Now, let’s say that you want to get philanthropically involved in a health-related cause. Where to start? Here are some questions to ask yourself.

1. What is motivating me?

The health sector is rife with problems to solve and opportunities to be seized. Your motivation often may be personal and likely will lead to one of four key areas:

• Your local hospital: When one man’s father died in a makeshift rural medical clinic, he personally raised the funds to build a full service regional hospital with top notch facilities and staff.
• Curing a disease: The examples are many of individuals and families who commit themselves to research and development targeted to a disease afflicting themselves or a loved one.
• Patient care: Unmet social needs – homelessness, for example – directly impact care needs and outcomes. One woman founded an initiative – Health Leads – to provide a solution.
• Systemic reform: Some people take a big picture view, and want to get engaged in public policy research or advocacy.

2. How much am I able and willing to commit, for how long?

This one is about time and talent as well as treasure. You have to be realistic. Maybe you can’t fund a new cancer wing but you can sponsor a garden where patients and families can relax. Maybe you are willing to make a one-time contribution but not a ten-year pledge. Maybe you lack the time (or skills) to serve on a board but can volunteer for a day of service or a specific project.

3. Who can I work with, and should I?

Who else is working on this issue? There may be one or several organizations out there already committed to your cause. You can support one or all of them. You may find like-minded individuals who are interested in pitching their dollars in with yours, too, for greater impact. Due diligence will be required, of course. External rating agencies can provide a starting point. (see our How trustworthy are external ratings blog)

Is this a well-functioning organization? There is a danger of only backing winners. You may have an even greater impact by helping a mediocre organization with a powerful mission to improve, but that may require rolling up your sleeves rather than just going along for the ride.

What if you can’t find anyone? Rare diseases, for example, often attract little or no attention. Some medical philanthropists, often people with business experience, decide to launch a new venture dedicated to their specific cause. (More on that, in another blog.)

4. How do I measure success?

There are two levels to the question. First, there’s the organization that you choose to support. As we’ve discussed before, performance measurement is hard. Accountability and transparency on the part of leadership is as important as the metrics, which will depend on the problem you are trying to solve and organization’s mission.

At a broader level, the question is: How satisfied am I with my philanthropy? Most people support more than one organization or cause, and your philanthropic portfolio probably will change over time.

It comes back to Question 1: What is motivating you to be philanthropic?

Many factors may come into play: family values/legacy, religious faith, gratitude and a desire to give back, public recognition, a sense of duty, tax incentives, wanting to have a significant impact, personal experience with a problem, altruism or simply the good feeling that comes with giving.

Philanthropy, as we’ve said before, is an intensely personal thing. You must develop your own scorecard, and ask yourself from time to time: How satisfied am I with my philanthropic activities and what they are accomplishing? And, is this a personally satisfying experience, to me?

[1] 2015 BNP Paribas Individual Philanthropy Index, Forbes Insights

Each of us has our own story and aspirations, and will have a different answer to the question “Why do I want to give?” In studying donors, however, we’ve come to see that there are four sets of motivations that can explain most giving decisions: achievement, significance, legacy and happiness.

We’ll use National Public Radio (NPR) donors as a case study. NPR donors have one important thing in common; they listen to public radio. But why did they choose to part with their hard-earned cash in support of NPR?

Some people were motivated by a sense of achievement, but that meant different things to different people. Some people got a lot of satisfaction from an on-air mention during phone-a-thons, and would wear a giveaway NPR t-shirt with pride. Others liked having their name published on a major donor list.

Others felt a sense of accomplishment from what they learned by listening to NPR. Still others were drawn by the opportunity to lead a fundraising team, or serve on the board. And some were eager to get an invitation to NPR events.

(Examples abound among other donor groups as well. Educational institutions count on the loyalty of alumni, and class competitions are a common fundraising ploy. Some non-ballet lovers will support the local ballet in order to gain social access or acceptance.)

Some NPR donors gave so that they could be of significance and have a positive impact on someone or something they cared about. They felt obligated to provide intellectually honest news and noncommercial cultural content to the nation, and thereby support an informed public debate.

(People also will respond to urgent needs. Dire circumstances brought about by some sort of catastrophe, in particular can motivate people to step up, as evidenced by outpourings of support after the devastating earthquake in Haiti or Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.)

Some people were inspired by the desire to do something that will matter when they were gone, to leave a legacy. NPR offered an opportunity to sustain a type of information and cultural experience that they valued, and felt others should be exposed to.

Joan Kroc is a good example. She believed in the power of public radio, and had enjoyed NPR programming over the years. As she began to plan her bequests, she approached NPR regarding a gift. NPR executives were startled—and understandably delighted.

Extensive due diligence was required to satisfy Joan that her gift would be well managed and her intentions honored. NPR evidently passed the hurdles. When Joan died in 2003, NPR received more than$200 million, and an additional $5 million went to a member station in San Diego.

Last but not least, there is happiness.

For some NPR donors, it was about the feeling of being “among friends” in the virtual community of the airwaves. Tuning in to NPR while making the morning coffee or driving to work was a familiar part of their routine and “Guess what I heard on NPR!” was a great conversation starter.

(Most donors just plain feel good when they give. What some call payback and others call gratitude can be a factor; many scholarship students later return the favor. Sometimes the giving experience can be downright fun; witness the huge success of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge.)

So, why do you want to give?

The answer may be some combination of the four motivations, and may depend on the giving opportunity or the amount of money (or time) you are thinking of giving. “Checkbook” gifts are very different from something that represents a major portion of your philanthropy.

