fbpx

Season 1, Episode 27

Amy and Andrea are joined by campaign expert, Richard Quinn, to discuss constructive approaches to common campaign dilemmas. For example, how should you respond if you go to solicit a donor for $500,000 and she greets you at the door with a check for $50,000? Or, what to do if your campaign chair isn’t good at soliciting gifts?

 

Listen Now:

This podcast is the second of a special Summer Series featuring our immensely-experienced Toolkit Advisors. Our live webinars will return in mid-August; learn more at ToolkitTalks.com.

Amy Eisenstein:
All right. Hello, everybody. Welcome to Toolkit talks. We are super excited to be doing a special edition today. But first I’m going to introduce myself and my co-host. I’m Amy Eisenstein. I am co-founder of the Capital Campaign Toolkit. I’m coming to you from sunny New Jersey today. And I am delighted to be here as always with my co-founder, Andrea Kihlstedt. Andrea, you want to say a word or two?

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yes, indeed. Hi there everybody. It’s so wonderful to be here with you. And Amy, with you as always. I’m Andrea Kihlstedt. I am calling in from the South Bronx, which is right across the river from Manhattan if you know anything about New York. And we are here with our colleague, Richard Quinn.

Amy Eisenstein:
Let me just say quickly. We’re doing a special series over the summer where we are picking the brains and interviewing, asking questions of our esteemed advisors here at the Toolkit. And just a quick reminder to everybody listening. The Toolkit, the Capital Campaign Toolkit, is a support system for nonprofit leaders running capital campaigns. So if you are looking for support, guidance, reassurance, strategy for your capital campaign, I do hope you’ll check out the Capital Campaign Toolkit.

So we’re super excited to have Richard Quinn, here, one of our advisors today to answer some really tough questions about capital campaigns. Richard, why don’t you introduce yourself? Just tell us a little bit about yourself.

Richard Quinn:
Well, it’s always a pleasure to be with both of you. Always great to have conversations with you. I have been working with the Toolkit for a little more than half a year, working with several organizations all over the country, even in Hawaii, which has been very exciting. And I have been a fundraising consultant since 2008. And it’s just delightful to be part of the team.

Amy Eisenstein:
Excellent. And we’re so excited to have you, Richard. And I think you didn’t give yourself justice. You’ve been at this fundraising business for decades. And we’re about to find out through our conversation just how knowledgeable you are.

When Your Donor Already Has a Gift in Hand

Amy Eisenstein:
So Andrea, we’re going to talk about pickles that sometimes non-profit leaders find themselves in during a campaign. So what’s the first pickle we’re going to talk about?

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah, we’ve got some doozies and they come from all of our, from our experience. Right? These are the kinds of problems that people face and that we have dealt with and campaigns that we’ve worked on.

So the first one, which is this, and this is really just such a classic problem. So imagine that you’re ready to go and solicit one of the lead gifts for your campaign. Right? You’re going to go and ask this person who you have been cultivating and engaging in your campaign for a gift for $500,000. And you have all the material and you’ve set up the meeting and they know you’re coming to ask them for a gift and you Zoom with them or you go walk in the door, wherever it is you’re meeting, and you start the conversation. And your donor says, “Andrea, it’s lovely to be able to meet with you and have lunch. But in fact, I’ve already decided what it is I’m going to give. And I’ve even written the check.” And she hands you a check, not for $500,000, but for $50,000. Oh, doesn’t that make your heart hurt.

Amy Eisenstein:
You got great stories.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
So the question is, what do you do? So what are the options when that happens? I don’t know, Rich, you want to start us off?

Richard Quinn:
Well, sure. And I hope that this can be a dialogue because you have as much expertise to bring to bear on this kind of question, as I do.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Absolutely. We’ll just going to go around, right.

Richard Quinn:
I will absolutely start off by saying this. I would wipe that expression of shock off your face right away. Perhaps even prepared not to have an expression of shock in advance so that if you were to get this answer, you can express nothing other than gratitude. Right? You should be obviously very grateful for this person’s gift. A $50,000 gift is a significant gift. But then I think it’s also an opportunity for us to educate the donor on where we are with the campaign. Right?

We’re in the early phases, right, as Andrea said. We’re asking somebody for a lead gift in the early phase, it’s really a pace setting, really kind of a gift that inspires people. And I wonder whether it’s an opportunity really to say to that donor after expressing gratitude that this is the time at which we are speaking with folks who are really, truly connected with our organization. And to ask them to do something that could be truly inspirational.

