Well, good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining. Let's get started. My name is Chase Moore. I serve as the executive director for the U.S. and Canada here at CASE, and it's wonderful to have you today. A couple of housekeeping items. This session will be recorded and added to the CASE learning management system, which can be accessed by visiting learn.case.org, where you will find a growing collection of on-demand resources. If you'd like us to do more of this type of programming, let us know in the evaluation at the end of today's conversation. We welcome your thoughts on this topic, as well as others that you might like to see CASE tackle. Feel free to drop questions in the chat, as I'll be monitoring those, should time allow for asking. The topic of generational values and impacts on advancement has been a theme that has cropped up across all eight U.S. and Canada districts and been sidebar conversations with dozens of CAOs this past year. I am really excited to tee up this conversation with three extraordinary advancement officers that I've had the pleasure to get to know over the years and through various capacities here at CASE. I'd like to welcome into the conversation a longtime friend and former CASE staffer, Anita Branch-Brown. Anita serves currently as the Vice President for University Advancement with Hollins University in Roanoke, Virginia. She is a CASE Laureate, has lectured, taught, and volunteered with District 3 and CASE for a number of years. Next, I'd welcome Dr. Krishan Mehta, who currently serves Toronto Metropolitan University as the Vice President for University Advancement and Alumni Relations. Krishan also volunteers as a CASE Commissioner for Alumni Relations, and I was told earlier this week that Krishan has graciously accepted an invitation to serve on the CASE Summit Planning Committee for this year. Rounding out the panel of CAOs is a CASE All-Star and Laureate to boot, Mr. Carl Miller-Lugo. Carl serves in the role of Vice President for University Advancement and Alumni Engagement with the University of Texas, San Antonio. Carl represents District 4 on the CASE U.S.-Canada Council. He too has been a District Volunteer, as well as faculty for numerous conferences, including summer institutes. So without further ado, I'd like to hand it over to someone I admire because of their own story journey as a Chief Advancement Officer and CASE Volunteer, CASE President and CEO, Sue Cunningham. Sue, over to you. Thank you very much, Chase, and very good to join Chase in welcoming our fabulous panelists, and also it's lovely to see so many of you join the call. Many familiar names, so it's lovely to see you in this conversation. And to those who I've not met, thank you very much for joining us. Greetings from a very cold Washington, D.C., although, Krishan, I think relative to Toronto, it's probably not too cold at all, but very good to see you all. And as Chase mentioned by way of introductions, this question of the generational value of advancement and how we're working with and engaging with different generations, I think is a subject that comes up almost more than any other. So I'm really grateful that we have some time to talk about this today and look forward, as Chase suggested, to your questions coming into the chat. But if I can add my warm welcome to Anita, Krishan, and Carl for joining us today, and welcome to all of you. So oddly enough, I've got some questions I want to kick off with, and if I may, Anita, I'll start with you. And it's really good to see you. So women, as we all know, are playing a larger role in philanthropy broadly, and we see it as a trend that's increasing. Do you think there are generational differences in giving and or engagement patterns that are discernible in the data among alumni of Hollins? And if so, could you tease out what you feel are some of the differences in values of your alumni by generation? Sure, I can certainly do that. Thank you all for joining us today. Thank you, Sue. And I'm looking forward to this wonderful conversation with Carl and Krishan. And so I want to start, first of all, by, before diving in into specifics about the generational differences in giving and engagement patterns among Hollins alumni, I want to talk about exploring the various values. I want to level set our conversation a little bit related to women's education, right? I think that's important, because many people are less familiar with women's education. So Hollins is a women's institution founded in 1842, 183 years old. Today we are, there are only approximately 26 women's colleges and universities in the United States, only 26. And sadly, that number of women's colleges has been declining, like six from 63 in 2000 to 31 in 2023. So the numbers just keep dropping. And that is significant when we start talking about generations, generational values and engagement in the philanthropy at Hollins. I also want to talk a little bit broadly, just briefly about related to enrollment trends with women's colleges. So when we look at enrollment trends and data over the decades of women's colleges collectively, we only have about 58,000 undergraduate women of all the undergraduate population, only 58,000. And that has decreased over the last 10 years by 3%, right? So I'm trying to make sure you understand how women's education is so indeed unique, and it does tie to what it is we're talking about today. So the last thing I want to share is that despite these challenges, 2% of American female college graduates are produced from women's college, only 2%. But two critical examples of how we make an impact with our graduates, 20% of those women are serving in Congress, and 30% of those women have been recognized as rising leaders in corporate