it does not matter what the size of the donation is. It is then pretty embarrassing if, in a board meeting, you are talking about the update and the fact that the senior executives have all decided to donate, and the board members are not donating as well. It does help persuade board members to think, perhaps we should be doing this too. 

These are obvious points in the opening set of slides, but they are absolutely crucial, particularly the leadership of the chair and the fact that you are looking for directors who are willing to actively engage. That comes down to the role of the head of fundraising with the CEO, to get the board excited about the mission, the vision, the case for support, and the donor program. 

Following on from this topic, I have a few strong views on boards, skill sets, and the things that I think do not work sometimes. Another thing I think is important is that most not-for-profit boards I see do not have a marketing and communications skill set on their board. 

I remember years ago Opera Australia had the head of Clemenger, one of the top advertising agencies, on their board. He was key. He would lean on suppliers and clients to get all sorts of things done at discounted prices or pro bono for the benefit of Opera Australia. It was absolutely crucial. I see a lot of chairs, boards, and CEOs say to me, “I have to have people who have fundraising experience or philanthropists on my board,” but they forget how closely marketing and communications is tied to fundraising. 

You have to be building the brand and the awareness all the time, and that is closely linked to your ability to fundraise well. Often when boards are doing skills matrices of the skill sets they need, they forget about that particular skill set and how important it is. 

The other thing I see happen time and time again is organisations that do not have strong induction programs for their board members. I have encountered this myself as a board member, even with some of the best organisations I have been involved with. I have probably been guilty of it too, when I was in roles such as Head of Development at the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. 

If a director does not truly understand the organisation, its different programs and projects, who is doing what, and the priorities, how can they really get excited, educated, and inspired about what the organisation is doing? Organisations need to spend more time and effort reviewing whether they have a formal induction program. If they do not, they need one. If they do, it may need to be reviewed to make sure it is achieving what it is meant to achieve. 

You want board members to be educated, but you also want them to be inspired. If they are not truly inspired, it will be hard to get them to help you with what we are talking about this morning. 

Another thing I see time and time again is management spending the bulk of the time, if not all of the time, developing the fundraising strategy, whether it is a major gift strategy or another strategy, with very little input from the board. If you are going to get the board inspired, educated, and more involved, you need to make sure the board has the opportunity to truly input into the process and the strategy. 

That is not necessarily about going into a board meeting, presenting the strategy, and then asking if they have any questions or comments. You need to construct a session, and it could be part of a board meeting, that gives the board the opportunity to provide input. Then you might present the final strategy at the next board meeting. It is about truly getting them to provide input. 

As I said earlier, my number one priority is building the directors’ confidence, passion, and excitement. You cannot do enough work in this area to build that excitement, passion, and confidence. It does take a lot of work to do it properly. At the end, when I talk about best-practice stewardship, I will talk about a really good example from the current board that I am on, the St Vincent’s Curran Foundation, which is the fundraising arm of St Vincent’s Hospitals in Sydney. It is not in the arts, but what they do can be applied across the arts sector. 

Another interesting topic in this space is that boards of arts organisations and other not-for-profits often set up fundraising subcommittees. While I am not necessarily a critic of that, you have to be careful that, if you set up a fundraising committee, you are not letting the board off the hook in the role they can play in fundraising and in donating themselves. 

I do see that happen. Board members sometimes say, “It is great. We now have that fundraising committee. We have X and Y director on it, and they are going to look after everything.” You have to be careful that the board itself is still actively involved in fundraising and that it is not just left to the fundraising committee. I do not think that is fair, and I do not think you will be successful if you do that. 

It is also a bit like when boards and CEOs say, “We will just set up a foundation. We will set up an endowment now, and I am sure the donors will come.” Again, it is not as simple as that. If you are thinking about doing that, your organisation needs to be mature enough. You also need to have a strong enough existing donor program to even think about setting up a foundation. 

The other key message here is that directors need confidence in management to unlock their networks. I have seen this many times over the years with different boards. I have seen board members who have very strong networks of potential donors, but they do not unlock that network or talk freely with management about those networks and helping management get access to them. 

Fundamentally, I do not feel they are confident enough in management to unleash that network to management. You need to demonstrate to a director, or a set of directors, that you are very strong on relationships with donors, so they know those existing networks will be properly looked after and the stewardship will be strong. I will talk more about that later. 

Do not take it for granted that board members will automatically release their Rolodex of contacts. You have to prove yourself and get the board member excited before they will unlock some of those networks. If they have discovered the joy of giving themselves, and they can see the reward that comes from donating as a board member, they are probably more likely to unlock those networks. It does not matter how small or large the network is. It is about how management can work with that director to build relationships with people in that network. 

Finally, on this important topic, I think too many organisations attempt to recruit board members who are already on too many not-for-profit or arts boards. That is a recipe for disaster. If you are chasing a potential board member because you believe they are a fantastic prospect and would work well with your organisation, you need to be careful they are not on too many other not-for-profit boards. 

If they are on three not-for-profit boards, it is human nature that they will prioritise. They may think the one they love the most is number one, the second is fine, and the third is okay. If you are number three, the odds of them unlocking their networks and being actively involved in the fundraising you need are not nearly as strong as if you are number one. It is human nature that they will rank them. 