And to say, “I wonder if, again, not minimizing my gratitude at all. But I wonder if it could be possible for us to think a bit bigger with you about your support so that we can include you among some of our early pace setting donors. What do you think?” That’s kind of a scary space to occupy as a solicitor and not necessarily the most natural conversation to have with somebody but I think that by leading with the authority of the process, you’re inviting that donor to do something that they don’t even realize that they could be doing. And I think ultimately helping fulfill their objectives in ways that also help you fulfill your campaign objectives.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. That language was so good, Rich. I wonder if you can come up with it again. So people who are listening can actually jot it down. How would you frame that?

Richard Quinn:
I cannot thank you enough for this gift. This is just so wonderful of you to make this gift. We are in the early stages of a campaign with huge aspirations. And we are in the process of asking very close friends to make significant gifts, to support this initiative that also inspire others to follow suit down the road. And I’m wondering if, again, not minimizing any of my gratitude, if you would be willing to think bigger with us about your support right now. Because I would very much like to be able to list you among our pace setting donors, early pace setting donors for this campaign. What do you think?

Amy Eisenstein:
Yeah. I think that’s great.

I wonder if it’s an opportunity to open the conversation about gifts using assets and plan gifts? So you can say, “One of the many ways that capital campaigns are different from annual campaigns is that we ask all donors to think about gifts that might involve them digging past their checkbooks, right, beyond their cash flow. And so many of our lead donors will be using assets like life insurance, real estate, stock, all sorts of things. And I’m wondering, you have ever thought about making a gift with assets? And if that’s a conversation that we might have.”

Right. Because this is a super generous check and right, just as Richard said, we’re looking for leadership level gifts in order to really put our campaign over the top and inspire others. So I think it is an opportunity to say, “This is amazing. And have you considered making gifts in other ways — blended gifts or planned gifts — maybe the gift wouldn’t come for a few years or many years, but really thinking about this organization long term?”

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. The other thing that we haven’t mentioned yet is that most capital campaigns are set up to accept pledges sometimes for as many as five years. So when someone presents you with a check, right, one of the questions is, “Do you think about this as the first installment of a multi-year pledge?” Right. To try to clarify what the intention is. But I like the idea of positioning that person in the leadership context. I actually hadn’t experienced just like this, a bunch of years ago, where one of the chairs of the campaign who was a wealthy man who had given significant amounts and really believed in this organization, gave a gift to the organization of $35,000, sort of when asked for a leadership gift.

And there was no way in a million years that that campaign could afford having this man in this community with that role as a co-chair of the campaign, start out the giving at that level, because everyone else was going to follow suit. So everyone was in a tizzy about what to do about him, right. Now, I was the campaign council for that campaign. And I thought about it long and hard. And I called him up and said, “Hey, Bob,” or whatever his name was, “would you be willing to have a cup of coffee with me?”

And I drove down to where this was and we met for coffee. And I said, “Nobody else can have this conversation with you. But on the outside, sort of looking at this campaign as the outsider, I think I can. And I hope you won’t be offended. But the reality is that if you give $35,000 to this campaign, if that’s your gift, this campaign will fail because everyone else is going to follow suit. So I would really… I’m not going to tell anyone else that I’m talking to you, right. I just want you to understand the role that you play in your position. And I wonder if you might rethink your gift.”

So that’s what happened. We discussed it, we looked at the other people who if they followed suit there was no way, right, that the campaign was going to be successful. And I think he ended up giving, I don’t know. I remember whether it was $150,000, I think instead of $35,000. But I, as the outsider, went to talk to him in a quiet conversation. Just to sort of say, “Listen, you’re no dummy, take a look at what you’re doing.”

Richard Quinn:
Yeah, I understand. I had a similar situation recently with one of the Toolkit clients where the ask amount was $500,000, just like this example. This person didn’t come with a check in hand, but they came with a gift in mind. And the gift came in at $250,000. So half of the ask. And in this particular instance, we felt it made sense for us just to simply show gratitude and to say, “This is an amazing gift. Thank you so much.” Because we also know that this donor is going to pay that gift really soon. And we have a couple years left in the campaign. So we know that we still have an opportunity to go back to that person, particularly as we near the end of the campaign to say, “Could you be the White Knight to come in and make this thing happen.” Right. “Wrap this thing up for us.” And then to be listed in the $500,000 level.

