What's in a Name? How Your Team's Label Reveals its Role.
Part 1 of 3: From Support to Strategy
Over the years, I’ve worked with teams labeled development communications, development marketing and communications, advancement communications, and advancement marketing & communications.
Organizations use different labels. But the more telling difference? How those teams are treated, and more importantly, what they’re empowered to influence.
Many of you reading this are part of—or have been part of—teams like these. Some of you supervise them. Others collaborate with them from areas like major gifts, alumni relations, annual giving, stewardship, or central marketing.
Have you ever paused to wonder, “What’s the real difference between these functions?” If so, you’re definitely not alone!
As institutions face tighter budgets, leaner teams, and renewed campaign ambitions, clarifying the role of communications isn’t just semantics. It’s strategic.
In fact, it’s often the difference between a team that delivers content and a team that drives engagement, donor retention, institutional storytelling, and revenue.
That’s the focus of this new three-part newsletter series:
- Part 1: Defining what these common labels really signal
- Part 2: Exploring structures and roles that support (or stifle) strategic comms
- Part 3: Mapping how teams evolve from reactive to influential
Let’s start with where you—or your team—might sit on the spectrum.
Beyond the Title—What Labels Reveal About Function
Here are four common terms I hear and what they often (but not always) reveal about how the team operates.
1. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS (DevComm)
“Can you help write this acknowledgment letter?”
This team is typically focused on writing donor-facing materials: proposals, cases for support, one-sheeters, thank-you letters, event collateral, and impact reports. The work is essential and often underappreciated. These teams are the unsung backbone of donor engagement, providing tools that gift officers rely on every day.
But they’re often positioned as reactive content creators—rarely invited into prospect strategy, donor segmentation planning, or pipeline development discussions.
Risk:
When DevComm is isolated from institutional goals or campaign planning, storytelling becomes fragmented and impact is reduced to execution. These teams can burn out chasing urgent requests rather than shaping proactive engagement.
Not every communicator aspires to shape strategy—and that’s okay. But institutions must recognize that if they expect strategic outcomes, they need to resource and empower these teams accordingly.
2. DEVELOPMENT MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS (Dev MarComm)
“We’re bringing more email strategy and digital into our appeals.”
This setup signals evolution. You may see segmentation, digital campaigns, or donor journey mapping—especially for annual giving or Giving Days.
But... these teams often remain siloed, operating more as tacticians than partners in strategy. They support development but rarely influence it.
Some leaders might argue that fundraising strategy should live solely with frontline leadership. But when MarComm teams are embedded earlier, they can help sharpen messaging, enhance audience alignment, and strengthen conversion. It’s not about replacing strategy ownership but amplifying it.
3. ADVANCEMENT COMMUNICATIONS
“We collaborate across alumni relations, stewardship, and development.”
This label reflects broader reach. These teams may support major donor communications, campaign messaging, alumni publications, stewardship initiatives, and events. But their strategic influence varies widely.
If not embedded in fundraising and engagement planning, these teams remain helpful—but still peripheral. Too often, they’re looped in once goals and narratives are already set.
4. ADVANCEMENT MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS
“We drive audience engagement across the advancement enterprise.”
This is where the real shift happens.
Advancement MarComm teams are more proactive, data-informed, and integrated across units. They think in terms of pipelines, audience lifecycles, and influence on donor behavior. They also align with central MarComm when possible, as well as School/Unit MarComm teams, ensuring institutional voice and philanthropic priorities don’t compete. They're capable of leading the architecture and execution of comprehensive campaign platforms.
They aren’t just telling the story. They’re shaping strategy.
Some teams may feel that this level of integration is out of reach—especially in lean shops. But the strategic mindset can begin at any scale. Even a two-person team can start asking: “Are we measuring volume… or impact?”
Want a conversation starter?
A few months ago, I created a LinkedIn carousel called Elevate Your MarComm Team to help teams reflect on where they currently operate—and where they want to be. It compares reactive vs. proactive behaviors across six core traits, from short-term execution to long-term strategic alignment.
You can use it as a diagnostic during team meetings, or as a framework for internal discussions with leadership about evolving your role. The visuals reinforce much of what’s covered here, in a format that’s easy to share and act on.
What’s Next
In Part 2 of this From Support to Strategy series, we’ll go deeper into structure:
- Who these teams report to
- How cross-functional collaboration works (or doesn’t)
- What skills and roles signal a maturing Advancement MarComm function
If this first issue helped you better understand where your team sits—or where you’d like it to go—make sure to keep an eye out for next week's issue.
What I’m Paying Attention To
📊 Ragan’s 2025 Communications Benchmark
Quick stat: 40% of higher ed communicators say they’re stuck reacting to last-minute content requests. This “order-taker trap” is a structural problem—not a talent one. Read it here. (Free but requires giving some info.)
🎧 “Advancement as a Revenue Driver” – Maria Kuntz & Bart Caylor
An essential listen for any advancement or MarComm leader rethinking their role in institutional sustainability. Maria Kuntz (CU Boulder) makes the case on The Higher Ed Marketer podcast that advancement isn’t just a funding arm—it’s a relationship engine and strategic revenue driver. From “friend-raising” to mentorship pipelines to digital engagement officers, she shares practical, scalable ways to elevate alumni engagement and fundraising outcomes. Listen here.
Final Thought
Whether your team is labeled “development communications” or “advancement MarComm,” the bigger question is:
Are you seen as tactical support or as a strategic partner in engagement and growth?
The labels we use aren’t just shorthand. They shape how others perceive our value. And how we perceive it ourselves. Sometimes, a small shift in language can be the first step toward a much bigger shift in influence.
Let’s start calling these teams what they are capable of becoming.
Let’s... make it matter.
Dan
P.S. I’ve got something exciting to share next week—especially for those of you thinking about how to integrate AI into Advancement. Stay tuned!
