The Old Big Thing
Marketing maven Seth Godin finished a recent post/rant with this comment:
“I love to hear about the next big thing, but I’m far more interested in what you’re doing with the old big thing.”
In fact, the title of the post was: Bring me stuff that’s dead, please.
Now, I had just read this account in Fundraising Success about some gee-whiz mobile campaigns, which had left me thinking … no one ever reports actual numbers in these ‘success’ stories. What you’re usually told is that the campaign ‘reached new target groups’ and ‘raised awareness’.
I’m not knocking experimentation and innovation (we know Roger loves mobile!), but reading the two pieces back-to-back was chastening.
Godin’s point made me wonder once again about the ‘dead stuff’ of fundraising … direct mail. At least from the column inches that seem to be devoted these days to online — and now, mobile — fundraising, one would think that direct mail has disappeared.
Maybe it’s just that innovation in direct mail has disappeared.
Is there anything left to be learned about direct mail. Anything that hasn’t been tested and re-tested?
Is the only news in direct mail these days totally idiosyncratic to a particular organization … as in, “we finally beat our prospecting control!” That’s great news, to be sure. But it’s just better messaging, offer, or creative, specific to that nonprofit or situation … not really an innovation in technique or approach.
So while The Agitator is always thrilled to hear news of a breakthrough mail package (and we’d probably write about yours if you furnished the numbers to back it up), what I really want to hear about is the ‘old big thing’ … Has anyone invented or discovered anything new in direct mail lately? Something that might improve performance for all direct mail fundraisers?
Who’s working on the ‘dead stuff’?
Tom
3 responses to “The Old Big Thing”
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
We are still using this “dead” technique. Because so many of our clients’ current donors don’t have email addresses or don’t use the Internet regularly (it’s that life cycle thing), mail is still the best way to reach both current and potential donors.
But we are using more sophisticated modeling than we did even 2 years ago to better target house mailings. As for acquisition mail, we just keep doing it, looking for ways to reduce costs (it can be done) and still be effective. And it is still in the lists that we find the most success. Try as we might, often the control package that was established several years ago is still the best, even if no one “likes” it anymore.
We do watch mobile and web techniques though and integrate these techniques as we go along. Fundraising is like a river, always looking for a new channel.
I’m working on the dead stuff – it’s a great time to be in the mail!
As Helen mentioned, we’re now using much more sophisticated modeling thanks to companies like Flowtown and Rapleaf who allow us to segment and perform better than ever. Big data tools are now cheap and widely available, too, so you can crunch data better than ever.
Since so many people have abandoned the mail stream, each piece gets more attention and thanks to decreased cost of color, packages can now stand on their own.
Pair all that with cross media options and you can continue to be wherever your audience wants you to be.
Tom, if you email me your address I’ll get some innovation (and hard numbers) mailed your way.
My father co-owns a decades-old tax correction business. Part of his business model requires that he inform homeowners that his agency could lower their property taxes if they authorized his lawyers to make a good case that the home is overvalued.
So how does he go about informing these thousands of homeowners? Direct mail. No e-mail, phone calls, texts, Tweets, or Facebook messages. Just mail.
It’s not that my dad is old-fashioned. He has a degree in computer science, and has been using computers for his business since a kilobyte cost $5k and filled up an entire room. He’s more tech-savvy than I am, and I’m 23 years old. So why does he stick to direct mail?
Because it works. His handful of tried-and-true direct-mail methods deliver great results; the most important thing is the ability to write well, not technology. People like short, simple, colloquial style, a personalized message, and good news. Direct mail has been able to provide all that for… well, how old is the post office?