So, there’s no single solution to one problem. Right? There are many ways in which you want to look at the circumstances that you’re facing. And that’s one of those instances where I wouldn’t have recommended that we say, “Can we think bigger with you,” on the spot. Because we knew that there was an opportunity to go back for another bite of the apple as it were.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. The other thing that strikes me is that one of the ways to head something like this off at the pass is by sending a proposal in advance. So that you actually are putting out an amount for that person to consider. Right? And then there’s not such a big discrepancy between what they thought was a good gift and what you were hoping for. So if you send the little proposal that says, “We’re hoping you will consider a gift of a half a million dollars, a leadership gift of a half a million dollars for this,” that sets the stage. Right? It may well have gotten rid of the whole problem beforehand.

Amy Eisenstein:
Yeah. And that’s one option. Another option is to let them know that you’re coming to talk to them about a leadership level gift. And those gifts start at a million dollars and up that you’re looking for 10 people in the campaign to give more than a million. Can you come have that conversation? And so you don’t necessarily have to put a whole proposal in front of them, but just make sure that they know that you’re looking for them for one of the top five gifts or something. And you’ll want to have a conversation about what their gift will look like, over a million dollars or whatever it is.

When a Campaign Committee Member Recommends a Poor Volunteer

Amy Eisenstein:
So, all right. What’s our next pickle? We’ve got a few pickles to cover.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. So here here’s a great pickle and this kind of stuff really does happen. So one of the amazing campaign committee members recommends that you recruit one of their friends to serve on the committee. And they’re good friends and it makes perfectly good sense to them to recommend the friend. Unfortunately, you have had experience with that friend before and you know that that person doesn’t follow through, you know that that person is disruptive at meetings, and you know that that person isn’t particularly generous. Right?

So you don’t want to say to the committee member, “Well, your friend is a dud.” Right. That’s not acceptable. But you are darned if you want to invite that person to serve on the committee. So how do you deal with that?

Richard Quinn:
This is another one of those examples where it is instructive both as an opportunity to kind of think about how you going to solve this pickle. By the way, I think, we should say that pickle is a phrase that’s kind of old fashioned. What I mean, I’d feel like we’re dating ourselves with we’re using words like pickle. I mean, it means brain teaser, puzzle, stumper those kinds of things.

But I think the first thing to do is to say is to thank the committee member for the recommendation. I mean, we are in the fundraising business after all, always lead with gratitude. Right. And then just like with the last example, take that shock expression off your face and just thank them. And even though you may not be fully on board, show an interest in the recommendation. Show an interest in the recommendation. Maybe your instincts are inaccurate in some way. Maybe you saw them in a context that was substantially different from the context were just and bringing them in. And you need to be sort of mindful of that, that you may be bringing your own personal orientation towards it that you might meet them again and think, wow, completely differently. So just be open to that possibility.

And I think the next thing to ask the high-powered committee members is ask them why they think this person would be a good addition. Right? Get them talking in specifics. And then I would recommend a meeting with a prospect to gauge their interest. And that gives you an opportunity to share… And this is the way you want to prep in advance for something like this. To share with them the committee member job description, what is required of committee members.

So if you don’t have a committee member job description, highly recommend writing one that is very specific, but as also to a certain degree loose because there are many different types of people that have different competencies and expertise, all of which can be brought to bear. Not everybody’s going to be a great solicitor. Some folks might be fantastic connectors, wonderful storytellers, just a font of useful information. None of them should be disruptive, obviously. I mean, that’s good behavior committee meetings is really important.

But be open to that person, having something of value to provide. And you may find during that meeting that person after reviewing the job description, that person might self-select out. Right. That this doesn’t seem as right for me as possible. And I cannot thank the other board member for recommending me. But then I really appreciate your honest, open, direct communication about what the responsibilities are. But I think I may pass. Or they may want to jump in a whole hog, at which point you want to be very specific about what it is that they would be bring to the table and make sure they stick to that.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. I love that response, Rich, because it’s probably not the response I would’ve come up with. And I think it’s much better than I would’ve thought of. I mean, I like it because it follows the appropriate form. Right? It, you don’t make an assumption that the guy… You may have had a bad experience with him, but that doesn’t mean that the people misbehaved. It may have been something particular to the situation that you had. So it assumes the best of people.

