IIMC/MC-1/Section 2/Monippally

[The assignment I gave you is reproduced here for your reference. Your submissions
follow. My written feedback is inserted in each. Oral feedback will be given in class.
I suggest that you read as many of these ‘mails’ as possible apart from your own.
This, along with my feedback, will give you a very useful perspective on how others
approach a persuasion task and insights into the process of persuasion.
I don’t know which group has written which mail; they are not in any specific order
either. You will easily recognise your own.
MMM]

Persuasive Writing (Group Assignment)

Write a persuasive email in 400-500 words to President, Lakshmana Gowda Trust. Create a
suitable subject line and salutation for your email. Details below.
Note:

(i) This is a group assignment.

(ii) You will receive my feedback. Although this assignment doesn’t carry any credit, you will
want to invest a little time and effort in making your email as persuasive as you can. The
feedback you receive will help you do your individual written assignment (worth 40% of the
course credit), which will be set later along this line. It is tougher than you anticipate to
persuade someone in writing.
================================================================

Background

You are Lead - People Operations of Lakshmana Gowda Trust (LGT), an NGO based in
Bengaluru.

It was founded in 1963 by Shyamala Gowda, the youngest daughter of Lakshmana Gowda,
to perpetuate her father’s memory. The man was raised in a dilapidated orphanage, but
made it big in later life and died a rich man. He used to help orphanages generously.
Shyamala Gowda institutionalised the giving by founding a trust in her father’s name and
endowing it generously.

In 2002, Shyamala Gowda’s daughter Sarala Gowda took over as the President of the trust
and enlarged the operations substantially. She not only increased the number of orphanages
being supported but also started raising funds from others interested in supporting
orphanages and underprivileged children. She hired professionals to approach people to
seek donations from them.

You head the team of executives who approach potential donors for funds. Sarala Gowda
has been pressing you to raise more funds. You find that during the last few years the flow of
funds has been steady but not going up. Those who give continue to give but new donors,
especially well-to-do professionals in their 20s, are not coming forward to donate money to
your cause. They do give but seem to be responding more easily to appeals following
dramatic events such as floods, tsunami, and earthquakes. Orphanages are dull in
comparison.
The Trigger

When you read a recent Financial Times article by Alice Hancock, “Eat, give and Instagram
it: Millennials lap up charity dinners,” (https://www.ft.com/content/03f5158a-c567-11e8-bc21-
54264d1c4647?segmentId=778a3b31-0eac-c57a-a529-d296f5da8125 ), it occurred to you
that organising charity dinners might be an excellent source of additional funds especially
from the young and well-heeled techies Bengaluru is teeming with. If you could rope in a
celebrity such as Deepika Padukone as the chief guest, several hundred young (and not so
young) men and women may be willing to pay ₹ 10,000 apiece for an admission pass for a
Sunday brunch or a weekday dinner with her. You may be able to raise at least ₹ 1 million
from a single event after all expenses are met.

You suggested the idea to President Sarala Gowda. She found the idea so repugnant that
she turned it down firmly and instantly. Crestfallen, you got up from your chair, whispered
“thank you” with a wan smile, and were about to reach the door when she called you back
and said, “I think it is a horrible idea. Giving should be pure. We shouldn’t contaminate it with
such gimmicks. However, send me a note. See if you can persuade me to change my mind.”
Assignment

That gives you hope. While she dislikes the idea intensely, you believe she has left the door
ajar. The trust needs more funds. You may be able to persuade her if you frame your
proposal appropriately. Write that email.

==========================================

Group 221
[Where is your subject line?]

Dear Madam, [“Dear Ms Gowda” maybe the most appropriate salutation in this
context. If you generally interact with her on a first-name basis, you can also write
“Dear Sarala” or even “Hi Sarala.”]

I am writing this note to reiterate that there is need of additional funds for supporting
orphanages and underprivileged children. [You’re barking up the wrong tree! Sarala
is keenly aware of the need for additional funds. She is your boss and she has been
pressing you to find more funds. Don’t bore her with stuff she knows very well.] Our
trust continues to receive donations from our early volunteers but we are unable to
attract the millennials for the donations. Though there are many well to do
professionals in 20s among the millennials, many were diverting their attention to
extreme situations such as natural calamities rather than orphanages. There are
many reasons for this and I would like to bring to your notice on the possible
reasons. [Most of this paragraph is unnecessary in your mail to Sarala. If you need a
starting point, have a brief sentence with the phrase, “as you know” or “as you are
aware”. You should come quickly to her source of resistance: funds raised through a
lavish celebrity dinner appears to her to be “impure giving”.]

Firstly, millennials live in the world of IoT where internet is everything. The extent of
awareness brought through digital & social media is the main source for encouraging
donations. This change in their lifestyle emphasizes the need to attract their attention
through events such as charity dinner. Presence of celebrities make attraction easy
to get from the millennials. [Very good point.]

