Lyndhurst, N.J. – November 02, 2026 -- Only about 16% of 38 higher education institutions surveyed by Marts&Lundy offer incentive compensation to advancement staff, while more than 40% of those without a program are considering one, according to a new benchmarking study from the fundraising consultancy.
The report, Incentive Compensation in Higher Education Advancement, revisits research the firm first published in 2016. It covers program eligibility, structure, performance measures and perceived outcomes. Marts&Lundy conducted the research through an online questionnaire in summer 2026, covering public and private institutions with and without programs.
Every institution with a program cites retention as a goal
Every institution that reported its program goals named employee retention as an objective. Improved employee performance and higher overall fundraising revenue followed. Penelepe Hunt, Senior Consultant & Principal at Marts&Lundy, led the study and said leaders have had "very little to point to" in the way of data on the topic.
Programs split evenly between ongoing and campaign-specific designs
Current programs are evenly divided between ongoing and campaign-specific structures. Eligibility concentrates in leadership and gift-officer roles: advancement leadership and principal and major giving professionals are each eligible in 83% of responding programs. Planned giving professionals are eligible in 67%.
Programs commonly pair fundraising results with activity, pipeline, team or other measures, rather than relying only on dollars raised.
Respondents report higher revenue and better culture
Among programs that answered the relevant questions, 80% reported increased dollars raised. Another 75% rated the effect on organizational culture as positive or very positive. The study notes that these outcomes reflect respondents' perceptions.
Budget, governance and public-sector rules slow adoption
Institutions exploring incentives cited philosophy, budget, culture and governance as considerations. Public institutions also pointed to state and collective bargaining rules. Many are focused on shared-credit approaches that recognize the team effort behind each gift.
The report also covers award structures, funding sources, administration and ways to recognize contributions across advancement teams. Its guidance for leaders includes:
- Engage governance and HR early.
- Start where measurement is strongest.
- Decide deliberately between campaign-specific and permanent program design.
- Build shared-credit approaches that recognize colleagues across the team.
Marts&Lundy describes the findings as directional benchmarks from participating institutions, not estimates for the sector.