Re-engaging Lapsed Customers/Donors
Everybody in marketing — whether they’re selling cars, cell phones or causes/charities — has the same problem … keeping their current customers engaged.
In the commercial world, marketers use all sorts of personal and individual behavior (or inactivity) data to trigger relevant customer contacts aimed at repeat sales or ‘softer’ relationship building.
Here’s a ‘tip sheet’ from Silverpop, an email/digital marketing firm in the IBM family, on How to Identify and Win Back Lapsed Customers. You’ll see some basic illustrations on how purchase behavior is used to categorize and engage potential defectors.
Nothing ‘brain surgery’ about it … you just need to pay attention to and act upon the customer/donor data right in front of you.
In Silverpop’s view, if a customer hasn’t engaged in a three-month window, they’re effectively gone … extremely hard to regain through typical ‘win-back’ programs. The damage is already done.
That corresponds somewhat to the smart fundraiser’s approach of prompt and personal thank you’s after initial gift, and a focused effort to secure that second gift quickly … within two months.
The Agitator has written frequently about the importance of quickly securing that second gift — e.g., The First Gift Was An Accident! Or just search our archive for “second gift”.
As Roger points out tomorrow, an initial respondent to an acquisition appeal is simply a lead … not yet a donor.
Tom
4 responses to “Re-engaging Lapsed Customers/Donors”
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
Tom, I recently discovered two examples where the 2nd Gift Strategy (btw, erroneously labeled “New Donor Welcome Strategy”) were being mismanaged because a production mindset had taken hold — and responses were being batched and held for greater production efficiencies — rather than focus on critical timing windows.
And of course, 2nd gift conversions had plummeted over time for both nonprofits. In the first case we’ve fixed the problem by creating a much less expensive package and getting it out within a couple of weeks of the first gift. After only one quarter performance is going back up where it should be. (We don’t have control over the second case!)
Timing, Audience, and Offer — the golden trifecta if you get these right.
Good way to start the week, Tom. Transitioning that first action into a donor. Keeping your donors. That’s why I write and talk so much about creating extraordinary experiences for donors.
— Yes, prompt and actually good thank-you letters. And more…
— Thank-you calls from board members.
— Really good donor newsletters with the donor as the hero.
— Insider updates over coffee or tea…small group gatherings to tell donors how we’ve been spending their money and inviting questions.
— And on and on….
Great thoughts here. I always stress to my team that you can never underestimate the simplicity of being prompt, and passionately engaging your donor as a friend.
The title of this piece talks about keeping members engaged but the content is about donor engagement (aka donation or gift). I’ve seen a shift in many charitable organizations calling donors members. But the more long-held understanding of a member is that they receive something special or unique by being a member. How well has this change in terminology worked for charitable organizations? Do donors like it or are they confused by it? Has the use of this term increased donor engagement?