Fundraising Tactics Versus Messaging
Roger has been systematically working us through the "who, what, when, why, where" of nonprofit fundraising fundamentals … with only "where" yet to go (coming next week).
I hesitate to interrupt the flow, but we received a response from Fraser Green at FLA Group that provides a useful bridge between the tactics of targeting (who) and timing (when), and the crucial necessity of effective messaging (what) that Roger emphasized a couple of days ago.
Here’s Fraser’s article — Check for Purple Cow Before Joining Online Herd — from Canadian Fundraisng & Philanthropy (see p2). This brief excerpt will give you a flavor.
"The online experts can put messages out in all the digital formats available — but the charity needs to provide compelling content … in today’s world, you’re either remarkable or you’re boring."
My sense is that the fundamentals of effective messaging are even more absent in online media than in direct mail … a view our Agitator audience might dispute.
However, neither Roger nor I would pose the issue quite as a competition between tactics and messaging, as Fraser does.
Yes, there can be plenty of over-indulgence in the "next BIG thing" ("technique frenzy" as Fraser calls it), and the planners/analysts and the creatives can argue over who makes the most significant contribution to fundraising success … but at the end of the day, it all must be knitted together.
I suspect that’s what Roger will be talking about next week.
Tom
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