Richard Quinn:
Yes.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
And I think that’s a really good reason to follow what you’ve said.

I think the other thing that I would think to do is to talk carefully with the friend who is doing the recommending, and say, “I was served on a committee with that person,” or “I know that person in my sense is that they don’t follow through. What’s he your experience with that person?” So to have that conversation, just to raise it with a person who’s recommending to make sure they really do think it’s a good idea to do that. I don’t know.

Amy, what comes to your mind?

Amy Eisenstein:
Yes. So I was going to add that if you’re going to have a conversation with the person who is the potential committee member or committee chair that has been recommended that you don’t do it by yourself. Have two or three people interview this person and review the job description. In that way, one in person, especially a staff member, doesn’t have to be the bad guy saying, “No.” It can be, we decided to interview three people or talk to three or five people, and this is what the committee decided. So I think that there’s another opportunity to share and evaluate as a group and find another place for them to serve. Just because that you don’t want them to serve in one particular position, invite them to serve somewhere else or participate in another way. So I think that there’s multiple opportunities.

Richard, you mentioned committee job descriptions. So I just want to remind our listener that as a paid member of the Toolkit, you can have access to all the committee member job descriptions. It is certainly part of the Toolkit subscription plan. So just as a quick reminder.

Okay. Anything else on that? Or should we move to the next situation that people find themselves in, in campaigns?

When Your Campaign Chair is Not Good at Asking for Gifts

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Well, let’s move to the next one, and here it is. It is again, not uncommon for this to happen.

Let’s say you’ve taken a job as development director in an organization and the campaign is in progress. And you have a campaign chair. The campaign chair has been around a long time. And somehow was appointed to be campaign chair because he sort of thought he should be. But when you start working with that person, what you find is that they are not good at asking for gifts. That they’re the kind of people that ask for gifts by saying, “Oh, I’m going to see Amy at a cocktail party next week. I’ll just hit her up there.” Right? I mean, how many times do you have a campaign chair that says that, right, that doesn’t take seriously the fact of actually having needing a real conversation about a gift. But is kind of just schmoozing by the side and saying, “Oh, I’ll…”

So, the language is bad. The “hit her up” language is bad. The doing it at a cocktail party is bad. The whole mindset of that person about asking for gifts is not going to be effective. How do you handle that?

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Richard, you want to kick us off, again?

Richard Quinn:
Another beauty, that’s for sure. So certainly one that many of us have seen happen. And I mean, the first thing to say here is again, I’m going to speak from the point of view of generosity towards humanity, here. Right? What are they good at? Yeah, they might not be great at everything.

Nobody’s great at everything, right. But what might they be good at? I mean, there has to be something, right. And give them those tasks to focus on. So I think that’s also, that’s an important thing to sort of acknowledge. Right? Because this person in your scenario, Andrea, this person’s been around a while. They probably view their connection with the organization with a deep sense of personal purpose. Perhaps they’ve been on the board for 20 years. Right? So I think in this particular instance, provide them with tasks that really resonate with them. Don’t ask them to do things that they’re uncomfortable doing.

Number two. I think it might be a wise thing to think about a campaign co-chair. Somebody who has been road tested. Right? Somebody who is doing the kinds of things that this particular chair hasn’t been able to do effectively. And present it as a way for the existing chair to have a partner as we look to build our prospect base and do more outreach. And say, “This is a big campaign, we’ve got lots of prospects out there. I think it would make sense for you to have some help as we move forward with us.” So that’s a thought that I had in mind.

I mean, the most important takeaway from this is, again, what to do in advance to avoid this happening. Right? Don’t recruit a chair that you haven’t yet seen in action doing the work that you need them to do. They need to be proven from your point of view so that you can honestly feel comfortable about having them in that role.

Amy Eisenstein:
I think that’s such a good point, Richard. So many organizations, maybe not with a campaign chair, but honestly, with a board chair, which is just as bad, sort of leave this up to chance. They say, “Well, who will do it? Who wants the job?” I’ve heard people ask that in a meeting. “Who’s willing to serve?” And that we want to hand select people that are going to be excellent. But I think your point about co-chairs is a great one, because sometimes we do need a lot of different skillsets or people with different competencies and networks, and you may not get everything you’re looking for in one person. So I think that there is some real value to thinking about co-chairs people can play different roles, have different responsibilities.

