Greater Than Zero

16 Feb Greater Than Zero

 

17 February 2026

 

By David Allen, Development for Conservation

 

Kate and I are moving soon, and we need your help – well actually you and your truck.

On Saturday, a bunch of people are coming over to help carry boxes and furniture from our old house over to the new house. The boxes are all labeled as to which room they go in to make figuring stuff out at that end a lot easier.

We really need you to come lend a hand if you can. Any amount of time will be great, but if you can give three hours, that would be terrific.

For those who contribute three hours or more, we are providing pizza after all the work is done to recognize your contribution. It’ll be delivered to the new address. A small token of our gratitude, especially as we won’t actually be there. (We had the vacation scheduled before we knew we would be moving, don’t you know.) But we can give pizza, even if we can’t give time.

Thank you so much!

 

So – what do you think will happen if the above scenario were ever to happen? My guess is that David and Kate would return from vacation to find all of their boxes and furniture right where they left them and several unopened boxes of pizza rotting at the front door of their new house.

People are not likely to give much when the person asking isn’t giving at all.

Moreover, I don’t think the results change if we substitute “visiting our grandchildren” or “working my second job” for “on vacation.”

It’s not about judging how you choose to spend the time you have. It’s about asking someone else to do something you are not able or willing to do yourself.

 

Now replay the above scenario where David and Kate cut their vacation short, or work multiple jobs and still show up briefly in between. They are leading by example even within the constraints of their current lives.

They are not asking others to do something they are incapable or unwilling to do themselves.

 

Board members who give money and never show up themselves to volunteer would not be tolerated very long. One shouldn’t be able to buy one’s way onto a Board. And such Board members would be ineffective in asking for or expecting others to contribute time. Further, Board members who consistently participate for 20-30 minutes of a meeting before rushing off to another meeting would not be tolerated very long either.

No one ever questions this.

So why do we question it when it comes to money?

 

“I don’t have enough time,” and “I don’t have enough money,” almost always means “I choose to spend the time and money I do have on other things.”

There’s no judgement about this and there shouldn’t ever be. Period.

But people who choose to spend their time and money elsewhere will be ineffective in asking others to spend theirs with the land trust. Ergo such Board members will be ineffective as Board members, too.

 

I am beating this drum because I frequently get pushback from Board members and staff when I make the case that all Board members should give.

 

“But what about recruiting people who can’t give or raise money?”

Raising money is one of the most important things Board members can do for the organization. Why would you recruit someone to the Board who can’t give or help you raise money?

“Because they represent parts of our community that we want represented on the Board.”

And they can’t give anything?

“Right.”

No one in that part of the community can give anything?

“Right.”

In that case, I will say with complete conviction that I don’t believe you.

And I would ask that you consider two questions: Isn’t it presumptive (and even arrogant) to decide for someone else what they can or can’t, should or shouldn’t give?

And why would you want someone on your Board who chooses to spend their time and money elsewhere? Whose priorities are not your priorities?

 

There are many people who give time and not money – they are volunteers. In fact, we should be creative in recognizing what they can and do give. For example, they can serve on committees and/or gain more formal recognition as organizational advisors. We don’t need to recognize their volunteerism by accepting them onto the Board.

There are also people who give money and not time – they are donors. And goodness knows we already have lots of creative ways to recognize what they give. We don’t need to recognize their donations by accepting them onto the Board.

Board members need to be able and willing to do both.

 

How much, you ask?

Greater than zero and enough to be credible when asking others is the only possible answer. A scratch farmer who gives $50 might be a saint. A Wall Street broker who gives $50 might not be. One size does not fit all.

But if we run a query asking for the names of everyone who has given money in the last 365 days, the names of every Board member should appear on the list.

Here’s what I will say:

• I don’t consider $20 / week ($1,000 / year) too much to ask from Board members
• I don’t consider $20 / month ($250 / year) too much to expect from Board members
• $100 is a common withdrawal amount from ATMs

 

Sometimes it’s less a question of IF and more a question of HOW. Enabling Board members to give monthly can make larger gifts possible.

And Board members giving $250, $1,000, or more will be credible askers of other donors.

 

Pizza anyone?

 

Cheers, and Have a great week.

 

-da

 

PS: Your comments on these posts are welcomed and warmly requested. If you have not posted a comment before, or if you are using a new email address, please know that there may be a delay in seeing your posted comment. That’s my SPAM defense at work. I approve all comments as soon as I am able during the day.

 

PPS: Most of this post was originally posted in July 2019.

 

Photo by Anja courtesy Pixabay