• Home
  • Blog Posts
  • Behavioral Science
  • On Demand Webinars
  • Toolbox
  • Archives

Board Meeting Swipe File

The Easy Money Is Gone

Last week was an especially brutal one for journalism. Gannett, publisher of USA Today and nearly 100 other daily newspapers and close to 1000 weeklies began slashing journalist jobs.  This in a cost-cutting move anticipating that a hedge-fund company was planning to buy the company. Some analysts were blunt in their assessment that the cutbacks are designed […]

Learn More February 4, 2019

Poor Year-End Giving and Email Volume

Year-end giving was down (on average and especially online).  M+R has said it; PMX has said it; you may have seen it yourself. The 2018 year-end giving macroenvironment cocktail was something like: Government shutdown + Tax bill shifting donations from 2019 to 2018 + Democratic House balancing out some policies + Continued mail deliverability challenges […]

Learn More January 16, 2019

Email Deliverability Part 2: The Impact of Mad Libs Fundraising

Let’s play Mad Libs to illustrate why many email appeals have a deliverability — and performance — problem. We will need: An urgency phrase, like “Act now”, “Ends at midnight”, “Last chance”, “The clock is ticking”, “Deadline”, etc A whole number between 2 to 5 inclusive A reference to what happens at New Year’s, like “the […]

Learn More January 14, 2019

Email Deliverability Part 1: Some Basics

If your Board, CEO or colleagues ask, “What’s the size of our email list?” they’re asking absolutely the wrong question. The question they—and you—should be asking is What’s the Level of Engagement of our email list?” If that “open rate” on your year-end email was 25% is it because 75% of the folks weren’t engaged […]

Learn More January 11, 2019

Poor Year-End Giving: Reasons or Excuses?

It’s clear from the moaning and groaning reaching our Agitator ears that, for many, year-end giving fell short of expectations and projections. Just how much off the mark? Results vary but overall the shortfall may be as much as 25% for some organizations.  For others there was no shortfall, and, in fact, 2018 year-end exceeded 2017 totals. […]

Learn More January 9, 2019

Popular Posts in 2018: The Slow, Painful and Costly Death of the Full Service Agency

First published on July 5, 2018. Four years ago In Part 5 of our Barriers to Growth series I raised the question of whether the “full service” fundraising agency has outlived its usefulness.  More pointedly I wondered whether in fact they’re actually a danger to the sector. Today, I’m revisiting this issue because, if anything, I’m […]

Learn More December 31, 2018

Popular Posts in 2018: Donors Are Ticked Off By Excess Solitication

First posted on February 1, 2018. Why do results decline as volume goes up? At a basic level, each new communication cannibalizes results from those communications around it.  Looking at one study here, researchers found that each additional mailing generated 1.81 Euro in revenues, but that 1.21 Euros of that was cannibalized from future mailings.  Thus, […]

Learn More December 28, 2018

Give to Get: Case Studies

So we’ve talked a good game about Give-to-Get this week. Monday, Nick noted the trend that asking people who donate to other organizations to care about yours is declining and the opportunity is to ask people who care to donate.  Wednesday, Kevin outlined how you can create a content-based reason to join, donate, and retain. […]

Learn More December 7, 2018

Give to Get: Creating Value Exchanges for Your Donor Identities

Avid Agitator readers know that donor identity is the core reason donors give to organizations.  There are a thousand ways to save lives and change lives, so donors tend to support charities that mean something to them personally.  And they will keep that preference even if the preferred cause is less efficient. But did you […]

Learn More December 5, 2018

Distinguish Yourself on #GivingTuesday

If the number of “How To Get Ready for #Giving Tuesday” emails in my inbox is any barometer this year’s #GivingTuesday targets  will be buried in a blizzard of breathless matching gift offers, convulsing countdown clocks and sundry demands that only an uncaring human,  without soul or  pulse, would refuse to hit the ‘donate’ button. […]

Learn More November 19, 2018

<< 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 … 108 >>

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

    DonorVoice products

    Commitment System

    Donor Feedback Platform™

    PreTest Tool

    TouchPoint Mapping



      • © Copyright 2005 - 2025, The Agitator. All Rights Reserved.
      • About Us
      • Privacy Policy
      • Sitemap
      • RSS Feed
      • We welcome your feedback!