The Problem of the People in a Room
Why effective fundraising needs a never ending focus on evidence.
At Bluefrog, we have a saying:
“It was people in a room.”
It’s our shorthand for explaining one of the most frustrating – and common – realities in charity fundraising. That moment when intelligent, well-intentioned people meet, make a decision, and tank their fundraising.
It goes a little like this…
“Why can’t we feature this project? That’s what their donors love to fund.”
“I know, but people in a room said no.”“Why have they ignored the data?”
“No idea. It was people in a room.”“Why did they cancel that programme? It was doing brilliantly!”
“People in a room got bored with it.”“What, they are launching another rebrand?”
“Yep. New people in the room…”
The tyranny of fashion
Rooms – committees, boards, planning groups – are not inherently flawed. But what happens inside them can be.
As Rory Sutherland, often points out, decisions are rarely driven purely by logic. Instead, they are shaped by ego, social conformity and a fear of looking foolish. He’s said that people don’t want to be right; they want to avoid being wrong in front of their peers. And that’s exactly what happens in rooms.
When consensus is driving a decision, even if it is going in the wrong direction, very few people will challenge it. In many ways it is more comfortable – or even rewarding over the short-term – to double down and support it. Particularly for leaders who don’t like to say no.
When evidence loses out
And once a decision has been made – to rebrand, or to invest in a new value-exchange product – it becomes harder to challenge it. Particularly after resources have been expended. Not because the facts have changed, but because to revisit it would feel like admitting failure.
Behavioural economist Daniel Kahneman refers to as this as the problem of “What You See Is All There Is”. In the room, people are often acting on limited or selective data that confirms a predetermined view. The decision feels sound in that context. But when the landscape shifts – when new donor insights emerge, or campaign results contradict expectations – there’s a strong instinct to defend the original call, not revise it. The group can actually get angry with the one or two people sharing uncomfortable truths.
The courage to go back
But knowing when to quit shouldn’t be seen as failure. It is a strategic act of resourcefulness. This means recognising when something isn’t working, even if it once felt like the right decision in a meeting.
The fact is intelligent leaders change course when the facts change. The mediocre double down.
So what’s the answer?
I’m not saying scrap your meetings and steering groups. But here are a few techniques to avoid people in a room syndrome:
Build a culture of reversal
Make it safe to say: "We were wrong then, but we’ve learned." Fundraising decisions should evolve as new data and insight emerge.Let evidence interrupt consensus
Have someone in the room tasked with defending the data. Their job isn’t to push an agenda – but to introduce and protect the facts.Create donor-centered checkpoints
Revisit decisions with actual donor behaviour in hand. What donors respond to should always carry more weight than what people like the idea of internally. Ask yourself “what would a donor think about this use of money?” Anything other than pleased, proud or supportive should be a red flag.Beware the boredom trap
The fact that a campaign no longer excites the people inside the charity is irrelevant. If it still works for donors, that’s what matters.Beware the sunk-cost fallacy
This is perhaps the most important of all. Just because you've already invested in a bad idea doesn't mean you should keep throwing more resources at it.
Make sure your room has a window
The room is a construct. It’s a group of people, in a moment, with some information. But the donors are not in the room. The evidence usually isn’t, either. And yet the decisions made there often shape – or limit – your charity’s fundraising potential for years.
As fundraisers, we must create systems that let insight, not inertia, guide the work. And that takes bravery. It takes someone to stand up, move away from the table and look out the window - to the world outside the room.
The real test of leadership isn’t making the right call the first time. It’s being willing to change it when the facts say you should.