Secondly, the trend of fund raising events is already practised by many organisations
to raise funds for welfare activities. For example consider the Syria Supper Club
which raises charity to aid Syrian people. The activities of the club are well received
and welcomed by the millennials. These events make the donors feel that they are
associated with the trust. [Again, a useful move; it tells Sarala that charity dinners
are a common means of raising funds from the millennials.]

Also, hosting a charity event can increase the prospect sponsors for the trust. It also
forms platform for exchanging ideas and receiving feedback from the donors. Events
with celebrities as chief guests would also invite attention from media and will lead to
wide publicity of our trust. This, in turn, generates more number of sponsors. Also
these events make existence of our trust to be known to the public and help build our
reputation. This also motivates more orphanages to contact us for help, bringing
more orphanages relying on our support. [All this is wonderful but if giving at the core
is impure, how can Sarala give you the go-ahead?]

Lastly, millennials are ready to donate for organisations as long as they believe that
money goes in to right hands and is being spent for the people in need. Our
Lakshmana Gowda Trust (LGT) [don’t use the full form in this internal mail
addressed to the President of the trust. Just say, “our Trust.”] enjoys this trust and
reputation among the public since 1963. Also charity dinners act as one of the
events where millennials can be briefed regarding the conditions of the orphanages
& underprivileged children. This makes the dinner more like a stake holders meeting
rather than a private function to manipulate them into making donations. [Your
attempt here is to sanitise the lavish dinner to make it less objectionable to Sarala.
But you can’t really hide the ₹ 10,000-a-plate dinner with a celebrity behind the
phrase, behind the label, “a stake-holders’ meeting.”]

In the view of above, I felt that organising charity dinner with celebrities as guests is
meant for only attracting attention. Recently, I have proposed the same idea for
increasing the donations to our Lakshmana Gowda Trust (LGT). However, the idea
was not accepted arguing that “giving should be pure”. We should all remember that
our main agenda is to serve the orphanages with pure hearts to achieve the goal on
which our trust was built. [Are you suggesting that if our hearts and intentions are
pure, it doesn’t matter what means we adopt to raise funds for the orphanages?]
Through events such as charity dinner, we are only attracting attention of their pure
hearts. We are not using means to manipulate of force donations from the people.
We are only providing them with opportunity to make memories while they are giving
us donations.

[Abrupt ending?]

[Pretty good attempt at persuading Sarala to let you organise the charity dinner.]

6.5/10
Group 243

Sub: Fund raising through charity dinner [this subject line captures the purpose and
content of the email very well]

Dear Ma'am

Based on our last meeting I could gauge that you found the idea of a charity
dinner repelling. I agree with you, the idea of 'selling' charity doesn't make sense in
principle. People should donate because they want to, not because they would want
to spend an evening amidst stellar company. [Excellent start. Brief. To the point. You
capture Sarala’s objections well in an empathic way.]
Unfortunately, the world around us is rapidly changing. As you very well know,
the money we raise has saturated over the last few years. We have traced this to a
radical shift in the demographic engaging in philanthropy. Today, the most probable
donors are professionals in their twenties, most of whom have been born after the
fall of the Soviet Union and have lived through an era of booming capitalism and fast
money. Having had experience in approaching donors for funds, I have observed
that in today’s fast-paced world, dramatic events such as natural disasters attract
more funds as opposed to orphanages which seem relatively dull in comparison. As
a result, however saddening it might be, even charity today exists with the underlying
principle of a quid pro quo. They look forward to an evening well spent, and if they
can do some good as a corollary, that's even better. In this era of digitalization and
social media, a good way to attract them is through these alluring social
gatherings/dinners. [Again, an excellent attempt at diluting Sarala’s resistance to the
idea of organising charity dinners to raise funds for the orphanages. The problem is
your condescending attitude to the millennials represented by the word,
“unfortunately”, at the start of the paragraph. You follow it up with “saddening” later in
the paragraph. This approach gives Sarala the notion that organising a charity dinner
with a celebrity is something that LGT should not be doing but nevertheless we
should go ahead with it because we have no other options. You expressly conclude
so in the next paragraph. While this may work in some contexts, this characterisation
of the giving by the millennials is likely to confirm her revulsion.]
You might say that our organization today can do without their contribution,
instead relying on our trusted donors to raise funds. This however is not a
sustainable approach. Our population has an increasing penchant [I’m not sure this
is a good word here.] towards money in the hands of the young and it will only
accelerate in the future. There will come a time when an overwhelming majority of
prospective donors will be a part of this demographic, and we will have to look to
them.
When Mrs Shyamala Gowda [say, When your mother] started the organization
[Trust] way back in 1963, it was a drastically different scenario she was dealing with.
I think we have to adapt to the times even if it is a necessary poison which might
leave a slight bitter taste in our mouths.[The problem with the poison is not so much
bitter taste in the mouth as harm to the entire body.] Our biggest motivation is the
people for whom we are actually doing this, the children in the orphanages and it
doesn't matter for them how the money has been raised. [This is a practical way out.
But Sarala may have strong reservations about this the-end-justifies-the-means
approach.]
Today, even the biggest philanthropic organization in the world, The Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation raises large sums of money through charity events across
the planet. [This is a good comparison. It should help her look at charity dinners in a
more positive way than she does now.] I am not comparing our philosophy to theirs,
neither am I comparing our activities. All I want to put across is that sometimes we
might have to compromise with our individual principles for the greater good. [You’ve
made out a very good case. Sarala may or may not, however, buy your argument.]

