There’s an underlying phenomenon here that’s highly relevant, I think, to nonprofit fundraising.

Pew reports that more than half of adult cell phone owners used their cell phones while they were in a store to seek help with their purchase decision:

• 38% of cell owners used their phone to call a friend while they were in a store for advice about a purchase they were considering making;
• 24% of cell owners used their phone to look up reviews of a product online while they were in a store; and,
• 25% of adult cell owners used their phones to look up the price of a product online while they were in a store, to see if they could get a better price somewhere else.

What’s really going on here? Consumers are looking for reassurance … and they’re looking for it from the source they trust most — other consumers who are friends or who have written reviews based on their own experience. And they’re looking for comparison information, specifically with respect to price … seeking value for money.

In short, they’re realizing … “I don’t need to be on my own making this decision. Advice is just  a few taps away.” They are being trained to consult with others because it’s so easy and immediate.

So, now they’re home, having purchased a new iPhone or iPad, and your prospect mailing shows up. What might they do?

I wouldn’t necessarily say that they’ll pick up the phone and ask a friend … “Should I give to Worldvision or Save the Children?” Although indeed some might inquire of a friend if they support either. Or they might recall reassuringly that a friend has ‘liked’ one of the organizations on their Facebook page.

What I do think many (most even?) will do is go online for some form of validation. They’ll go to the organization’s website and poke around.

And, given the consumer shopping experience described above, where peer referrals are hugely important, what should they readily find?

I would suggest — above all — TESTIMONIALS!

Testimonials both from very satisfied beneficiaries of the organization’s work and from real donors who appreciate the organization’s accomplishments. Testimonials in a variety of formats, from short quotes to short videos.

Secondarily, but definitely not with the same weight as the testimonials, strong ratings from the charity raters (or some other straightforward reassurance/evidence about financial accountability and transparency). Price comparison isn’t really a relevant concept in the fundraising setting. But reassurance about money being properly managed and delivering big bang for the buck clearly is.

Few offers (or solicitations) are considered in isolation anymore. The best thing you can do to address that reality is make sure your online presence is your prospect’s reassuring friend.

Tom

This article from The Guardian reports that 10% of prime time TV ads have been developed using neuromarketing techniques … reading the brain’s reactions to creative stimulus in real time.

So, I’m wondering … who will be first in the nonprofit sector to don the EEG headset?

My predictions …

1. It will happen.

2. The first will be a major health-related charity (because they have the money to experiment) or maybe even more likely, a child sponsor agency (because they have the money and they already use direct response TV to prospect for high lifetime value donors).

3. If this tool is akin presently to the mainframe of the ’60s and ’70s, soon there will be the iPad version … with one in every development office!

Other predictions?

Tom

There’s simply too much good stuff going on out there to spend time dithering about whether or when the economy will rebound, for boards to come to their senses … or whatever folks spend their time worrying about. Usually, things over which none of us has any control.

Agitator Readers are special and we sure don’t want them looking back on 2012 wishing “If I had only known” about this innovation or that innovation.

Equally, we have no desire to tout, hype or otherwise go overboard on the latest New, New Thing. Too much of that going around already.

Rather, our goal with the new Agitator Toolbox is to serve up innovations that have been tested and proven. And we’ll also focus on innovative approaches and processes that build on basic and sound fundraising and donor relationship practices.

Some of these tools, applications and case histories will come from our colleagues at DonorVoice, DonorTrends and TrueGivers. Others from serendipitous discoveries we make while attending conferences and reading mounds of research reports. Still others from alert readers. We hope you’ll share your discoveries with us.

Because a large number of Agitator Readers find themselves dealing with direct mail, our first entry for the Toolbox is about a proven tool designed to identify likely direct mail package winners and losers – without having to waste needless time and money on waiting for ink to dry and the postal service to deliver. It’s all explained by Kevin Schulman, the CEO of DonorVoice.

WARNING: You won’t find the Toolbox in your daily email feed; rather it’s a feature that will appear on the homepage of The Agitator’s website along with other features  we hope prove helpful. Features like our Jobs section … an Archive now Searchable by Categories … and some older favorites like Comments, a constantly updated listing of The Agitator Community, and our popular Blogroll.

We’ve added or rearranged others in response to requests and guidance provided by Agitator Readers in our recent survey.

We hope you’ll pass along any discoveries involving tools, applications and processes you think are innovative and helpful. Help us fill the Agitator Toolbox. Together we can explore a fundraising world that’s filled with opportunity.

Roger and Tom

P.S. A Webinar on the Direct Mail Pre-Test Tool will be held on Thursday, February 9 at 11:30 a.m. Eastern Time.  Registration is FREE, but attendance limited on a first come basis.  Sign up here.

In what part of ‘the biz’ do you work? How long? How big is your organization?

What are your interests? What are you looking for from The Agitator?

You get it.

So we’ve put together this simple nine-question survey. Please take it now. The five minutes (or less) you invest in helping us understand who you are and what you want will help us immensely to deliver a year’s worth of Agitator editorial that is truly relevant and helpful.

Here’s that survey link again.

We look forward to a stimulating year!

Roger & Tom

Here’s one from the Neuromarketing blog, which chronicles developments in brain research, especially as it has implications for marketing.

Some titles from Neuromarketing’s ‘best of’:

• Simple slogans double sales
• Don’t sell, seduce!
• Most desired brands
• Replies can change customer minds
• The power of positive names
• Paper beats digital for emotion

Enjoy!

