Your organization’s program goals clash with a major donor's request. How will you navigate this conflict?

Start by clearly outlining your program’s core objectives and why they matter—use real data or success stories to illustrate impact. Then, engage the donor in a constructive conversation, showing appreciation for their support while exploring ways their priorities might align with your mission. Often, donors are open to compromise if they see how their contributions still drive meaningful change. If alignment isn’t possible, it’s okay to respectfully decline or suggest alternative funding options that honour both sides’ values.

Make sure the donor’s request fits your mission and won’t hurt your work. If it might, be clear about the risks and use that to guide your response.

Great framework! I'd add: Always bring it back to impact. When I faced this, I shared real stories of how staying mission-focused created better outcomes for beneficiaries—it helped the donor see the bigger picture. What's your go-to move in these situations?

One thing I have found helpful is approaching the conversation as a partnership rather than a correction. I begin by sharing what we are trying to accomplish and the reasons behind our goals, using real stories or data to make it more relatable. Then I ask thoughtful questions to understand what is motivating the donor’s request. In many cases, donors are coming from a place of genuine care but may not fully see how their idea fits into our overall strategy. When both sides feel heard and respected, it becomes much easier to find a solution that honors the donor’s intentions while staying true to the mission.

In situations like this, I think honest conversation is essential. Taking time to understand the donor’s motivations opens space for collaboration rather than confrontation. From my perspective, it’s not just about defending the mission - it’s about inviting the donor into a deeper partnership. Have you ever had to shift a donor’s mindset without losing their support?

I would initiate an open and respectful conversation with the donor to understand their perspective and share our organizational vision.

In my experience, it helps to come to the table with a few well-thought-out alternatives before the conversation even begins. This shows the donor that we value their support and are serious about finding a meaningful way to work together. I try to identify related projects or needs that align with both our mission and the donor’s interests. Sometimes that means shifting the focus of their gift to a different program area or suggesting in-kind support if funding is not a perfect fit. When you approach it as a collaborative solution-finding process, donors are often more open than you might expect.

If an initial request cannot be honored, your group should take the time to see if there is another option available that can be a “win-win’ for both parties. Recommend you start with modifying the donor’s original request to see how it can be altered to make it acceptable by both groups. If the original option cannot be used, your group should brainstorm for 2-3 potential ideas that are acceptable to your group, but still provide a benefit to the donor. For these options, start with the one that will give both parties the most success and then proceed to the remaining options if needed. A key factor in this situation is to keep on open mind where you want to do what’s right for your group, but also convey to the donor their importance.

Next, I would brainstorm alternative approaches that meet the donor’s interests without compromising our core goals. This might include modifying certain aspects of the program or offering different avenues for support. Being creative helps maintain the partnership while safeguarding the organization’s purpose.

Staying grounded in the mission is the most powerful tool you have in these conversations. I have found that when you clearly connect the dots between your mission and the impact you are trying to achieve, donors are more likely to respect your boundaries. It is not about rejecting their idea, but about showing them how mission alignment leads to stronger, more sustainable outcomes. When the mission leads the way, the conversation shifts from pressure to partnership.

I would remind all stakeholders of the organization’s mission and values, using them as a guiding framework to evaluate any proposal. Anchoring decisions in the mission ensures that the program stays true to its fundamental purpose, which is essential for long-term credibility and success.

Ethics must to lead the way when navigating tough donor conversations. I always ask myself if we would feel comfortable explaining the decision publicly to our board, our clients, or the community. That question helps bring clarity. Transparency and accountability are not optional. They are the foundation of trust. If a donor’s request would compromise how we allocate funds or blur the lines around our mission, it is better to have an honest conversation and decline the support than to risk long-term damage to our integrity.

It’s easy to say that ethics are incorporated in your decisions & that all decisions are ethical, but based on the request it can become considerably more difficult. Decisions you make involving donor’s request may not affect your values or mission statement but can affect how your group is perceived later on. In these types of situations, it would be valuable to discuss the situation in a small group or committee. Having varying opinions can bring up potential issues that you may not have thought about & avoid an unfortunate situation. If the team finds the terms acceptable then you can proceed, however if the concern the team has puts the group in jeopardy, you need to be prepared to look for another solution or deny the donor’s request.

Ethics must be at the forefront of this decision. I would consider whether the donor’s request aligns with our moral standards and the community’s best interests. Upholding ethical principles protects the organization’s reputation and fosters sustainable, responsible partnerships.

Finally, I would think about the long-term relationship with the donor and the overall strategy. Sometimes short-term concessions may be justified if they advance our mission without harm. However, preserving integrity and sustainable impact is key. I would aim to build partnerships that support growth and shared values over time.