Boomers: Love ‘Em Or Leave ‘Em?
I love these reports from The Boomer Project … they’re the Agitator’s agitator. While they almost never address fundraising directly, one need only scratch lightly to discover some implications.
There are some great nuggets in this one. For example, I’ve just learned that the latest crisis in France is over raising the retirement age from 60 (yes, 60) to maybe 61 or 62. Roger and I are packing our bags … this is a cause that requires our firsthand attention!
But I digress. Seriously, take a look at this chart:
TBP’s editors point out that once in-migration and deaths — yes, Boomers are dying — are factored in, Boomers lose their vaunted numerical supremacy as a population group.
The question becomes, sheer numbers aside, who has the greater ability (financially speaking) and disposition to give?
Arguably, there are two factors that offset each other.
The Boomer Project talks a bit about evidence that Boomers have become especially conservative in their spending, reflecting a fundamental (and irreversible?) attitudinal shift caused by the shock of the current recession.
Objectively, many Boomers have lost a considerable chunk of their wealth (in home values and equities) at the same time that they expect to live longer than ever. Subjectively, they are more mentally and emotionally inclined to be in financial “survival mode” than to be thinking about investing in saving the world. Not good news for fundraisers.
But then, on the other hand, cutting against this gloom are some “natural” changes in mindset that are associated with aging. Here’s how a splendid article (one of the best I’ve read on the subject) from Fundraising Success — Young Donors and Other Mythical Creatures — puts it:
“The reason young people aren’t a meaningful part of the pool of donors is not their incomes. It’s their brains. Young brains are innately more self-focused than older brains. Want evidence? Argue with a teenager. (Please note that I’m not saying young people are immoral or lacking in character. They just don’t give often or in a sustained way. Their good deeds are more typically in the form of volunteerism and other direct action.)
As for older people, changes in brain chemistry as they age make them more emotional, more empathetic and less cynical. That’s good for giving. And it gets even better: There’s the increased wisdom and perspective that comes with age, and a deepening of (or return to) religious faith. Both of these things strongly promote giving.”
So which forces will prevail with respect to Boomers — the financial drivers of caution or the bio-chemical drivers of generosity?
Which do you think?
Tom
4 responses to “Boomers: Love ‘Em Or Leave ‘Em?”
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
Our office has had many recent discussions about Boomers. We keep circling the subject of your paragraph “Objectively, many Boomers have lost a considerable chunk of their wealth (in home values and equities) at the same time that they expect to live longer than ever. Subjectively, they are more mentally and emotionally inclined to be in financial “survival mode” than to be thinking about investing in saving the world. Not good news for fundraisers.”
As a Boomer, I can relate completely. An additional factor is that we are often becoming caregivers to our aging parents who are living longer, but with more health problems.
Re: Boomers, et al.
Demographically, you need to look at the changes in race and ethnicity to tell the full story. By 2020, approximately 30% of the nation will be non-white and Hispanic. In some states these cohorts are already over 50%. What is that impact on fund-raising? jvt
We’re entering tricky times for fundraising, that’s for sure. The field has been crafted almost exclusively around a generation that had a sense of duty and obligation, and that generation is almost gone. The Boomers replacing them — and I apologize if I offend any Boomers — aren’t going to step up and fill their shoes like everyone expects (or hopes?), even with the bio-chemical changes that come from aging.
Boomers, unlike the generation before them, grew up in an era that was much more self-interested with a heavy emphasis on consumerism. While aging will soften that, changes in brain chemistry won’t erase decades of hardwiring. So Boomers will continue to be focused on financial survival. They’ll probably become more giving with age, but it won’t be anything like the generation that preceded them. Not at all.
I think it will come down to Generation X. Xers grew up largely disaffected by consumer culture — and more, they saw how Boomers abandoned their youthful idealism of the 60s and 70s. I think in Generation X there is a strong sense of not wanting to end up like that. Plus, Gen Xers are statistically the most educated, which generally bodes well for giving. And when you look at it, they’re not all that young. According to that chart, the oldest Gen Xers are mid-40s — not exactly the traditional donor “sweet spot”, but hardly a teenager.
Ultimately, I think it means we’re going to have to really think about the way we fundraise. I’m not at all convinced that we can keep doing what we’ve been doing and expect it to work just because Boomers are entering that prime donor age.
In my experience with older donors, self preservation often wins and I’ve sensed that Boomers are very concerned about out-living their money and becoming a burden on their children. This doesn’t bode well. NFP’s who aren’t using Charitable Gift Annuities to appeal to aging Boomers and/or dabbling in e-philanthropy to appeal to Xers & Millennials are headed for bumpy roads ahead.