SMART Goals and Fundraising
Last week in my Promise Me post, I urged nonprofit fundraisers to connect your "asks" as much as possible to specific goals. Then commit to your donor/prospect that your organization will break its back to achieve those goals, and report regularly on your progress toward them.
Then I noticed a comment about SMART goals in an unrelated Social Citizens article, reminding me of this basic "project management" goal-setting approach. See if it helps you identify goals around which you can build compelling fundraising appeals …
S = specific, significant, simple (note: none of these terms need be mutually exclusive!)
M = measurable (’nuff said!)
A = attainable, achievable, actionable (and for those who must operate by committee … agreed!)
R = rewarding (as in, the achievement of which is likely to emotionally satisfy your donor)
T = time-bound (there must be a defined time frame in which accountability for reaching the goal can be reasonably expected)
I appreciate that fundraisers don’t often or unilaterally "call the shots" when it comes to organizational goal-setting. But fundraisers MUST have a seat at the table when your organization goes through that process.
I once had the benefit of a Board Chairman who told me: "You’re the marketer in this organization … you should set its goals." Now he was saying that a bit for motivational effect, and we all realize that goal-setting in a major organization requires participation (and buy-in) by a range of stakeholders.
But the point wasn’t lost on me: if I didn’t think I could sell what the organization was doing, it was my job to fight like hell to change the "product." So, push back fundraisers … if you don’t see SMART goals being set, tell the powers-that-be that they can forget about raising money!!
Tom
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