In anticipation of the 50^thanniversary of the founding of Common Cause, the first of the modern, nonpartisan citizens’ advocacy organizations, I’m going through my files and pulling out the direct mail packages and ads we used to launch the organization.

With a war raging in Vietnam, Richard Nixon in the White House, a hopelessly paralyzed Congress on Capitol Hill and special interests running rampant (sound familiar?) our launch theme – “Everybody’s organized but the people”–seemed more than appropriate.

The theme struck the public’s frustrated and worried nerve.  In less than 6 months Common Cause had signed up more than 250,000 dues-paying members.

Of course, those were the days—25 years before—the internet and email, not to mention 36 years before Facebook and other social media. “Instant messaging” back then was via Fax.

What was common then and now was the effectiveness of direct mail first for Common Cause and then for dozens of other organizations that followed it in the early and mid-70s.   Even though today these organizations also have massive and effective digital presences, direct mail continues to be a vibrant workhorse.

The point of this post is not wallow in nostalgia. Rather, it’s to emphasize that in a marketing world overly smitten by digital and social media, direct mail continues to play a special and effective role as a predictable, consistent revenue producer.

That’s especially true when direct mail is integrated with the new media. Unfortunately, too many folks—boards, budget committees and fundraisers– are too quick to throw it overboard in favor of what they mistakenly believe is “free” or “low cost” digital. Forget “costly” postal mail; “it’s dead” they say.

One of the reasons for the belief that direct mail is no longer effective for many lies in the horrible manner in which it’s often executed. When a particular fundraising tactic begins to create cost-effective results, everyone jumps on the bandwagon.

As a result, mailboxes were flooded with a sea of look-alike packages (remember the ‘nickel package’…the endless parade of premiums…stuffed animals, address labels, raffles, sweepstakes, you name it), compounded by the promiscuous use of the exchange of donor lists and the rise of the list cooperatives where everyone began taking in each other’s laundry.

This era of indiscriminate overuse of the medium—the era of burn and churn when prospecting volume ruled, and retention be damned. Lost donors could quickly and cheaply replaced with fresh new donors.

Because of that volume-oriented mindset much of direct mail’s essential strength– and some great opportunities– are being overlooked.

A few thoughts on where many organizations are missing the boat when it comes to direct mail. (Please add to this list with your Comments.)

• Direct Mail is not just for acquisition. No matter how much we preach about retention (there have been 400+ posts about Retention in The Agitator over the past 11 years) and how much lip service folks pay to its importance, very few organizations are willing to spend money to do anything about it.

Instead, the main focus has been on acquisition, and because acquisition returns have continually diminished many groups have simply abandoned direct mail.

BUT…the financial equation on the effectiveness of mail for acquisition—and throughout the donor life cycle– changes when new donors are properly thanked, onboarded, their identities and their preferences noted in follow-up communications that dramatically boost their value and retention.

Why is it that organizations will spend $25, $35 or more to acquire a new donor, yet avoid spending a few cents and a first-class stamp to properly and promptly thank the new donor for the gift?

Or, realizing that the Lifetime Value of the average retained donor is likely to be $350- $500 or more over a five-year period, why not spend a couple dollars more to make sure they properly onboarded and given the best donor care possible?

Maybe it’s easier to sign a purchase order for acquisition lists and printing than invest additional time and resources in protecting and enhancing the acquisition investment.

• Direct Mail is Essential for Effective Integration. Lots of folks mouth the term “multi-channel integration”, but few really practice it. Yet the use of direct mail as part of a multi-channel strategy is a powerful booster of revenue and retention.

Sure, social media, email, and digital advertising have their use for reaching large audiences at low cost. Direct mail has the ability to deepen relationships with new and existing donors.

As Nick noted last week there’s good reason why the 2019 M+R Benchmark Study of Online Giving reports that online giving has grown by only 1%.  Your own email box cluttered with endless and often poorly executed messages is the only proof you need for why the online channel is increasingly ineffective if used alone.

• 5 Reasons Why Direct Mail Should be in Your Mix. Here are some reasons –and opportunities—you shouldn’t overlook. (For more details on  direct mail as a “secret sauce” for marketers see this splendid piece by Bruce McMeekin, CEO of BKM Marketing writing in Forbes.)

1. Direct mail has a longer shelf. Email is often deleted seconds after it appears. A direct mail package is likely to sit on a donor’s desk or kitchen table for days after its first notices and until it’s dealt with.
2. Direct mail, unlike an image on the screen, can be held and touched and can trigger action ways not possible on screen.
3. Direct mail is read or scanned by 42% of recipients according to the US Postal Service.  The average open rate for digital is half that.
4. Direct Mail can be physically modified to reflect the donor segment. For example, unlike digital a mid-level donor or prospect can receive a more detailed, “heavier” package than a lower dollar donor.
5. Direct mail is effective with millennials. Contrary to myth millennials read and respond to direct mail rates similar to other segments of the population. They’re not digital-only.

I’m sure Agitatorreaders who incorporate direct mail into their multi-channel work have additional reasons.  Please share.

• BIG Missed Opportunity—I Think. Each week, prompted by issue advocacy organizations, I sign dozens of Petitions and send scores of letters to my elected officials.  So do millions of other folks, judging from the reported size of some email lists.

I wonder, given the ability to append postal addresses to email addresses, how many advocacy organizations are using the power of direct mail to convert those digital advocates into donors.  I know that digital-to-digital conversion rates are low.  I wonder how much adding direct mail to the process would improve results.

Conversely, organizations that rely solely on direct mail because they don’t have their donors’ email addresses are likely missing out on significant, digital opportunities for communication (action alerts, donor testimonials, videos.

In the commercial world matching consumers IP addresses to postal addresses to synchronize online ads with the same direct mail offer, has increased campaign results as much as 44% in conversions for a small increase in cost.

Why not test and take advantage of these mail-to-digital, digital-to-mail opportunities?  (You can find out more about these simple and inexpensive appending processes by email Info@TrueGivers.com)

What are you doing to truly harness the power of multi-channel fundraising?

Roger