Q: I am curious about Seth Godin’s statement related to not having a donate banner on a nonprofit website. Thoughts from the Agitator? https://seths.blog/2018/12/do-we-value-attention-properly/
In my view, the answer isn’t the same for all organisations. When it comes to health charities, Seth’s approach is a winner. When it comes to any other charitable organisation, there’s need for balance. Let me explain.
Visitors to a health charity’s site are most likely looking for information or support. Their primary goal is to feel more in control of their situation and relieve their stress. Making a gift might not be crossing their minds at that point. Imagine how they will feel though after they found what they were looking for. In that moment, when they feel grateful to the charity for providing what they needed, they might consider to give something back. In short, health charities could lose the donate banner on the homepage, focus on services, ask after the service has been provided and increase revenue.
Now let’s consider any other charitable organisation. In this case, website visitors might just want to know more about the charity, or they might want to donate. Having a donate banner that takes up most of the real estate might turn off people who arrived there to learn more. Removing the donate option completely might increase the hassle and frustration for people whose sole purpose was to make a gift. That’s why there’s a need for balance. The answer isn’t whether you should have a donate option or not but how you execute it. There’s no reason why you couldn’t dedicate a small but distinctive area of the homepage to donations. It will make life easier for those who want to give while the rest can easily ignore it. People know they’re on a charity’s website after all and charities ask for money. Not only it won’t come as a surprise to them but it’s kind of expected.
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer