Does Your Nonprofit Make Friends?
Last week, I raised the question of whether your donors relate to your organization as "friends" or merely "acquaintances?" The hypothesis being that donor loyalty requires building a "friend" relationship.
I suggested a simple first step, like including photos of the signers of your letters and emails. So far, no one has dumped on the idea.
Ray Mitchell commented a few days later, and I didn’t want his observation lost in Comment never-neverland. Says Ray:
"What you posited is a critical concern, and what you suggested is so very far from dumb!
My own view of organizational relationship management dynamics — and the one I try to pass on to all clients — is that it’s rather the same as in the personal relationships between people. The more important and valued a personal relationship is, the more personal one should try to make the communication and interaction with that individual.
It’s not complicated. We all do it — by instinct! A greeting card with a friendly note on a birthday or anniversary. A phone call of concern when someone is ill. A gift of flowers when a friend is grieving over the loss of a loved one. In all of those situations, we personalize the message and the “touch” as best we can.
So, too, should organizations in every “touch” with a constituent/donor. Put faces to signatures. Communicate with them as we do with friends, and they will be inclined to feel and respond as friends. It’s not rocket science. It should be just everyday instinct!"
Well said, Ray.
Tom Belford
2 responses to “Does Your Nonprofit Make Friends?”
Behavioral Science Q & A
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
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
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
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
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
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
Loyalty is an interesting word. It may be able to imply victory, meaning we have been successful in having a donor be loyal. It is unhealthy for any relationship to assume victory, or the relationship is finally what I want.
To operationalize what you’re suggesting I would encourage nonprofits think continuous attraction. Meaning you always have to be thinking and acting on renewing the key relationships. Keeping things interesting and fresh.
I plan on writing a blog post on this, thanks for the inspiration.
Hey, Tom! Thanks for considering and posting my comments in reaction to your post last week on nonprofits making friends as opposed to just acquaintances.
I’m amazed that there were not many more reactions/comments on this subject, because it is such an essential aspect and DNA-like component of constituent/donor/customer-relationship management (CRM) — in any type of business, but particularly in the nonprofit world.
I was struck by the comments of our colleague, Jay Goulart, in response to your follow-up posting on this subject earlier today. Where I had not, Jay picked up specifically on the key word “loyalty” in this matter, and I think he hits one of the more critical buttons in the CRM process.
I believe we all would agree completely with his points on constituent/donor/customer loyalty — and I hope, Jay, that I’ve got them straight and correct. One (an individual or an organization) can never ASSUME loyalty or that it is forever. One must always be conscious of reinforcing the reason/s for mutual attraction and loyalty. One must be always thinking about and acting on renewing key relationships (in order to maintain that loyalty). One must always be looking to keep things “interesting and fresh!” Just as in life and love, isn’t it? Jay hits the nails on the head! I look forward to his blog on this topic.
It happens that Henry Winkler, the actor we all know and love from the TV show, “Happy Days,” once made a comment that sums up all of this really well: “Assumptions are the termites of relationships!”