America. So we're getting smaller, our schools are going away as an institution type. And so we are working very hard to survive, to maintain enrollment, but still achieving, still in graduating, I guess, individuals who are doing great work. So quickly, some key points about generational giving at Hollins that I think will contribute to this conversation and hopefully generate some questions from you all. When we think about the different generations, for us at Hollins, the silent generation and boomers generally contribute 97% of our annual philanthropy. So almost all of it, right? Across the generations from silent generations to generation Z, there is a steady decline by 10% every year in terms of the amount of philanthropy or the number of people who are participating in our philanthropic efforts. The largest group of potential donors for us consists with boomers and Gen X, which makes up about 57% of our donor pool. And however, we've received only 3% from Generation X, Millennials, and Gen Z, which may be the par for the course for many of you, which this leaves many of our fundraising practices to cater to the giving preferences and values of the silent generation and the boomers. So we're a small team. We are not able to serve everybody. And we have to maximize the philanthropy goals that we're trying to achieve. So trying to really manage the values and how we implement and execute to respond to those values is very challenging for a small shop, for a women's college. Finally, I want to say that 50% of our incoming class are first generation college students, which is also a factor that has to be considered in the context of generational giving strategies. So I know I said a lot, but hopefully you have an understanding of perspective on women's education in this space, and that I've left certainly some things for my fellow panelists to share as well. Thank you, Anita. And I have to say your arms around all that is relevant to your institution is phenomenal and very, very concerning about that drop off you describe of 10% across the generations, really concerning. And as you suggest, something that is not unique to Hollins and what we're seeing. So if I may go north to Canada and Christian, can I bring you into the conversation? So you're a chief advancement officer of a very large urban institution in Toronto. And you've somewhat recently went through a name change, which resonated differently with alumni and donors. Are there things you learned about Toronto Metropolitan's alumni that have the appearance of differences in generational values? And what does that mean for your approach to engagement at your institution? Sure. Thank you, Sue. And hello, everybody. It's nice to be here and to share some of the experiences we've had at Toronto Metropolitan University. As your question points to a huge thing that happened at this university a couple of years ago, whereby we went through an institutional name change in light of what was happening across Canada. In 2021, a series of mass graves were discovered alongside and adjacent to a number of recently or historically closed down residential schools that were established as a way to manage and really coordinate a new colonial effort to eradicate Indigenous folks from their communities and from their families. And that caused a huge devastation, of course, national conversations and led to an entire almost eight year process of truth and reconciliation commission was developed. Edgerton Ryerson, the namesake of our university, was considered to be one of the architects of the residential school system, having developed the curriculum that was embedded into this program. And upon the discovery of the mass graves, our campus became the kind of flashpoint for grieving and solidarity with Indigenous communities. And this wasn't the first time that our university was really grappling with our namesake and the legacy of the school system. And we've done, over the years, we implemented a number of educational programs, we've put signs around, we've invited people into conversation about the legacy of the curriculum and the impact it's had on Indigenous peoples and people across different communities. But this time, it was different. This time, it was visceral. It was in the heat of COVID. It brought people together in ways that we never imagined we could, or it would. And we couldn't sit on our hands and just do the same, put up a sign and put up a website. So we established a committee, a group that really took a deep dive into ways in which we could, as an institution, serve, better serve truth and justice telling within Toronto and beyond. And so that led to a number of recommendations that were accepted by the board, one of which was to change our name. What does this mean for our alumni community and to our donors? Well, it was a really interesting time of engagement. I'm delighted that we spent quite a bit of time educating people on the reasons why we were pursuing this. And we had to do that because, in a very diverse way, because we were thinking a lot about the various ways in which people engage with our institution and the ways in which they wanted to have a say. There's something about belonging as it relates to names. And so we had to really provide information and comfort, frankly, to scores of alumni who were questioning the validity of their diplomas and degrees, questioning their connection to their alma mater. And frankly, what we had to do is spend a lot of time reassuring people that, in the context of a name change, that their identity and their sense of belonging still really matter to us. And that was really critical. The chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission wisely said that education got us into this