Wear It On Your Sleeve
I've been reading a blog called The Nonprofiteer lately with great enthusiasm. The Nonprofiteer is witty, provocative … at times ascerbic, and always has a point of view.
Here, for example, is author Kelly Kleiman's take on those corporate promotions where the company says, “Buy our product and we'll contribute to charity X.”
The Other People's Money idea arose in response to a commenter who defended the Bristol-Meyers-Squibb “you click and we'll give” campaign as “encouraging people to actually do something, rather than just sitting around bemoaning the state of the world. In that sense, at least, it's an opportunity to participate.”
Allow the Nonprofiteer to argue that letting George (or Bristol) do it is not doing something, and that the charitable sector is going to be hurting even worse than we are now if we insist on continuing to pretend to people that charity doesn't involve giving anything up.
The Nonprofiteer has views, always well argued, on nonprofit management and fundraising issues like whether $10 donors deserve to tell their charity how to spend the money, on whether foundations should be taken to task for how their funds are invested (versus whether they're actually spending enough of their bounty), on whether it's worthwhile for a nonprofit to convince McDonald's to use paper instead of styrofoam, on whether board members who don't contribute or fundraise should be tolerated, etc.
So far, The Nonprofiteer is batting about .500 with me in terms of occasions of agreement. Which of course is irrelevant. What matters to The Agitator is that she agitates, and does it so well. Look forward to arguing with her from time to time.
Take a look.
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