Filipinos Have Grit, Not Just Resiliency

Defined in Psychology as “how well a person adjusts to tough internal and external demands,” resiliency is seen as a much-desired trait in people from all walks of life, especially among marginalized sectors of society. But this trait is not all positive, and some critics have pointed to its regressive role as a safety valve for socio-economic pressures that would otherwise have led to actions for fundamental changes. 

As a case in point, Filipinos are admired by many foreigners as a resilient people, being able to bounce back and cope from natural calamities, economic downturns and pandemics. But this is not a national trait, it is in fact characteristic of people in the Global South, where poverty is multigenerational and economic crisis is chronic. Its existence in the Philippines only becomes remarkable because Filipinos smile and make fun of themselves and their misery during dire times, a spirit of fatalistic bravado that masks much more than it reveals.

This devil-may-care attitude also keeps us sane in an insane world, acting as an opiate that seeks to numb us from fully recognizing our country’s festering social realities. Other ways of escapism are illegal drugs, alcoholism, karaoke, gambling and online games, all of which are rife in every corner of the country. They keep us from seeing the need for urgent and deep-going changes, and bonding together to form movements that can push for paradigm shifts.

Resiliency is often mistaken for grit, which focuses on long-term plans and goal attainment. The former delves on surviving the present, not on creating the future. One cannot even look at forward trajectories when preoccupied with the moment, which for many Filipinos is a daily, life-and-death situation. People who have grit are those who believe they stand a chance in achieving their goals within the present system, with a good dash of hope thrown in.

Filipinos should be praised for more than resiliency; we should be praised for having plenty of grit. We don’t just hanker for survival; we also want to get to the top. The only time people settle for resiliency is when they have settled for a kind of life that merely waits for death. Grit reaches out for the very essence of Life itself, and defies even the gods of convention and the status quo in order to reach it. THAT is what Filipinos have in abundance.

Fundraising for NGOs

Fundraising is not rocket science, but it is certainly one of the hardest jobs in a nonprofit/NGO. In many ways, it is an even harder role than that of that of the organizational head (CEO or Executive Director, depending on the Board’s mindset), as the fundraiser’s effectiveness is primarily measured by one precise metric – how much money is raised as against the target. In a world replete with nonprofits vying for scarce funding, this is a tough KPI indeed.

On the other hand, the NGO head’s ’s performance is gauged by many other metrics, most of them flexible and subjective such as leadership, management, representation, and fundraising support. This is why the fundraiser role is often the shortest and most vulnerable in any nonprofit, and anyone who gets this job is up for sleepless nights, caffeine abuse and chewed out fingernails. There is hardly any fulltime fundraiser who can say this is a “fun” job.

That said, fundraisers are practically the lifeblood of any nonprofit. This is mainly due to the very nature of such organizations – they are not legally allowed to make profits. Their sole source of income is asking other entities for money so that every aspect of their operation can run. Without proper funding, nonprofits and their worthy (or sometimes unworthy) programs will wither on the vine or become unsustainable in the long run.

The constant need for frugality has pushed some nonprofits to cut corners by setting up ad hoc committees or assign program staff to deal with fund sourcing, rather than hiring a dedicated fundraiser or establishing a fundraising department (for large NGOs). They often end up with even bigger problems, such as overburdening program staff (leading to quick turnovers) or dropping grant funding calls that have short submission periods.

Hence, the idea that “anyone can be a fundraiser” is an idealist fancy, a romantic spin on the accepted notion of “everyone is a fundraiser” in NGOs. While the latter mantra rightfully acknowledges the collective nature of resource mobilization in nonprofits, the former is an extreme interpretation that can lead to disastrous results when operationalized. Truth be told, not just anyone can be a fundraiser. The role itself requires a unique skill set and experience that other program- or operation-based staff may not have at all.

Saving funds by having existing program or admin staff double up as fundraisers may seem sensible at first glance, but it is actually a shortsighted approach. At best, nonprofits that choose this option end up subsisting in hand-to-mouth fashion and are unable to build reserves crucial to operational stability. Conversely, NGOs that hire experienced fundraisers can reap handsome dividends in the long run, creating sustainable resource inflows and buffer funds (through unrestricted income) without the loss in program momentum required by an ad hoc approach. Viewed in corporate terms, hiring fundraisers make for good ROI.

While securing the services of a good fundraiser does not guarantee deficit-free operations – especially if a nonprofit mismanages cash flow or has flawed systems that make it hard to fundraise – the organization can still benefit in other ways. Rare is the fundraiser who is not adept at partnership and communications, and rarer still is the job description that does not lump these two skills under the rubric of fundraising. Even if the funding target is not reached in a given year and leads to a deficit, the fundraiser still has intrinsic value for the entire organization if she/he performs well in other skills aligned with the role, and which may lead to an income rebound the following year. This means that fundraisers should not be judged based solely on the KPI of hitting or exceeding the annual funding target.

Fundraisers are definitely an added cost, and for proven ones, quite expensive. But having someone deal with the complexities of fundraising – a combination of acumen in grant development, partnership, communications and marketing – allows the CEO/Executive and program staff to be more effective in delivering their nonprofit’s core mission, thus optimizing the terrain for productive resource generation. At the end of the day, it’s worth hiring a fundraiser.