mess, and it will get us out of it. So we spent a lot of time educating across generations. An interesting piece of context, and Anita talked very well about how context really matters in our settings, is that we are an institution embedded within the City of Toronto, and many of our students and younger alumni are new Canadians and first in their family to go to university. So the education we were doing around reconciliation wasn't just about Toronto Metropolitan University, but it was an education around Canada and our history and our legacy of colonialism and where we wanted to go as a nation. And so it was really interesting to be able to, in a way, shape a national conversation through the offerings we provided. But you know, after all was said and done and we officially changed our name, there were people who were of course dismayed, there were people who were really excited and were looking forward to a much more just opportunity to get involved with the university. And we incorporated a number of different activities. Now remember, as I said earlier, this was through COVID. And so we were doing a lot online. And we were bringing people together in conversation through our social media channels, through online webinars like this one, through panel discussions about the future of our institution. But we also decided that we weren't just going to talk about this, we were going to talk about many other things that people were dealing with throughout COVID and beyond. And so we spent quite a bit of time nurturing that sense of belonging across generations. And we found that younger people in particular, recent alumni were really engaged and fired up on issues of human rights, justice, civil rights and advocacy, especially as we saw in some of the other challenges around anti-Black racism throughout COVID. And so that was a really powerful way in which we were able to engage people on issues connected to but not necessarily about the name change. And we are really delighted by our results. We've had tremendous 250% increase in engagement through that. And we've also been able to find the right kinds of donors based on the values alignment that we are seeking. And have you seen, Krishan, thank you for sharing a really interesting journey and an important journey. In terms of thinking about generations and talking about 250% increase in engagement is fabulous. Is that more in the context of more recent graduates? Or is that right across the board? You know, about 50% of our alumni are in and around the age of 40. And so it's very interesting because for us, we are also paying attention to life stage issues, you know, and their capacity and ability to engage. We are thrilled by that level of engagement amongst this very busy cohort. We're often dealing with issues around like the sandwich generation stuff, right? We're dealing with also, you know, economic issues around job security. And so that engagement is particularly around that amongst that cohort was very strong. And we're keeping that up in a way because we find that a lot of the alumni engagement work in particular has focused on what really matters to them as end users, not our own value proposition. And that has resonated tremendously with that, with that particular generation, and even younger than the Gen Z generation of alumni we have now. Thank you very much. So Carl, and I hope it's not nearly as cold where you are. I was on your campus too long ago, but it's a beautiful place as a San Antonio. So as the Chief Advancement Officer for another urban university, but a very different city to Toronto, you have a really diverse student body as well as therefore an alumni and donor base. So how are you seeing generational values reflected in how and what UT San Antonio's donors are supporting? And how are your constituents engaging? Well, thank you for that, Sue, and thank you for this opportunity. You know, I was, we were talking right before we got on, Anita and Christian and I, that, you know, we, we, the three of us go back, I think, 20 years plus, and it's all thanks to CASE and how we've been able to watch each other grow in our careers and in our lives. And so this is a real treat to be on with them as well. It's also fascinating for me to hear the conversation because there's so many things that make our institutions unique, but there's so many things that we also share. And I think you'll hear some of those things too, as I describe UTSA. By the way, it is 53 degrees today and sunny, it's balmy. We're loving it. So I think to put some context to the question, or to my answer, I guess, to your question, Sue, as you said, you've been here to our campus. UTSA was founded in 1969, same year I was born, by the way. So when we call it a young institution, I really like that because I like to think in young terms. So the institution itself is Generation X, I guess you would say. We were founded with a mission to serve San Antonio and South Texas, and specifically the Hispanic community of San Antonio and South Texas. And the Hispanic community was a major driver in seeing this institution be created. And we continue to serve that community today. We are a majority Hispanic university and a majority Hispanic city. And we're very proud of that. And at graduation, when we ask our students who are first generation to stand, it's typically 40% plus that do. And that is also a big part of our work here. And we're very proud of that. So having been a young institution, like Christian said, our average alumni age is around 42, and 90% of our alumni are under the age of 65. So if you think of 65 as kind of that, still that kind of key age for major gifts and principal gifts, most of our gifts come from non-alumni in that sector. It's also