Sincerely,

7/10

Group 254

SUBJECT - Fund Raising Proposal [too general; specify the kind of fundraising you’re going
to talk about in the mail]

Hi Sarala,

This mail is in reference to the meeting we had earlier during the day, to discuss the inflow of
funds in our organization. [Brief and business-like reference to the meeting you had with
Sarala earlier in the day. Very good.] Our ultimate goal is to let everyone experience the joy
of helping. Introducing people to the system and giving them an opportunity to feel the
contentment of creating a smile, motivates them to take up charitable contributions
eventually. An organization founded by your father [mother!] and so passionately carried
forward by you requires funding, and initiating charitable eating events will be a major boost
to our mission of collating with as many orphanages as we can. [Don’t start with this
assertion because Sarala was repelled by this idea when you presented it to her earlier in
the day. Her rejection was instantaneous. She desperately wants money but not through
such ‘contaminated’ giving. Your objective should be to dilute the resistance and then bring
her to this conclusion.]
As we are aware that 4 per cent (or 20 million) of India’s child population are orphans, who
are not gifted with the guarantee of their next meal, depriving them of the funds that are
possible through this campaign would go against our ultimate motive of making a difference
in their lives.
I think it makes sense to target the age group of 18-29 because these are the same people
that would come forward to donate during natural calamities. They tend to give more
importance to these times of crisis, making our orphanages dull in comparison. Creating
awareness about the need to donate on a regular basis should be dealt with, and these
charitable events would be a great idea to cater to this.[Sarala does agree that you have to
target the age group of 18-29; but can’t you find a way other than tainted giving?]

In this modern world, people are so busy in their lives that even if they have an urge to
donate, they are way too busy with their professional, social and personal lives to take out
time to come forward and make a change. A large number of millennials are not even aware
of this alternative they can be provided for donating money. Techies who want to invest their
time in charity subconsciously push it down their priority list due to their busy schedule. Our
aim is to design a system where we can help them explore their goodwill. We can provide a
platform to people where they can socialize with their peers, and at the same time feel that
they are contributing to the society. Our intention is to donate all the profits generated
through these events to the ones in need. Giving people a reason to better utilize their time
will not only benefit them but also us. [All this is wonderful for someone who has no objection
to throwing a lavish ‘charity’ dinner to raise money for the starving poor.]

Also considering the fact that today’s young generation is more interested in their online
social profile, we can leverage our events to incentivize these professionals who, through
our events, will get an opportunity to socialize, and will also post it on their social media
profiles to highlight their activities. As a result it promotes our events and expands our reach.
[The publicity is welcome. What is unwelcome is the kind of tainted giving associated with
charity dinners and similar attempts to raise funds.]

Request you to give a thought. We never know, this initiative might give the society another
Lakshmana Gowda. [Excellent closure.]

Regards,
Lead - People Operations
Lakshmana Gowda Trust
Bangalore

6.5/10
 Group 287

Dear President [avoid such impersonal salutations in a context that calls for warmer personal
connect. You are not writing to an office but to a person you interact daily with.]

Lakshmana Gowda Trust.

Subject: View on Adapting Charity Dinners.

I hope you are doing well. [Cut this out! It merely shows you’re not sure how to start the email.
This string is inappropriate when you start an email to someone you meet almost every day. It
may be okay in an email to someone you write to occasionally. But, again, it does not match the
impersonal salutation, “Dear President.”] This is with regard to the raising of funds for our
organisation. [Not really. This email is about the advisability of holding charity dinners to raise
funds for the Trust.] I request you to consider the idea of conducting charity dinners with an open
mind, which would help in serving more number of orphans.

Firstly we have to be proud of ourselves for the tremendous amount of work we carry out
successfully. The current burning need for our organisation is how to bring in new donors. We
live in the heart of the IT hub of India, Bengaluru, where most of the youth exists. [These three
sentences do not constitute a paragraph because each one is pointing to a different topic. A
paragraph should be on a single topic.]

Today’s millennial generation is throwing away their money on the growing party culture in the
metropolitan cities. We have seen their generosity in reacting to floods and other natural
calamities. Moreover these young techies love to go out on dinners more often. The cause of
organizing a charity dinner attracts these youth to spend a more awful [??] time as well as
donate for a wonderful cause. The charity dinner is not a tainted promotional stunt but a
persuasive effort to increase awareness. We are giving them a delightful dinner along with the
satisfaction of donating for charity.

