I’m Buying Buyology
I don’t know about you, but I’m ready for a break — at least for a day — from the blogging blizzard (including here on The Agitator) on the woes of fundraising in a recession and the endless achievements of Obama’s online fundraising machine.So when I saw this review of Buyology: Truth and Lies About Why We Buy by Martin Lindstrom, I pounced on it!According to the reviewer, Buyology is “an account of a research project that spanned three years and cost $7 million. Lindstrom used both MRI and EEG technologies to study what was really going on in the brains of consumers as they watched commercials, thought about brands, and much more. This body of research is surely the biggest compilation of neuromarketing data ever, and the results are always fascinating and sometimes surprising.”I’m sold … I ordered it and I’m recommending it before I even see it. Of course, my idea of a great book is anything written by Antonio Damasio, starting with Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain and onward!”Enough!” of the macro-forces of global economic meltdown and presidential transitions! I feel a need to withdraw and do a bit of micro-focusing on brain cell functioning.Buyology discusses findings like …Is the brain actually stimulated by cigarette warning labels? [How about global warming warnings, I wonder?]Do brains really perceive brands the way they perceive religions? [Hmmm … What’s the chemistry of zealotry?]Can you “watch” the brain to predict which TV programs will succeed? [How about which fundraising appeals will succeed? Can I get an edge?!]My kind of questions! I’ll let you know how they’re answered when I come out of withdrawal.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