interesting the experience that alumni had depending on when they were on this campus. The campus today is obviously very different than it was when we were founded. It was mostly a commuter campus. There were no residence halls. There was very little to any student activities, sports in the first few years, none of that existed. So it was really a means to an end for folks. They were looking for a place that gave them the opportunity to get an education, but they would come to campus, do their classes, and then go back to their lives, go back to work. So when you look at our alumni giving and our outstanding annual giving team gave me a few stats to work with today, but 50% of our total alumni giving comes from the group between 2010 and today. And you can look at 2010 as kind of this magical date because that's the date that football started at the University of Texas, San Antonio. And obviously football is king at Texas, but in all seriousness, it did create kind of this new active student lifestyle on campus. We'd had other sports. We, by that point, did have some dormitories on campus, but since then things have really increased. And so also the largest percentage of our alumni have graduated in the last 20 years. So again, adding to that younger base, I did have an interesting anecdote that was shared that out of our most recent direct mail piece that we sent out, all of the responders to that were over the age of 50. So take that for what it's worth. I think there's something there and we'll continue to explore that. But we certainly see some differences I think we're also careful to not generalize too much, but like Anita said, when you only have certain resources and so much staff, you have to make some calls and maybe some broader generalizations as you do the work. But we test and we analyze and we assess and then we look at what we can do to make it better. Base our future activities on that continuous evaluation. One last piece that I wanna mention cause it's important to the university and to the city. One of the nicknames for San Antonio is Military City and we have the largest military student or military affiliated program in Texas. And so that is also a group that we work with a lot and obviously that comes with its own very diverse groupings and experiences and depending on what branches they might have been in, where they have served around the world and around this country, but we're very proud of that group as well. Thank you very much and a really interesting. I think that the impact of the introduction of football is absolutely fascinating actually, but thank you Carl for sharing all of that. And I've learned a lot from your three introductory presentations, so thank you. So in recent weeks, both Canada and the US have seen significant transitions in terms of the politics of our countries. And I know that Christian, you still have your election to come in the coming months, but your leader is recently stepping down. So when one thinks about the geopolitical landscape, both within our countries and further afield, how does that or does that affect how you think about engaging with different generations of your stakeholder groups? Does the geopolitical context influence how you communicate, how you connect, how you engage? And I'm looking for eye contact here. Who'd like to start? Christian, you were the first off the button and then I'll come to Anita. Thank you. Sure. Absolutely. Obviously having that inside outside orientation that so many of us do in advancement, need to be thinking about the ways in which the geopolitical context impacts our institutions and more specifically, our work is critical to just not just our success, but really our efficacy. You know, we've been thinking quite a bit about not just the upcoming election federally, but also within our jurisdiction within Ontario. And so one of the things that I keep turning to though, is the ways in which the geopolitical climate is impacted by context, whether that's urban versus rural, whether that's domestic versus international, whether that's in this case of the US, red versus blue. I've been thinking a lot about that. And how do we ensure that our engagement work and our fundraising activities or aspirations continuously strive towards and align with the institution's values. That's what really for me continues to be critical despite in light of all of the geopolitical challenges and shifts that we're in the midst of. And so we've been really thinking about what are core pillars at the university? How do they relate to these conversations that are happening in the media, amongst political parties globally, amongst international bodies? And how do we then respond in a way that speaks to those values? And so for us, a lot of our work in equity, for example, or inclusion building, belonging, has centered around really service delivery and accessibility initiatives, scholarships, bursaries for underrepresented students and the rest. That's changing politically and the conversation is changing. And we're really watching carefully about the impact that could have on some of these initiatives that have been around now for 30, 40 years. And I know that's a deep and great concern for my colleagues, not just in the US and in different provinces and territories in Canada, but also in Europe. So we've been thinking a lot about creating dialogue amongst us on how best we can respond to and anticipate some of this. But I think also one of the things we really are paying great attention to, especially at Toronto Metropolitan, is kind of the changing nature and demographics of our student body and how that might influence future alumni engagement. I go back to the question or the issue at hand around our current student body