Celebrity guest could become positive influencers during the dinner as well as on
social media platforms, thus being part of a good PR campaign. Celebrity selection can be done
on the basis of their inclination towards giving a better life to children in orphanages like Priyanka
Chopra who being the UNICEF Goodwill ambassador can give an international perspective of
the current problems. We can also rope in Sushmita Sen, who herself has adopted two girls from
an orphanage, which might help increase the awareness about child adoption. The guests being
instagrammers and tweeters would spread our initiative on social media. This will bring more
awareness for our trust thereby brings in more donors. We can use our social media handles
and also tag the guest bringing more views which would give a wider foot print not just in
Bangalore but also across the country. We can keep the costs to a minimum and make sure we
maximize the amount which goes to the orphanages. We can also rope in a popular restaurant
and let them know our cause and also convey how this would better promote their brand too. It
doesn’t make our cause impure but we are just maturing in our approach. If you ask me, not
doing this kind of dinners is letting go of a good opportunity to expand. With more donations, we
can support even more orphanages. I would request you to give it a second thought for a good
cause and a better society.

[You are trying to persuade Sarala to let you organise a charity dinner with a celebrity guest
chiefly by describing the many advantages including further publicity for LGT’s orphanages.
But her resistance is to an entirely different aspect of lavish charity dinners. Such donations
(realised through overpriced tickets for those glitzy events) are not pure. And she firmly
 believes that giving should be pure. You haven’t really addressed her main concern. Unlikely
to persuade her.]

Hoping for a positive response.

Yours sincerely,

XXXX.

6/10

Group 298
[Where is your subject line?]

Hello Sarala,

While returning to my home I was pondering over our earlier conversation regarding the fund
raising event. [A very attractive opening. Informal. Conversational. The phrase, “the
fundraising event”, however, is too general. It would have been better to say, “my suggestion
to hold a charity dinner to raise funds.”] I reflected through the journey of our NGO, which
brought to light the reasons for us to adopt a dynamic approach to raise funds for our NGO.
[Refer gently to Sarala’s reluctance to accept your proposal before you go on to persuade
her to accept it.]

As we look over our history, we realize that we have come very far from where we began;
from a small trust we have grown into a large NGO benefitting a large number of
underprivileged children and not just orphanages. At the same time, we must accept that we
have now stagnated and funding has ceased to grow. In order to maximise the number of
people we benefit through our endeavour, we should consider other areas of funding and be
more open to modern ideas.

The nature of our NGO is such that it is an on-going concern, it does not benefit from the
media attention that is provided to other causes considered more “sensational” such as
natural calamities and famines. These calamities appeal to the masses through social media
and hence they are more likely to donate to such causes. Therefore, we should find other
ways of capturing media attention and fund-raisers are a great medium to do that.

These new avenues of funding could be beneficial in a multitude of ways. Through

organizing a fund-raiser, we would be able to raise awareness about our NGO which would
attract a larger base of young donors, which would be beneficial in the long run as our
current donor base largely consists of old donors and has not grown significantly in the past
few years. [You are trying to sell to Sarala fundraisers such as charity dinners by dwelling on
their direct and indirect advantages. She can see that but she may not be persuaded
because her reservations are due to the commercialisation or impurity of such “donations.”]
If we wish to attract the attention of the newer generation, we should recognize their
preferences and seek to gain popularity among them by catering to their lifestyle. If we invite
a popular face for our event it will gain traction among the millennials. [Fair enough. But can
you find some other way of reaching out to them than selling overpriced tickets to celebrity
dinners?]

Apart from expanding our donor base, fund-raising events can also provide a platform for
children to gain exposure and showcase their talents through performances during the
event.Through the interaction between the donors and the children , a stronger incentive will
be created in the minds of the donors as they will directly interact with the
beneficiaries.[Have you thought this through? Is it feasible? Will you take all the kids to the
five-star venue? Or will you take a select few? Wouldn’t it be more impactful for the celebrity
or interested donors to visit some of the orphanages?] This will also help in making their
donations a tad ‘purer’ as per your standards. ( Saloni try to make this line about purity a
little less mocking).[I agree with your suggestion to Saloni. There is a tinge of mocking in the
phrase, “a tad ‘purer’ as per your standards,” especially with the word purer in single quotes.]
This involvement of children in the fund raiser has not been done by other orphanages and
so we would be pioneering a concept which would only receive appreciation from all over.It
will also give the kids a chance to display their talents in front of a newer audience.

I request you to reconsider my proposal regarding new sources of raising funds. Not only will
it provide benefits to a large number of people through our expanded outreach, it will also be
advantageous for the NGO in the long term by building a wider donor base. I sincerely hope
you will reconsider your stance regarding fund-raisers.

