Mastering the “Soft No” Is Essential for Major Grants Success
I cut my teeth in fund development by calling university alumni and asking for gifts. One alum was eager to reveal a decades-old frustration securing his preferred classes, having waited three decades to vent to 18-year-old me.
He followed the rant by demanding that the school not call again. Ever.
The technical term for this reaction is a hard no.
As I began asking for larger gifts, I learned about the soft no. In development-speak, it means “not now” and shows up like this:
Life has intervened since we last spoke. I’ve lost my job/my investment portfolio is down/I need to give this more thought.
Major gift officers prod at what’s behind the response and agree on a next step with the donor.
When I moved from gifts to grants, discussion of the soft no was absent. My peers took most versions of no at face value unless it was otherwise made explicit by foundation staff.
The soft no must become a feature of grant trainings and conversations. Why? My most gratifying career highlights have emerged from a not now. (Read to the end to learn about one of them.) There’s great potential if we recognize and strategize around the rainbow of rejection.
Major Grants and the Soft No
Here’s what a foundation leader recently told me about a prospective grantee: The applicant’s data collection was not up to the foundation’s standards. The parties discussed benchmarks needed to move toward a partnership. This program officer agreed to be added to the nonprofit’s mailing list, and the conversation ended. So did the human part of the relationship.
If your major gifts colleague entertained similar pushback from a prospect, do you think the relationship would freeze? Doubtful.
Gift officers know that it’s easier to build on existing rapport than to develop it fresh. Those of us in the grants space need to start talking more explicitly about how to build connection over months, and yes, even years.
Here are some institutional equivalents of that soft no:
A foundation’s standard rejection letter explains that there were so many applications…. You know the rest.
A program officer suggests that you consider coming back during a future funding cycle.
A request to speak with someone at a foundation goes unanswered.
Each of the above might lead to a hard no, but potential lies within every one.
Assuming you feel confident a funder is a solid match, develop systems that move the relationship forward.
Evolution of the No
A soft no is a pivot unless a rejection becomes concrete. It’s an invitation to dig into the niches that stand to carry the partnership forward. In the earlier example, if an applicant knows that its data collection is unlikely to meet the funder’s expectations, a conversation about that very fact enables potential—for understanding, and even action. Funder input can give chief executives motivation to restart a lagging initiative.
Even a non-response is an invitation to carry on. Foundation employees are busy. Give them reason to read your messages. They may well be paying attention before they have reason to respond.
Your program officer might even come clean: “Thank you. Unfortunately, I don’t see an opportunity to make a grant to your organization now.” Let not now guide your next steps. I’ve seen so many relationships blossom when immediate financial benefit wilted. Maybe that’s because the strain lifted. Assume a continued relationship unless told otherwise.
If the foundation staffer does not close the door on your continued relationship, attempt a 12-to-18-month plan. Ask, Do you recommend we apply again? Would added information clarify things for you? What is the best way to stay connected?
You’ll know that hard no when you see it.
Relationships Reign
Ilene Mack, the late, longtime program officer at The Hearst Foundations, was my earliest role model on all that can come from an initial no.
In her typically candid way, she’d tell me that she would recommend a grant if she could. The board had other priorities. If only she could influence the board.
It was a no, but I sensed an opening.
Ilene was sincere. She called me for insights on what I was seeing with peer organizations. I asked her what she was seeing in the funding world. It was easy to forget that she could leverage a check.
I have found many Ilene Macks in the funding world. They might adore your nonprofit’s work, but unlike individual donors, they have no direct means of sending money your way. Engage with them. You might be surprised how involved they’re willing to get with a cause they admire.
One day, without fanfare or application, a $100,000 Hearst Foundations check landed on my desk. It marked a new phase in my relationship with Ilene. But really, it felt like an extension of what we had already built: a respectful, meaningful partnership.