Code Table Entries for Titles/Suffixes

Pamela Gunthorpe

I am working to clean-up our code tables that had been allowed to run-amok prior to my arrival. For instance, I recently decreased the number of Constituent Codes from 100+ to 22!  Now I am working on the tables for Titles and Suffixes, both of which also have 100+ entries.  Some are an easy fix, such as combining PhD, Ph.D., Ph.D, and ",Ph.D.". Yes, we had many entries start with the comma!


What are some best practice guidelines you use to maintain this type of information?  For instance, what do you do when a constituent have multiple suffixes such as, Jr. USAF?  Do you use Ret to indicate someone who is retired? Would you use suffixes for BSN, PSY, or should that be part of their education information?


And with regard to Titles, I probably have every possible military rank listed as a table entry. These are especially difficult as I do not have a military background.  Would it be completely inappropriate to do away with all of them except for the highest ranks?  Does a 1LT, 1SG, 1stLt, 1stSgt, 2d Lt, or 2LT really need to be recognized as such in their title?


Your perspectives are much appreciated.


Pamela


 

Kylea Johnson

Depends on what level of formality your org wants to use in your correspondence. A lot of our donors have started to ask to simply be addressed as John and Jane Doe, so I'm slowly simplifying ours. When I came on they were set up as "Mr. and Mrs. John Doe" which is a little out-of-date in my opinion, especially since most of our donors are women. I changed it to "Mr. John and Mrs. Jane Doe" and have plans to pare it down even farther to John and Jane Doe. This makes sense for us as we mostly correspond with alumni, and since we are a small community college, the relationship is naturally lends itself to a little less formality.


It's hard! There's a lot of exceptions to the rule. John Doe and Jane Deer, a few who prefer to be addressed by their military rank, etc. I make global changes in batches depending on what the salutation type was before.

Diana Turner

I agree with Kylea Johnson‍ in doing what makes the most sense for your constituents. In saying that, I would also add, if the person is retired military, then you have an additional designation. MSgt First Name Last Name (retired). My Marine will let me know quickly how to address to another military person. Most active duty personnel are introduced as rank and last name, only.

We have a fairly closed group of constituents and still use standard titles. I did clean up the multiples of Jr., Jr and Junior, etcetera. There was Ph D and Dr., also Judge and The Honorable for the same person. 

It can all be confusing. 

It is a good practice to write down your org's preferences for the data entry personnel. 

Good luck!

Dariel Dixon

I don't think I would add in every military rank prefix by default; there's just too many of them!  Military titles also are dependent on branch so I would only add what is necessary.  Also, don't forget that there are 2 suffix and prefix fields, so you may not need to create compound titles.  But Kylea Johnson‍ is right, your addressees will depend out your level of formality.  Which, in turn is somewhat reflective of your constituent base.  For instance, I have an older constituent base, so our titles are more traditional.  It needs to be an organizational decision so there's no confusion for this decision.  And for your sanity and everyone else's, please document whatever the decision is.

Kelli Crispin

I did a great deal of research on this a few years ago. We are a CRM shop, so I am unsure if all of this would apply, but hopefully it is helpful. The attached doc is our standard around titles and suffixes, which includes info on military rank. Two excellent resources (included in the doc) are the Department of Defense Manual for Written Material (http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodm/511004m_v2.pdf) and Robert Hickey’s On-Line Guide to Forms of Address (http://www.formsofaddress.info/FOA_home.html).


(The doc refers to "Special Information," which is a customization in our database that appears at the top of the Personal/Org, Relationships, and Contact tabs to capture exceptions to the rule on a variety of topics and reduce data entry errors.)


One frustration of CRM is that there is a single Title code table that is used for both the Title and Title 2 fields. The same is true for Suffix. We use a combination of training and data checks to look for errors to mitigate this.


Our biggest mess around this topic is the Suffix code table, which contains a great many entries with multiple credentials, separated by commas. We are a university, and our students are proud of their accomplishments, so we must do our best to accommodate preferences in how we address them.


A few thoughts regarding other responses... CRM uses Name Formats to store items like "Mr. and Mrs. John Doe," which is preferable to some of our older constituents, but becoming less and less preferable. We have extensively customized the criteria in certain formats to accommodate the order of constituents in the pair and same-sex couples, as well as pairs that include nonbinary folks or people with no title. Also you will notice in the attachment that we have kept Dr. and PhD, as well as Judge and The Honorable. A constituent can have a Title and Title 2 of Dr. and a Suffix 2 of PhD, or a Title of Judge and Title 2 of The Honorable. Users can pull the correct name formats to use when mailing to constituents, so that the title and suffix are used correctly.


Of course, all of this does depend on how you use the data. We simplified where we could, but also have a great deal of legacy information that needed to be preserved, so we have a good deal of complexity in our titles and suffixes.

Rachael Walker

Kelli Crispin‍, I can't thank you enough for sharing this document. I've been looking for something like it as we audit our title table at Western Carolina. This is fantastic.