Hello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me…
Conversation abounds in fundraising whether in-person or over the phone and everybody notes we should be active listeners and strive to make our conversations, well, conversational.
That feels thin. Social science has a better answer with implications for humans talking to humans but of equal import for AI bots that are rapidly evolving in ways we can’t begin to appreciate or fully comprehend. Suffice to say, the future’s here with AI agents already conducting over the phone, complex sales calls – i.e. not just for basic order fulfillment.
But back to our knowledge base on what makes for a successful call. For starters, conversations are positive.
I’ve come across many charities refusing to consider telefundraising or opposed to canvassing. These are subjective biases. As proof, research shows we humans consistently underrate the enjoyment a stranger gets from having a conversation with us. If I wrongly believe a stranger won’t enjoy a conversation with me then I’m doubly convinced and doubly wrong they won’t enjoy a conversation with someone else.
It’s true some TM and F2F shops will create guilt induced, pressurizing experiences. That’s an indictment on the shops, not the power of conversation.
The chart above shows mood before and after a conversation. It’s a big, positive shift in mood after conversations and age makes no difference. I imagine a direct mail letter or email or social post having a hard time consistently creating this level of positive mood shift.
But not all conversations are created equal. What are the features of a good vs. bad conversationalist?
The blue marks are good conversationalists and they talk,
- Slightly faster (about .1 word per second faster)
- With greater variation in their loudness
- With more intensity
- With more novelty to the conversation when warranted but staying on topic as needed too
- With more behavioral cues of head nodding and smiling
Kevin
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