I am not against someone being on an arts board and another not-for-profit board. I do not mind that at all. But you probably do not want them to be on too many because it probably means they are too busy. I am not keen on someone being on more than one arts board, because I worry about the time and devotion they will have to more than one. I would probably prefer it to be one. If it is two, make sure it is not competitive in any way, and ideally it is one large organisation and one small organisation, so it is a very different experience. 

The other thing I am keen on is ensuring that boards set terms for their directors, because I think it is good governance. The boards that I have been on, and the only ones I would go on, have three-year terms and a maximum of nine years. I actually think six years is not bad either. I would even vote for six years in some instances. 

What can happen with directors who stay for too long is that there is natural fundraising fatigue. There might be an event where they are asked to bring some contacts, and they think, “The people I normally bring to this have come with me for the last five or six years. They must be getting tired of coming every year.” If it is a cracker event, that is a different proposition, but I do think terms are very valuable. 

Terms are also valuable because they give you an opportunity to have a heart-to-heart with a director if they are not pulling their weight after a certain point. Ideally, that could be at the end of three years. I had an instance recently where I did a board role for three years, but I did not seek renewal. They probably wanted me to continue, but I felt I was not contributing as much as I would like to that particular board, for various reasons. That is probably an unusual situation, but you want to avoid fundraising fatigue where you can. 

The other thing that happens with terms is that chairs and CEOs often hate having to find new board members. It is like recruiting a new artistic director, general manager, or CEO. It is hard, and the pool of people is limited. Sometimes they want to keep people on for a long time because they are avoiding the tough task of finding new people. 

You must make sure you have a nominations committee, or even a couple of people on the board if it is not formally a nominations committee. Their role is to always be thinking about new potential board members. 

On that note, one of the things I was fortunate to do at the Sydney Symphony Orchestra was having a CEO who enabled me to have quite a lot of interaction with the board of directors. It was so strong that, while I was not a formal member of the nominations committee considering new board members, I was actively encouraged to put forward names and a case for why I thought a particular person would be good for the board. 

I would actively encourage heads of fundraising to be thinking about this, because you may come across interesting people in your travels who you think the CEO and the board should consider. From time to time, the board did like my suggestions. As a result, I felt good, and it saved them work. I think that is something a head of fundraising could have more involvement with. 

Sometimes they might be people you do not necessarily know or have access to, but you have read about them and believe there is a good reason why they would be a good fit. It might be that someone on your board knows that potential director, or you can find ways to get access to that person too. 

The final point on recruiting development-ready board members is that all board members need some capacity building in this space in some shape or form. No board is perfect when it comes to being development-ready. There may be great examples of perfection in places like the United States, where it is so ingrained in board members. We have all read stories about boards there where, in some cases with high-profile and very prestigious boards, board members pay to be on that board. It is a privilege to be asked to join. Here, we are often twisting people’s arms to be on not-for-profit and arts boards. 

You do need some sort of capacity building, and that is where organisations like Creative Partnerships Australia can help. It might be particular directors who need help. It could be the chair in particular, or the chair might be great on a whole lot of other things but not so good on development. Maybe it is about seeking help from Creative Partnerships Australia and the relevant state manager about how you would handle a particular situation. 

I remember years ago at Artsupport Australia, I helped a small-to-medium performing arts company in Sydney that recognised it had a new general manager and that the board was probably not as strong as they would like for this particular topic. We sat down and talked about an exit strategy, how to find a new chair, and how to exit the existing chair gracefully. Obviously, that is a very difficult topic. 

One of the ways I added value at the time was to put that general manager in contact with a couple of well-respected chairs in the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors who had dealt with this issue before. They helped the general manager with the process of how to exit the existing chair well. They did not help her find the next chair, but they helped with the process, because it can be, and often will be, a very delicate subject. 

I might move on to the second stage. This is a subject I really love, and I am trying to keep this to very practical tips. With a seminar or session like this, I am drawing on experience I have had personally when I have been in your shoes, but also experience from when I was running Artsupport Australia. 

The first point about how to activate boards with fundraising goals is that usually, in just about all not-for-profit boards, the goals are only set for management. They are not set for the board. I think it is important that the board has some expectations about what its goals are. 

I often see letters of appointment for board members of not-for-profits that do not set out in detail what the expectation of that director is. In my last role, I was CEO of two listed investment companies, the Future Generation investment companies. One thing we did there was set out in a lot of detail what the expectations of board members were for particular parts of the business. 

It is worth thinking about this when you are having the discussion with a potential board member about joining the board, and also when you send the letter of offer or letter of appointment. It should include more specific goals. That might include board members agreeing to donate, and that should be set out. 

I think boards should have an annual target for their annual donations. As previously flagged, this should definitely be led by the chair. It has to be led by the chair. I do not think it is nearly as successful if a general manager, artistic director, or head of fundraising asks the board to donate. 

It needs to be an initial meeting with the chair, the general manager and/or the head of fundraising, where you talk through the idea of doing it and what those annual targets are. Each board member can give different amounts, but there is a particular dollar target. You want to acknowledge and recognise those board members for doing it. 

