Donor Identity - Agitator

Behavioral Science Posts

Fantasyland Fundraising

Grandma Craver always advised: “Never wake a sleeping snake to kill it.” And generally, I try to follow her advice. But, over the weekend The New York Times ran a blockbuster of a piece How Trump Consultants Exploited the Facebook Data of Millions. Behind the story is the tale of a voter profiling firm named […]

Learn More March 19, 2018

Are You Donor-Obsessed or Merely Donor-Centric?

Customer experience guru Gerry McGovern warns that even if a company is indeed “customer-centric” that may not be enough these days. “To truly be successful, you need to nurture a customer obsession culture within your organization.”, he warns. The Agitator says, “Amen.” So, let’s kick ‘donor-centricity’ up a notch and focus on what makes for […]

Learn More March 5, 2018

A Little Hair of the Dog

You’ve heard me talking about knowing your donors’ identity or identities. One of the classic examples is cat people versus dog people: it’s simple, there are two options, and you can see how messaging would be different for each group. But it took a for-profit to give an interesting example of a next logical step […]

Learn More February 28, 2018

Peer-to-Peer Fundraisers: Don’t Run. Dash!

I mean it. Dash right over to Amazon, click and order Dollar Dash: The Behavioral Economics of Peer-to-Peer Fundraising , a practical and powerful guide to the psychology behind P2P fundraising and the factors that drive donors and volunteers with plenty of case studies. In fact, even if you don’t give one whit about peer-to-peer […]

Learn More February 26, 2018

Advocacy Fundraising #2: Slacktivism Science

Online advocacy has a bad name. Specifically: slacktivism (or clicktivism). Seth Meyers put the prevailing opinion into funny words on SNL: “Look, if you make a Facebook page we will “like” it—it’s the least we can do. But it’s also the most we can do.” This frames the debate well. Is online activism a prelude […]

Learn More February 22, 2018

Advocacy Fundraising #1: The Advocate Identity

Editor’s Note: This is the first of a three-part series on Advocacy Fundraising. Part 1: the Importance of Advocate Identity. Part 2: Slactivism Science. Separating the wheat from the chaff. Part 3: Putting it all together. Finding and Converting Advocates. ——————————————————————————————————————- THE ADVOCATE IDENTITY Do you recognize any of these signs? Some of your supporters will […]

Learn More February 21, 2018

Introducing TrueAppend for Fundraisers

Today we’re adding TrueAppend to The Agitator Toolbox. This easy-to-use tool enables you to go online and quickly—and without charge – get a demographic overview of your donor database. In a matter of minutes, you’ll receive charts and graphs identifying key characteristics of your donors. Attributes like Age, Net worth, and Income. Lifestyle markers like marital […]

Learn More February 20, 2018

Testing Your Donor Identities

Previously on donor identity: It’s good to segment by identity But they must be the right identity/ies There must be meaningful differences among different identities And you must be able to get value by messaging them differently So, how do you know if you get value by messaging differently? You must test. Sorry. I wish […]

Learn More February 8, 2018

Brainstorming Donor Identities

I’ve been preaching testing donor identities as ways of segmentation your file even in my pre-Agitator days. But here’s a secret: not all donor identities are created equal. Remember that the goal of a good segmentation – including an identity segmentation – is to minimize difference among group members and to maximize difference among different […]

Learn More February 7, 2018

What Do You Mean When You Say “Segmentation”?

A couple of weeks ago, I stirred things up when arguing that neither demographics nor RFM analysis should be the first point of segmentation for organizations. In the ensuing discussion, it became clear we are talking about different types and levels of segmentation worth exploring. In (approximate) order from least to most sophisticated: Full file […]

Learn More February 6, 2018

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

Behavioral Science Posts

Fantasyland Fundraising

Are You Donor-Obsessed or Merely Donor-Centric?

A Little Hair of the Dog

Peer-to-Peer Fundraisers: Don’t Run. Dash!

Advocacy Fundraising #2: Slacktivism Science

Advocacy Fundraising #1: The Advocate Identity

Introducing TrueAppend for Fundraisers

Testing Your Donor Identities

Brainstorming Donor Identities

What Do You Mean When You Say “Segmentation”?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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

DonorVoice products

Commitment System

Donor Feedback Platform™

PreTest Tool

TouchPoint Mapping