Yikes … Fundraisers Make Way For Marketers!
Here’s the NY Times headline that caught my attention: To Sell Themselves to Donors, Nonprofits Are Turning to the Pros.
Wow! I thought … I’m about to find some real breakthrough thinking. Can’t wait to see who are these “pros” are?
Don’t get me wrong, I do agree that nonprofits can communicate in ways that obscure their missions, accomplishments and stories.
But really, the examples of advice given by the new “pros” is old-hat for experienced fundraisers … such innovative insights as:
“…nonprofits [should] more clearly explain their purpose in simple but powerful ways that connect emotionally with the public.
“[Using] storytelling ability — along with the sophisticated use of data to identify donors and maintain a digital connection with them.
“[Avoid] bland mission and vision statements that are vague, inflated and indistinguishable from one another.
“A nonprofit needs to use data to connect with donors early — and often — through emails, phone calls, letters and other communications in a way that addresses their particular interests.”
“Nonprofits need to constantly monitor the competition.”
To say nothing of “coordinate [their] message across the digital landscape”.
And where can fundraisers get shrewd, ground-breaking advice like this?
According to the article, from marketers … “the pros”.
Here’s the capper quote, from a “marketing expert”:
“It’s no longer business as usual like it was five or 10 years ago, where fund-raisers handled marketing.”
And, if you’re not sure whether or not your nonprofit needs to be rescued by a marketing pro, this observation by another marketing pro regarding the need to hire “branding and marketing experts” might convince you:
“They can’t afford not to … There is definitely a risk for nonprofits that don’t morph with the changing consumer psyche. They run the risk of losing their member base because they don’t feel as relevant to the consumer.”
Rest in peace, all you fundraising amateurs, all is not lost, marketing pros are on the way.
Tom
P.S. I’ve always thought all fundraisers were marketers, but few marketers are fundraisers. What about you?
9 responses to “Yikes … Fundraisers Make Way For Marketers!”
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
LOL! Many nonprofits could use more pros — of all stripes. The key problem with much of nonprofit marketing and fundraising, IMHO, is that it’s not integrated. It’s always mattered, but the digital revolution has shined a gigantic flashlight on the problem of keeping the two disciplines — which are more alike than they are different — siloed. I wrote recently on the topic here: http://clairification.com/2017/08/18/nonprofit-marketing-fundraising-like-peanut-butter-jelly/
I have always argued that marketing and fundraising are inherently different, but shouldn’t be in silos or at odds with each other. This article is a great example of someone who doesn’t understand the sector giving us all advice. Marketing is about getting new people involved in the cause; fundraising is about keeping them and deepening the relationship. No matter what, you have to get me to pay attention, and after that, to care.
Sorry let me clarify – the NY Times article is an example, not Tom’s article! 🙂
Hear, hear1
I head up a large public media membership program. What we do is absolutely marketing… and I have to make this case all the time.
This NY Times article explains very nicely what WE do on my team.
What they’ve left out, though, is that our success at marketing is defined by the bottom line — an increase in revenue (through acquisition, retention, cultivation, etc….).
Don’t even get me started on this topic Tom! Marketing Directors that oversee direct response programs but have no fundraising experience and no understanding about building a pipeline to major gifts. Branding companies who issue lists of “banned words” that include critical descriptors of an organization’s mission or constituency. And to be fair, what about the Development Directors and major gifts folks who roll their eyes at even a hint of marketing?
The truth is we all have much to learn from each other…with one common goal in mind…how can we bring more money to the organizations and movements that are changing the world? #leaveyourEGOathome
What Kathy said.
Oh brother… I agree with Kathy and Lisa and Claire. They must work together. I do not see them as that different. And yes, how do you measure each?
Unless it’s an organization with another revenue stream driven entirely by marketing (like, say, an arts organization with tickets), revenue comes from fundraising.
I have also seen what happens when “branding experts” got their hands on a good organization (being paid quite nicely for it, too). First step? Change the organization’s name!
Staff successfully fought off that stupid idea.
Silos. Silos kill. FR and marketing MUST work together.
Seconding (fifthing?) Mary, Kathy, Lisa, and Claire. At the risk of over-simplification, I tend to think of much of marketing as broadcasting, and good fundraising as attraction/customer service-based. We blogged about it back in 2013 http://www.pamelagrow.com/3227/its-all-fundraising/ in response to John Lepp’s brilliant post, http://agentsofgood.org/2013/05/from-the-mouths-of-donors/