You also want to talk about the fact that all of the board is donating when you are talking to potential donors. I think it sends a really strong signal to potential donors if the board is donating not just its time, but also money. 

Another thing to think about is making sure you consider professionals to help drive larger campaigns that you might want to do. Sometimes I see organisations running larger fundraising campaigns and trying to do it all themselves in-house. It might be that you need external professional help, particularly to help set the strategy for the campaign. 

There are different people who are good at this. Melissa Smith at Noble Ambitions, and Frankie Airey, who I know ran the very first session, are among the best in the business. Sometimes it is worth spending the money to get those people in early to help set the strategy. They are not going to be out there raising the money for you, but they are helping you with the strategy. 

As I mentioned before, it is important that directors are involved in developing the strategy. This is where things can come unstuck if management develops the strategy without any input from directors, and then comes into the board meeting or fundraising committee to say, “Here is our strategy. Do you have any questions?” That is not being involved in developing the strategy. 

You need to do one or two sessions with the board, or a subset of the board, to develop the strategy. Again, do not hesitate to use a professional to help facilitate a session like this. It is worth spending a little money, or you might be able to get someone to agree to do it pro bono. It is worth its weight in gold having professionals involved where you can. 

When I was running Artsupport Australia, I spent a lot of time building the confidence of boards on how to do this topic well. I also offered formal coaching or mentoring on the ask. How do you ask a major donor to make a contribution? Do not think you need to know it all yourself. 

Creative Partnerships Australia can help. James Boyd worked for me, and he knows this topic inside out, as I am sure do the other managers in the other states. There is an art in how you ask a donor to consider investing in and supporting your organisation. There are tips about what you do not say. For example, some people think that if they talk about the case for support and pitch what they need the money for, they do not have to ask for a particular sum of money. I believe you do. 

Formal coaching and mentoring might involve one or two sessions with the board, or a subset of the board. The specific role of directors is also important. Not all directors will be good at asking major donors, and not all directors should ask. That is a rarity on a board. Often the ask will not be made by a board member anyway. It may be made by the most appropriate person who has the best relationship with the targeted potential donor. 

That could be a general manager, an artistic director, the head of fundraising, or a board member. There could be a couple of board members who are appropriate to have more training in this space. One thing all board members can do is be thankers. You cannot thank a donor enough. 

Time and again, I see many examples where donors are not thanked properly. I will give you a small tip as an example. I have been in instances where one board member picked up the phone and called the donor to say thank you. Another board member on the same board wrote a personal card of thanks to that donor. Another board member wrote an email. There are different ways and forms of saying thank you, and I think you cannot thank enough. 

I am not just talking about when the gift is made. That might be on an annual basis or a six-monthly basis. Another specific role that can be set for board members is that some board members will be more appropriate to host things, whether in their home or in their office. Do not underestimate the power of that. It is not about flashy homes or flashy offices. 

I see board members sometimes say, “I could not open up my home to anything. It is just not good enough.” One of the best functions I ever went to in Sydney was at a board member's home. It was a very small arts sector board in Sydney. From memory, the board member lived in Newtown. If you know Sydney, it is in the inner west. It is not a salubrious suburb by any stretch of the imagination, but it is a good one. 

This particular board member had an amazing book collection, with bookshelf after bookshelf. It was fascinating, and people loved it. People were chatting and networking, but they spent a lot of time looking at his collection of books. Sometimes there is something quirky about a home. It is not about how flashy it is. 

Another important thing with activating boards with fundraising goals is to almost go over the top with thank yous and acknowledgement for directors and the different roles, tasks, and activities they have done to help you as a CEO and/or head of fundraising to raise money. Think of it as how you thank or acknowledge a donor, but go even further with board members. Board members feel great when they are acknowledged in front of their peers in a board meeting. It is human nature. 

It could be a particular letter. I am involved in one board where the chair, each year after the AGM, sends a beautiful email to the board to say thank you for their contribution. He spells out particular things that have happened during the year. He has taken the time. It is not just a quick verbal mention in a board meeting or AGM. He has typed that email at length. I would encourage you to go over the top with the thank yous. 

The other thing I want to mention is the power of a director, or directors, as founding donors of what I would call group donations. I will talk about this as a best-practice stewardship example at the end, but it is one of the best ways that a board director can be very actively involved in helping you achieve fundraising goals. 

In this instance, I am talking about a director hosting a small lunch, dinner, or drinks event with people in their network. The aim at the end of that evening is that the small group of people comes together and decides to make a syndicate or group donation together. I will save that for a little later. 

Another thing that helps with training board members to be better skilled in this space is to invite less experienced directors to some of the ask meetings you might do with potential major donors. In that case, they are observers. They do not necessarily have to say too much, but it helps build their confidence and helps them understand how you do this process well. I would encourage you to do that in the training and induction process with less experienced board members. 

It also helps to invite directors to input into and critique the case for support. Good organisations spend a fair bit of time trying to nail the case for support. That case for support is presented verbally, and it may also be written. The verbal case is even more important. 

