Voluntary Versus Involuntary Churn
I suspect that most fundraisers think of donors who don’t renew or make subsequent gifts as having made a conscious decision to abandon ship, such as …
- My priorities have changed.
- I’m supporting other organisations in this field … you no longer make the cut.
- You did something I disagreed with.
The reasons we suppose are at play we probably ascribe more to programmatic dissatisfaction of one sort or another — like the ones above — as opposed to service-related dissatisfaction or glitches, such as …
- You never have spelled my name right.
- I asked you umpteen times not to solicit me so much.
- I guess neither of us noticed that the expiration date on the credit card paying my monthly gift was passed.
- You didn’t ask!
But of course, the first two of these reflect conscious decisions as well … with the outcome to cease donating based just as much — and consciously — on donor dissatisfaction.
This article from Marketing Profs looks at customer retention from the standpoint of ‘voluntary’ versus ‘involuntary’ churn, and makes the audacious claim that attrition can be reduced 50% by paying attention to ‘involuntary’ churn … “without even having to execute a retention campaign”! Be that as it may …
What they mean by ‘involuntary’ churn is essentially payment failure — breakdowns in the transaction process. The last two reasons given above would meet their definition.
For fundraisers, the article (aimed at commercial marketers) is more useful for the conceptual issue it raises than for its tactical suggestions.
Ask yourself: What percentage of your donors do you think you lose ‘involuntarily’? Not because of a conscious choice not to give, reflecting some dissatisfaction (curable or otherwise), but simply because the transaction process failed — from credit card expirations to dysfunctional online donation forms to unavailability of phone assistance.
Do they give up on the mission (hard to retrieve) or give up on trying to give? No excuse for the latter.
Tom
6 responses to “Voluntary Versus Involuntary Churn”
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
Merry Christmas, Happy Chanukkah and happy holidays, thank you for always keeping us fundraisers on our toes… Enjoy, cheers, Erica
Great topic Tom!
So much of the research points to donor service and communication issues as second only to financial considerations for attrition.
I often wonder how many of those donors, who say it is financial, switch their giving to another charitable organization for other reasons…
Let’s not let fundraisers off the hook! The research in fundraising tells us that we are doing a lousy job of securing a second gift and ensuring year-on-year retention. All the relationship-building issues and and and …..
Thanks for keeping us all honest Simone! (Very easy to hide behind research stats…)
Does involuntary churn include only sending one appeal or renewal letter out a year and expecting that your most of your donors are going to respond to that one appeal? For what we see, that’s the first and easiest fix to make. In just one example, a small land trust we know raised $40,000 more a year in membership just by following up on folks who had not yet renewed.
Oh, I’m sure it must, Gayle! SO many organizations ask once a year and expect that donors will happily fall in with the organization’s schedule! It’s not about when an organization wants to ask… it’s about being ready and noticed when a donor wants to give.
Though on the other end of that are the big charities who mail, mail, mail – one cloned package after another, saying little. And often don’t even thank the donor.
We can do much better than those two extremes.