I’m sure you have a friend, or relative, who constantly repeats things. Well, I do too. And it’s true; repetition enhances memory.  I remember perfectly what my friend’s latest issue was. So what? Was my advice different after the 8^th repetition than it was after the first? More importantly, did my willingness to give advice increase with every repetition? No. If anything, it decreased. You know what increased? My negative mood and attitude. I also got bored and started ignoring him.

How is this relevant to fundraising? It’s the same premise. We’re talking about helping behaviour; giving a friend your time and advice, giving a worthy cause your time and/or money.

Repetition does have some positive qualities: it reinforces the message; it makes a theme stand out; it enhances memory. But wait a minute.

As fundraisers, what are we trying to do? Teach people a lesson, improve their memory, or motivate them to give in the moment?

The crucial question is: does repetition increase giving? To my knowledge, this hasn’t been properly tested, and I haven’t seen any evidence to support the idea.

Here’s a controversial thought. Could it be that people keep giving despite repetition and not thanks to it? Or could it be that repetition might actually decrease giving?

If you think about it, repetition is bloody annoying!

If you think about it, repetition is bloody annoying!

If you think about it, repetition is bloody annoying!

But there are several advocates of repetition in the context of fundraising out there. I’m here to challenge this stance and to be challenged in return.

First, a crucial distinction: I’m not talking about exposure. There’s no argument that repeated exposure to your brand through multichannel marketing will increase attention and positive attitudes towards it. In this blog, I focus on repetitive messaging.

Even for exposure though, too much repetition isn’t ideal. Continuous or non-stop marketing activity is less effective than what is known as pulsing; a period of marketing activity followed by a period of no marketing at all and so on. But I digress.

The effect of message repetition across communications

What’s the impact of using the same message over and over again across the communications cycle?

To an extent, we can get away with even sending the same appeal again. We all know that the majority of people don’t open them. Those who do, don’t read them thoroughly and those who do, won’t remember them after a while. So, repeating the same appeal is not going to result in disaster.

Why not keep doing it? Because repeated exposure to the same ad, decreases recall of brand information, decreases positive attitudes towards the ad and decreases sales. On the contrary, using a series of ads increases performance in all these measures. See the graph below (and the whole paper here). The same can be assumed for fundraising appeals.

Message repetition in the same communication

Of all kinds of repetitions, this is the one that boggles my mind the most. In any given appeal, the copy is repetitive. Am I the only one who gets annoyed? If you were a supporter, would you find that interesting, or engaging, or even, normal? I’d like to think not.

But here are some arguments I’ve heard in support of this repetitive loop of insanity:

• “People need to be informed and repetition increases attention”. Maybe, but you have the wrong goal in mind. In the context of fundraising, people just need to be motivated to give. By the way, trying to educate them isn’t the way to do it.
• “People will remember it better”. So what? Is the goal to improve my memory on the issue, or to make me donate towards the issue? Also, why do we need people to remember anything when the next appeal is just around the corner? Again, we just need them to give in the moment.
• “Repetition might convince people to help”. Ultimately, that’s the most important argument. If this is accurate, then repeat your message to eternity.

But why would repetition make me more likely to help? If a piece of information can trigger my helping behaviour, it will do so the first time round. What I need to tackle then is my procrastination.

Think of this: Johnny suffers from a rare disease that affected his ability to walk. Unless he receives a very expensive treatment, he will never walk again. You can help him with just $20. Help now #JohnnyWalker.

Now, how many times do I need to repeat this to convince you to donate? Remember, I’m not talking about different points in time. I’m talking about right now. If you’re not already, would you be convinced if I repeated variations of this 3 more times? Or is it that you felt some inclination to help already but procrastination is in the way?

A final point that counteracts, all the arguments above. As fundraisers, we don’t want to be reminded that some of our messages go unnoticed. But as humans, we know we skim read – some of you are doing it right now. If a conversation lasts too long our thoughts start wandering off. That happens even in the absence of repetition. What’s the likelihood of people not “skipping” the repetitive parts? And what’s the point of repetition, if people can avoid it?

Repetition of the ask

Let me be more provocative. Why do we even have multiple asks in the same communication? To make sure people see it, one might say. As if we don’t assume there’s a financial ask the moment we see any charitable communication. The ask is implicit. That’s why “thank – you” communications also raise money, even when there is no ask in them. People know the concept of charity. People understand. People give.

I’m not suggesting to never ask again, or to change your letter structure completely. I’m only asking us to take a step back and think: Would you be more likely to give just because the message is repeated? More importantly, do we have actual evidence that repetition increases giving? If we don’t, let’s find some before we keep annoying the hell out of our supporters. If you do, please share it with us.

Kiki

Behavioural Science Strategist