It is important to road test and seek input on that case for support from directors. Directors have to understand it and feel excited about it. They are not going to donate themselves, or help you build a wider donor network from their own networks, unless they feel connected to the case for support. It also makes a board member feel good if they have been involved in shaping it. 

Another thing is the value of intimate director and donor-hosted events. I will talk about one of those near the end. I will not labour the topic of give, get, or get off, because there are pros and cons and it is a hot topic. As you can tell from what I have already said, I am a big fan of board members giving, getting, or getting off. I do not think there is any excuse for not doing it. Again, it is not necessarily about the size of the donation they make or get from other people. 

I am not sure if it still happens today, but very few boards really enforce this. The Sydney Symphony Orchestra, where I worked, did enforce this when I was Head of Development. The chair at the time, Helen Lynch, and I decided that we wanted to instigate a policy in this space. Every board member was required to donate $5,000 a year, and that was non-negotiable. If she was talking to potential board members, she needed to have that conversation, sound them out, and make sure they were willing to do it. 

I appreciate that is a large organisation, so I am not suggesting five thousand dollars for small-to-medium organisations. I know that, subsequently, at the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra, and I do not know if this still holds today, they had a give, get, or get off requirement of $50,000 a year from each board member. Each individual board member had to give that, or get that from corporate sponsorship and/or donors in their networks. It was led and enforced by the chair, who really believed in it. 

I may be out of touch, so that may not be the case now. For a small-to-medium organisation, it could be $100, $200, or $500. The important thing is that board members take this topic seriously. 

Another important thing directors can do to get engaged and activated with fundraising goals is to be moderators at an event. They could be welcomers when people arrive at an event. They could also do a thank you speech or a wrap-up at the end of a donor event. Make sure you involve board members actively in some of these tasks. Do not let management just do all of it, because board members will get better at it, and they will feel more involved and more engaged. That is what you want. 

From personal experience, particularly when I was Head of Development at the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, when you are trying to build relationships with boards and get them to help with fundraising goals, I found the most successful way was by picking up the phone, having a chat with a board member, and sometimes saying, “Could we have a coffee?” It might be once a quarter with a particular board member. 

That was because I wanted to test something with them. I wanted advice. It might be that I thought they knew a potential donor who was a good prospect, but I needed to have a conversation with that board member to see if they believed it was a good fit, and what the best route might be to get access. 

It is also important to talk to your CEO or general manager to make sure you are doing regular presentations to the board. You need to be doing them at least once a year, if not twice a year. At the SSO, I was able to present to the finance and audit committee at every single board meeting. They wanted to hear an update from me and see how I was tracking against each of my KPIs. I also had the opportunity to present to the board. 

One thing I see too many times, and I think it is a problem, is when a head of fundraising emails board members for help on things. It might be asking who they know from a list. Often that is a recipe for disaster. The emails go into a black hole and you do not hear back from directors. You have to appreciate how busy board directors are with other things happening in their lives and with other boards they are on. 

My view is that the fewer emails directors receive from a head of fundraising, the better. Try to be strategic about getting a coffee with them. Have two or three important things you want to flag beforehand, so they know what the meeting is about and you can make the most of the time with them. 

I also have a bit of a bugbear about heads of fundraising having access to board members. I see some CEOs or general managers who do not allow that, or do not allow it as much as they should. They feel the relationship with the board is very much with them. I think that is a recipe for disaster if you want the head of fundraising and the fundraising team to have success in this area. 

I would encourage any CEOs, general managers, or equivalents to make sure that your fundraising person, if you have one, has the right access to board members. That is how they will develop the relationship with them and help them. 

I want to give a practical case study. I mentioned that I am on the board of the St Vincent’s Curran Foundation. Once a year, the board approves grants made to particular clinicians at the hospitals or particular areas of the hospital. It might be for a piece of equipment or something similar. 

Rather than simply sending an email to let those people know they have been successful, management asks some board members to give up three hours of their time. We go around and meet some of the successful grantees. We hand them a small certificate and half a dozen cupcakes or something similar, which they can share with their team. 

It is a fantastic way to meet the grantees firsthand. We only spend 10 minutes with each successful grantee, but I learn more about the hospital, I meet some fantastic people, and I feel completely inspired and uplifted at the end of it. Think about those sorts of examples in your organisations as well. 

One final point. When I was at the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, we instigated a mentoring program where each board member was teamed up with a senior member of the team. I happened to be matched with the chair, because she was quite interested in development, learning more about development, and contributing more to development. I was very fortunate, and it was a very successful program. 

Another board member might have been teamed up with the artistic director, or someone else. I would encourage you, particularly if you are in a larger organisation, to think about something like that. It helps the head of fundraising build relationships with the board and with other senior members of the team. 

This is the fun bit, where I talk about some of the best-practice stewardship examples I have come across. This is the last section of the presentation before we open up for questions. When I talk about these examples, please do not think, “That is the big end of town. We would never be able to do that with our organisation.” I do think it is possible. When I was mentoring at Artsupport Australia, we spent most of our time with small-to-mid-sized organisations. We used these examples many times and saw smaller organisations adapt them and do something similar themselves. 

