Of course I do. The question seems almost ridiculous on its face. Fundraisers are constantly battling their rivals for the attention of donors … even when a relationship with the given donor already exists. And of course, other fundraisers are not the only marketers competing for the awareness and attention of your donors. Our attention is the scarcest and most precious asset most of us have to allocate and award amongst the limitless number of people and entities who seek it.

So I get uncomfortable when folks like Jeff Brooks at Future Fundraising Now contend that getting attention — or building awareness — is a useless, wasteful exercise … as Jeff argued recently in Why fundraisers shouldn’t waste their money on “awareness” campaigns.

Of course, you can set up a straw man example and say it would be a waste of money to attempt to ‘build awareness’ amongst some large, untargeted population when your goal is actually to raise money for, say, protecting civil liberties or for your local food bank. Duh!

However, by the same token, it would be equally dumb to send a direct mail fundraising letter for a gun control advocacy group to subscribers to Guns & Ammo magazine. Stupid is stupid and smart is smart, whether it involves strategies for building relevant (i.e. accurately targeted) awareness — the prerequisite of winning attention — or for aiming relevant (i.e. accurately targeted) fundraising appeals.

Why would a creative star like Jeff spend hours on designing a direct mail carrier? Because he knows that the first battle to win is the one for awareness and attention.

I’m on this topic because of this short post I read today on Online Spin, Attention: Nothing Else Matters, which adds some context to Roger’s post yesterday, Making The Most Of The Hottest Season, about preparing for the year-end giving avalanche.

Roger’s talking about preparedness. The Online Spin author is talking about the glut of year-end marketing expenditure. He observes that consumers have no more minutes of attention, no more hours in the day (and I would add: no more money to spend) at year-end than any other time, yet still there’s a predictable marketing frenzy, with huge amounts of money spent on winning consumers’ attention … and, hopefully, share of wallet.

Sure, the marketers — including fundraisers — generate heaps more potential impressions, but the consumer has no greater capacity to notice, let alone absorb, them in December than he or she had in, say, June. So is the effective reach or impact any greater?

I suspect all marketers and fundraisers pile it on at year-end on the theory that: “My brand, product, cause is toast if I don’t ramp up to stay competitive in the battle for attention. I’ve got to do it. If I’m not in my customer’s face, someone else will be, and they’ll grab the dollar.” Hence a year-end blizzard of appeals from everyone. All marketers are on the same treadmill, and some unseen hand turns up the speed dial!

The result: people DO spend more (starting around Thanksgiving in the US) and contribute more (in December) than any other time. An interesting ‘chicken and egg’ question … because they’re predisposed for a variety of psychological and cultural reasons, or simply because the promotion is so intensified?

Interesting question to ponder. But meantime, do I want the advantage over my competitors of greater awareness/attention? You bet. And do I want to get ready for the year-end frenzy? Absolutely. Smart strategies are required for both.

Tom