Tiny Clues Build Trust
Nothing is more essential to donor commitment and retention than trust.
Let’s posit that a donation is a (at least implied) ‘compact’ with a donor that your nonprofit is going to wisely use that person’s contribution to further his or her charitable aspiration or goal.
Perhaps not a great deal of consideration of trustworthiness went into giving that first gift, so I added the caveat ‘implied’.
But when it comes to the next gift, I would suggest trust is indeed coming into play.
Having made my first gift, have I received some signal or experience leading me to entrust your organization with another?
In this brief post — Can I trust you? — Seth Godin reminds us that trust is grounded in the small stuff … the tiny clues that send signals which are more important than what we actually say to each other.
Says Godin:
“The thing is, almost no one decides the answer to the trustworthy question based on the fine print, your policies, your positions on critical issues of national importance.
We decide long, long before that.
People watch what you do. They watch with the sound off. They listen to others. They seek out clues of the tiniest sort.”
How does your nonprofit stack up in terms of “clues of the tiniest sort”? In terms of what you do, how you interact, with your donors?
Do you spell their name right? Answer their questions? Seek their preferences? Show recognition?Thank them?
These are the clues that suggest “we belong together” … and move us from there to commitment, as in “let’s stick together”.
Or as Godin would say … “we’re in the same tribe”.
Tom
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