One organisation that is the master at major gift fundraising is the Australian Ballet. Kenneth Watkins, who is the Head of Philanthropy, is so special and so good at this. There is a great story from many years ago where there was a potential donor. He was an elderly gentleman at the time, and he responded to an end-of-financial-year tax appeal letter. I think he donated $500. 

They did not have a previous relationship with him. They received that donation and could have simply put him on the database, added him to the newsletter list, and sent him another appeal in 12 months. Instead, they thought, “$500 is a decent donation. Let’s invite him in because we want to personally thank him for his contribution.” 

They also discovered that this gentleman was donating to four or five other arts organisations, probably similar amounts, so smaller amounts for larger organisations. They brought him in. I think, in this instance, it was the Head of Philanthropy with the artistic director who had the coffee. He was a lovely gentleman, and it was a lovely first meeting. 

They then decided there could be something there, so they invited him in again. I think it was three months later that they invited him for a tour and a sandwich. In that next meeting, they started to put a few carrots in front of him. They talked about different areas of the business, perhaps their education program or regional work, to see if there was anything he responded to or was excited about. 

On the back of that meeting, they thought that rather than simply send him another tax appeal letter in 12 months, there might be an opportunity to ask him for a major gift. After that second meeting, they decided there was something particular they wanted to ask him to support. They did some more research, got ready, and asked him to come in again. It was probably nine months after the initial gift. 

In this instance, the artistic director was going to talk about the particular program or project and get him excited, and then the Head of Philanthropy was going to make the ask, because you do need to ask. They brought him in, had a lovely chat, and were about to launch into the pitch. 

The gentleman said, “You are just so professional. I really love how you operate and what you do.” He knew he was being wooed, really, since that first coffee. He said, “I want to gift the organisation a million dollars because I really love what you do.” It is an interesting one, because I mentioned before that I believe you have to ask. This was an unusual situation where the donor put it forward himself and said he wanted to make the gift. 

The lesson is that another four or five organisations had received smaller donations from this gentleman, but no one had taken the time to get to know him, have the coffees, and build the relationship. That is why the Australian Ballet ended up with the major gift. I am sure that gentleman is still a major donor today. This is all about relationship building. 

With board members, you will often have business people on your board, or people who were business people. You cannot run a business unless you develop relationships. There are similarities here between how you build your network of clients, suppliers, or other business relationships, and how you build a donor program. 

The next example is the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. This is an example I was actively involved in when I was Head of Development. I had an approach from the artistic administrator, going back to the late 1990s, a long while ago for those of you who are younger and listening. 

He said to me, “Louise, I need to find a donor to fund a new commission of a new work. Could you just find me that donor?” I think he thought I would pull it out of the air. I said, “I am not sure I have the right donor for this particular project.” I think he wanted about $30,000 to fund it. 

I said, “What I am going to do is talk to a particular board member who is a donor, to see if they would be willing to host a small dinner in their home with four or five couples who are close friends. Let’s see if we can get this happening through a group donation.” 

That is what we did. I spoke to this board member, and they said, “Louise, that is a great idea. We have these close friends. They are not existing donors of the orchestra, but we do a lot of things together. We go on holidays together. We have bought things together. Let’s have a go.” 

The artistic administrator and I turned up at the dinner. It was low-key, not a fancy dinner at all. They knew before they arrived that there was a particular project this couple wanted them to hear about. We had a lovely dinner. The artistic administrator talked about the project. He waxed lyrical about it and made the group feel like they had some input into the type of music, the genre of music, and the type of composer. 

A couple of red wines later, they had agreed at the end of the night to donate. I think each couple agreed to donate $4,000 or $5,000. They were well-heeled people and could afford to do it. 

Three months later, we had a small supper after an orchestra concert. We invited the composer and the couples who had become donors. They loved meeting the composer and understanding how a new work of classical music comes together, because they had no idea. I must admit I did not really know either, so I was fascinated. 

Three months later, we invited that group of donors, I think four or five couples, to come to something like a rehearsal. It was a creative development session that the composer was doing with six or seven musicians. In this day and age, with YouTube, even if a donor cannot come to something like that, you can put together a two-minute video, send it to the donor, and say, “I know you could not be here today, but this is what happened and this is the progress of the project. We thought you might like to have a look or listen.” 

Then it was opening night, the premiere of the work. The group invited some friends of theirs. They turned up and had drinks afterwards. They received a signed copy of the score. They were thrilled by the experience. Three months later, they all got on a plane together because that work was performed in another city. 

The point of this story is that sometimes it is not about finding one donor to fund something. It might be that a group of friends or family comes together and supports something together. The final point is that you need to be careful not to create too much work for yourself or spend too much money to raise the money. 

I think all of those couples are still donors to the Sydney Symphony Orchestra today. At the time, the founding donor who hosted that dinner was a board member. They believed in it, wanted to do it, and saw it as a great way to get some of their friends engaged. Think about this idea of a syndicate or group donation. 

The last example is something I have experienced in more recent years. When I was at Artsupport Australia, I mentored the Sydney Story Factory. It is a fantastic small creative reading and writing organisation based in Sydney, in Redfern and Western Sydney. I helped them as a start-up. 

