Wanted More Than Ever: Human Duct Tape
It’s so much easier rolling the rock up the hill with pals and true believers like those Agitators who’ve been been weighing in this week in response to our posts Who Gets Fired?, Rejecting The One Acq Stand and Roger Started It!
Clearly, they understand that the business of acquiring donors ain’t over with the initial contribution, just as the building of a meaningful relationships isn’t the result of that first handshake.
Consistency and reliability on an ongoing basis are essential in building trust — the fundamental pillar of any relationship. Reliability and consistency must go on and on through the years. Even to the point of inviting and welcoming donors back when they’ve strayed from the fold.
What’s troubling me is why all this is so difficult for so many to master. And why, year after year, so many — be they consultants or staff — have to harp over and over on this basic good behavior; as though telling third graders to eat their graham crackers, drink their milk and take a nap.
We ended 2011 with the post Resolved: No Fundraising Silos, and Steve MacLaughlin of Blackbaud exhorting that the separation of functions and channels — acquisition, digital, mail, telephone — must end.
The next year in my book Retention Fundraising I indicated that silos — those little huddles of specialists and ‘experts’ who failed to communicate with one another and act in unison on behalf of the donor– were the #1 enemy of retention.
Will we never learn?
The reality is we all assign far too much importance to specialists: digital, renewal expert, acquisition, gurus, telemarketing — everyone has a title, a specialty? We’re making a big mistake.
Under this construct who has responsibility for the donor? No one!
That’s one reason I envy the one-person or two-person shops, have a rising disrespect bordering on contempt for “all-inclusive” consulting shops, and am so grateful for the readers whose comments were generously given this week.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for hiring subject matter specialists either as staff or consultants. And abhor those who claim they can do it all.
For the rest of the fundraising world I can only say, “Come on folks. It’s really not that complicated. Find the subject matter experts you need. Hire them. But for heaven’s sake, put one person in charge of watching out for the donors — from their first donation to when they indicate they’re leaving.”
If we don’t do this we’re gonna lose far more donors than we should. It’s that simple.
What Human Donor Duct Tape have you put in place?
Roger
P.S. Tomorrow: Why it’s worth your time to worry about this.
5 responses to “Wanted More Than Ever: Human Duct Tape”
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
Why don’t organizations focus more on their donors? The fact is – as several commented yesterday – that many decision makers in nonprofits simply don’t understand fundraising.
We battle against nonprofit CEO’s who want the quick money. There are board members who meddle and want to make fundraising decisions based on their own personal preferences. Then many program directors look down on fundraising and think it’s dirty work.
All these decision makers and influencers inside nonprofits will try their best subvert good fundraising strategy. The poor development staff DOES know how to do it correctly – but they are often frustrated, hamstrung, and held back by their organizations.
Gail, hit the nail on the head! When we at Bloomerang begin working with a fundraising professional at a small or medium size nonprofit they are so excited to learn that we can help them raise their donor retention rate 1-2% annually. We actually discuss the cost justification that comes from the increased revenue forthcoming. Unfortunately, this utter excitement about addressing this vital issue comes to a screeching halt 41% of the time.
Why?
That is the percentage of times that either the CEO or the board states they will stay with with the status quo because they do not feel donor retention is a problem or they are so tied to a budget that even a predicted 2% change in the coming year is not worth making a slight budget exception for!
It is getting better in some organizations. We’re working on a number of mid-level programs that bridge the gap between major gifts and direct mail/membership — and have found that at least quarterly meetings with both teams is a big win in this regard.
And the real wins come from great leaders. I recently read some regional plans for major donor development that actually referenced the pipeline from new acquisition, to the mid-level program and how those results will impact solicitations. And, where shared events are being coordinated by staff on both sides to steward their donors from $500 on up.
Also, some organizations are now doing thank you calls to donors who join with gifts of $100 or more.
There are signs of hope. But in most cases, just as Gail and Jay said, it starts with leadership. So, I ask, what are we doing to educate those leaders? CEOs? CFOs? Board members? Are we still just talking to ourselves.
This work isn’t easy. It involves so much more than ‘fixing’ your thank you letters, or adding in an extra appeal, or even adding a feedback widget to your website.
It requires a wholehearted COMMITMENT to the donor – to the donor experience – from the top on down. Once you have the commitment, you’ve simply GOT to trust in the process. We’re not miracle workers. But when you’ve got these two things in place, you can be assured of success – healthy success – and growth. I’ve seen it with my own members and subscribers. And you can see a stunning case history, courtesy of the brilliant Erica Waasdorp, Lisa Sargent, and Denisa Casement here: https://michaelrosensays.wordpress.com/2016/04/29/how-can-nana-murphy-make-you-a-better-fundraising-professional/
All great fundraising efforts stop at the C-Suite and or board. Thompson & Associates has 90 nonprofits generating an average of $2-$5 million per year in new planned gifts with an average ROI of $75:$1.
Our greatest obstacle to acquiring new nonprofit clients come from CEOs who say, “I’m only interested in generating revenue for this year!”
University presidents top that by saying, “Let’s do more capital campaigns!”
Let’s take it up a level. A director of development invited me to do a board presentation regarding the effectiveness of direct mail for acquisition and retention. . The Chairman of the Board was a car dealer who introduced me by saying, “Direct mail doesn’t work. Mike, come and tell us about it!”