We Don’t Write So Good. And How to Easily Fix It
This is the cover page of the co-branded, jointly produced report on the state of email copy from NextAfter and DonorVoice.
In this case, you can judge the book by its cover. It’s a large email sample and the report is visually appealing, easy to read and easy to find nuggets of goodness.
One of the main analytical tools used was Copy Optimizer. Sign up for your low cost, no contract subscription here.
The 2,000 emails covered 8 verticals and 80 organizations and including a mix of fundraising and engagement content.
Our sector’s storytelling is still the weak link in copy. The average score is a mere 28 out of 100. The sector does better on Readability, scoring 50 out of 100.
But, unicorns exist that score well on both. This is a distribution plot of Engagement Scores and you can see a lot of variance in our 2,000 email sample. The ones on the far right are doing well on Story and Readability. ( Note: The lower the score the better.)
Your copy can join those on the far right of the graph, one of those lovely blue dots scoring high on Readability and Story and Overall Engagement. A five star review is within your grasp.
It just requires a different set of flashlights highlighting where copy is off the mark and illuminating your path to fixing with easy to follow guidance. You can get that here.
Kevin
P.S. You can download the report for free, here.
Behavioral Science Q & A
Great question! Here’s how behavioral science can help unpack what might be happening: Pain of Paying: Even a small extra charge can make giving feel more transactional than emotional, potentially reducing generosity. Fairness Concerns: Some donors might perceive donor cover as a surcharge rather than a contribution to the cause. If they feel the charity […]
Read Full Answer
The choice between “Your gift CAN…” and “Your gift WILL…” taps into the psychological framing of certainty vs. possibility. Currently, there is no academic research directly comparing these two framings in charitable appeals. However, I suspect no framing is universally better—the outcome likely depends on your target audience and the campaign’s goal. Here are some thoughts: Certainty Framing – […]
Read Full Answer
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