Say “Thank You”
Fundraiser Ken Burnett says that any fundraiser who doesn’t say “Thank you” to donors is — he doesn’t mince words — a fool.
In a recent blog post, Ken is responding to a donor who suggests otherwise.
Says Ken:
“…as a profession we are truly crap at saying thank you and welcome properly and at reassuring donors that their gifts have been safely received and wisely applied. Is this something to be proud of? We wonder why we can’t keep our supporters, why, as Adrian Sargeant says, ‘Building donor loyalty is the biggest challenge facing our sector today.’ There’s little enough pleasure in being a donor. Perhaps we get the loyal donors we deserve.”
Amen, I say.
If you want to know how Ken really feels and why, his entire article is worth a read.
Tom
One response to “Say “Thank You””
Behavioral Science Q & A
Thanks so much for raising this. Yes, capturing donor information can be helpful for stewardship like newsletters, thank-you letters, impact updates. But how you ask matters. Forcing full data capture introduces friction that can significantly depress conversion, many donors may simply abandon the process. Beyond the friction itself, required fields also shift the emotional experience […]
Read Full Answer
Unlike holidays that everyone already knows, Giving Tuesday is a created event. Many donors recognize the name but not the exact timing, so referencing it becomes a helpful cue. It serves as a reminder and taps into social norm activation (“everyone’s giving today”), which boosts response. However, we still want it paired with the mission, […]
Read Full Answer
When a subject line leads with the match (“Your gift matched!”), it risks triggering market-norm thinking: the sense that giving is a financial transaction rather than an act rooted in values, identity, and care. This shift reduces intrinsic motivation and, over time, can weaken donor satisfaction and long-term engagement. It also makes the email indistinguishable […]
Read Full Answer
There’s no evidence that QR codes suppress mid-value giving; all available research suggests they either help or have no negative effect. In fact, behavioral and usability research consistently shows the opposite: reducing friction at any point in the donation process increases completion rates and total response. And that has nothing to do with capacity and […]
Read Full Answer
What you’re experiencing is very common. Resistance often isn’t about capability, but about motivation quality. If board members feel pushed into fundraising, that triggers controlled motivation (low quality motivation) i.e. obligation, guilt, or fear of judgment, which often results in avoidance. Instead, we need to create conditions for volitional motivation (high quality motivation) by satisfying […]
Read Full Answer
That’s a really thoughtful question, and you’re not the first to raise it. Many of our clients have been cautious about placing the ask at the very end. To address their concern, we’ve tested both approaches, and the results are clear: when the ask comes last, even if that means it appears on the second […]
Read Full Answer
Dear Tom,
Ken Burnett is absolutely right.
In my almost twenty years’ experience in not for profit start ups, I can add that it all depends on numbers.
When you have to deal with a “manageable” number of donors you can build up and maintain a very good communication system, with thank you letters, personalised text and so on. But when the organisation reaches hundred of thousands of donors it is very difficult to keep up with it. Letters become very standardised, databases are messing around with names and addresses, content and style become “commercial” and Donors perceive this.
Only a few Big organisations are able to cope with this challenge but they are backed up by a very good system.
Tiziana Fattori
Italy