One thing they do particularly well is their very special annual donor thank you event. Their chair is a partner in a law firm, so they ask him to host the event. I think they have done it every year at his office. About 50 people come along, and they are all donors. 

When you arrive, you are very strategically seated. Each year, you sit with someone you have not previously met. It is purely donors, and there might be six or eight people at a table. It is almost like a classroom or cabaret-style setup. 

The food is always fun. Sydney Story Factory works mainly with primary and secondary school children, so the food is the sort of food children eat. There might be a Mars bar or a Golden Gaytime or something fun at the end. It is not corporate, stuffy food that you might expect in a law firm’s office. They make it fun. 

When you sit down, there is a placemat made by the children that welcomes you, and you can take it away with you. During the event, you hear from a very inspiring CEO and from one of the program managers who is doing the work, out there at the coalface, running workshops with children. They are disadvantaged children, and the work is all about developing their creative reading and writing skills. 

Every year, you engage as a donor. There is a 10-to-15-minute segment at that lunch where you are involved in a creative writing exercise as a group at your table. You are actively involved and engaged as a donor. You are not just there listening to talks that go on and on, then having a drink. There is no alcohol or anything like that. You walk out feeling amazing. 

Every year, I notice everyone comes. People do not miss it. There is something about that event. They also have one of the highest donor retention rates I have seen. They have a number of foundations and donors who do not just contribute for one year or three years. They have now been going for 10 years. I think they would have a retention rate of something like 90%. It is incredibly high. 

I think that is enough from me. I feel as though I have talked for too long. I am going to have a glass of water, but I am very happy to take any questions anyone would like to ask me on any topic. I do not care how hard or difficult it is. I will do my best to answer it. 

Louise, thank you very much. Our brief to you was to provide practical tips on how to strategically recruit a great board and then activate the board to support this development role. You have really delivered. You have gone big time practical. Your PowerPoint slides will be shared, and there are some terrific points in there. Let’s turn to questions. Please type questions in the chat as they come to you. 

Let me kick questions off with the elephant in the room to some degree, because not many of us will be sitting here with a boardroom of empty chairs to recruit from scratch. Most of us will have boards, and we have development directors, CEOs, and board members on the call today. You touched on this briefly, but how do you change a board once you have one and it is not quite working the way you would like it to work? How do you go about exit strategies or change strategies? You mentioned connecting with a mentor to help a chair work through change, but do you have any other practical tips about changing the dynamic of a board? 

I am the first to acknowledge that it is not easy to do. It is not easy to make that change. Fundamentally, if there is something broken, it could be that the chair has been in the role for too long. That often happens. They are either not interested, or they have been there for too long. A head of fundraising cannot bring that change on their own. If there needs to be some change on that board to lift it so it is stronger from a fundraising point of view, my view is that fundamentally you have to come up with a strategy first to change the chair. 

I am a big believer that leadership comes from the chair. If you think there needs to be change, and you are sitting there as one person thinking that, you need allies. You need other champions who are thinking the same as you. Typically, from a management point of view, you would need at least a head of fundraising and a general manager or CEO who think the same. 

I do not think this is necessarily about going behind the chair’s back and scheming with other board members. I would concentrate on management believing there needs to be some change. Then I would think strategically about the skill set you believe is missing from the board, and what the ideal scenario should or could be. 

I would then get some advice on that. That might be talking to a Creative Partnerships Australia person, or people, about it. It could be another arts organisation that you know and respect, that you think does this well. Maybe there is someone associated with that organisation you can talk to. 

If you believe there needs to be change with the chair, one of the key things you have to do is come up with the solution. It is probably not going to work if you are only saying something is not right, but not coming up with a solution. When there are issues or problems, you are more likely to get a hearing if you have a solution. Think about that, because if you can come up with a name or a couple of names of people who you think could be good successors, that helps. 

In some cases, chairs are quite happy to step aside or step into another role. You do see organisations create roles for alumni or former board members. That can make the chair feel special and honoured, rather than being let go into the wilderness. These things can be very difficult, so you have to think strategically. 

It could be that you suggest a particular board member who could then step up into the chair role. That may be less threatening for the current chair. Usually when chairs come on, they like to be on the board for a period of time and then step up into the chair role, rather than being parachuted in as chair. An interesting strategy may be for the head of fundraising, with the CEO or general manager, to be more actively involved in suggesting board members, with a view to identifying potential successors. It is very case by case, so it is hard to advise generically, but you need sounding boards who can help you work out the best way to go about it. 

Do not act alone. 

No way. It is way too difficult. 

I suppose the extension to that is David Pearson’s question. You mentioned the importance of board induction. What do you think good induction looks like? 

I think it is probably a combination of things. Nothing is better than tours and site inspections. It is not just heaps of written documents. You have to receive the written documents, the dry stuff, the Constitution, annual reports, financials, and all of that. That is a given. But the things that really get people fired up and excited are tours, site inspections, and meeting more key people involved with the organisation. 