[You are trying to persuade Sarala to let you organise a charity dinner with a celebrity guest
chiefly by describing the many advantages including further publicity for LGT’s orphanages.
But her resistance is to an entirely different aspect of lavish charity dinners. Such donations
(realised through overpriced tickets for those glitzy events) are not pure. And she firmly
believes that giving should be pure. You haven’t really addressed her main concern. Unlikely
to persuade her.]

Regards,

6/10
Group 232

Subject: Proposal to organize a charity dinner with Deepika Padukone for fund-
raising [Cut out unnecessary words.]

Dear Ma’am,
Our trust currently holds a good & established position amongst the orphanages as
well as amongst the donors who donate generously being interested in
supporting orphanages and underprivileged children. We endow orphanages with
money raised from working professionals in India. Under your supervision, we have
extended our network to aid several more orphanages. [The entire paragraph is
unnecessary. You are writing to your president who is keenly aware of this. Cut it
out.]

Consequently, the more challenging this work is, the more is the need for financial
support. However, the past years’ data trends suggest that the inflow of funds have
relatively been steady. There hasn’t been any considerable increase which is a
cause of worry. [The last 3 sentences also are unnecessary. Use a single sentence
to refer to the conversation you had earlier; that’s all that is needed here.] And post
analysing the issue, I found that the well- to -do millennials are not coming forward to
donate us money. In comparison to major disasters such as tsunamis, floods,
earthquakes, the motivation for donation to orphanages is relatively dull/ weak
amongst these professionals. In order to sustain our vision of improving the present
state of orphanages in long run, I think it’s high time we devise strategies aimed at
targeting the millennials.

A novel initiative that can influence millennials and people in their 20s to embrace
our cause is a charitable dinner. Charity dinners are events where proceeds from
tickets, activities go to a noble cause, like supporting underprivileged children in our
case. This event has both tangible and multiple intangible benefits. Hosting such an
event and inviting a few celebrities will give our organization public attention, media
coverage which ultimately benefits our cause. Such events are a sensation in
America and European countries. As Bengaluru is a city of primarily young working
professionals, the event will be well received and I expect our tickets to sell out
quickly.

Deepika Padukone was one of the 100 most influential people in 2018 Time
Magazine’s list. She is a prominent celebrity for many brands and has a strong public
profile with huge followers [you mean ‘huge following’] all over the globe. She was
the face of many events including The Sunfeast World 10K Bangalore 2009 which
generated 1.31 crores towards charity benefiting 81 NGOs.
Her image in the public shall strengthen the will and desire of people to donate with
followers aligning with her presence. Such an event will provide with such avenues
and help spread the message to the masses. It is understandable that our
organisation expects donations to come with a positive attitude towards the upkeep
of orphanages. Our long-term donors have shared these values. However, it is
wrong on our part to assume that millennials addicted to social networking platforms
do not have any such value.

In today’s day and age with such a fast-paced life and short attention spans, young
individuals do not pay much attention to society’s problems. It is a fact that their
focus mostly stays with attractive and glitzy things because these are the things the
internet responds positively to. It is this preconceived notion [what do you really
mean?] that attracting millennials through organising an event with Deepika seems
like a gimmick.
However, if we look at the brighter side, this can be an extraordinary opportunity for
us. The online presence of today’s youngsters and the habit of capturing every event
to upload for public viewing can be a great way for our Trust to get publicity and
spread awareness among not just those who are invited but also to those who are
virtually connected to our invitees. I do understand that inviting Mrs Padukone as an
incentive for attracting millennials looks like a disgusting way of raising donations on
a superficial level, however, the event does not have to be hedonic in any way [after
they pay ₹ 5K or even 10K for a ticket, do you offer them Kichadi?]. In my mind, I
was planning an engaging event to gain the attention of the guests by bringing to
attention the work that we do and what is the quantum of need in India for
orphanages. If we are able to bring everyone’s attention to the challenges of our job,
by posing hard hitting questions, the attitude of the event can be set in a very
different way as compared to what it seems like right now. This way, even though the
invitees will come to the event with the purpose of meeting a celebrity, [you are
reconfirming Sarala’s revulsion] they will leave thinking about us and our work. They
will not think, that they spent their money as charges to meet Mrs Padukone but
rather as a charity to a just cause and they will take pride in it. [Are you perhaps
trying to apply lipstick on a pig?]
[You are trying essentially to sell the idea of charity dinners by highlighting the
advantages. The problem is that Sarala is aware of the advantages but considers
this kind of giving impure. You haven’t done enough to disabuse her of her belief.
Until you do that, she is unlikely to be persuaded.]
Hence, I request you to consider this proposal in the best interests of our cause.

Regards,
Lead- People Operations of Lakshmana Gowda Trust.

[Way beyond the word limit!]

