Offering “Touch” And “Experience”
Yesterday I talked about the challenge for nonprofits in offering donors and prospects the opportunity to actually "touch" and "experience" their organizations. The assumption being that such closer connection would benefit fundraising.
Here’s a terrific example, albeit in a category that has lots of tangibles to offer its audience — a museum. In this case, the Brooklyn Museum. Take a look at their new 1stfans program, which I originally read about in Fundraising Success.
As this article by program co-creator and manager William Cary indicates, this level of in-person and online interaction is hugely labor intensive. The Brooklyn Museum is using the program to attract new engagement from two target groups that have not historically shown interest in Museum "membership." As I look through the program, I question directing such a major investment to what is effectively prospecting, as opposed to adding value for and deepening the engagement of existing donors.
But, I love the concept and look forward to hearing more about how the program plays out … and whether the current focus turns out to deliver a successful return on investment.
Meantime, Will Carey and Shelley Bernstein at the Brookyn Museum, this is innovative thinking … you deserve a raise!
Tom
One response to “Offering “Touch” And “Experience””
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
[…] week on the subject of donor experience as the future of fundraising. (See The Agitator’s Offering “Touch” and “Experience” and Donor Power Blog’s Give donors more experience for their […]