Watch Your Pictures!
I subscribe to “Which Test Won” — a feed that proselytizes for A/B testing — both for the fun of testing my own instincts (and often disagreeing with their analysis) and just to remind myself that tweaks of copy, design and imagery, based upon testing, indeed matter.
Here’s a recent test (actually a replay from 2009) that caught my eye, literally, because it was a test of two images.
The email feed subject line said: Happy Baby vs Sleepy Newborn Image Test. How could I/you resist?
When this test was first presented in 2009, 88% of readers got it wrong … they picked the loser. In the current test, 75% have gotten it wrong so far!
The winning image produced 12.6% more responses. Not insignificant lift.
And this time I definitely agree with their analysis.
Go ahead … be brave … take the test.
This test involves an online offer … no excuse for not testing in an instance like this. Especially when the ‘gut’ choice’ of professional marketers can prove so wrong.
Apart from encouraging you to test, I have another point … do not be casual about choosing images to support your fundraising. Don’t get lost in the copy and design, then throw in some stock photos as an afterthought. Think it through.
If you put yourself in the heart of the person reading the promotion tested above, you can’t go wrong. Even a guy can get this one right!
Tom
P.S. I’ll place a hopeful bet that our savvy fundraising readers will do much better on this one. But still no reason to not test.
One response to “Watch Your Pictures!”
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
Why do you agree with this test? How do we know the win has to do with the photo and not the copy since they differ? Is this really apples to apples? Thanks for your insight.