composition, first in family, first generation, and many are immigrants or children of immigrants. And so we're thinking a lot about what are some of the experiences they're having today that will impact their ability to secure employment in the first few years of graduation, that may impact their ability to express their generosity to their alma mater, to other organizations. These are the kinds of things that we're watching very carefully today in the context of the geopolitical climate that we're in. Thank you, Krishan. And I think I was doing an interview with a journalist the other day and was reflecting as I was talking about how introspective at times institutions, educational institutions are, and that we have institutions of higher education going back over a millennia in the world. And Anita's institution is nearly 200 years old. These institutions outlive any individual government, any individual movement, because there's a mindset around remaining true to mission, but being nimble and changing when we need to be nimble and change. So Anita, you were about to jump in. Well, I was thinking, hearing that question, I think for us, we, as you mentioned, we're almost 200 years old. And so, and Hollins as an institution and who we serve now is very different from who we were created for, the wealth of the students, the family background. You know, some people say it's true that we were initially, certainly our mission was educating women, but we were also kind of considered a little bit of a finishing school as well, right? And so many of the women who came to Hollins, although I'm sure there were some who received scholarship, you know, they came from very wealthy families. And so it's very, it's a little bit different place. Carl and I share that kind of first gen piece. And so when I think about political, climate, geopolitical and generational engagement, one of the things that we struggle with, as I mentioned, is that where some institutions, they are younger demographic is outgrowing, they're more seasoned demographic, right? The boomers and the silent generation, we are absolutely the opposite, right? Our smallest numbers are those younger graduates because our class sizes are dwindling, they're getting smaller, they're not growing. And so when we think about where we need to grow and the impact, we think about, you know, this younger generation, millennials and Gen Z, and they are facing unprecedented economic challenges that are surrounding this topic, right? The rising cost of education in general, the cost of housing, just living wages, all of these things are impacting their capacity and willingness to be more philanthropic and engage in philanthropic practices. While we have our kind of older generation, our boomers and our silent generation who have great economic stability, right? They are truly the supporters of the institution right now, but they are prioritizing legacy giving, which legacy giving is wonderful, but we can't spend that right now, right? We all, in advancement, we know we need it, it's important to sustain the institution, but we can't spend it right now. And so, you know, not to mention the fact that our younger donors are more likely to focus on these social justice causes that also come up. And, you know, so how do we, what we are struggling with and what we are trying to overcome is maintaining this sense of what our more seasoned, higher level supporters are accustomed to and trying to think about our giving practices and how we engage, as Krishan said, with the things that are meaningful to them, that create a sense of belonging. I think the other thing would be the globalization and digital connectivity, right? We have this rise in platforms and how people wanna engage in our younger generation. They want a very seamless experience. They want it to be, you know, online communication, where, you know, as Carl gave as an example with the letter and how it performed, you know, it doesn't, we won't get where we need to go in growing that group. And so I think the final thing I'll say is that, you know, our younger generations, they really prioritize broader international issues over some of the local and institutional causes sometimes. They want to know what we as an institution are doing to either prepare our students, what are we talking to our students about related to the issue, particularly at a regional campus? What is our engagement for some of these global issues versus the causes and the mission of our campus specifically is always kind of a little bit of a challenge to how we do both. Thank you. And I think there's a really interesting sort of evolution of seeing younger generations being incredibly resilient. And as you're describing being driven around global issues like climate change or mental health, or as opposed to allegiance with specific institutions or types of institutions, which is an interesting thing to navigate. Carl, could you say a little about how you are navigating a different or a shift in political context when you think about your different constituents and the different segments of your constituents? Sure. You know, I think what Christiana and Anita have shared, I don't know that I've got a lot to add to the mix, but one of the things that Dr. Amy, our president, I think has done really well for us when we think about our messaging, whether generationally or just across our community and to all our constituents, is this idea of, and I think it's been mentioned, but going back to what our mission is. Why were we established? Who are we here to serve? And what are we here to do for our community? So as the only research one institution, for example, in this part of the state, we focus a lot on what does that mean? What does having