Too Much Nonprofit Competition?
Awhile back I saw this LA Times article about a new website/organization (is there a difference these days?) launched by Chris Hughes, one of Facebook’s co-founders and online organizing whiz for the Obama campaign.
But as I read about the site — Jumo, promoted as a venue for connecting causes/charities and interested volunteers — I thought to myself … Who needs this? Did this guy even bother to see what sites were already doing this job … and doing it just fine, thank you.
So, in a huff, I didn’t write about it (also in part, because the site is still in info-collecting mode … "we’re not ready to offer you anything yet … just give us a lot of information about yourself").
And then I saw this post about Jumo — Is competition in the nonprofit sector always a good thing? — by Kristin Ivie on Social Citizens Blog. And I thought … she’s read my mind! Says Kristin: "…while I’m sure that Jumo will be different and innovative, and I’m excited to see what it is, I find myself wondering if the best product for all might have been created more quickly through one of the existing tools….I honestly don’t know."
Unfortunately, there’s nothing you, or Kristin or I can do about competition. It’s upon us in the nonprofit realm like a plague. It’s unstoppable.
But while I’m bemoaning the fact, Roger has tackled it head-on in Mission Competition, the first paper in his Fundraiser’s Journal. Roger’s Journal is for The Agitator’s premium subscribers only (see here for premium details). He’ll be preparing one of these papers on "change issues" facing fundraisers for release to premium subs each month.
Meanwhile, I’ll just keep whining.
Tom
P.S. Premium subs, Mission Competition can be found in the Vault by logging in here. Once inside, search ‘journal’ or simply click the ‘Roger Craver’s Fundraising Journal’ category.
6 responses to “Too Much Nonprofit Competition?”
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
I think the system is a bit broken. Nonprofit organizations don’t have shareholders and “belong” to the community they serve. Yet any of us is free to establish another nonprofit organization and compete for funds and resources with existing organizations. That’s not necessarily in the best interest of the community. Perhaps we need a way to asses the needs of the community before granting 501(c)(3) status.
Tom, I never think of you as whining! You just say what the rest of us are thinking 🙂 One thing I will say is that for some reason, I’ve seen less collaboration across many sectors over the past five years or so. I don’t know if it’s because we’re all doing the work of four people now or what, but when we have a brilliant idea, we just go and do and don’t always pay attention to what’s been done and what’s happening. Or perhaps we just think that we can do it better without engaging the person who is already doing it. I wonder if it’s a uniquely American trait, or if it’s just a human trait. If anyone has the answer, please share!!!
From Andrew Davis, American Target Advertising
I think if there is any lesson the nonprofit world can learn from the commercial realm, it’s to embrace competition, rather than fear it.
The principles that drive innovation and progress in the commercial world are the same principles found in the nonprofit world. Nonprofits are always searching for new technology and practices to more effectively reach donors. This innovation is developed by both established and emerging companies. And, thanks to the competition among these companies, nonprofits have more fundraising resources available to them at a lower cost than ever before.
Competition is a healthy, natural force in any business environment, commercial or nonprofit. In the long run, competition weeds out inefficient products or services and replaces them with others of a higher quality, usually for a lower price. This is why nonprofits should be embracing competition at every turn.
Sure, one copywriter may be giving you quality copy. However, tell two copywriters that their packages will be tested against one another, and — without a doubt — your results will improve. This is because competition drives individuals and companies out of their comfort zones and compels them to do more than just what has previously been accepted.
A fear of competition is simply an excuse to be comfortable—which is a death sentence for any nonprofit in today’s marketing world.
tbelford said it well! We need innovation and people trying to find a better way to carry out a mission or do work. If someone else thinks they have a better way to do or say something, and tries to grow the idea into an organization or business or product, GREAT. That’s how brilliant ideas come to life and dumb ideas get flushed. Bravo to Jumo for trying. If any of us don’t like it – ignore it.
I don’t think I’ve seen the Agitator miss the mark on anything this widely. Or was this whole issue tongue-in-cheek?
From John Whitehead, WaterAid.org:
Too many not for profit initiatives and charity set-ups are vanity projects.
Responding to John W: True. And it’s human nature and predictable for some people to do things that others see as vanity projects. IMO, the question is what do we individually do about it? If one of us sees one of these perhaps misguided efforts, it’s worth our time to spend a few minutes trying to help them see the bigger picture and shift their efforts to a more productive venue. The glass can be half full.