The last thing I would add is, if you do, if you find yourself with a campaign chair that isn’t an asker, or isn’t willing to ask, or isn’t able to ask, well, you can always point back to the gift range chart. And say, “You know what? We need that person that you’re thinking of asking at a cocktail party” to go back to Andrea’s example, “to make a $100,000 gift. Do you think that at a cocktail party, that is the probably the most appropriate way or the best way to get them to really consider a lead gift? How else might we think about this? If they make a $10,000 gift, because you asked them at a cocktail party, this campaign isn’t going to work. And so let’s really strategize how we might do this.”

And I’ve been at places before where the ultimately the board chair in my case, didn’t come make the ask. They sort of set it up. They got their friend to agree to a meeting, and then somebody else, some other staff member or board member ultimately went and made the ask because that person just wasn’t prepared mentally or emotionally to make the ask of the size of the gift that we needed.

Andrea, what else?

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. This conversation reminds me of a strategy that our friend and colleague, Peter Heller, shared with me a while ago, which is what he called the whisper campaign. And the whisper strategy is a strategy designed specifically for cocktail parties. And this chair, I mean, there are people who love cocktail parties and who love the idea of sort of pulling people aside and makes them feel good to be able to do that. And what, Peter, suggests is that cocktail parties are a great place to pull people aside and say, “Hey, Rich, can I talk to you for a minute?” Then you say, “Something really is on my mind. And it’s serious. I really want to talk to you about it. I wonder if I can have the staff call you on Monday and schedule a time for us to get together.”

Andrea Kihlstedt:
So it’s a whisper in someone’s ear that sets up his or her saying, “Of course, I’d be happy to do that.” Right. And then the solicitation meeting can be set up after that. Right. So the task here would be to give this chair, this cocktail party chair, a real opportunity to use his cocktail party skills. But just shift a little what it is you want him to do. Right?

Amy Eisenstein:
Yeah, shift the ask.

Richard Quinn:
And maybe that chair attends the ask meeting, but they are not the one.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yes. They’re not the ones to be doing it.

Richard Quinn:
They’re not the one doing the ask, right. Yeah. So that you’re creating a space for that particular person to operate very effectively, right, even in their comfort zone.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
That’s right. Right. Exactly. So I think that… I mean, this particular pickle, this particular scenario is quite common.

Richard Quinn:
Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Andrea Kihlstedt:
So I’m glad we are looking at it. You take people who have been these board chairs, who have been around forever and sort of stumble into the campaign chair role, or even continue on with the board chair role. How do you use them effectively? And in my image, they’re kind of old codgers, right, and they’re not going to change. You’re not going to get them to change. Right. They’re not going to wake up the next morning and all of a sudden function differently. So to the extent you can use what they feel is their superpower and just transform it a little. Right. You may have more luck.

When the Campaign Has No Clear Vision

Andrea Kihlstedt:
We’ve got one more pickle for you, Rich. It’s a good one. And again, one that we hear a lot. And it is the vision dilemma.

What do you do when you find yourself in a campaign where the organization hasn’t clarified a vision that is actually driving the campaign. And this comes in several categories, several flavors. The most common flavor is our organization is about to be 50 years old. And we want to raise $50 million, right, because we’re about to be 50 years old. No vision, no nothing, just the sense you can raise a lot of money based on that number. Right. And we know that’s not going to work. So that’s one flavor of this problem.

Another flavor of this problem is we want to pay down the debt. Right? The organization owes X millions of dollars, and we’re going to have a pay down the debt campaign. Now, again, that has nothing to do with vision. And it’s sometimes not even smart to pay down the debt, right? If the debt isn’t costing very much.

Another example is endowment. An organization says, “Well, we have an endowment of a million dollars. We want an endowment of five million dollars. We’re going to have a campaign to do that.” These are all vision-less campaigns. What do you do about that?

Richard Quinn:
I mean, to a certain degree even a building campaign. A building campaign in and of itself is its own visionless campaign. Right. And if it’s really only about the building, right. Buildings are never only about buildings.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Right.