a research one institution in San Antonio mean to the workforce, the everyday citizen of our community? So we try to message that and tell stories around that. And then the same thing about access and how we continue to do different things to create access to education in San Antonio and South Texas. We recently announced, or I say recently, I guess it's been a couple of years now, but we just recently announced a new level to our bold promise program, which basically means that anyone with a family income of $100,000 or less can come to UTSA for free tuition. So again, that just shows that recommitment to this community and to access and staying true to why we were established and what we're here to do. Thank you very much, Carl. And I'm mindful of the time and really keen to respond to questions that those who've joined us have. Whilst those are coming in, I have a question, and please, any of you who'd like to answer it, please do, but don't all feel the need to. I think the sort of the golden egg, as it were, is about how we engage younger generations of our communities, our alumni, and you've referred to this in different ways around the purpose of our institutions, what we're seeking to achieve, and ultimately around philanthropic support. How are you, clearly direct mail isn't option one at UTSA. How are we, how are you thinking about this? What are the, what are some of the keys you're already finding to really unlock the younger generations? Carl? Sure, Sue, I'll jump in real quick. I, you know, so one of the things that we're able to do today, and I think back to, you know, my early days starting in this business, but with the way that we're able to slice and dice, you know, our, our constituency, our database, with the different tools that we have available, being able to, as I said earlier, test different messaging with different groups of people, whether that's generationally, different parts of the country, you know, whatever that might be, and and then, you know, always using that information, assessing that information to, to make us smarter, and hopefully more efficient and effective as we move forward. I think that's, that's, that's been such a key for us. And I only see that continuing to get better. And now with AI and all the things that are that are coming, and we're starting to obviously explore some of those things as well. And then, you know, we are doing a lot more with, you know, digital and video. And that's just become our way of life. You know, we no longer have a we haven't had a phone center, we did away with it during the pandemic and never brought it back. And now it's all about not to say that we don't do phone calls strategically still, and in some cases, obviously, but, but it's all about digital outreach and, and using a lot of different tools and methods. And like I said, just continuously testing and evaluating so that we can do it even better each time. Very good and very interesting. Christian, I'm interested, do you do telephone fundraising still? No, we don't. And in fact, one of the things we've been spending quite a bit of time on is identifying working with influencers, alumni influencers, and people who just generally care about what we are up to over here at TMU. And drawing on their audiences, their believers, as a way to excite people about what we're, what we're trying to accomplish at the university and the impact we think we can have together. And so really, not necessarily using ourselves as the storytelling platform, but drawing on the generosity of people's networks and connections, both virtually, but also, you know, in real time in person, to kind of deliver those messages. There is something about kind of creating a homegrown type of storytelling aesthetic that seems to really stick, because it's not just genuine, but it's really not authored, strictly authored by the institution. And so we're finding that's resonating really well with our younger alumni and donors. And, you know, it's kind of not really anything wild, if we think about, you know, who used to sign annual fund letters, there used to be some aspirational alum, that everyone would just kind of glom onto and, you know, follow the leader type of kind of movement that takes hold. And so we're doing that in this kind of influencer type of format, which is which is proving to be really successful for us. And then the translation to giving, of course, and the storytelling around the impact we're having through collective and collective impact we're having through a number of small communities come together, is really important to, you know, which which points to the question around the efficacy of traditional fundraising campaigns are broad sweeping kind of efforts to develop a position for an entire institution. A lot of the communities that I'm working with or speaking to, many are new to Canada, you know, have different interests in being a part of something so institutionalized. Some are embracing it, and some are really skeptical of it. And so it's really important for us to demonstrate that kind of flexibility. Thank you. And Anita, can I come to you? We've had a great question from our friend Bill Doerr in the chat, which is a nice because you really talked about, about with with the scale of team you have focusing on the silent generation and baby boomers, and so on. And Bill's question is really is one thinks about the younger generations, Generation X and Millennials and Generation Z and alphas, how are you finding time? Are you even trying to find time to pay attention to the kind of segmentation that needs when there's this obvious focus on as Bill puts it, the arms race for principal gifts and the top of the pyramid. So what percentage of the amount of time you're