Friend, Or Mere Acquaintance?
Our sister firm DonorTrends has just been in the field with a survey on donor loyalty for a major national nonprofit. This group has been around a few decades, long enough to develop some considerable brand awareness and loyalty.
Here’s an interesting finding:
Respondents are three times more likely (60% to 22%) to think of the organization as an "acquaintance" than as a "friend."
What distinguishes a friend from an acquaintance? Trust … greater familiarity … openness … acceptance … mutual respect … availability … shared values.
Let’s posit that one might expect loyalty from a friend, but not so much from an acquaintance.
And maybe the same is true about an organization and its donors. Then, how might an organization nurture more friendships than acquaintanceships?
My mind goes to personalization. Here’s one thing I’d try, in the interest of putting a face on my organization. Maybe you’ll think it’s a dumb one.
I’d literally put a face in my donor/member communications. If the action alert is from Fred, I’d include a thumbnail photo of Fred by his signature. If the contribution acknowledgement is from the "Membership Director," I’d replace that with "Joan" and include her thumbnail photo … or even better: "Delores" … a long time supporter, with photo, welcoming the newbie to the fold.
Obviously earning donor loyalty requires more substantive ingredients than photos. But I do think that loyalty can be reinforced by introducing real people into the relationship.
As I think about the relationship between brands and people, I’m reminded of the current angst over the health of Steve Jobs at Apple. Indications that Jobs was seriously ill sent Apple’s stock plummeting a few months ago. Now the computer world is anxiously awaiting whether he will deliver his trademark new product presentation to this week’s Apple developers’ conference.
What do you think? Is it too much to expect an organization to have friends? And if it can have some friends (proving such bonds are indeed possible), why not a lot of friends?
Tom
3 responses to “Friend, Or Mere Acquaintance?”
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
It is not adumb idea. For a nonprofit for which I directed fundraising, we always included a picture of the signator. However, when that picture changed, noting a new signator, we heard about it.
We always use thumbnails in our emails. We find it builds connection. Each of our senders also has an individual voice. People seem to get very attached to them.
Tom, I’m a day late here in responding to your June 10 post, but what you covered is a keystone issue in effective organizational advancement and relationship management, so I wanted to respond. 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!