Rather than a series of one-on-one coffees, which take a lot of time for both sides, it could be a small group session in the boardroom with three key staff. It should involve the artistic side, because donors and board members love being around artistic people. It is part of the reason you donate and part of the reason you join an arts board. You want to be around more creative people. Maybe you are not creative, or maybe you are a frustrated creative. 

I think it is also about creating fun experiences, so they get to meet people across the office. They might meet some quirky people who are not necessarily senior. Take them around and let them meet everyone. The written material is the dry material. The other experiences are what they will remember more. 

If you are doing donor events, you have to make sure new board members come early on. Sometimes they can have reasons they do not want to come to things. If you actively involve them in a role, such as welcoming guests, giving the welcome speech, or being at the door, they are more likely to come than if they can simply say they have a meeting and cannot attend. 

How common is it that board members of arts companies in this country actually have a written agreement, almost like a performance agreement? I have a faded copy of a contract for a board member of a theatre company in New York. The first questions on that signed agreement are: how much are you going to give in year one, year two, and year three? How much are you going to get in year one, two, and three? Those are the first two questions. I do not think we are at that point, but to your knowledge, how common is it that board members in this country have written agreements? 

I think it is rarer than we would like it to be, particularly on fundraising goals. It is very common to have a written letter of appointment or letter of offer, but they probably do not go into nearly as much detail. They might say things like input into strategy, but they do not go nearly as far. That does need to change, but we also need to remember that we are not the United States. 

Is that happening outside the arts? 

Not that I know of. 

Another question that comes to mind is that you gave pros and cons about setting up board subcommittees. I am of the opinion that there are probably more positives than negatives, because it is a strategy organisations can implement if changing a board is proving difficult. They can recruit more aligned development involvement at board level by having some sort of subcommittee. Could that be an interim measure as boards are changing for the better? 

There are some advantages. I am not anti fundraising committee. Towards my time at the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, I did end up with a fundraising committee, and I did not think it added a lot of value. It depends on the quality and experience of the head of fundraising and whether you need one. If a head of fundraising is good, they should automatically have relationships with the right board members who are going to add value with fundraising. They do not necessarily need a fundraising committee. That is my view. 

What I worry about is that the more onerous you are on the time of a board director, the less effective the result may be. I think it depends on the experience of the head of fundraising, and whether it is needed. I found it became more meetings, more agendas, more minutes, and more work for me, so I got frustrated by that. 

If a head of fundraising feels that a committee is a better solution, they should suggest it. If you are going to do it, you need to think carefully about its composition. In our case, we had two or three board members on that committee, and then we brought in a couple of people who were not on the board. That was interesting because they brought different perspectives. It was also a good test run for potential board members. 

Almost like a potential pipeline for new board members. 

Caroline Davies asks a great question. Often we are approaching the same donors from the same circles, which means we do not necessarily see much diversity among our donors, and that risks growth. What is the best practice in recruiting diverse directors to bring new contacts and new communities to our art form? Do organisations need to consider advertising for new directors? 

I have seen organisations do it. I saw a very small theatre company in Darlinghurst advertise in its local paper many years ago, and I think it was quite successful for them. In certain communities, they are very village-like, and it did work. They had enough interest that it became like a recruitment process for a job. 

They did have a lot of unsuitable responses, so if you want to do it, do not be too optimistic that advertising will automatically find the solution. Often the best people for jobs or directorships are not necessarily looking. You need to bear that in mind. 

That is where a good nominations committee will think strongly about diversity of networks. You want different skill sets as a given, but you also want directors with different backgrounds and different networks. There is an art to doing that well. It could include different ages too. Age is important because you naturally get different networks if you have a couple of board members in their 30s or 40s, alongside others in their 60s. 

That is healthy. Younger people have a lot to contribute, but it can be hard to get them onto boards. If you are going to do it, do not just have one younger person. You need at least a couple, otherwise it can be lonely for them. They may think the board feels old-fashioned or that there are too many older people and it is not going anywhere. 

These days, you also need someone who understands the online and digital space. It does not matter what sort of board you are. If you do not have someone who understands that space, whether you are for-profit, not-for-profit, or in the arts, you are probably missing something. 

The St Vincent’s Curran board is interesting. There is a person on that board who is the founder or co-owner of Coco Republic, the furniture company. He is fascinating because he spends all his time building customers. He is in retail, so he is great. From a marketing and communications perspective, the way he thinks about tracking data and customers is gold. 

I raise that as an example because a lot of boards need that kind of diversity of thought and experience. Listening across generations is important. I have just been involved in the launch of a new organisation, and its board has three younger people under 35. It feels supercharged. There is more energy. 

One question, which may be a bit specific, is about the process of rebuilding a board or starting a new board. Would you recommend recruiting a great chair first, and then looking for board members, or do you think they can be recruited at the same time? 

One advantage of getting the chair right is that it naturally attracts other good members. A good chair will typically want to recruit one or two people around them. That is when you know you have a good chair. They want a couple of spots free so they can bring in people around them who can support them and who they know they can rely on. 

I have seen this with good chairs. They will not necessarily recruit people from the same network, but they will look for people they can rely on. Another strategy I have seen with an arts start-up is that they were having trouble finding the right chair, which is tough when you are starting out. They built the inaugural board with three or four board members, and had one person in mind as chair ultimately. 

