Who’s Worse?
The client or the consulting firm?
Seth Godin recently featured the meeting in the following video. Do you recognize it? Have you been there?! [I can’t wait to hear from consultants!!]
He comments: “We owe it to our work and to the people who pay us to stand up (often) and say, ‘no, sorry, I won’t do that’.”
Amen … and enjoy!
Tom
4 responses to “Who’s Worse?”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Whether “help” is more engaging or not really depends on the framing and context. The word help can sometimes weaken the perceived agency of the supporter, making their role feel secondary rather than central (your point). On the other hand, help can also signal collaboration rather than implying full ownership of the outcome, which might […]
Read Full Answer
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
That was excruciating to watch, and may have induced the consultants version of PTSD.
*facepalm*
Oh my, yes I have been there. Classic example of who needs to protect whom. Consultants from themselves, consultants from clients, clients from consultants or clients from themselves…
The consulting firm is worse, by far! They choose to ignore obvious facts and a project doomed to failure rather than help the clients see reality and adjust plans accordingly. It is one thing to push back against typical resistance to change and help both client and other outside experts to see new possibilities, grow and adapt to new realities. This is a good thing. It is something else to totally ignore reality in order to make client happy and, therefore, doom the client to failure.
Fortunately, the consultants with which I have had experience over the years are not like this one!