The Remarkable “Wet Blanket Challenge”
Last month the ALS Association won fundraising’s equivalent of the Mega Million Power Ball Lottery — picking up 3 million donors and $100+ million in August alone from the “Ice Bucket Challenge”.
Then on Friday they blew it.
Up until then our tireless Agitator editors were happily and busily white boarding the steps that fortunate organization might take to ensure the best retention possible from this massive burst of flash philanthropy.
You know the drill: Prompt thank you notes with great stories … thank you phone calls to those donors identified by a predictive model as most likely to make a second gift … same with invitations to become a monthly donor.
We outlined how best to identify, thank and continue to involve the most active and effective missionaries, should the organization want to make this an annual event.
And we brainstormed best ways to move folks to mid-level donating and eventually even to major and planned giving involvement.
What a wonderfully exciting case study for retention to follow-up a flash philanthropy situation similar to that faced by dozens of relief organizations after a tsunami or earthquake.
And what a great opportunity to volunteer. We were so happy with our brainstorming work that we were about to send it off to ALSA and also to NNE Marketing, their agency. (Both of us know how it feels to be overwhelmed because of our involvement with the massive Hands Across America homeless/hunger campaign a generation ago.)
Alas! No sooner had we wrapped up our session than the news services moved the story that, of all things, the ALS Association had filed paperwork with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to lay claim to the terms “ice bucket challenge” and “ALS ice bucket challenge”.
The organization’s efforts to assert ownership of the phrases seems to have first come to the attention of trademark attorney Erik Pelton, who mentioned the filings in a blog post last Wednesday.
We shook our heads. How naïve were we?! There we were, thinking that in a situation like this most organizations would be figuring out how to make the most of an opportunity. But no, leave it to an enterprising — and absolutely tone deaf — lawyer or bureaucrat to try to squelch the opportunity for everyone else.
Apparently we weren’t alone. The blogosphere and social networks exploded in anger. Typical of the comments: “I’m sorry to see that stupid people are at the helm of the ALS Association. Makes me wonder what the raised money is going to — research or stupid pills?”
THEN … just as we were wondering out loud whether others in the sector would be brash or stupid enough to trademark “monthly giving”, “sustainer”, “donor-centered”, “Face-to-Face” or “matching gift”, the news wires came alive again. This time with the report that the ALS Association had reversed itself and was withdrawing the controversial trademark application.
See this Washington Post report on the reversal. Somebody must have reminded ALSA that (American) winning football teams have been pouring ice-filled buckets of Gatorade over their coaches for decades!
So what’s our takeaway from all this? Plenty.
- First, the ALS Association needs and deserves the support of our community as it works its way through this. Sure, they made a mistake, but they listened and quickly remedied it.
ALSA is a solid, highly rated U.S. charity and the petty and jealous will seek to undermine it. That should not be allowed and the poseurs and naysayers should be called on it.
- Failure is a no-brainer. But success — especially when it’s sudden and massive like “The Ice Bucket Challenge” — poses real and important challenges, as well as extraordinary opportunities. Given the sheer size and speed of this phenomenon, long-term success (second gifts, upgrading, retention) doesn’t come easily. Every organization should have at least a basic plan of essential steps when lightening is indeed captured in the bottle.
Do you have a ‘Lighting Strikes’ plan? Do you want The Agitator to do something on planning for success?
- Who says prospecting can’t be fun?
Indeed, Tom and I are so fixated on retention these days that we’re tempted to refer to what ALS Association has done, despite the first torrent of dollars, as ‘lead generation’, instead of ‘fundraising’.
- Ideas are not exclusive. As Oscar Wilde noted, “Talent borrows, genius steals.” Just as the Ice Bucket Challenge raised millions for ALS, it also raised millions more all around the globe for cancer, homelessness, climate change, you name the cause.
Anyone who thinks they can prevent a good idea from spreading and being widely applied is a fool. Anyone who doesn’t try to exploit a good idea is a damned fool.
We’d sure appreciate it if you’d share your thoughts on all this with your fellow Agitators.
Roger and Tom
P.S. Today is a national holiday — Labor Day — in the U.S. Starting tomorrow things get back to ‘normal’ and the countdown to year-end begins. We’ll have much to say about that. For our fellow Agitators around the globe, we hope you’re making the most of the Ice Bucket Challenge … whatever your cause.
10 responses to “The Remarkable “Wet Blanket Challenge””
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
Roger & Tom,
Don’t you consider the ALS ‘tsunami of donors” to be episodic donors such as the donors to Salvation Army in times of disaster and very unlikely to make a second gift?
The other factor is that this type of gift enhanced “the selfie culture” of being able to do the ice bucket challenge and posting on social media.
Did the donor give to the mission of ALS or the mission of self promotion?