6/10

Group 276

Subject: Rationale for organising charity events to raise donation funds

Dear Madam,

Further to our meeting today, I would like to share a little more of my thoughts regarding the
proposal to raise additional funds by organising charity dinners. Thank you for being kind
enough to be willing to give this a second thought. [Excellent start. Brief reference to the
context. Purpose of the email. And finally, acknowledgement of Sarala’s gesture.]
I have been really thinking about the points that you raised, and I understand the reasoning
behind your line of thought. We are a charitable organisation, founded to serve one of the
most underprivileged group of people in the society. Conventionally, organisations such as
ours work in a lean fashion, with no extravagant events or fancy parties. It may thus seem
that an attempt to raise funds by holding a glamorous charity dinner with celebrities and the
likes, will put us in a bad light from a traditional perspective. Another reason that this idea
might be disturbing to you, is perhaps the feeling that the purity of the intent of the people
who donate in this manner is questionable or borderline ironic. [Again, excellent capturing of
the reader’s concerns.]

However, the fact of the matter is that we are at a juncture where we have not been able to
increase the donations received by the NGO for the past few years and have not been able
to rope in any significant number of donors from the younger demography.[Yes, you’re right.]

I believe it is pertinent to bring to your notice the impact the extra donations can have on the
quality of lives of the children in the orphanages we support, while also increasing the
number of orphanages we will be empowered to support. It is imperative for our organization
to strive to provide the children in the orphanages we support a respectable life, the best
resources and training so that they can lead a self-sufficient life. This will only be possible if
we are able to raise sufficient funds. Traditional methods to raise money do not resonate
with the new generation. Thus to further the values of our founder president Shyamala
Gowda to bring a meaningful change in the lives of the children, we must change with the
times.

In addition to the monetary benefits such events provide to NGOs like us, they also provide a
host of benefits to the donors. Such events are not just about calling celebrities, throwing a
fancy dinner and collecting funds for charity. They are also a great way for people to
socialize, for people who just want to make a small contribution at their own level at dinner.

Besides raising money these events also help in increasing awareness about the cause.
Currently, donating for ‘generic’ causes, like orphanages and old age homes, are not of
priority to the millennials, who generally are very enthusiastic when it comes to donations for
earthquake relief / war refugee welfare causes. These dinners are a great way for them to
identify with our cause and make a contribution.
[In the last three paragraphs you make your case by saying that the traditional methods of
raising money don’t work any longer and listing the many direct and indirect advantages of
charity dinners as fundraisers. Your attempt is very good, but you don’t address Sarala’s
main concern that this kind of giving is tainted. She can ask you, “Would you accept stolen
money for the great cause LGT is pursuing? Does the great end justify the rotten means?”
Yes, LGT desperately needs more funds. It’s pipeline of donations is stagnant. Traditional
approaches are not working. But find a way that does not compromise on the core values of
giving or of LGT.]

I request you to please consider this proposal of raising funds through such events and
provide a respectable life to every child

Thanking You
Your Sincerely
[well written. The first half is excellent. The mail, however, is unlikely to persuade Sarala to
change her mind.]

7/10
Group 265
Respected Madam [“Dear Ms Gowda” maybe a more appropriate salutation in this
context. If you generally interact with her on a first-name basis, you can also write
“Dear Sarala” or “Hi Sarala.”]

Hope that you are considering my proposal for a charity dinner for raising more funds
this week. [How can you start your mail with this statement when she “turned it down
firmly and instantly”?] I realized that from the face of it, my proposal was one
entwined in the business of raising money and was antithetic to the virtuous task that
Smt. Shyamala Gowda [write: your mother] might have started. And rightfully so,
after all we appeal to the inner virtue of human goodness for their contribution and
support in helping us support orphanages. But before you dismiss this, Ma’am, I
would request you to kindly allow me one chance to explain why a charity dinner
might be the best way for us in order to raise money, given the socio-economic and
cultural conditions in this day and age.[That’s what she has given you - a chance to
persuade her in writing. Don’t waste time and words. Get on with it.]

The World Health Organization rightfully estimates that almost 5% [you mean 50%?]
of all Indians suffer from depression. In a country of close to 1.3 billion citizens, the
number of 650 million is staggeringi. But all it took was Deepika Padukone in a tear-
jerker of an interview to highlight this plight. We might have thought that 650 million
citizens of our nation suffering from something, would have to wait for a leading
actress to give an interview for us to do something about it. [Wonderful! Let’s try and
get her to talk about the deprivations of millions of orphans in the country. Let’s hope
that it trains the spotlight on the orphans and prompts well-to-do professionals to
contribute generously to a trust like LGT to work for their welfare.]

