AI AND THE HUMAN WORK OF FUNDRAISING

Artificial intelligence has moved from future talk to daily reality with startling speed. It’s already reshaping how people work, communicate, search, write, plan, and make decisions. And if arts and cultural patrons are growing accustomed to instant answers in their daily lives, we need to ask ourselves the hard question: how will the art of fundraising be affected?

I recently spoke with RSC Founder Bob Swaney about that question. Bob has seen several major technology shifts over the course of his four-decade fundraising career, from tele-funding to online research, CRM systems, and donor retention tools. The lessons learned from those shifts have shaped his measured and practical perspective, which is exactly what this moment calls for.

Bob is not afraid of AI. He uses it regularly. But he’s clear about where the line is.

AI can help fundraisers prepare better, communicate more clearly, and reduce unnecessary friction. It cannot replace trust, judgment, timing, or human ownership of donor relationships.

Below is our conversation, edited and condensed for clarity.

Catherine: AI is now integrated into many areas of life, both personal and professional. As arts fundraisers, what do we need to pay attention to right now?

Bob: The question is no longer whether AI is a good idea or a bad idea. It is already part of daily life, daily work, communications, and decision-making. The real question for arts fundraising is whether AI is changing human expectations enough that we need to change how we fundraise.

I think the answer is both yes and no.

Yes, expectations are changing. People are getting used to speed, personalization, and low-friction experiences. They ask for something, and they get an answer quickly. They ask a better question, and they get a better answer.

But no, that does not mean trust, judgment, and timing have become outdated.

Donors do not live in a separate universe. If the rest of life becomes faster, clearer, and more responsive, arts organizations will feel that expectation too. But the deeper expectation is not simply, “I want everything right now.” It is more like, “I want things to be easier, more relevant, and more thoughtful, but I still want to know that a competent human being is there when the stakes are high.”

I have seen versions of this before. In the 1980s, I helped usher in telemarketing and telefunding as serious revenue development tools in arts organizations. Later, I watched online research become faster and deeper. I watched CRM systems evolve from glorified filing cabinets into central operating systems.

Every wave of technology comes with some version of the same promise: this changes everything. My conclusion is more measured. Good technology can make us faster, more efficient, more informed, and sometimes more thoughtful. But it does not replace the fundamentals of successful fundraising.

The test is still the same: does this tool help us develop and mature relationships with prospects and donors? Does it help us know people better, prepare better, follow through better, respond better, or steward better?

If it does, good. Use it. If it only helps us create more activity, more noise, and more false confidence, then we are not improving fundraising. We are just keeping busy.

Catherine: What does that mean for how organizations actually fundraise?

Bob: In some practical ways, we need to change. We need to become faster in our responsiveness, better in our preparation, clearer in our communication, and less tolerant of needless friction.

Slow acknowledgments, vague follow-ups, clumsy giving systems, and generic communication were never virtues. Arts organizations often did those things because they had to, or because they did not have better tools. Donors tolerated it more often than they will now.

But in a deeper sense, we should not abandon the tempo of relationship development. We cannot rush trust. We cannot lean so hard into efficiency and speed that we damage the relationship. A donor can appreciate quick service and still respect thoughtful pacing. A donor can want a prompt thank-you and still understand that a major gift conversation, a campaign conversation, or a legacy gift conversation unfolds over time.

Technology may reshape patience around process. It does not erase the deeper realities of trust, caution, discernment, and conviction. Arts organizations can offer a reprieve from automation and speed without becoming outdated.

Catherine: RSC champions relationship-based fundraising. What do you think AI will mean for relationship development?

Bob: There is a difference between impatience with inefficiency and impatience with relationship.

Many donors may be impatient with bad process, and frankly, they should be. Some organizations have hidden weak discipline behind the romance of relationship building for years. They say, “Everything takes time,” when what they really mean is, “We are disorganized,” or “We are afraid to make the Ask,” or “We do not have strong fundamentals.”

