Fundraisers secure financial resources that organizations need to achieve their missions. Raising money, particularly large gifts, can follow years of relationship building with individual donors. When fundraisers leave these efforts can be set back substantially, making fundraiser turnover particularly worrisome and worthy of exploration. This analysis addressed the issue with US survey data (n = 1663) and examinination of three research questions. What are the job tenure and intent to leave of fundraisers? How is fundraiser job tenure affected by intent to leave? What relationships do job tenure and intent to leave have with fundraisers' individual demographics, position attributes, and organizational characteristics? We found that the study participants had current mean job tenures of 3.6 years (median = 2 years) and mean tenures across their fundraising jobs of 3.9 years (median = 3 years). Twenty percent intended to leave their organization and 7% intended to leave fundraising within the next year. Of the tested variables, salary consistently had the largest effects and was the most significant. Older and more experienced fundraisers had longer tenures. The study provides nuanced information about fundraisers' jobrelated behaviors, includes careful attention to theory and related research, and presents specific ideas for organizational interventions for increasing fundraiser tenure.

This survey-based study ( n = 1,663) addressed charitable behaviors of fundraisers—key arbiters of others’ donations. Our research question was as follows: Are fundraisers’ charitable behaviors related to their professional identity? We found several anticipated differences in giving and volunteering behaviors (and their social determinants) in comparison with the general public and the influence of some fundraising-specific variables. Nearly all the fundraisers gave time and money and were more like one another than the public. On average, they gave more money and donated a higher salary share than the typical household. They volunteered at a higher rate and, excluding outliers, more hours than the average American. We contend that fundraiser charitable behavior and professional identity are interwoven. The professional norms regarding personal philanthropy may also be influenced through the self-selection of the inherently philanthropic into fundraising. Future research should examine formation of fundraiser professional identity and its outcomes more broadly.

Many US employees are regularly asked to give charitable donations through work. The techniques used to solicit workplace donations vary. Drawing on a nationally representative survey, the study used a sample of donor responses to examine the effectiveness of several widely used campaign strategies: donor choice, company matching, public recognition, and solicitation support. The theoretical framework built on workplace research by Barman (2007) and established charitable giving mechanisms (Bekkers and Wiepking 2011a, 2011b). The research question was, “Do workplace campaign strategies lead employees to participate and to make (larger) donations in the workplace?” The positive outcomes of the strategies, aside from donor choice, were limited, suggesting that tried‐and‐true workplace fundraising strategies warrant additional scrutiny. The findings are meaningful to campaign managers seeking to identify approaches that generate workplace giving. For researchers, the results confirm growing attention to the importance of purpose‐based giving in comparison with community‐based giving.

This study fills a gap in research on the philanthropic outcomes of political events. More specifically, it provides empirical evidence to supplement anecdotal reports that nonprofit organizations experienced a substantial increase in donations following the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Based on daily transaction data from an online giving platform, the study uses random-effect panel Ordinary Least Squares models to examine whether and how charitable giving patterns changed after Election Day 2016. Overall, our analyses show no evidence of increased giving due to the election; however, gender differences are apparent. Women donated in greater amounts than men following Election Day, and they appear to have targeted relevant progressive charities with their giving.