What is“Development?” 25 well-trained on the ranch, is that they are quick to persuade pros- pects that private funds are needed to avert some imminent disaster— cutting upper division classes, conference travel, or departmental lecture funds. Crying poor rarely interests donors. Donors like to give to success, not to prevent collapse. Also, while it may come as a shock to hardworking faculty members struggling to get by on modest sala- ries, many prospects, even those who believe strongly in the value of higher education, tend to believe faculty members have it pretty good. The imminent disaster of reduced conference travel might provide the material for a good joke at the country club. Faculty members, after all, have privileges few private sector employees possess: scheduling much of their own time during the typical work week, deciding what they want to research or which grants to pursue, participating in choosing their supervisor (i.e., chair), and having at least three months of vaca- tion each year. And did I mention tenure? Most donors understand that faculty members have their freedom because they work with students and create and carry on knowledge. Prospects and donors often have little patience for tales of faculty deprivation. Faculty members may have to be coaxed to tell stories about the great things that students are doing with faculty members and how, with a major gift or greater annual giving, prospects can help us have an even greater impact on young people’s lives. These common mistakes—event planning and alumni relations run amuck, Lone Rangers, and crying poor—explain why many Vice Presidents of Development are wary of constituency development offices. Too many constituency officers, as is said in many a Univer- sity Development Office, “go native.” That is, they identify with the immediate interests of their constituency and fail to get the dean and his or her faculty to adopt a culture of development that promotes the long-term interests of the institution. It is also true that Arts and Sciences is renowned among development officers for having the worst internal battles over what to raise money for and how to best to raise it. Regardless of their knowledge about the subject (or lack thereof), Arts and Sciences faculty members generously share their advice on how fundraising should be done. As Mark Roche, the longtime dean of