Strategy Is Whatever Gets a Row
Does this look familiar? Spring Appeal. Summer Appeal. Fall Appeal. Year End. Then the channels are added underneath. Direct mail, email, digital, phone.
This uber common way of organizing the world is a major decision point that was probably decided by default, by habit. What’s the strategic unit? With this approach, it’s the campaign.
All the rich differences that make up the people on the file get adapted to the campaign because the calendar came first.
But what if the strategic unit is the audience? In this world, the first row is identity – e.g. parent, veteran, conservationist. Identity tells us who the person is in relation to the mission.
Then identity subdivides by trait. Two veterans may share the same connection to the cause and still need very different messages. One responds to duty and structure. Another to possibility and meaning. Trait shapes what we say.
Cadence sits across those identity and trait groups and determines when we say it.
A new donor should not receive the same rhythm as a Mode-of-1 donor who gives annually. A responsive multiple may welcome many asks in a year. The audience is defined by identity and trait, while timing is shaped by the giving pattern layered on top.
Budgeting follows the unit of strategy and that is why this matters. In the campaign-first model, Spring Appeal competes with Fall Appeal for money and the answer to where more money is coming from is another campaign – always.
In the audience-first model, identity and cadence groups compete for investment. Campaigns and channels still matter, but they become execution choices. They describe how the audience was engaged rather than defining the strategy. Want more money? Do more audience research to better understand a laggard group and test a more tailored set of interactions.
The rows tell you what the organization actually believes drives growth.
Kevin
P.S. You can learn more exactly how we’re doing all this here, The Volume Trap: Why Fundraising Scaled the Wrong Thing and What Comes Next.
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