dedicating? Can you focus on broadening the bottom of the pyramid and engaging those later generations? So we are very limited in the amount of time, I would say somewhere between 10 and 20%. Maybe, if that high, you know, we recognize that particularly with the students that we're bringing in a demographic, that we are going to miss the boat completely if we don't start some great conversations and super engagement with student philanthropy. Right. And certainly, when we start thinking about the resource allocation, and the things that our, you know, Millennials and Gen Z might respond to, we have to carve out some funds to make investments in those things to ensure that we can at least attract them. But, you know, as Bill is, to his question, we really aren't able to really abandon very much those folks who are in Silent or Boomer, because I mean, 90% of what we raise every year is coming from that group of alumni, but we cannot, we have to start building because when they who's going to be that next generation, right? We don't know. You know, Krishan talked about the influencer piece. So we are doing a little bit of that that doesn't cost as much more your time in terms of building that influencer piece, and thinking about unique engagement opportunities for them to do, you know, create, have greater donor agency within the mission of the work that we do. And so from a, it's very limited, we think about it, we try to ensure that we are touching upon it, something that we can track, etc, which we all do. But if the if we need to meet our goals, and achieve, you know, wonderful outcomes, we have to really leave that piece of pie, just it's very, very small. Yeah, well, no, thank you for being so thoughtful in that answer, Anita. And Kyle, I mean, I know your institution is incredibly young. But how do you think about, and therefore, de facto, as you said, most of your alumni are relatively young, how do you think about the portion of your time you give to focusing on Generation Z? And the Generation Alpha is 14. Now, I can't get over that. But how much of your time do you focus on, on unlocking those locks, Kyle? Yeah. So, you know, and I think Anita alluded to this, it, we have a team, you know, an annual giving and leadership annual giving team that's that's devoting all of their time to some of those younger segments. But from a resource standpoint, that's, that's, that's where the discrepancy is. And I appreciate Bill's question, by the way. Hi, Bill. Miss you, my friend. You know, we're, we're probably putting, you know, to Anita's point, I don't have not that I checked here recently, but you know, 70% of our resources are going to the higher end versus, or the or the larger gifts, potential donor segment, then, then we're spending. And so I do fear sometimes that, you know, are, are we using, as I mentioned, some of the latest and greatest potential tools that could be, you know, helping us do this work better? Are we? Do we have the number of officers that that can pay attention to those segments? You know, are we like, you know, Anita mentioned student philanthropy, you know, we're doing it, but are we doing it as well as we could, if we could put some more resources into it. So it's, it's always that's the push and pull. I think, and that's where that's where the struggle is for us. Thank you, Christian. Before I ask, I think what will need to be our final question. Do you have a take on this in terms of where you allot resources to when you think about the donor pyramid? It's really interesting, because our experience of particularly the last couple of years is that our principal gift prospect pool is increasingly younger, that we're seeing younger people amass incredible wealth. And that has led to some really interesting conversations about how we engage prospects who are in their mid 40s, or in their early 30s. For that matter, we just received a transformational $5 million gift from someone who isn't even 40 yet. And we're really seeing this kind of arc in principal giving, where younger people are starting to invest big time in change and impact and issues that we're taking up in a very big way in our institutions. And so I think it's really incumbent upon us to do two things. One is obviously engage younger folks in the building of loyalty and in anchoring their generosity to within and towards our institutions and the priorities we stand for, or values we stand for. But it's also really important to be thinking about the ways in which the composition, complexion of wealth is changing as well. Interesting, and congratulations on the $5 million gift. That's fabulous and inspiring. So Karl, I'm going to start with you with our last question, which is, the word digital has come up in this conversation several times. And ultimately, I would, I believe we're all in the people business. And for me, nothing beats being in the same three dimensions as other people. How do you weigh up as we think about deepening engagement across the generational spectrum? Karl, how do you think about the balance between the opportunities of digital of AI and actually being in the same space? Thank you, Sue. You know, I'm obviously a true believer in the face to face and I, you know, even with all the talk of AI and things that are coming, I still hope that that's the way things are done in the future. But this generational piece, you know, when you're talking about folks that are growing up with some of these technologies, I think we have to continue to explore, or keep an eye on how they interact with the world in general. And that we have to, you know, make sure that we're adapting to the to being in the places where they where they are. And, and I also think that, you know, we, we, we change as we