When You’ve Blown It!
What do you do when you’ve really screwed up with your donors or other stakeholders?
First of all, I’m assuming: a) you have ways of listening to your donors; and b) you are paying attention.
Second, you’ve realized that they’re right; you’re wrong.
Then do what one of my favorite clients of all time — Maker’s Mark bourbon (did I need to say bourbon?!) — recently did. Apologize … sincerely.
Maker’s Mark decided to water down their bourbon, lowering the alcohol content from 45% (90 proof) to 42% (84 proof) because supply problems were keeping them from meeting soaring demand.
Fortunately, they pre-announced the change to their customers (Maker’s Mark has an extraordinary customer relationship/communications program), because that’s the kind of company they are.
Passionately loyal customers revolted … they’d rather have less bourbon than less alcohol in their bourbon!
Maker’s Mark listened. Changed its mind. Publicly apologized.
Here’s their apology …
Dear Friends,
Since we announced our decision last week to reduce the alcohol content (ABV) of Maker’s Mark in response to supply constraints, we have heard many concerns and questions from our ambassadors and brand fans.
We’re humbled by your overwhelming response and passion for Maker’s Mark. While we thought we were doing what’s right, this is your brand – and you told us in large numbers to change our decision.
You spoke. We listened. And we’re sincerely sorry we let you down.
So effective immediately, we are reversing our decision to lower the ABV of Maker’s Mark, and resuming production at 45% alcohol by volume (90 proof). Just like we’ve made it since the very beginning.
The unanticipated dramatic growth rate of Maker’s Mark is a good problem to have, and we appreciate some of you telling us you’d even put up with occasional shortages. We promise we’ll deal with them as best we can, as we work to expand capacity at the distillery.
Your trust, loyalty and passion are what’s most important. We realize we can’t lose sight of that. Thanks for your honesty and for reminding us what makes Maker’s Mark, and its fans, so special.
We’ll set about getting back to bottling the handcrafted bourbon that our father/grandfather, Bill Samuels, Sr. created. Same recipe. Same production process. Same product.
As always, we will continue to let you know first about developments at the distillery. In the meantime please keep telling us what’s on your mind and come down and visit us at the distillery. It means a lot to us.
Sincerely,
Rob Samuels Chief Operating Officer rob@makersmark.com
Bill Samuels, Jr Chairman Emeritus bill@makersmark.com
You can’t do it better than that.
A great model for the next time your organization stuffs it up.
Tom
P.S. You can read the full story here.
6 responses to “When You’ve Blown It!”
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
Wow, they couldn’t possibly have predicted the overwhelming response that they got to their proposal, could they? Mind you, if anyone had said to me that Bundy rum, here in Aus, was changing their recipe, I would have predicted actual uprises amongst the dedicated many, not just a bit of outrage. Oh yes – and National Media coverage, voxpops, talking heads, maybe even interviews with politicians! And maybe, with a bit of thought, maybe… I would have predicted that after all that valuable publicity and, with a bit of spin, the producer could turn it into a very powerful customer relations/loyalty exercise.
Absolutely acknowledge mistakes to your supporters if you have made them, and tell them how you will try to avoid doing it again, but please dont make it your next marketing campaign.
I too applaud Maker’s Mark for how they handled this. I am a “Maker’s Mark Ambassador” (their fantastic customer loyalty program) and I was surprised at their e-mail informing me of the plan to water down their bourbon, but I had to admire their transparency. Yet, I was convinced it was a bad decision. The public spoke, their customers called and complained, and they listened. I was even more impressed with their second e-mail letting me know they heard us, they agreed it was a bad decision and that they were scrapping the plan. Handled really well all around.
The Maker’s Mark story reminds of the neuroscience research that says: Correcting a mistake produces a dopamine high for those who “received” or “experienced” the mistake. Maker’s Mark made a mistake. Maker’s Mark corrected the mistake. And its customers are now enjoying the dopamine high of a corrected mistake. I jokingly say to myself: “Make a mistake on purpose so you can correct it so your customers will get so high.” Of course, we make enough mistakes unintentionally – that we can correct!
One of my most memorable (positive and wonderful) experiences – as a donor – is a mistake made my EMIILY’s List, the pro-choice Democratic women’s political action committee.
I received a gracious email saying that my membership was expiring and EMILY would love me to renew. I called and said, “Gee, I think I did renew.”
First, I easily connected with the membership office. No voice mail hell. The membership person immediately found my record and apologized for the mistake. Off I went to a meeting. Returned to my office and an email awaited me, apologizing for the error. “That’s nice, I thought. Nice apology on the telephone when I called. Nice email follow-up apology.”
I work away at my desk. And after traditional business hours, about 6 p.m., I get a telephone call from the senior development officer at EMILY’s List. She apologizes again, explaining what had happened. (By the way, I received an explanation of what went wrong both in my original telephone chat, and in the email.)
And then the senior development officer says to me: “I was looking at your record, Ms. Joyaux. And did you know that 3 days from today will be your 20th anniversary as a EMILY donor? We are so thrilled that you have been such a loyal donor. We hope you are thrilled and proud, too.”
And I am thrilled and proud to be a loyal donor to EMILY’s List. Wow. 20 years? I had no idea. And I am impressed at their quick response to a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes. No big deal. But they acknowledged and apologized for their mistake so well and so quickly and with extra attention and care and graciousness and and and … I sure enjoyed that dopamine high! I tell the story over and over.
As usual, Simone, you’ve weighed in with a most important point: first-rate donor service is an ESSENTIAL for first-rate RETENTION.
In study after study by The Agitator/DonorTrends (without the presence of Maker’s Mark), Campbell-Rinker and others poor donor service usually ranks among the top three reasons for why donors dump an organization and head for the exits. This represents between 15% and 20% of all defecting donors.
As soon as I can yank the Maker’s Mark away from Tom we’ll do a post on Why Donors Leave.
Nice article. Thanks!
If only Walmart would follow the same suit, eh?
Darn! Now, I’m thirsty for Makers Mark and it is only 8am. 😉
The timing of this post is ironic, as it is similar in nature to the recent post by planned giving author Michael Rosen. http://michaelrosensays.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/what-to-do-when-you-mess-up/
Taking responsibility for your mistakes and owning them is far superior to trying to pass the blame on others or trying to cover them up. Personally, I would rather be embarrassed by the truth than tell a lie.