Scott is an executive director and Juanita is a fundraising manager at Werner Charities. They are trying to create a more effective letter to secure funding from past and prospective donors. Their response from the current letter and the second have been disappointing, to say the least. Both Scott and Juanita are acutely aware of the importance of the success of this mailing. Also, each of them has some definitive ideas about how the letter should look and sound.

Scott, the charitys director, believes it is vitally important to address the logical, thoughtful mind of potential donors. He wants the letter to focus on facts, figures, and good works the charity has accomplished. Juanita, the fundraiser, takes the approach that the letter should tug at the heart strings of potential donors. She wants the letter to focus on real life stories of people the charity has helped. Further, Juanita wants to pull in new, younger donors through social media outlets and digital letter delivery who will donate electronically; while Scott wants to retain the older, wealthier, more established donors who prefer a paper letter through the mail with return envelope for sending in checks.

Both Juanita and Scott are known for their expertise in different areas of marketing. Because of company protocol, both of them will need to sign off on this crucial letter and on its delivery method. Also, both have run very successful campaigns in the past.

Right away, tensions started to rise between them. Both of them know that a win-win solution should be their goal. Before anyone could have predicted it, however, they were both raising their voices more than necessary. Both of them were sure that the other ones letter deign and delivery would ruin the company.

1. What steps should Scott and Juanita take to start making some progress toward a win-win solution?

2. What could they have done to prevent the situation from starting out this way? If you were running this donation campaign, how would you set up the campaign so that conflict would not occur?

3. Would a win-lose approach work in this situation? Why or why not?

4. What additional information should you obtain to be effective in settling this difference of opinion?