Why is it that some schools have a "Development" office while others have an office of "Institutional Advancement"? Is there a difference between the two, and, if so, what is it?
To my knowledge, no one has ever attempted to distinguish the two terms, so I'll attempt to do so. I encourage others in the field to respond in the "comments" section below, so that, collectively, we can hash out a working understanding!
Permit me two anecdotal statements:
1. For some schools, "Development" and "Institutional Advancement" are synonymous. Simply put, nomenclature is not important for these schools. One "sounds better" than the other.
2. "Development" is the more traditional, time-tested title; "Institutional Advancement" sounds a bit more progressive and comprehensive. (But is it really?)I submit to you that there should be a difference in the terms. Following are my proposed definitions.
By Development, we mean an office whose sole raison d'etre is to raise funds for the school. The Director of Development is the person who is responsible for organizing the fundraising efforts of board members, development officers, and volunteers, and who does his/her own solicitations for the annual fund, major/planned gifts, capital gifts, and/or endowed gifts (among others). The development office works in concert with communications and marketing, but these two areas do not necessarily fall under the managerial purview of the director of development.
By Institutional Advancement, we mean an office that is, by nature, more complex in terms of its structure. This office comprises all development functions listed above, plus marketing, communications, all voluntarism within a school community, social networking, strategic planning, and has a strong partnership with (or even oversight of) the admission department. The director of institutional advancement might oversee a director of development, among other reports. The raison d'etre of this office is to advance the mission of the school from multiple perspectives, all of which require agility, a strong sense of vision, and the ability to manage disparate points of view on a massive scale.
Any other thoughts out there on what the difference in terms ought to be?