The prominent thing to observe is how millennials use social media as their primary
source of news when they begin their day. The 2016 Global Mobile Consumer
Survey by Deloitte states that 18% of people check their phones immediately after
waking up, 43% of people do it within 5 minutes of waking up while 62% of people do
it within 15 minutes1.[You have indicated references. That’s a good thing. But the
superscript leads us nowhere.] What I am trying to highlight here, and what is
happening all around the world in this crazy tech savvy digital age of mobiles & high-
speed tech devices, is that we treat actors, sportspersons and famous celebrities as
reverential persons. Their personas already amplified by the all-powerful digital press
has made them demigods and their lines of influences and command over
sentiments of a nation are unparalleled. [See my comments at the end of the
previous paragraph. If successful actors, sports persons, and other celebrities are
highly influential, let’s try to get them on board to appeal to the young folks that
follow them. But does it mean we need to throw lavish dinners at 5-star venues to
raise money for the poor orphans? That’s the dissonance experienced by Sarala.]
You have been an inspiration to us. You have increased the scale of operations
manifold, carrying on the noble work that your mother had achieved through her life,
all the while remolding the trust into something suited to this day and age. You have
hired professionals to look after it just as any modern organization would do. [Your
praise is welcome. It’s precisely because Sarala has been your inspiration that she
cannot adopt what she considers tainted means to raise money for LGT.]

In this context, I urge you to take the next big step towards modernization and
harness the power of social media influence of celebrities to accelerate the raising of
funds and finding prospective contributors to this noble cause. There is nothing
wrong with using the generated image of celebrities towards fund collection; we are
just utilizing new age marketing influences to help us attain a noble cause.

As problems arise due to modernization, it is only rational that we also look towards
modern solutions. Let us believe such initiatives help our orphanages touch more
lives effectively. I hope we can look forward to the fruitful outcomes that could be
realized through this highly potential idea.

Looking forward to a positive reply!

[The nucleus of a good solution to the problem is found in the last two paragraphs but it is
not developed enough to make clear enough to let Sarala feel comfortable with it. Somehow
the impression you created is that this kind of giving may not be pure but this is what works
in the modern world and we need to adapt ourselves to this. She may or may not accept
this.]

7/10
Group 259

Hi Sarala,

Hope you’re having a good day! [This is a fine greeting that matches the informal “Hi
Sarala.” However, make sure that all your emails don’t start with this. If they do, it
loses its warmth.]

This is in reference to our conversation about a ‘Fundraising Charity Dinner’ to boost

donations. I believe I did not do justice to the idea, and I’m interested in walking you
through the inception of it and the impact it is capable of creating. [Very good start.
There is a brief reference to the earlier conversation. You also introduce the email
brilliantly with the self-deprecating words, “I believe I did not do justice to the idea.”]
Our current donation patterns reveal that most of our sustained donations come
from Xennials, and show that Millennials willing to donate are not being attracted to
our cause due to a lack of trigger. [Very good observation. But the question that is
likely to arise in Sarala’s mind is, “Is a lavish dinner at a five-star venue or a selfie
with a celebrity the trigger that these guys need to support underprivileged
orphans?”] The millennials are forthcoming in taking initiative for social and political
causes, and an event like this can drive their ’ desire to create an impact’ while
initiating a dialogue about our cause.

The Millennial are socially driven, ambitious and over-worked professionals having
little time to embrace impacts, an event like this can serve to their needs of a social
connect as well as of making an impact for those in need of association. By making
sure our funds flow transparently from the donor to our orphanages, I’m working
towards optimising organisational impact by channelizing maximum funds for
orphanage development. [Yes, you will do your best to save every rupee possible for
the orphanages. But that’s a mitigating step. Doesn’t it confirm Sarala’s fear that the
kind of giving those funds come from is tainted?]

I understand your concerns about commercialising charity, but I see this as a great
opportunity to encourage new donors to contribute and expand reach of our
organisation. It would be unfair to overlook the enthusiasm of the millennials in
talking about change and their willingness to execute it, a platform like this is the
best of both worlds. An event like this can help them oversee the impact they make
more closely, creating a convenient avenue while recognising need of a social
gregarious currency. [You are trying, especially in the first sentence, to paper over
her reservations by highlighting the benefits of getting additional funds. You don’t
really deal with her concern. You think that the wonderful things you can do for the
poor orphans with the additional funds will wash away the taint that she associates
with this kind of giving.]

There are 800,000 working professionals in Bangalore, much of who donate to

socially prevailing issues - over 80% everyday giving is acquired through face to face
interactions and millennials wanting to give back (ref) . Face-to-face and
telemarketing channels are projected to continue to dominate till 2021 and India’s
everyday givers are motivated by four triggers : Convenience, Urgency, Community
and Impact. Compared to other giving economies, low-barrier avenues of giving -
those that optimise for the giver’s choice, time, effort, etc. — remain nascent in India.
59% respondents in Sattva’s quantitative survey of everyday givers stated that they
would be encouraged to give if the process were more convenient. This initiative can
enhance all the four triggers and boost donations significantly. [Convenience? Isn’t a
simple standing order to your bank to transfer a certain amount every month to the
LGT account far more convenient than buying a ticket to a charity dinner and being
there at the appointed hour on a particular day chosen by the celebrity guest to suit
their convenience? The stats in the paragraph do nothing to allay Sarala’s fears.]

