Selfish Giving For The Little Guys

July 24, 2008

Here is an excellent post from fundraiser Joe Waters, who blogs at Selfish Giving.

Joe offers smart advice on how small- and mid-size nonprofits should pitch cause marketing relationships to small- and mid-sized businesses.

Two of his observations:

"As a mid-size nonprofit working with similar sized businesses on cause marketing programs I always get questions on how cause marketing will impact the bottom-line. I find that larger businesses are less concerned with cause marketing being a sales driver and can afford to lump it under the do-nothing moniker of "branding." But not so with small business owners. Every dollar spent has to drive sales and grow the business."

Indeed, that’s why Joe prefers to call cause marketing "selfish giving." He adds:

"Unlike the media salesman that wants you to write a check for another flight of ads, the cause marketer wants access to something that you (the business) value but costs you nothing to deliver: your customers."

Here are the questions Joe answers …

  • Will my participation in a cause marketing program boost sales?
  • How does the costs of cause marketing compare to other types of media (e.g. radio, TV, print, billboard, etc.) I invest in?
  • How is cause marketing different from the other ways I invest my time and money to promote my business?
  • If I run a point-of-sale program, how do I handle customer questions on how much my business is donating?
  • Don’t customers find these programs a hassle and would rather not be bothered?
  • If I do this for you every charity in the City will be hitting me up to do something similar or to give them money. Won’t I have a gigantic bulls eye on my business?
  • When I die and go to hell, can I use my cause marketing efforts as "Get out of hell" free card?

Good questions … practical advice. Joe, you deserve a raise!

Tom

 

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under You Deserve a Raise, cause marketing, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Direct Mail … Gotta Luv It!

July 23, 2008

As reported in the Chron’s online column, Prospecting, the University of Indiana’s Center on Philanthropy says that the 140 fundraisers they surveyed are getting bummed out … confidence in their expected results for the year is falling.

Except for this bright spot …

"With the exception of direct mail, fund raisers say that all types of appeals were doing less well in the past six months than they had expected when the year started."

Of course, this could just mean that fundraisers low-balled their direct mail projections so much that any returns look terrific! But I doubt that’s the explanation.

As Roger has commented, advocacy groups in particular have bucked falling donor acquisition and retention trends. A simple case of passion prevailing in that sector?

But the fundraisers in the Indiana survey presumably cover a wide spectrum of the nonprofit community.

Is your direct mail performing better, worse or the same as you expected back in January? If better, take credit … you deserve a raise! If worse, do you blame it on the economy?

Tom

 

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under You Deserve a Raise, direct mail, fundraising | 1 Comment 

What I Would Do First

July 22, 2008

I’m sure you’ve seen all the gloomy articles and blog posts floating around noting the threat to nonprofit fundraising posed by a sinking economy.

A threat compounded by data indicating further fall-off in new donor acquisition and retention rates throughout much of the charitable community, as fellow Agitator Roger has commented on. Roger concluded his assessment with this recommendation:

"Now’s the time to take another look at next year’s budget and make sure you’re spending more, not less, to achieve on donor satisfaction and loyalty to hold on to your base."

Now, "hold on to your base" can mean a lot of things, from programmatic strategies to emphasize the work and activities you know (because you’ve done the donor research) brought your core donors in; to fine-tuning member/donor communications to report and celebrate results, results, results … and how your donors made those possible; to ensuring that in-bound member/donor inquiries are effectively handled; to tactical adjustments to donor renewal campaigns (the copy, the contact scheme, etc.).

All of these are important and can make a big difference. And because renewals are the most profitable fundraising activity you undertake, from your biggest donor to the rank-and-file, any retention improvements you achieve will yield significant net revenue.

Maybe you don’t control every aspect of the programmatic and marketing mix that can combine to strengthen donor retention. Perhaps as a fundraiser you "merely" control the nuts & bolts of the renewal process. Even so, now’s the time to show folks just how critical smart execution can be to the bottomline.