Richard Quinn:
Program expansion is really not only about program expansion. Endowment building is not only about endowment building. So there was a fascinating TED talk, a lot of folks have seen it, called “how successful leaders lead” by Simon Sinek, where he talks about this whole concept of starting with why. I mean, I think this is one of those examples or so. So say you have the CEO on the board and they’ve got a list of things that are semi compelling and they really want to advance this and turn this into a campaign.

The goal of the development office and certainly the consultant and partnership with the development office is to help them see that their projects are in the service of a greater why. Right. So it’s the classic yes and moment to have this kind of conversation with your organizational and also volunteer leadership. So your executive and volunteer leadership. “That is great. I love that you’re so interested in this. And what I love about it is that it gets us towards something truly special in the future.” Right. So that’s a way of thinking about it, not so much as semi compelling, but rather having the seeds of something truly magical, what they’re thinking about.

So that’s really our role; it’s to help CEOs, board members, board chairs, other volunteers who have projects that they find interesting to see them as in the service of something greater, more bold, more exciting. And that’s, when you get there, that is what’s going to bring in the revenue. The thing isn’t, the vision is.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Right. Yeah. Amy, what do you have to add to that?

Amy Eisenstein:
Yeah. I of course agree with Richard. And I also think that anything that is really, truly going to get you closer to your mission. So how are you going to fulfill the mission of your organization and how will this campaign get you closer to that? So what is concrete, and tangible that you can raise money for? And I don’t literally mean concrete and tangible because lots of times you’re raising funds for things that are not buildings; they’re staff positions, and program expansion, and things like that. But how can you talk about this in a way that people will understand that you’re moving the needle and that you’re getting closer to your vision, your mission for the organization.

And just to go back to your example, Andrea, about an anniversary campaign and why that specifically isn’t good because listeners may be thinking, “Oh, we were thinking of having an anniversary campaign. I don’t really know why that’s not good.”

So anniversaries look backwards. They talk about what you’ve done in the past. Right? You’re celebrating your 50th anniversary or your 100th anniversary. As a campaign donor, I’m interested in what are you going to do for the next 10 years? What are you going to do for the next 50 years? And you need to be concrete and specific, just not what we’re going to do more of the same. But how is this really going to transform the community? How is this going to transform your organization? Why should I dig deep and think about giving my assets and not just a small gift?

Richard Quinn:
So to root that somewhat in vision, the concept of the anniversary campaign. Great cases for support, answer three questions. Right. Why us, why now, and why you? “Why you,” so the donor can be the hero. “Why us” is a very important part of that, because you’ve got to be able to make the case that we can do this. We have the track record. So that’s a way of using retrospective content. Right? 50 years of an anniversary to undergird people’s feeling of confidence that you can achieve the vision that you’ve set for yourself. So I wonder whether even things that are retrospective, such as anniversaries can be turned to be made arguments for successful vision achievement.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Yeah. Richard, I think I smell a blog post in your three part discussion of a case. It would be wonderful to have a blog post about that. That’s such wonderful clarity about what needs to be in a case.

Richard Quinn:
Oh, my pleasure to write that. And yes.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
Thank you, for that.

Amy Eisenstein:
Richard, I now know… Well, I’ve known it all along. But now everybody knows why your Capital Campaign Toolkit clients are so lucky to have you as an advisor because you are so brilliant when it comes to this stuff. So much experience and wisdom. We thank you for sharing it with us today and our listeners. Let me give you two a chance for final thoughts. Any last pieces of wisdom you want to leave listeners with today? Richard, you first. And then, Andrea.

Richard Quinn:
Well, just remember that any pickle you find yourself in is an opportunity to solve it. Right? It’s an opportunity to do something with it. And to do something really potentially quite wonderful with it. So don’t run away from a pickle, but seize it and make hay of it.

Amy Eisenstein:
Perfect. Andrea, how about you?

Andrea Kihlstedt:
I don’t think I can do better than that.

Amy Eisenstein:
Wow.

Andrea Kihlstedt:
I think that’s perfect. Pickles are opportunities, right. And when you involve people in helping to solve problems, not only do the problems get solved, but you have engaged and involved people’s wisdom and experience. So I think that’s right. Pickles make you uncomfortable. Some of these things are going to make you uncomfortable. I mean, Richard, this has been terrific to have you with us today. Thank you so much for doing this. We should do this more often with our advisors, Amy.

Amy Eisenstein:
Thanks everybody for joining us. We appreciate it. See you soon.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share