Thank You, Thank You, Thank You
Since the election, I've received email thank-you's from a number of advocacy groups — MoveOn, League of Conservation Voters, and Environmental Defense among them — expressing gratitude for all I helped accomplish as an activist during the campaigns.
You're welcome. Now I hate to be an ingrate, but I have to admit I did nothing to deserve these thanks.
MoveOn credited me with helping mobilize a huge GOTV phone effort, and invited me to a party to celebrate. Surely their database has recorded that I didn't participate, as much as I admire their efforts.
Here's their message. Click on image to get readable version.
Other than missing the chance to indicate they actually “knew” me, MoveOn's communication was marvelous. It reported a terrifically impressive GOTV and fundraising performance, with hard (read: real) numbers. It related a wonderful story where a contacted voter, a single Mom, credited her MoveOn caller with in fact stimulating her to vote. And it called for joining a weekend celebration party in my area, perfectly in keeping with the Gestalt of their pre-election group phone banking efforts.
Finally, there was a link, not hyped, to a donate page. Here they failed to really capture the opportunity. Instead of an appeal that played directly off their exciting email communication and told me — as I thrilled with victory — how my next dollars would be used, they bounced me to a dull, lifeless generic “Donate” page.
So I give MoveOn an initial “A+” for message … and especially for “thinking” about a message that was entirely consistent with their brand and delivered some emotion. But I need to knock the final grade back to a “B” for failing to capitalize on the personalization and fundraising opportunity.
Read below for LCV and Environmental Defense “grades.”
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