Start by taking a really careful look at your renewal program … everything from copy to the number, nature and timing of renewal contacts. Larger organizations tend to test each element of their renewal efforts very carefully, as they should … judiciously fine-tuning complex programs on an ongoing basis. Smaller organizations might be quite disorganized and even desultory in their approach, not even having what I’d call a renewal program … instead virtually "cut & pasting" stale year-end or annual appeals.

But the dropping renewal rates in the community — and the reality that donors will husband their charitable resources during stressful economic times — suggest that there should be no higher priority than fresh examination of renewal programs. Nothing should be taken for granted.

When "the boss" asks what should be done to protect revenue over the coming year, were I you, I’d say: "Bust our chops to improve renewal rates!" Then I’d add: "And get the rest of the organization focused on that goal too."

Sound simple, or obvious? Try it!

Tom

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, direct mail, donor retention, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

She Planted Trees So Others Could Enjoy The Shade

July 10, 2008

This morning our friend and long-time colleague Polly Agee, 61, will be buried in the National Memorial Park in Falls Church, Virginia

Personally we mourn her death (and have had quite a good wake telling “Polly stories”), but we most of all want to note her passing because she contributed so much to the small, but critically important and uniquely back-biting branch of American fundraising focused on social and political change. A contribution for which all fundraisers, regardless of politics or discipline, should be grateful

For nearly 10 years in the early days (‘70s) of the liberal advocacy movement through the late 80’s Polly was in the foxhole with us. Developing systems that are still used to this day…developing training systems still used to this day…and developing an intolerance for the mediocre that seem to have been all too recently forgotten.

As the Senior Vice President of Craver, Mathews, Smith & Company, Polly helped us launch and build many of the liberal advocacy organizations that are household names today. The National Organization for Women, National Abortion Rights Action League, Greenpeace, The Cousteau Society, and Common Cause. While at CMS she worked on dozens of United States Senate campaigns for Democratic candidates and the presidential campaigns of Morris Udall, Edward Kennedy and John Anderson. Not to mention the Democratic National Committee, The Democratic Senatorial Committee and the Democratic Congressional Committee.

Never one to suffer fools lightly Polly had a temper, but one tempered by an iron-willed discipline to get the most out of every opportunity and every person she came in contact with. And she succeeded. Today, there is a generation of seasoned direct response fundraisers in the advocacy and political arenas that are tougher and wiser because of Polly.

Polly “retired” ( her own words) in the early ‘90s. AND… then went on to start several new careers. Her energy went toward women’s equality and democracy. As Ellen Malcolm, the founder of Emily’s List puts it:

"She always had infectious enthusiasm for women candidates and so many progressive causes. And if there was ever a set-back or special challenge, Polly was ready to give a helping hand. So many of the elected Democratic women we see in public life benefited from Polly’s generosity and help.”

She trained a generation of fundraisers, but wasn’t one bit willing to stop there.

In her final years she went into life coaching and established New Directions Life Coaching which helped, trained, and mentored many.

When a pioneer dies we all should pay attention — and also pay homage.

Polly, honest to God, we’re paying attention. Don’t get mad. We’re just saying “Thank You!”

Roger and Tom

P. S. A memorial service for Polly will be held in early August. We’ll keep you posted as to dates and times.

 

 

 

Posted by rcraver | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, advocacy, direct mail, direct marketing, fundraising, politics | 7 Comments 

The Latest Wake-up Call

July 7, 2008

At the very time when the stock market is dropping, unemployment is rising and fundraisers are attempting to read the tea leaves in preparation for next year’s budgets, Target Analytics has released their Index of National Fundraising Performance for the 1st Quarter of 2008 … and the picture ain’t pretty.

Not only did the number of direct response donors continue to decline, but, for the first time, the increases in revenue per donor that have compensated for the decline in number of donors failed to prevent an overall revenue drop.

The Index’s authors say the falling donor populations “may be due to a mix of factors including economic changes, a changing generational profile in the United States, changing attitudes of donors about giving, and a change in focus by fundraisers toward higher-dollar donors.