grow. And so the way that we're interacting with some of these folks, at a certain age today may not be the way that they want to be interacted with, you know, 10 years from now, but how we keep that, that relationship strong and ongoing, and keep that in that they feel engaged with the university. I think that's the important piece. And we have to use all the technologies available to us to to ensure that we're doing that for all of them. Thank you, Paul. And Neeta, what about you? How do you think about striking the right balance? So I think you always have to think about institutional culture. And how do you overlay these things with institutional culture? For us, we really right now in this space cannot afford to not have that face to face, it just has to happen. Even if it's limited to a certain, a limited number of people, we just have to do it. I believe for us to grow in the space with a younger demographic, we have to learn how to use these AI tools, as Carl said, to be able to communicate with them, and hopefully, be able to continue to think about ways that we might engage with them in that three dimensional space as well, right. But if we're really going to make any headway, based on the amount of time we have, and the limited resources, we're going to have to use those digital tools to meet them kind of where they are. You know, I think for us as a women's institution, the personal touches, you know, again, back to that same thing, the personal touches, just that's just who we are, you know, I am still signing letters every day with the extra note on it to say, you know, hope you're wonderful, this is wonderful, we appreciate you, like, literally, there's a folder on my desk, we will not survive without those things, because it is an important part of our institutional culture. And we have had to really think about how do we do things like the letters I just mentioned, and think about how we've succeeded and what is going to replace that as we see our women love a challenge, they love a challenge. I heard that when I got here, and they love a challenge. Our younger alumni are like we, we really don't care about those, they fall flat every time with them. And so it really is trying to find that balance, as you said, between the best practices that we have the wonderful opportunity to talk about here, and overlaying that with institutional culture. I remember when I went to the University of Oxford and the women's colleges would send the women alumni bouquet of flowers from the age of 70 every year on their birthday. And they would have women alumni calling up saying, I'm actually going to be traveling that day, could they come two days later? Very powerful. The last word with you, Christian. So how do you think about this balance between, between the digital and the in person? You know, it's really important, of course, to invest in both, but I have a feeling that kind of getting through the noise of digital, there is some kind of novelty for young people to receive mail that's addressed to them. You know, we did a little postcard campaign to all of our alumni, and we got the best reactions from the ones that were recent grads, because that's something they don't get anymore. And they thought, wow, this is really, really amazing that people thought of me and took the time to do the extra effort, like they used to do back then. So that's that was, to me, quite surprising, because I thought they just want, you know, we just be efficient, and everyone's online, and everyone's on their phone, and just, you know, how quick and easy is it to be, you know, using the tools of technology for our benefit, but there is something about what Anita's talking about, is that bespoke, pure, carefully curated opportunity to show and express connection, that is very special. So, you know, and I'm, you know, I'm, I'm not a millennial. So I, you know, I believe that there is something really important about really focusing on what drives connection to people. One more thing I'd just like to add to my mind, I'll be really quick, is that we also, particularly for those of us that work in really diverse institutions, need to be thinking about the ways in which people enter and think and consider philanthropy. I often say philanthropy is an imported value. And so it's important for us in the work of advancement, to be thinking about the context and the baggage that people bring with them as it relates to charitable giving. And that influences our strategies and our ideas and programs and services in a very important way that oftentimes breaks the mould around how we think about intergenerational engagement. I think you've just queued up the subject matter for the next together. Krishan, can I thank you and Anita and Karl very much for a really engaging hour. This is a conversation that will run on and on. But I think a constant theme has been about meeting people where they are, and also about not putting people into assumed boxes based on their generation. So I think there's some really exciting opportunities ahead. And before we close out, and thank you all for joining us, I'm going to hand back to Maestro Chase. To echo Sue, thank you for the gift of your time, your expertise and sharing with members across the US, Canada, and in fact, around the world, because we have someone joining from Guam and Australia. With that, for those that would like to revisit this recording or share with colleagues, it should be up in the LMS, the Learning Management System within 48 hours. Thank you so much. Have a wonderful afternoon.

generational engagement

educational advancement

donor strategies

digital strategies

cultural considerations

inclusive engagement

philanthropy

demographic shifts

educational institutions