Fundraising at schools, colleges and universities has certainly been professionalized over the past 20 years. My own alma mater, Sidwell Friends School, is a fundraising juggernaut, as are, for that matter, my other two alma maters – The University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins University.

(I wonder if that tiny gem I spent one of the best years of my life at, The Warburg Institute in London, has jumped on the bandwagon? Somehow, I think not.)

Leaving aside my own, my wife’s, and my children’s institutions, I connect with many institutions in a professional consulting capacity on the issue of fundraising. One thing that is clear, although rarely acknowledged, is that virtually all educational fundraising, successful or not, is bland and generic.

What do I mean by bland? The fundraising communications lack a strong, distinctive style or voice. The photographs, though generally of high quality, are predictable and middle-of-the-road. The lead lines and body copy are conventional and expected.

Why do I say generic? Virtually all of the appeals sent out by virtually all educational institutions say the same things:

• Give to [your institution here] for feelings of school pride and spirit
• Give to [your institution here] so that students today can enjoy the same wonderful experience you enjoyed.
• Give to [your institution here] because we depend upon your gifts to support our faculty, students, and program.
• Give to [your institution here] because our rankings depend upon a high level of alumni support (This last one only applies to colleges and universities and not to independent schools).

There are several reasons for the blandness of fundraising communications. One is the topic at hand, which is raising money. Fundraisers tend to be tactful, cautious and risk adverse professionals by nature. No one wants to alienate a prospective donor.

Another is the way educational fundraising has evolved over the past 20 years. The community has coalesced around a cautious, albeit highly professional, approach. Institutions are serviced by consultants who provide similar advice. These consultants do not possess much in the way of marketing expertise in their professional toolkit. Often the consultants are former fundraisers. They conduct prospect research in the context of feasibility studies. They do not fully appreciate the power of distinctive messaging and certainly do not know how to achieve it.

There is a road not yet taken – this is to build fundraising communications around a distinctive, research driven brand personality.

This alternate path involves incorporating a different professional skill-set into fundraising operations. Vice Presidents for Advancement would need to begin to take brand-based marketing seriously, not just for the admissions operation, but for their own operation as well. The creative services that support fundraising would need to move away from generic appeals and toward conveying a more distinctive “attitude” in their messaging. Organizations would need to overcome their tendency to be cautious and conservative at every turn.

In fact, this alternate path is the road to take. Academic institutions are all competing for pieces of the same pie in their fundraising. Eventually some will figure out that one way to increase their share is such brand-based marketing.