They did not ask that person to be chair from the beginning. They asked them to be on the board. I think they had a rotating chair while they were starting out, but within 12 months that person became the chair. It was natural. It was quite a young person, but it was someone we believed would ultimately be the chair. 

One thing I would say is that it is not easy to find a good chair. I have seen many instances across for-profit and not-for-profit organisations where there are great directors who are real contributors, but it is rare to find a very special chair who ticks every box. You are probably not going to get the ideal person. It is an art to being a good chair, and unfortunately there are many well-meaning chairs who do not have the full package. Do not be too down about that, because it is rare to find someone who has everything. 

Someone who can do it all. 

I want to ask this question from Louise King. She works in a regional organisation, and we have some tremendous regional arts organisations around the country. I have just been up in Broome with Marrugeku and Marapikurrinya, and that is just Western Australia. Do you have any advice for regional arts organisations around recruiting great board members, diverse board members, and being successful in the development space? 

I have firsthand experience with this because we spend half our week in Sydney, living in Darlinghurst, and the other half in Jaspers Brush near Berry. It is regional. It is only two hours south of Sydney, but in the Artsupport days I also spent a fair bit of time mentoring in regional Australia, so I understand it. 

There are two things to say about regional Australia. In New South Wales, my experience is that some regional areas are attracting more people. This is partly a COVID effect. With more people able to work from home, more people are moving to attractive regional centres. Those places are going to attract serious talent. I see that in Berry. People can spend several days working from home. They do not have to be in Sydney, and they are out of the traffic. 

In regional centres there are business communities. There are networks of accountants, lawyers, and interesting businesses. You have to seek out the business people in those networks. There used to be more local newspapers than there are now, but the point is that you need to find the business people and networks in those places. 

We have done that in Berry. It has taken a little bit of time. We have been there five or six years, but I am helping a few small organisations there develop donor programs. It is interesting. My husband is now involved in what they call the men’s book club, which is really an excuse for a wine night. I said to him that he needed to go, because it is good to get to know people in that space. It is good for Walsh Capital, but also good for other things we are involved in. 

You have to seek out these people. Another thing about regional Australia, and certainly places like Berry, is that you find people like us who spend half their week there and half their week in Sydney. They are harder to get to know, but they often have the money. They are also interested in contributing in that regional centre. 

You have to think strategically about who runs the best cafe in town, who runs the best restaurant, who runs the bottle shop, and where these people go. They like going to good cafes. Often the people behind successful businesses in regional areas are good people to have on the board. They may not necessarily be that interested in the arts, but most people have some interest in arts and culture. 

And potentially a little more time. That sounds like a growing opportunity. Those who are dividing their time may also retain networks back in the big smoke. 

With those people, their ultimate goal often is to spend most of their time in the regional centre, not in the city. They might be going through a transition. With us, my husband spends nearly all his time there now, and I am in Sydney three days a week and down there four days a week. I am not planning on being there full time, but he probably is. I like a bit of both. Where I want to make more of a difference is down there, because I can see the difference it makes. That is the community. 

That is a wonderful point to end on. Thinking of David in his wine and book club, Louise, I cannot thank you enough. It is great to work with you again, and tremendous to get you involved with Creative Partnerships’ work. 

To highlight a couple of key things that stood out to me: the chair’s role is absolutely critical. No question. The importance of marketing and development working together, and how brand and reputation are so linked to successful fundraising. The importance of induction, and board members really understanding the case for support and the vision of the company so they can be advocates for you. Access, from the development director directly to board members, to brainstorm and work out where the opportunities lie. Lastly, thanking not only your donors, but really thanking those board members who are activated and willing to help you in the development objectives. 

Louise, thank you most sincerely, and all the best with the new business. Thank you very much. I think we have all appreciated it. Any last word? 

The only thing I need to say is that unfortunately I am not available for any boards. 

I do get asked sometimes after things like this. I love the arts with a passion, but I have this new business that I am very devoted to, and I have my two boards. I am lucky that one of them is a fundraising board, and the other one, the Snow Foundation, is giving money away. I have the luxury of both, but as much as I love it, unfortunately I cannot. 

Not available. Thank you again, Louise. We are slightly over time. The last of the Knowledge Series webinars will take place on Thursday 2 December. It is a Christmas treat. Chris Paver of Dataro in Melbourne will explain the concept of machine learning to us. Not-for-profit organisations have typically been quite slow to adopt new technology, but what can be gained from the AI world in the arts, and in arts and culture fundraising and sustainability? 

That webinar, Unlocking New Arts Fundraising Potential with Machine Learning, is on Thursday 2 December. Sign up on our website. We hope you are enjoying the CPA Knowledge Series. If you would like to make any suggestions for topics in the series for 2022, please email your state manager. 

Thank you for your participation today. It is an important topic and was tremendously well presented. Louise, thank you most sincerely, and may I wish you all a terrific end to your week. 

Thank you, James. Thank you, everyone. It was great to see you all, including some old faces I have not seen for a while.