5 responses to “Remember Telemarketing?”

1. Bethan says:

   August 30, 2012 at 9:07 am

   It is a shame that fundraisers don’t talk about the telephone (beyond the handful of award entries each year) as it definitely hasn’t been forgotten. There are mountains of great case studies out there. At Pell & Bales we run over 250 successful telephone campaigns and talk to over 3 million supporters and prospects every year. The phone continues to play a significant role in recruitment, conversion, cross sell and up sell fundraising (admittedly more of a role in countries that have a bigger focus on monthly giving)

   The phone as a fundraising tool continues to evolve too. Recently it is starting to play a bigger role in donor stewardship at loyalty for example as discussed recently on our blog.

   I agree with the points drawn out from Kirchoff’s webinar (linked above);

   • There are big wins are to be made from integrating the phone into multi channel activity, and in this area I believe we will continue to see the phone grow and evolve. This will be aided by the use of mobile phones and in particular smart phones, which are paving the way for wonderful products such as Connected (regular giving through your mobile), a product which is becoming ever popular with our clients and their supporters

   • Acquisition i.e. pure cold calling is not easy, and not as popular as it once was. This is because ‘cold’ calling relies hugely on good quality data or leads, and with everyone fighting over the same limited data lists these good quality leads are simply too hard to come by at a significant volume. Smart fundraisers are generating their own leads however. They are designing lead generation activity with the key objective of harvesting hand raisers and prospects for follow-up phone activity

   I’m not sure why the sector shy’s away from talking about the phone, though they talk very little about any direct dialogue activity (street fundraising is talked about a lot, but almost always the articles and debate are about how hated it is by the public, about the regulations and the challenges)

   I think there is a lot to be gained from talking about all direct dialogue channels more positively and more often, but particularly the phone which has so much reach, is so flexible and ultimately so successful. Thanks for your article – let’s hope it provokes more telemarketing chatter – I for one am more determined than ever to get more case studies on our blog which i will happily share with you guys too

2. mike cowart says:

   August 30, 2012 at 10:43 am

   Allegiant Direct combines direct mail with Advance Voice Mail (a 30-40 second pre-recorded phone message). The call is made 3-4 days before the mail arrives and is made during the day to purposely hit voicemail. This combination typically increases response in ranges from 25-400%!

3. David Smith says:

   August 30, 2012 at 11:29 am

   We might be a rarity, but our Telefund call center is still the main flagship for our Annual Giving efforts. It’s is the most personalized touch we have on a mass level. While there have been obstacles (cell phones, caller ID), it is still our most productive way of addressing donor retention, lapsed donor reacquistion, and new donor acquisition. Rather than downsizing, we’re looking for ways to expand our Telefund’s influence and reach.

   One thing that has worked: having student callers from a certain geographic region call alumni from that area. This has been a big help in building rapport, sharing the case for support, and facilitating the gifts, particularly amongst non-donors…the proverbial “foot in the door.”

4. Mary Cahalane says:

   August 30, 2012 at 2:43 pm

   I worked at an organization for years that had built a very successful in-house telemarketing program. As this was an arts organization, for many months, the focus was on selling subscriptions. But the few months of the year that development was able to use telemarketing made a huge difference in our annual giving program! I think it succeeded so well because:
   1. The callers were very well trained. And were staff members, with an interest in seeing the organization succeed, and an interest in the art form. They could really speak to prospects’ interests!
   2. In addition, we worked to keep the best callers on, year after year. It got to the point that I’d have donors wait to give until they had their annual call from “Bill”. They didn’t dread that phone ringing – they looked forward to the call!
   3. We called only in-house names – mainly people who had already made a commitment by subscribing. (Though I contend that we could have done more with single ticket buyers – I think it’s just as likely that someone would make a small gift first and THEN commit to a subscription as the other way around.)

   Personally, I dread the telemarketing call. I admit it. But the truth is, done well, it can be a powerful fundraising AND stewardship tool.

5. Darren McLaughlin says:

   September 27, 2012 at 8:05 am

   There’s a certain segment of the population who are most effectively reached by telephone. For sure that number has gone done in recent years, but there’s no reason to think every organization is going to abandon the practice. If it works for them, they need to keep using it.