Donor retention / loyalty / commitment - Agitator

Breaking Out of the Status Quo

Scarcity Is The New Cool

Last week Jeff Brooks, in his post How scarcity focuses your donors on your fundraising , noted the power of using “scarcity” in fundraising. He cites the “scarcity” that exists in matching gift funds where there’s only a certain amount of money available and only a finite amount of time to meet the match There’s […]

Learn More July 24, 2019

The Real Limited Resource

The real limited resource isn’t money. Sure, budgets are tight for most. But if you found a magic box where you put one dollar in and got two dollars out immediately, I’ll wager phrases like “hiring freeze,” “unbudgeted expense,” and “budgeting cycle” would be thrown out the window pretty quickly. (Also, you’d have to decide […]

Learn More July 12, 2019

Are Smaller Organizations Missing Out on The Direct Mail Advantage?

I’m getting more curious and more concerned about why so many nonprofits sector so neglect the “basics.” Simple things like updating addresses. Identifying deceased donors. Or promptly sending a prompt and truly heartfelt “thank you”—on paper… in an envelope… with a stamp. “Basics” that are considered mundane but left unattended damage every organization. Many caring […]

Learn More July 10, 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

F-2-F Part 2: Avoiding the Sins of the Past

A common and dangerous misperception of F2F is that it’s seen as a powerful acquisition channel for securing monthly donors. As a result, most current F2F programs—just like their direct mail forebears– focus on acquisition volume while ignoring any serious attention to retention. And, just as in the case of direct mail, F2F will face […]

Learn More June 26, 2019

Is F-2-F Acquisition a Sustainer Oasis or a Mirage?

Face-to-Face fundraising in the United States holds great promise if for no other reason than it isn’t a grossly oversaturated channel and we’re a big, populous country. This likely explains the Paul Revere feeling some have as the Brits (and Canadians and Australians) “invade” to setup shop on U.S. shores. Why? Because in those countries […]

Learn More June 24, 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

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

The $110 Billion Treasure Trove For Nonprofits

Take a football field. Cover it to a depth of nine inches (actually, about 9.14 inches, if my math is correct) with $100 bills. That’s $110 billion. That’s how much money is held in donor-advised funds (DAFs) in the United States right now. These funds are earmarked to go to a charity like yours. And the […]

Learn More May 30, 2019

The Power of Auto-Renewal: Why Are You Waiting?

I grew up among the Pennsylvania Dutch who constantly reminded me, “We grow too old soon and too late smart.” They might as well have had fundraisers in mind because it takes us lots and lots of time to adopt the proven best practices of others. Too much time. Too much lost donor loyalty and […]

Learn More May 28, 2019

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

Q: As a designer who works with non-profits on fundraising strategy, I see the language like the following: “Our supporters help empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs.” I do not think the word “help” is useful–I think “Our supporters empower every girl, ensuring she has the resources she needs. ” is much more engaging. Thoughts?

Whether “help” is more engaging or not really depends on the framing and context. The word help can sometimes weaken the perceived agency of the supporter, making their role feel secondary rather than central (your point). On the other hand, help can also signal collaboration rather than implying full ownership of the outcome, which might […]

Read Full Answer

Q: We started offering a donor cover option last april 1. The data to date suggests this may be dampening giving.eg. those who say yes to donor cover have a lower average gift (based on analysis of 6000+ gifts). I’m wondering if those who give lower gifts feel more guilt and therefore say yes to donor cover or if the presence of donor cover is making people adjust (lower) their gift size to accommodate the extra 3%. Would love any insights you have.

Great question! Here’s how behavioral science can help unpack what might be happening: Pain of Paying: Even a small extra charge can make giving feel more transactional than emotional, potentially reducing generosity. Fairness Concerns: Some donors might perceive donor cover as a surcharge rather than a contribution to the cause. If they feel the charity […]

Read Full Answer

Q: When writing an appeal, I waffle back and forth between writing “Your gift CAN…” or “Your gift WILL…” Any studies of which of these two words is best for an appeal?

The choice between “Your gift CAN…” and “Your gift WILL…” taps into the psychological framing of certainty vs. possibility. Currently, there is no academic research directly comparing these two framings in charitable appeals. However, I suspect no framing is universally better—the outcome likely depends on your target audience and the campaign’s goal. Here are some thoughts: Certainty Framing – […]

Read Full Answer

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

Breaking Out of the Status Quo

Scarcity Is The New Cool

The Real Limited Resource

Are Smaller Organizations Missing Out on The Direct Mail Advantage?

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

F-2-F Part 2: Avoiding the Sins of the Past

Is F-2-F Acquisition a Sustainer Oasis or a Mirage?

Thanks But No Thanks: Part 2

Become a Cyborg: Increase Your Fundraising Productivity

The $110 Billion Treasure Trove For Nonprofits

The Power of Auto-Renewal: Why Are You Waiting?

Ask A Behavioral Scientist

Behavioral Science Q & A

Q: When writing an appeal, I waffle back and forth between writing “Your gift CAN…” or “Your gift WILL…” Any studies of which of these two words is best for an appeal?

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?

DonorVoice products

Commitment System

Donor Feedback Platform™

PreTest Tool

TouchPoint Mapping