Women Play Prominent Role in Philanthropic Decisions

The Fidelity® Charitable Gift Fund today announced the results of a study of charitable givers in America showing that women play a prominent role in their households and communities when it comes to philanthropy. While this probably doesn't surprise anyone, there are some kernels of useful information in the study.

Almost half of women (46 percent) surveyed say they have the primary or sole decision-making role in their households for both how much money to donate to charity and which charities to support. Likewise, most men say they defer to their spouses on which charities to support (81 percent) and how much money to donate (83 percent).

Men overwhelmingly (92 percent) name their spouses as their primary influencer in charitable giving. Women are much more likely to name a wide range of influencers. While 84 percent name their spouse as an influencer, women also rely on extended family (24 percent), friends (23 percent) and co-workers (17 percent).

Hopefully, we're long past the time when causes planned their gift-seeking approaches primarily to the husband, almost totally excluding the wife. But even when the wife is present, even savvy solicitors can speak more to him than to her.

In my experience, in modern day, most couples have rules -- either stated or inferred -- for charitable decision making. Usually, each has a limit. Below the limit, he can say "yes" unilaterally. Below the limit, she can decide alone. But above the limit, both need to be a part of the decision.

Especially when we're asking for significant amounts, the lesson is that our visits should, whenever possible, be with both wife and husband. And while we're with them, we must listen to both parties. Deferring to the man is not only disrespectful to the woman, it ignores the fact that she's mostly in charge of making these decisions.

Four Categories
The study also classified four profiles of givers in America today that illustrate distinctly different approaches to philanthropy.

Mainstream Contributors
The majority of those surveyed (52 percent) fell into the "mainstream contributor" category. This group is the least likely to give more in challenging economic times because of greater need. When decreasing giving year over year, they are the most likely to keep the same number of charities and just decrease the amount they give. They are the most likely to know in advance which charities to give to. Their average total donations in 2008 were $6,842.

Empathetic Givers
One third (29 percent) of the survey participants fell into the "empathetic giver" group. These people give the most in challenging economic times because of need. They are the most interested in creating a family tradition of charitable giving by engaging their children and spouse. They are the most likely to respond to a cause when personally touched by a disease, illness or tragedy. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $7,287.

Reactive Contributors
Just 15 percent of survey participants are "reactive contributors." This group gives the smallest donations as a percentage of income. They are the most likely to cut back on charitable giving in challenging economic times. They are the least likely to think of charitable giving as part of their overall financial plan. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $3,687.

Pioneering Givers
The Gift Fund found that only 4 percent of its survey participants are "pioneering givers." They are the most likely to contribute to organizations that are lesser known or to support new causes. They give away the most money as a percentage of their income. They use credit cards and securities for donations more than any other group. They are more likely to be influenced by a philanthropist in the news and the most likely to want guidance from a financial advisor regarding charitable giving. Their total donations in 2008 averaged $7,347.

When strategizing your approach to a prospective investor, it might be useful to predict which of these archtypes apply.

Click here to read the news release.

Click here to read a six-page executive summary.