Behavioral Science Posts

How Asking Affects the Asked

There are some phenomena that are impossible to measure without effecting some change. Think of your tire pressure gauge – to measure the pressure in your tire, you have to let some air out, thus changing your tire’s pressure. This is so ingrained in our lives and our physics that there are times that subatomic […]

Learn More August 30, 2019

The Donor Upgrade Conundrum

Every day on her way to work, a woman walks by the same bagel stand run by a guy who is clearly selling these bagels to survive. So every day, that woman drops a dollar in the mug and leaves without asking for a bagel. One day, she feels a tug on her sleeve as […]

Learn More July 8, 2019

Everyone Loves Fireworks

… except parents with babies trying to get them to sleep. And many dogs and their owners. And those suffering from trauma where loud, explosive noises are a trigger. And others. For them, it’s negative. Everyone loves ice cream… except the lactose intolerant. And dieters. And vegans. And those who don’t like the taste. And […]

Learn More July 5, 2019

F-2-F Part 4: What Data Makes a Difference and How to Get It

It’s more than ironic that a large nonprofit employing both a $5 million direct response acquisition program and a F-2-F program costing the same $5 million will cumulatively spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars on the preparation of their direct mail package, but totally neglect any significant investment in the training and monitoring […]

Learn More July 1, 2019

F-2-F Part 3: Missed Opportunity and the F-2-F Paradox

Given the unique opportunity to capture information directly from the donor that is essential for assuring higher retention and donor value, it is ironic that most F2F operations simply ignore this bonanza. In fact, it’s more than ironic. It’s downright wasteful and irresponsible. I call it the “The F2F Paradox”. … On the one hand, the […]

Learn More June 28, 2019

Thanks But No Thanks: Part 2

Thanks to everyone involved in the robust discussion here and on social media about the study of thank you calling on subsequent giving Kiki and Roger discussed Monday. In particular, discussion from Penelope Burk and other minds in fundraising have centered on who calls, when they call, and what is said. I’ll have a brief […]

Learn More June 19, 2019

Thanks, But No Thanks

A new study strongly questions the near-universal assumption that saying “thank you” and showing “impact” is the silver bullet for improving supporter value or increasing second gift conversion. Take a deep breath. Now, read on. Titled Do Thank-You Calls Increase Charitable Giving? Expert Forecasts and Field Experimental Evidence, the study has spawned lots of debate […]

Learn More June 17, 2019

Empathy: the emotion your agency didn’t know to use

Imagine you are a Syrian refugee fleeing your war-torn country. Where would you flee, or would you stay? What would you take with you, limited to what you can carry? What do you feel would be the biggest challenge for you? Could this language trigger empathy and foster inclusion and prosocial behavior? Could this be […]

Learn More June 5, 2019

Become a Cyborg: Increase Your Fundraising Productivity

There’s a vision of AI (Artificial Intelligence) I (jokingly) referenced a few weeks ago: that it is coming to take our jobs and, in extreme Skynet scenarios, our lives. But a more realistic, and optimistic, scenario for the long-term is that we will all be enhanced by technology. Computers are very good at repetitive tasks […]

Learn More June 3, 2019

Speed Round 2: 7 More Updates on 7 More Issues

So many things to update; so little time! So we went back to a concept we tried, and you tolerated, last month: the potpourri post. Sustainer growth: We’d talked about the 2019 M+R Benchmarks Study, which showed monthly giving rising as one-time giving was mostly flat. An astute commenter (all Agitator commenters are astute!) asked […]

Learn More May 22, 2019

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

Q: Do you have any insight on whether integrating an individual giving appeal with other comms from the charity in both appearance and messaging can uplift results? Or does the actual appeal become ‘lost’ for lack of stand-out?

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

Q: Is there any research on response rate impact in direct mail when referring to a sustainer gift as ongoing or recurring (catching all frequencies) v. monthly or annual?

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

Q: A major conservation nonprofit sends me lots of mail, many of which have on the envelope “time to renew” or “2nd notice.” I find this practice deceptive, especially as I haven’t given to said organization since 1997. It must be effective or they wouldn’t do it. But is it ethical?

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

Q: I find it irritating when some nonprofits accept my “gift” and then ask me to cover their credit card fees separately. It feels like a practice that does nothing to help win donors and runs the risk of turning others off. Is there any data on this either way?

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

Q: What are the three most important things to consider when designing a brilliant supporter journey?

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

Q: Is there any evidence that changes to the tax laws in the USA changed end of year giving behaviors? Previously, ~30% of US taxpayers filed itemized tax returns allowing them to receive a deduction for charitable giving. Tax law changed in 2017 so that now only ~10% itemize. This should mean tax year-end giving should not matter to millions of people for whom it used to matter. Is there any data evidence to support this?

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