Our research shows that checkbook gifts often reflect a passing interest or a quid pro quo (your friend gives to your cause, so you reciprocate). You may make a lot of them but they represent only 5-15% of your giving.

Something that is a personal priority – have you asked yourself, “What problem do I want to solve?” – is likely to garner a more significant portion of your dollars and time. And a true passion – like finding a cure for a loved one’s disease – can lead you to devote a major part of your philanthropy to one project.

Timing is a factor too. When you’re starting out, you may have more time than money, and contribute through volunteer work. The young bucks are more often motivated by achievement, while those in their later years are thinking about legacy.

“What do I hope to accomplish?” is another good question, closely followed by “Do my means match my ambitions?”

Finding a cure for cancer may be your passion; there are many ways to help. A few people can fund a major drug discovery and development initiative; more can build a wonderful, peaceful garden at a cancer treatment facility; and many show up to participate in walkathons.

Giving is an intensely personal act. Take the time to think through why you want to give, and you are more likely to feel good about the good you are doing in the world.

That one gives me pause, because it has been all over the lot.

One thing that I can say for sure is that women have always been generous with their time but have become increasingly involved in the money aspects of philanthropy, as their economic clout and financial sophistication have grown.

I will venture to make some additional personal observations, but with the caveats that each varies by woman philanthropist and applies to men as well. Here goes:

• Some women who have achieved career and financial success in the private sector are opting to devote their time, talents and networks to the nonprofit sector, with the aim of making a significant impact on causes important to them. Example: Joanna Jacobson, former marketing executive and founder/managing partner of Strategic Grant Partners, a consortium of philanthropists supporting game changing ideas that improve the lives of struggling individuals and families.
• Women really dig into the impact on beneficiaries, wanting demonstrable evidence of change on a “business” level (quantitative measures) and personal level (meeting beneficiaries, witnessing change). Example: SummerSearch (where my wife Fredi sits on the board), which has developed longitudinal success metrics and makes sure that donors get to know the children involved in the program.
• Relatedly, privileged families use these opportunities to sensitize their children to the challenges faced by many people in the U.S. and worldwide, educate them about the importance and power of philanthropy, and instill a spirit of giving. Example: a family friend who regularly takes her kids to Rwanda, where the family has invested many millions of dollars to alleviate poverty.
• Women seem to be leading the trend towards “Don’t talk to me about endowments.” There is less blind faith in institutions and their ability to remain meaningful for perpetuity. Example: For a public media station, where technological advances are rapid and game-changing, favoring a ten-year annual gift over an endowment gift. The logic:  if the organization can demonstrate success over that time frame, it will have no trouble raising any additional funding required.

More interesting than my observations, perhaps, is the considerable amount of research on and support offered to women’s philanthropy in recent years. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University has established a Women’s Philanthropy. New Ventures in Philanthropy has published A Plan (of One’s Own): A Woman’s Guide to Philanthropy. 

One research nugget that I found especially interesting was about generational differences in women’s giving, stemming from age and social influences.[1]

• “Mature” women (born prior to 1931) may not have ever brought home a paycheck. They may feel a responsibility to give all their money to their children and/or continue to support their husband’s causes.
• Women in the 1931-1945 generation may share those views but also may have attended college and worked outside the home. They tend to be wary of money and power, and tend to give to traditional women’s causes.
• Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) are more likely to earn a paycheck, make financial decisions, and demand accountability from the organizations they support.
• Women born after 1964 are more likely to be financially independent, and tend to resist a separate focus on women.

Something to remember, as you work with prospects and donors. But always remembering that for every rule, they are exceptions. The key – with women or men – is to get to know them as individuals.

I developed what I call the priority giving strategy after a capital campaign experience with the late Frank Batten, an HBS Class of 1952 alum and media pioneer. As the publisher of a newspaper in Virginia in the 1950s, he had championed desegregation; the paper earned a Pulitzer Prize for that work.  He also was a noted philanthropist, making large gifts to his undergraduate alma mater and many other institutions and causes.

As I waited outside his office, I considered what to say to Frank. If I went about the conversation the normal way, explaining how important HBS and the campaign were, I suspected we’d just get into an argument. (Frank wasn’t one for tooting one’s own horn, so I figured I shouldn’t toot HBS’s horn.) I decided to try a different tack, and begin by telling Frank how proud the School was of his success, and philanthropic generosity. This was easy, because it was true. I closed by saying that I hoped HBS could be number four or five on his list of giving priorities. 

Not long afterward, HBS received a $32 million donation from Frank to support the renovation of the School’s residential campus. Actually, that put HBS fifth on Frank’s list—but that turned out to be a very good place to be!

The experience of Groton, an independent boarding school in Massachusetts, provides another example. During Groton’s capital campaign, which was approximately one-tenth the size of HBS’s, the headmaster of that school enjoyed great success by asking people to make Groton the number-four priority on their giving lists (except for the board chair!).  Conversely, I recently attended a meeting of a group to which I was a reasonably generous donor—in fact, one of their biggest—and was offended to hear a staff member proclaim that this organization had to be the number-one priority of everyone at the table!  Why? And who was he to make that decision for me?!

Would it be wonderful, even magical, to become a prospect’s number-one priority? Absolutely! Would it be wonderful, even magical, if that prospect’s engagement with your organization grew and grew, and your work emerged as his or her core issue? Yes—all the better!

Meanwhile, don’t count on wonders and magic.  Be bold, ambitious, and realistic.  Earn the bird in your hand, and keep an eye on the two birds in the bush.

Are you undershooting your potential? Do you need to aim higher? Or do you have the opposite problem: unrealistic expectations?