To be clear, time should not be confused with pace. Authentic relationship development has a pace because trust has a pace. Meaningful philanthropic decisions have a pace. Stretch giving has a pace. Legacy thinking certainly has a pace. The danger is becoming so obsessed with the efficiency of an AI-driven process that we jeopardize the relationship or make the interaction feel like a foreign object.

Serious prospects and donors still appreciate the tempo of philanthropic relationship, provided the organization is competent enough to distinguish thoughtful pacing from avoidable sluggishness. That is the real line. It is not speed versus slowness. It is useful speed versus destructive haste.

Catherine: You mentioned that we have seen technology shifts before. What do those past shifts tell us about what is ahead?

Bob: Telefunding did not replace relationships. Research tools did not replace judgment. CRM systems did not replace cultivation.

At their best, each helped fundraisers reach more people, prepare better, remember what mattered, and coordinate their work with more discipline. In every case, the best use of technology moved fundraising toward a more mature donor relationship. The same rule applies to AI.

Use it to prepare better, think better, respond better, and save time on mechanical work so front-line fundraisers, volunteers, Board members, staff, and artists have more time for the human work. Just remember that faster preparation does not mean a faster route to trust. A machine may accelerate research or drafting. It does not accelerate trust in the same way. Trust is built between people.

Catherine: You often say, “Only do what only you can do.” How does that apply to fundraising professionals using AI?

Bob: Let the machine do the machine’s work. Let it gather, sort, summarize, organize, inform, and help with first drafts. Let it help you walk into the room more prepared, more confident, and better informed.

But when it comes to the moments that determine whether a donor relationship matures, the human being has to step forward. Only you can sense hesitation, decide whether a prospect is really ready, and pick up on subtext in the conversation. Only you can evaluate whether to press, pause, reassure, or wait.

There are elements of every job that will be augmented by AI. But for a front-line fundraiser, the essential part of the role can only be done by a human. AI can support preparation. It should not substitute for judgment, experience, and care.

Catherine: There is real fear around AI. What’s your take?

Bob: I am not afraid of using AI. I use it every day for business and personal purposes. It is a place I go to form ideas, test thinking, and gather information. My concern is not the tool itself. My concern is misuse.

If AI cuts too many corners, it can weaken the very instincts that make someone a good fundraiser. Part of being a strong fundraiser is understanding why things work with people, why humans behave a certain way, and how to respond in a positive and generous way.

Fundraising professionals should heed a few warning signs. If donor communication starts sounding overly polished, hollow, forgettable, or rote, it's probably time to back off a bit from the tech.

Arts organizations cannot afford to sound like everyone else. They have their own voice, identity, and personality. If relationship-driven fundraising gets replaced by the appearance of relationship-driven fundraising, the dashboard may look busy for a while, but deep trust and confidence are not being built.

Use AI wisely. That also means knowing when not to use it.

Catherine: Any final thought you would leave with arts fundraisers?

Bob: AI can help you prepare for the relationship, but it cannot own the relationship.

Takeaways for Arts Leaders

Bob’s central thesis gives us a useful filter. For arts and other nonprofit arts leaders, AI should make us better prepared for the human work, not less responsible for it.

Donors, patrons, Board members, and community partners are already living in a faster, more customized world. They expect clearer communication, easier processes, quicker follow-up, and fewer unnecessary hurdles. That also means practices that create friction in the relationship – slow acknowledgments, generic messaging, clumsy giving systems, or vague next steps – are tolerated less than ever. Relationship-based fundraising still depends on trust, judgment, timing, and care. Those cannot be automated without losing something important. Organizations should start by looking at where AI can help build capacity without replacing ownership. Could it help your team research prospects?  Draft digital chasers to your direct mail appeals?  Identify patterns in your fundraising results that deserve a closer look?

Most importantly, keep the human decisions with humans: the decision to Ask, the decision to wait, the decision to listen longer, the decision to change course because something in the room tells you the donor is not ready, or the decision to pick up the phone instead of sending another polished email.

In other words, use AI to protect time for the work only people can do. How is your organization using AI? If you're balancing new tools or processes and want to enhance your relationship-based fundraising, please reach out. I'd be happy to connect.