I've talked to a lot of deans in recent years about fund-raising strategies, and the common wisdom seems to be that it's always easier to raise money for a building project than anything else – ie something that donors can physical put their name on. So when a law school is thinking development but isn't planning a building project, the dean has to think more laterally about the approach to fund-raising.
I guess I've never asked the obvious question why this is necessarily the case. It seems there are lots of things a donor's name could be attached to that are not part of a building project eg an endowed chair, a scholarship fund, a fellowship, or (gasp) even a Center of Excellence (see Eric Johnson's recent post on Prawfs about Centers of Excellence!).
Do any current or aspiring deans out there have any thoughts as to why bricks and mortar is an easier sell than these other things? Or is it simply an urban myth that bricks and mortar are the easiest sell?
More people typically see buildings and know about them than know about a scholarship or endowed chair, I suspect. Building names are on maps; students refer to building names all the time. As in "let's meet in front of Zinnecker after class. Oh, wait, you've got class in Lipton. Well, in that case, let's meet in front of Krawiec. You don't know Krawiec? It's the building right next to Massey." I'm not sure how many students hear about scholarships or endowed chairs. So if you're thinking about naming as a monument, buildings are probably larger monuments than scholarships or endowed chairs. They may also be a lot more expensive, of course.
My sense is that deans have done a good job of targeting naming opportunities to donors' interests — like a moot court team named after a successful litigator.
I had a named scholarship in grad school*, and remember the name- the Geo L. Harrison fellowship- but only because I was told that, though the fellowship endowment officially specified that it was to be for a "gentile male", the university no longer made any investigation into the gentileness (nor even the gender, I think) of the recipient. But as for this, "it's always easier to raise money for a building project than anything else – ie something that donors can physical put their name on."
Perhaps the solution is to put names on more things? The latest idea here at Penn is to have people "endow a chair", where this really means "have your name on a seat" in one of the classrooms. I don't know how much it costs (a few thousand, at least, but maybe more) but I guess it's been a pretty popular fund-raising method.
*I'm pretty sure that I had this fellowship for no special reason, just that it was a source of funding for the normal graduate fellowship packages the philosophy department offered.
In the spirit of musing…
When I was in law school, I thought that if I ever made enough money to endow something (unlikely, given my academic inclinations), I would endow a restroom — partly because they're really, really useful for everyone (unlike, say, Centers for Excellence), partly because I've never seen it done before, and partly because I find the idea of an endowed restroom side-splittingly hilarious; it plays up the absurdity of everything being for sale. (Also, in "emergency" situations," people might notice your name as they sprint in, and they might be truly, thank-you-note-writingly grateful to you.)
Which leads me to a related question. I can't imagine that a school would allow a donor to endow a restroom. Right? Or have I missed scads of endowed bathrooms in my travels?
Here's another fantasy endowment to try on for size. I don't really know what a "Center for Excellence" is, but I can tell you that the Orwellian sound to it creeps me out. Wouldn't it be lovely if someone decided to donate money for the a "Center for Mediocrity"? (Doesn't the Goldman Sachs Center for Mediocrity have a nice ring?) Or perhaps I'll try to endow the anteroom to the Dean's Office — the "Vladimir & Estragon Waiting Room."
All of which is to say that I'm genuinely surprised that there isn't more irony, satire, and absurdity in endowments.
Dude – if you want a "Vladimir and Estragon Waiting Room" why not attach it to something more fitting like student services, health services, or financial aid? Or (to put two of your ideas together) the women's restroom at intermission at the theater…
When I was an undergrad, a friend and I used to play a game about what we'd endow at our college if we ever made bucketloads of money (a most unlikely prospect for either of us). My favorite was the Henny Youngman Chair in Stand-Up Comedy. "Take my seminar, please!"
I can see this post is clearly directed to the right audience. No wonder none of us are deans (that I know of!)
" I would endow a restroom "
About 6 or 7 years ago the men's room in the basement of the main library at Penn, where the undergrad study center and the reserve desk and a little cafe are, was re-modeled quite nicely, replacing a dingy old restroom. Next to the nice, new urinals was a little sign on the wall saying, "The relief you are about to experience was made possible by a generous donation from X". Unfortunately, I've forgotten who X was, so perhaps that goes against Vladimir's idea, but it still makes me smile every time I happen to be there.
You just so totally made my day, Matt!
As a former dean, actually at four institutions if you include a year-long tenure as an interim dean, I will try to respond. First, I do not agree that buildings are necessarily the easiest thing to raise large dollars for. Certainly, they are larger projects, so they may entice a larger gift and do provide something tangible to put a donor's name on. While at one university, we raised a very large (I am told the largest to that date at the university) for professorships and scholarships (we did however name the law school — not the building — after the donor). I think that contributed to our moving up two tiers in the infamous US News ratings scheme. My experience is that you can raise funds for centers of excellence (when they are genuine), for professorships and scholarships (each with their own naming opportunities). The bigger problem that I have discovered, now that I serve as a college president, is that lawyers, even in big firms, do not tend to be major donors (7-figure and larger), in part because they depend on salaries and often seek to maintain a life style like their clients who are in business and have deeper resource bases. I think it makes sense to go after all sources but to try to identify graduates and friends who are in business (have built businesses) and plaintiff personal injury lawyers (who are the lawyers with the biggest pot from which to give). Just a few thoughts in response to what I consider to be an important question.
The "Vladimir and Estragon Waiting Room" will surely be the best blog comment of the month, on this blog or any other.
Congratulations.