I voted already. I did it the minute I got my new voter registration card here in Tennessee. I have the sticker to prove it.

And I did this despite knowing in my brain of brains (as opposed to my heart of hearts) that it made no possible difference. Everyone I voted for will win or lose by a healthy margin. And even if my one vote could be the margin for victory, it wouldn’t be, with recounts and lawyers and such.

But I did because I believe 1) being a voter is good, 2) I am a good person, and therefore 3) I will be a voter.

It’s so much a part of my identity I would think differently (and worse) about myself if I didn’t.

Now, note that I mentioned neither candidate nor party. Who I voted for was just a means to my end of express my identity and beliefs.

Our donors are very similar. Nonprofits are how good people do good deeds and reinforce their own identities.

That is the basic “why” for why people give. Let’s call this level one identity: you are a good person doing a good thing. And yet some nonprofits don’t even reinforce the identity of you as a good person, so busy are they talking about themselves. Here’s an anonymized (because I believe in the organization) thank you letter I got from a nonprofit for a donation:

“Dear Nicholas Ellinger,

XXXXXXXXXXX gratefully acknowledges your generous gift(s).

Thank you for your generous donation. To learn more ways you can help our organization, please visit our website at XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.”

People like Roger Craver and Jeff Brooks and Tom Ahern have been saying for years that nonprofits need to be better about making their communications about the donor and not the organization.

And it’s working. More and more nonprofits are getting the hang of level one identity. But too many still don’t have these basic table stakes.

Level two identity is playing back your donor’s donor identity to them, ideally with a subgroup identity attached. In one study on American Red Cross donors, Wharton School researchers found that appeals that reminded people that they were a donor to the organization, donations went up. Also, priming someone with their membership in a local community called increased giving. In fact, the smaller the group, the better – people responded better to identity priming by city than by state.

Level three identity is taking an existing identity and imbuing it with positive, aspirational characteristics. There’s a reason that Texas A&M and the Seattle Seahawks call their fans the 12th Man. Even though it is highly unlikely that someone will be called out of the stands to play (although Browns fans are waiting by the phone for their chance to play quarterback), this idea of a team that helps the team on the field gives these fans something to aspire to and a role to play.

Or, as Seth Godin puts it:

“People like us do things like this: There is no more powerful tribal marketing connection than this.

More than features, more than benefits, we are driven to become a member in good standing of the tribe. We want to be respected by those we aspire to connect with, we want to know what we ought to do to be part of that circle.

Not the norms of mass, but the norms of our chosen tribe.”

But there’s one thing that’s missing from all of these identities – they are all things that you could say about any donor. None of them understand why the person is giving to you. So, without further ado:

Level four identity is understanding why a person is giving and then using the tactics from levels one through three. And this isn’t the same for everyone. Reading the feedback comments for a prominent religious relief organization (let’s call it Buddhist International Relief), the groups were split – some people were giving because they were Buddhists and wanting to help; others were giving despite not being Buddhists because the need was great and they knew that organization was on the ground.

For disease charities, it’s often the difference between those who have the disease or care about someone who does and those who don’t. For animal organizations, it might be cat and dog people. It could be people who want to advocate to change the system and those who want to help within the system they have. It’s different identities for each organization.

Right now, most organizations are talking to these people as if they have the same identity. Imagine if you had to craft a one-size-fits-all letter for Buddhist International Relief. Would you make it a call to Buddhists to give because of their faith and alienate the non-Buddhists? Or would you leave out religious mentions and ignore the core identity that caused a majority of donors to give?

The answer is neither — you wouldn’t do one-size-fits-all; you’d talk to both groups by their individual identity.

A word of warning on trying to get to level four identity: it isn’t necessarily what you think it is. We’ve seen an explosion in journey mapping seminars recently that talk about identity that say that step one is to say what you think your donors’ identities are.

It isn’t.

Step one is to ask your donors why they give. They will tell you and I will guarantee that at least one thing will surprise you.

You can see our methodology for determining identity here – we’d love to help you set up a pilot program that puts these identity and preference variables to work for you.  You can learn more here.

And please vote. Yes, one vote may not make a difference, but together, those votes are powerful. The world really is a better place when there are more voters in it. For all those who have died to get the vote and for all those around the world who would do so given the chance, please vote.