Whatever the reasons the numbers are a bit spooky:

·The number of new donors has declined 7.6 % over the past two years. (However, the rate of decline has slowed from 5.3% in the first quarter last year to 2.3% in this first quarter of 2008.)

·Retention rates continued to fall with first-year donor retention dropping 6.6% in Q1 2008 over the same quarter a year before.
·And reactivation rates declined 5.0% from Q1 2007 to Q1 2008.

Among the 72 organizations included in the Index only those in the environmental and animal welfare sectors escaped the pain. For advocacy groups (what Target Analytics calls the “Societal Benefit Sector) there is sunshine among the clouds. New donor growth rose 6.1% in Q1 2008 with 69% of the organizations in this sector showing positive donor growth.

The news wasn’t as encouraging for groups in the International Relief Sector where new donor acquisition declined 23%–the greatest decrease of any sector –and reactivation rates were down significantly as well, falling 21.6% from Q1 2007 to Q1 2008.

And we shouldn’t be looking for clear skies and a return to growth in the near-term future. As the economy slows, so does giving.

Now’s the time to take another look at next year’s budget and make sure you’re spending more, not less, to achieve on donor satisfaction and loyalty to hold on to your base.

Roger

 

Posted by rcraver | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, Hot Research, Measuring Up, advocacy, charities, demographic trends, direct mail, donor retention, fundraising, loyalty, nonprofit management, nonprofits, research | Leave a Comment 

How To Raise Funds Online

June 30, 2008

For months, we’ve been urging readers to track the online fundraising exploits of presidential candidates, where new ground has been broken almost weekly … especially by Barack Obama.

The Obama campaign is to online fundraising what George McGovern was to direct mail fundraising in 1972 … the trailblazer. Though the Obama folks might not like the comparison, given the electoral fate of George, running against what’s his name.

Here’s the latest example of why the Obama campaign has done so well at online fundraising. It features a video briefing by campaign manager David Plouffe, backed by slides, explaining how the campaign expects to contest the election in all states … a strategy made possible — he emphasizes over and over — only because of the terrific grassroots donating and organizing achievement so far by the supporters watching the video … who now need to do just a bit more.

It’s a terrific execution of historically proven fundraising technique in a new medium.

Check it out. Can you imagine your CEO delivering such an appeal? Why not?

Tom

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, email marketing, fundraising, online activism, online fundraising | 4 Comments 

Boomer Gloom Affecting Fundraising?

June 27, 2008

Have The Agitator and DonorTrends discovered the Fundraising Rosetta Stone … demystifing the real reason behind falling acquision and retention rates and other recent fundraising plagues? We think so.

In reporting our 2005 DonorTrends survey three years ago, we noted that Boomers had climbed to the top of the donor heap, surpassing Seniors (born before 1946) and Post-Boomers (born after 1964) in average annual contributions. In 2005, Boomers on average contributed $1361 over a 12 month period; Seniors — the traditional bedrock of giving — donated $1138, while the younger generations brought up the rear with $791.

Might this be the beginning of a "Golden Age" of Boomer giving we asked. Well, as it turns out … not quite.

In our recently completed and soon-to-be-released 2008 DonorTrends Survey, Boomers fell to the bottom of the heap — Seniors reclaimed first place, averaging $1542 in donations in the past 12 months, Newbies (our term for the Post-Boomers) jumped up to $1205 in donations (a percentage increase of 52%!), and Boomers fell to $1081.

What happened to the Boomers?

A new "must read" report by Pew Research, called The Gloomiest Generation, suggests the answer.

As it turns out, compared to both their predecessors and their successor generation, Boomers actually have the least optimistic view of both their current and future economic situation, even though in real terms they are the most prosperous. For example, Boomers give their overall quality of life a lower rating than other generations; they are more likely to worry that their incomes won’t keep up with inflation; they believe more than others that it is harder to get ahead now than it was 10 years ago; they are less likely to say their standard of living exceeds the one their parents had when their parents were the age Boomers are now; and not surprisingly then … Boomers are more anxious than other Americans that they will have to cut household spending in the coming year because money is tight.