A few upscale social hubs have shown interest in hosting our event, offering
attractive discounts that count ensure maximum absorption of funds by orphanage
development. Inviting Smriti Irani, minister of child & women development and
Sushmita Sen, a single mother who adopted two young girls can be a good facilitator
of conversation and influence. Pricing each ticket at INR 6000-7000 for 80 people
and reaching out actively for sponsorship could ensure 75% of cash inflows to be
directed towards our ground level causes. [You are merely talking about operational
details here. They don’t add much value until Sarala’s core resistance to the idea is
addressed adequately.]
I am open to feedbacks [highly inappropriate to say this when you write to your boss.
You can write this to your peers or subordinates, but not to your boss.] and altering
plan of execution as per your suggestions. I just feel the legacy of Lakshmana
Gowda should live on in hearts of happy kids who have access to good education
and stable environment. [Sarala doesn’t doubt the purity of your heart.] An initiative
like this would not create funding but also awareness for adoption mechanisms that
can ensure happy homes for many of our children.

Regards

[Pretty good attempt. It’s unlikely, however, to persuade Sarala because you don’t
really deal with her main objection.]

6.5/10

Group 238

Dear Ma’am,

I am writing this letter in continuation of our discussion the other day to augment the
contributions to our 55 year-old Lakshmana Gowda Trust. With you at the helm for
the last 16 years, the NGO has grown to new heights. We have expanded our reach
and got more orphanages under our ambit and all of us wish to see the NGO impact
more lives. However, we believe that limited financial resources may restrict our
efforts to achieve this goal. [Very good start. There is reference to the conversation
that triggered this email. There is praise targeted at Sarala to make her feel good
and listen to you with a positive mind. Perhaps you should compress it a little more
without doing away with either of these two strands.]

Despite having a long list of legacy donors, who have been generous enough to
support our activities year long, we have stagnated in terms of growth of fund
contribution. Our executives have been proactive to reach out to potential donors but
the conversion rates have been very poor for the last few years. This has led to a
consensus among the team to revise our strategy to attract more people to support
us in our endeavour. One of the widely supported ideas among the group is that of
hosting charity dinners. [Compress this into a single sentence. Sarala is keenly
aware of the stagnant funds position. Come quickly to charity dinners.]

Charity dinners have become a common way, especially in the west, to attract new
donors. [That other charities are raising funds through this means will probably dilute
Sarala’s resistance a little. However, that it’s a practice seen largely in the West
rather than within our country may hold her back. Of course, she might retort: that a
lot of people are doing something doesn’t necessarily make it right.] It allows NGOs
to connect with the millennials – young professionals in their 20s and 30s. Our team
has found it difficult to draw significant donations using traditional methods from this
segment. This idea, still novel in India, can help us make inroads there. Bengaluru is
home to a large number of such young tech professionals. Millennials value their
experiences and therefore, experiences are most likely to change their perception on
their need to give back to the society. A Sunday brunch or a Saturday dinner can be
a good way to invite youngsters and spread awareness about our trust as well as our
activities. Given our legacy and reputation in Bengaluru, we can also try to rope in
one or two local celebrities to be part of the event. This will not only increase footfall
but also boost the public image of our trust. A celebrity with a substantial social
media following could help us grab enough eyeballs. Based on some preliminary
calculations, the team estimates that with a footfall of 200-250, the event can
generate net proceeds of Rs 10,00,000 – equivalent to 25 man-days’ worth effort
under the present scenario. Some of the recent fund raising events in the city have
been successful in not only collecting significant amounts towards their respective
causes but also growing their list of donors. [It is one thing to invite about 250 well-
to-do millennials along with a celebrity, talk to them about LGT, and invite them to
donate generously. It’s a matter of standard courtesy to offer them high tea or even
a meal when they spend a couple of hours with us. It’s quite a different thing to
charge them a hefty fee such as ₹ 10K for admission to the lavish dinner with a
celebrity. They contribute not out of compassion for the underprivileged orphans
but for the privilege of having a fancy meal with a celebrity and possibly taking a
selfie with them.]

We are well aware that such events might undermine the purity and simplicity of our
work. Charity does not follow ‘quid-pro-quo’. However, with change being the only
constant in today’s world, we believe that we need to adopt newer methods to
sustain our organisation. The team wishes to try out some new methods and
maintain the dynamism with which we carry out our responsibilities. We may even
opt for a small-sized event rather than a large event at the first instance and then
decide on the path ahead, based on the response we receive from the first event.
[This seems to be a reasonable compromise that Sarala may be willing to
consider.] The team hopes that this letter will help us articulate our thoughts better
and seek your views to make the best of this new initiative.

[Conclude the mail appropriately!]

[A pretty good attempt, but unlikely to sway Sarala because you’re skirting around
the main block in her mind.]

6.5/10