New Fundraising ‘Crowdblog’
The term ‘crowdsourcing’, according to Wikipedia, was first coined by Jeff Howe in a June 2006 Wired magazine article.
The author reasoned that because technological advances have allowed for cheap consumer electronics, the gap between professionals and amateurs has been diminished, thus enabling organizations to call on large groups of people to perform tasks, solve complex problems and contribute fresh ideas in ways never before imagined.
In the short 60 months since that article appeared, a raft of crowdsourcing initiatives around funding and fundraising have emerged. FirstGiving: “Online fundraising for everybody” … ChipIn: “The easy way to collect money”… Kiva: “Loans that change lives”… and specialty groups like Sellaband: “Where fans invest in music” … to name just a few.
Last year The Agitator reported that Wikipedia itself was adopting the idea of crowdsourcing to conduct its 2010 annual giving drive.
At the time Philippe Beaudette, the Wikimedia Foundation staff member overseeing the campaign said:
“Group collaboration is the future of fund raising. Organizations are going to have to work harder for donor dollars, and the ones that will be successful will be the ones that do not involve professional fund raisers. Professional fund raisers are sometimes limited by history and afraid to think outside the box. It is going to take new creative ideas, and the best way to get that is to have a huge number of people thinking.”
We’re delighted to report that Wikipedia’s “crowdfunded” 2010 campaign met and exceeded its goal, raising $16 million from 500,000 donors around the world. This is more than double the 230,000 contributions received in 2009.
Take that, professional fundraisers!
HOWEVER…as if not to be outdone, a group of fundraising pros from around the world have banded together to create a ‘crowdblog’ called 101 Fundraising that launches this morning.
The brainchild of two Dutch fundraisers, Renier Spruit and Jeroen Beelen, 101 Fundraising has so far enlisted 22 bloggers from eight countries. The first blog will appear Wednesday, posted by Rebecca Davies of Canada’s Doctors Without Borders.
As the founders say, “This blog is for fundraisers who don’t have time to run their own blog, but want to blog once in awhile. If you can write, read, or react … join the crowd.”
Roger and Tom
P.S. We wish 101 Fundraising all the best. To make it easy for you to access we’re added them to The Agitator’s Blogroll.
2 responses to “New Fundraising ‘Crowdblog’”
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
Geesh. Why a slam against professional fundraisers? How is group collaboration the future of fundraising? Why is group collaboration mutually exclusive from a professional fundraiser’s duty to create philanthropic opportunities for those who want them?
I’m thrilled that Wikipedia – an internationally known and used entity -exceeded its financial goal using this method.
But what about, say, the small local organizations that depend on more than financial gifts from donors? These organizations and the communities they serve thrive on the deep relationships with their donors (of time and money) through the donors’ advisory leadership, ambassadorship, community connections, and more. It’s the relationship with these donors (developed by professional fundraisers) – not just the dollars – that strengthens the impact of the organizational missions. And, many of these relationships will yield larger and more dependable gifts over time.
Group collaboration sounds like an amazing channel for fundraising. But why do you suggest it will replace all others?
I’ve got a statement about this posted on my website… http://philippewiki.com/node/17 🙂