This adds up to a pretty gloomy head trip! Might it cause a more conservative approach to donating — even a retrenchment? In our opinion…Absolutely.

Pew suggests a few possible reasons for Boomer gloom.They note that substantial percentages of Boomers are in a "sandwich" phase of life — many are financially supporting their parents, their own children in the home, as well as adult children outside the home — at the very time they are beginning to contemplate retirement and living on fixed incomes. Also, Pew finds seven-in-ten Boomers dissatisfied with the direction in which the country is going, a worse assessment than other generations. The DonorTrends 2008 Survey, to be reported fully soon, probes Boomers’ issue attitudes in detail and finds the same concerns.

But taking their gloom into account, and noting the fall-off in their average giving, we still need to remind ourselves that Boomers numerically dominate the donor universe … so target them we must!

Fundraising Implications Today and Tomorrow. Make no mistake. When the largest and most wealthy generation of donors is in a near-Prozac stage and scared to death of their financial future in a society they perceive is going to the dogs, it’s not good news for fundraisers.

Acquisition suffers because they’re reluctant to make new commitments. Retention suffers because the generally skeptical nature of Boomer generation is turbo charged by fear of the future … and perhaps the perception that the world’s problems are getting solved after all, despite Boomers’ original idealism. In short, they’re skittish, disappointed, and they bail far more quickly than either the Seniors or the Newbies. Is it any wonder acquisition and retention rates for many organizations hit the downward skids at the same time the Boomer generation succeeded the blindly-loyal Seniors as the majority of America’s donors?

And rising gas prices, food prices, and health care costs merely exacerbate the giving malaise.

In short, fasten your fundraising seat belts! This is about more than a temporary economic downturn.

Roger and Tom

P.S. In the DonorTrends 2008 Survey on Generational Giving, available shortly, we’ll set forth actionable recommendations on how to survive and thrive in this sea of depression afflicting America’s largest group of donors. Meanwhile, download the Pew report and stay tuned to The Agitator. Roger & Tom

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under Boomers, Don't Miss these Posts, DonorTrends, Hot Research, demographic trends, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Celebrity Power

June 23, 2008

Of course not every nonprofit has access to a celebrity to help raise its profie … or fundraise.

But if you do, should you jump at the chance?

This article from the NY Times provides some excellent insights into the world of celebrity marketing. Does it work? You bet your Rihanna umbrella … your Patrick Demsey cologne … your Nicole Kidman perfume it does!

Here’s why.

First and foremost, sheer awareness … capturing attention:

“As consumers, we see over 3,156 images a day. We’re just not conscious of them,” says Marshal Cohen, from consumer research firm NPD Group. “Our subconscious records maybe 150, and only 30 or so reach our conscious behavior. If I have a celebrity as part of that message, I just accelerated the potential for my product to reach the conscious of the consumer.”

Second, emotional connecton trumps rationality:

Even savvy, skeptical consumers who understand that stars are paid to support a product may still rely on an endorsement and buy the brand anyway, says Robert Cialdini, a professor of psychology and marketing at Arizona State University.

“We’ve used our cognitive capacity to build a sophisticated informational and technological environment,” he says. But overloaded with information and stimulation, shoppers’ brains revert to a more primitive, raw association of celebrity and product, Mr. Cialdini explains.

So, should we all jump on the phone to Nicole Kidman’s agent? You wish!

Assuming you can access a celebrity, there are obvious issues of "fit" (Is there any actual compatibility between your nonprofit mission, your target audience and the celebrity, or relevance that connects the two "brands"?) and "durability" (What is the desired lifespan of this relationship and how might the affair turn sour?) that need to be assessed.

Is celebrity marketing limited to the "killer" brands of the nonprofit universe, like UNICEF and Amnesty International?

No, not at all.

Celebrities are defined by the pond in which they swim. If your nonprofit has a local or regional focus, there are still likely to be plenty of high profile personalities — outstanding athletes, media celebs, artists & performers — who just might help your nonprofit break through the clutter and help deliver your message.

And don’t forget … every star was born somewhere. It might just be your nonprofit’s hometown!

