Donors: Clients Or Customers?
A short blog post from Seth Godin has been rattling around in my head.
He posits some key differences between ‘clients’ and ‘customers’.
For example:
“The customer buys (or doesn’t buy) what you make. The client asks you to make something.”
Both types exist objectively in the marketplace, and both represent legitimate marketing opportunities. But Godin’s also getting at the mindset you, as a marketer, bring to the table …
“There is a large number of potential customers, and you make for them before you know precisely who they are … If a customer doesn’t like what’s on offer, she can come back tomorrow. If the client doesn’t like what you deliver, she might leave forever.”
As he sees it, the client is more empowered … they can define, insist, shape to their satisfaction.
Bottom line: marketers shouldn’t confuse the two … different approaches are required. Here’s the Godin post.
As a fundraiser, what mentality do you bring to the table? Do you see your donors as customers — pretty much as commodities, one readily substitutable for another? Maybe that’s not the best long term approach.
Consider how you might view your donors as clients, each asking you to enable their particular aspiration. You might then begin to listen more … and that might be the start of a more enduring and valuable relationship for both parties.
Tom
5 responses to “Donors: Clients Or Customers?”
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
Agree that whatever you call them, donors should be part of your mission — not just conduits to fulfilling your mission. Helping donors fulfill their dreams and lead more meaningful lives is part of why the social benefit sector exists. If we all facilitate this, one person at a time, the world becomes a better place — driving forward the visions of one person, one organization, one cause… and then many.
Is it Shakespeare who asked, “What’s in a name?” Often more than we think. Our vocabulary ends up controlling meaning. And too often, we don’t create shared vocabulary in organizations.
What we know for sure is that the NGO sector, its fundraisers and staff and boards and and and …. more often than not, don’t treat those gift givers as well as we should. Custom made as Seth reflects. Better treatment as Mr. Belford notes.
Let’s get better….
SENT WITH LOVE 🙂 You guys are driving me fricking nuts. For years, I’ve been trying to hammer into fundraisers’ heads that they ARE in marketing and they HAVE a customer and that customer is the DONOR. Why is this simple vocabulary important? So we have a common understanding in our “profession” about why donor-centered communications that deliver decent doses of emotional gratification are so vital to retention. AND so we can therefore realistically chase the thing Adrian Sargeant says we should chase: higher customer (donor) satisfaction. I read my Seth every day. I read my Agitator every day. But can we keep it simpler, please? Client vs. customer? Sheesh! Maybe that distinction matters in the 7th circle of enlightment. But here’s what I’ll be hearing in the future: “The Agitator doesn’t agree. They say we shouldn’t call them customers.” Like semantics will fix the retention problem. 🙂 SENT WITH LOVE
Donors are donors are donors. They’re not “customers” (tho’ some organizations treat them that way). They’re not “clients” (same comment). The relationship between a cause or agency and its donors is simply different from either. The nub of the difference is that typically donors don’t in any practical sense need (put “need” in italics) what the recipients of their donations provide. I think we’ll be better off if we remember that. The best that can be said for a discussion that limits the choices to the client/customer dichotomy is that it helps with thinking through how best to relate to donors. And the answer is (or should be) as donors.
I do not NEED a second boat, but I am buying one.
Donors NEED to feel give, so they donate. Thus they are your customers!