Thanks
Mike
Ah gimmicks. So much money through a gimmick. But are they “real donors” or just selfie gimmick slacktivists? (And I’ll bet that many of the played won’t even remember what ALS is … it’s just ice bucketing.
On the one hand, so much money. Not illegal or unethical. Celebrate and use it well. On the other hand, are any of these selfie gimmick slacktivists going to become donors? ALS can try hard to nurture donors. Go for it.
And yes, dozens (hundreds? thousands?) will try to invent a gimmick like this. And those organizations will waste lots of staff time and opportunity cost and and and ….
Trademarking? Oh please… We already have that in the nonprofit sector: Donor-centered fundraising is a registered trademark… (Yes, just check it out.) And it was suggested to me that I should trademark “Keep your donors.”
WTF? I mean really…..
Okay. Labor Day. Back to work.
I think there are some things that should be respected: St. Joseph’s Indian School has used the dreamcatcher for years now; St. Labre uses a blanket; Purple Heart uses a Purple Heart stamp, Cystic Fibrosis has used roses, etc. At some point, I think it almost becomes part of their “brand” and what works for one group may not always work for another. Yes, we’re always looking for that next, great, “big idea” — but it may not be the “gimmick” that organization down the street is using. What happened to originality?
Simone and Mike,
I agree with virtually all the points you make. “Episodic” or what we calledl “flash philanthropy” donors in the post can’t be expected to stick around and perform like “normal” donors. For the most part they are “leads” albeit leads that gave some money for whatever reason.
Tom and I were struck, a apparently so is Simone, on the enormous numbers. Numbers of donors and number of $. Both give ALS an opportunity that’s worth pursuing in our judgement.
Impressed to see you both working and stirring the pot on Labor Day.
Roger
There is a body of social psychology research that supports this — because a person donated to a nonprofit’s mission or took an action on behalf of a nonprofit (ice bucket dumping), regardless of the reason they took either action, that person’s mind now tells the person that they are aligned with the mission.
Ice bucket people or donors who avoided the bucket — both these types of people are many times more likely to say “yes” to ALSA’s next ask, whatever it may be. (google consistency bias & self label)
If people do a good thing for self-absorbed reasons, the outcome is still good. Go forth and ice bucket, or streak, or shave your head, or whatever…and definitely selfie it.
Katrina
Unfortunately, six months from now, ALS will not be able to tell you who participated in this stunt–I suspect they couldn’t tell you today. Frankly, the stunt is the story and how it helps ALS is frequently lost.
I would bet that ALS offices are closed today because it is a national holiday.
By the way, I have trademarked “Jelly Jump”. If you have done a Jelly Jump for your Junior High School opening school event, you owe me $1 for each participant.
I would like to be wrong, about all of this, but I don’t think so.
I’ve been thinking about the neuro-linguistic pathways of altruism – that part of what’s valuable about the Ice Bucket Challenge is a million people laying down/practicing the sef-definition that “I am a person who does good for others.”
Could this be a moment – can we seize it – to harness the American trait of “pitching in”?
I too have been thinking about Hands Across America; we actually use it as a teaching tool on the importance of setting and prioritizing special events objectives and aligning on-the-ground decision-making to those goals (http://www.causeeffective.org/resources/blog/entry/ice-water-and-holding-hands).
So much food for thought, on such a grand scale!
I love, love, love your calling this a ‘lead generation strategy.’ Because that’s the part that other nonprofits can replicate. Yes, you need a gimmick. But after you’ve found one and generated your leads, then what?Yes, nonprofits need to have a retention strategy in place. All the time. Not just for windfalls. Most don’t — which is why donor retention hovers around the abysmal rate of 39% (ongoing) and 30% (new donors).
Still… even if ALS blows their retention strategy completely, they’ll probably still end up renewing 3 out of 10 of their new donors. Those who are crying “flash in the pan” and “no big deal if they don’t retain” folks may be blinded by envy. Something happened here that is unalterably good for ALS. They’re a LOT stronger today. They’ll be at least a little bit stronger tomorrow. It’s now up to ALS to determine how much stronger they’ll be.
For the rest of us, we can take the lessons we’ve learned and try to develop our own lead generation strategies. Most won’t be lightening, because that’s something we can’t control. But we can turn the electricity on.
Roger and Tom,
We seem to be on the same page. I also suggested that ALSA should treat these givers as leads, rather than jumping to retention. See: http://www.ceffect.com/2014/08/26/deep-thoughts-ice-bucket-fundraising-challenge/
My other major concern is how they plan to spend this money as it now double what they and all of their chapters received in 2013. I would hate to see them the subject of next year’s exposes on how they didn’t use the money wisely.
100 million is a lot of cash. Just like Kony 2012, this will pass and the question will be “how was the money used?” However, regardless how many donors they retain they have raised awareness.