Happy celebrity hunting.

Tom

P.S. Don’t get your hopes up, Kidman was born in Australia. Rihanna in Barbados. But Patrick Dempsey … Lewiston, Maine!

 

Posted by tbelford | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, branding, cause marketing, celebrities, communications, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

The Girl Effect

June 12, 2008

Global Giving, founded and run by brilliant social entrepreneur Dennis Whittle, is one of my favorites. Dennis left his cushy World Bank job to raise a little social hell and do a whole world of good.

Check out Global Giving’s latest flash/splash animation "The Girl Effect" for a lesson in how to do things right –and wrong.

I’m sure that this will be a viral marketing ‘winner’ with both women and men –especially women. Powerful. Energetic. Poignant. But sadly, like some hunting dog ranging out and about on the scent, it takes too long to get to the point — assuming the point is putting some bucks in the treasury of Global Giving on behalf of women.

But, you be the judge. My point in passing this along is to both recognize and praise creativity ( and this deserves praise), but to also point out that too much ‘warm up’ can prove fatal. I love this piece. I only hope that all the brilliant foreplay translates into fundraising action.

Of one thing I’m sure. This piece will certainly make the viral rounds — big time. But will it come back home laden with cash? Please let me know what you think.

Roger

P.S. And Dennis, please let us know how "The Girl Effect" worked from a fundraising standpoint. Big bucks or not, for your consistent pushing of the envelope and Global Giving’s constant efforts at innovation, YOU DESERVE A RAISE!

Posted by rcraver | Filed Under You Deserve a Raise, creativity, fundraising, new media | 7 Comments 

Postal Mail Lives

June 10, 2008

Agitator aficionado Bob Roth alerted us to a piece in e-Marketer reporting on the just-released “2008 Channel Preference Survey” from email marketing firm ExactTarget.Bottom Line: The preferred personal comunications channels — phone, email, text and instant messaging — are not necessarily the preferred channels for marketing. On a scale of 1 to 5, respondents gave direct mail an average score of 3.9, followed by e-mail at 3.7. All other channels averaged under 3. More than 75% of the 1550+ folks surveyed reported making a purchase in response to direct mail. And nearly two-thirds said they had made a purchase because of a marketing message received through an e-mail.Take a look at the Age and Channel breakdown on this chart prepared by e-Marketer:
 Take a moment to download and study the ExactTarget Channel Preference Survey. Among the points I found worth noting:

  • New marketing channels are being layered on pre-existing ones instead of replacing them.
  • Overall, direct mail has the highest acceptability score of all channels. E-mail received the highest score across digital channels compared to SMS and instant messaging.
  • BUT…there is a quite different attitude between direct mail and e-mail when it comes to unsolicited promotions. Send an unsolicited promotion through direct mail and consumers do not mind. Send the same message through e-mail and it’s SPAM.
  • Be careful about invading personal space. The survey found that the closer you get to the individual, the more likely consumers are to sense that their personal space is being violated. Direct mail and e-mail can feel anonymous if the consumer chooses. However… as Morgan Stewart, Exact Target’s Director of Research and Strategy notes: “phones, text messaging, and social networking sites feel more personal. Let’s face it, regardless of the ‘relationship’ a consumer has with a company, interaction through these channels can feel creepy, pushy, and just generally uncomfortable.”

Finally, if you really dig into this survey you’ll get some fabulous tips on what channels are best for what types of communications and why here at The Agitator we keep harping ad naseum about the importance and benefit of multi-channel integration.RogerP.S. The results of this channel preference survey agree with our just-out-of-the-field DonorTrends Survey of Online and Offline Donors. Our analysts and editors are now at work preparing twelve specialty survey reports dealing with everything from generational and channel differences in giving, to a report on the top-ranked nonprofits in each major fundraising sector from animal rights to human rights, and a range of other findings and actionable recommendations. Stay tuned for release dates.

Posted by rcraver | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, Uncategorized, demographic trends, direct mail, direct marketing, fundraising, marketing metrics, new media | Leave a Comment 

Next Page »