Dr. Jay Dillon’s origin story in alumni engagement began when he was a 22-year-old making phone calls, 19,000 of them in a single year, thanking UCLA alumni and offering to help, never asking for a dime. He used the script every time and got wildly different responses. Some people lit up and talked for half an hour. Others couldn’t wait to hang up, even once they knew no ask was coming.
What was the dynamic behind these interactions?
His answer, after nearly a decade of research across ten institutions, is deceptively simple: alumni give because of who they are, not who we want them to be. The things we usually sort people by, wealth, age, zip code, affinity, describe alumni without explaining them or their giving behaviors.
His challenge to the field landed hardest of all. We say “students, faculty, and staff” constantly, and we leave off the largest constituency we have. On the pod today, Jay shares his test for whether any of this has really changed in ten years is whether our leaders start adding one word: students, faculty, staff, and alumni. Treat alumni as part of the community rather than a source of revenue, he says, and start while they’re still students, because students are alumni too.
Big Themes This Week
Alumni give because of who they are, not who we want them to be. Wealth, age, and affinity describe people without explaining them.
What sits underneath giving is belonging, and it’s more stable and measurable than we assume, largely formed in the 18-to-22 identity-making years.
You can’t install connection with one more event or program. Engagement sticks when it expresses an identity alumni already hold, and fades when we ask them to create one.
Team Discussion Questions
Are we sorting alumni by what describes them, or by what actually connects them?
Where are we asking alumni to manufacture a connection instead of expressing one they already have?
Do our leaders, and our campus tours, treat alumni as part of the community, and does that start while they’re still students?
