So Much For That Theory!
On October 9th I posted I Hate This Study, and predicted that in thirty days it would blow away other posts in terms of open rates.
Why? Because, as the neuroscience study it referred to established, negative information and emotions are processed more readily by the brain than positive stuff.
So I tested my "Hate" title. Bummer!
After 30 days, I Hate This Study has a 59% open rate. Not bad. But seventeen articles posted after that article already have higher open rates, with the highest enjoying a 116% open rate (indicating some people opened it twice or passed it to others who opened it).
The titles of the top three opened articles in the last thirty days are:
Contrasting Web Strategies — Charity:Water
Best Nonprofit Taglines Announced
The last of which was written only nine days ago and has a 99% open rate!
Of course, there’s more going on here than negative versus positive. I’d only call one of the top three a "positive" headline.
The really important thing they have in common, confirming what all email gurus say, is that a more specific subject line — ideally one that telegraphs the content to follow — will always outperform a more cryptic or obscure or amazingly clever (but not descriptive) subject line. And I suppose it doesn’t hurt that the titles/subject lines also suggest that practical information or advice might be on the way.
[I might add the same is true of headlines in direct response print ads.]
So consider this your direct marketing lesson for today!
Tom
P.S. A lesson The Agitator regularly ignores in our determination to communicate an attitude, as opposed to being merely utilitarian!
One response to “So Much For That Theory!”
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
Validation is a beautiful thing! I have been commenting on your blogs (which I find stimulating) however the primary message in my responses is that you don’t offer “positive” feedback/ideas for organizations to incorporate in order to improve their operations. Rather you point out the negative… thus you are the Agitator. However, in a time where NonProfits are hurting, the economy is in a state of flux and their is so much uncertainty in the world, people need to latch onto hope and ideas that make a difference. Thus the handwritten thank you letter/correspondence. It’s pretty basis- people want to find the good in a situation. Look at candy sales- they are up. A quick happy fix. People crave a glass that is half full….