Tom

As we head for 2011’s fundraising finish line The Atlas of Giving on Friday reported that overall giving this year will finish 7.4% ahead of last year.

Key takeaways from the Atlas of Giving November report:

• In terms of sectors, ‘Education’ was the biggest gainer (up 9.3%) and ‘Religion’ posted the greatest decline (but still 6.5% greater than 2010). All other sectors remained posted gains in the 7% range.

• Corporate and foundation giving up 6.2% and 6.1% are forecast to account for the least growth, while individual giving will increase 7.7% and bequests +7.4%.

• There are some signs of weakening. Giving in November (+0.4%)  and the December forecast (+0.2%) are worrisome portends for 2012.

• We’ll know more when The Atlas of Giving releases its 2012 Forecast in mid-January.

Much like the CIA once monitored the wheat harvest in the old Soviet Union, Ethan Boldt over at DirectMarketingIQ reports the top 5 fundraising direct mail trends in 2011.

Using the remarkable database of direct mail contained in the Who’s Mailing What Archive  that includes 14 different types of fundraising mail, ranging from social action, through international relief, culture, health, politics, religion, sports, animal welfare and wildlife, Ethan summarizes the key trends as follows:

• Controls showed a slight uptick in 2011. This year 45% of all fundraising mail was with a control package (by his definition a package that appeared in the Archive for at least 1 year); that’s an increase of 1.8%.  This means that 55% of all packages were ‘new’—a hopeful sign that there’s considerable testing going on. [Or, asks Tom cynically, does this merely reflect desperation?!]

• Personalization and Variable Data Printing Hit Record Levels.  Today, according to Ethan, 60.3% of all fundraising mail is personalized either by copy or imagery—the highest point since the Archive began.  And, it increased by a full 8% over 2010, the previous record high.

• Surprising Increase in Larger Formats. Ethan examined all direct mail in the Archive and reports that the usage of envelopes smaller than 6″ x 9″s stayed constant over the past two years. “The only change was an increase in larger-sized formats (bigger than 6″ x 9″s), by 9 percent, with larger formats taking up a quarter of the mailstream with a big contribution from the fundraising industry.”

• The Self-Mailer is (probably) Out! In 2010 self-mailers accounted for only 4% of fundraising mail, but that represented a 12 percent increase over 2009. Bad economy? Bad thinking? Whatever the reason Ethan reports that the use of self-mailers declined by 21% in 2011, a trend also reflected in the commercial sector.

• Mailings with Premiums showed a 14% increase. In the commercial sector the use of premiums increased by 7% in 2011. Is the fact that premium use doubled in the fundraising sector significant? We’ll explore premiums in future Agitator posts, but the reality is that today 1 in 5 mail pieces contain a premium. [Again, Tom asks, a sign of pure desperation? He'd be more comfortable if he thought fundraisers were serious about measuring and evaluating the lifetime value of these premium responders.]

Your ‘premium’ for tomorrow?  Agitator posts that rang our readers’ chimes in 2011.

Meanwhile, what giving or technical trends caught your attention in 2011?

Roger

The overwhelming conclusion of psychological studies is that giving is motivated by a variety of non-rational needs and impulses and that, indeed, thinking or rationalizing gets in the way of giving.

Ironically, the same day, Beth’s Blog cited a study, Money for Good II, suggesting that sharing information about results and financial transparency would attract more donors.

Says Beth: “The study points out that nonprofits can increase their fundraising and improve operations through an intentional focus on measurement – that helps them determine impact, effectiveness, and efficiency.  After financial information, individual donors want information about how nonprofits are getting their results.”

Precisely the kind of information that yesterday’s researchers claim will diminish giving.

Now the Money for Good study was conducted by GuideStar, whose business is providing charity performance info. That’s OK. And donors will always say in a survey that of course they think deeply and carefully about their giving choices. No one admits to being victims of their emotions!

I do often argue that some donors — especially educated Boomers — will look more than others for more evidence that a charity is in fact effective at producing results.

But even so, I’m sticking with the psychologists. Emotion rules giving. Emotion brings donors to the point of giving. If any ‘analysis’ and ‘thinking’ occurs, it can break either way … it can get in the way, or it can help the donor make a ‘reasoned’ choice amongst alternatives.

So absolutely, talk about results. But I’d argue that the whole point of talking about results is still to elicit an emotional response … not trigger some sort of ROI analysis. Keep that in mind as you present your results. How, for example?

Don’t present a laundry list of 10 things you’ve accomplished this past year.

Do tell stories about the people your donor helped, the crisis she averted, the enjoyment he enabled.

Let’s hear more from you on this. In making your fundraising case, what’s the balance between heart and mind?

Tom

It’s been claimed that these have some predictive capability vis-a-vis the outcomes of national elections in the US.

I’m wondering if anyone has ever tracked charitable giving against either of these indices.

Both were released recently, with the Conference Board index experiencing its biggest gain in eight years. The UM index also jumped in November.

Meanwhile, the National Retail Federation reported that US shoppers spent a record $52.4 billion during the Thanksgiving weekend, 16% up over a year earlier.

All of which might suggest that US nonprofits will close the year strongly.

Here’s hoping confidence matters!

Tom

For the first 20 days of the November – December 2011 holiday season, $9.7 billion has been spent online, marking a 14% increase versus the corresponding days last year. comScore projects a 15% increase by the end of December.

If consumers’ purses and wallets are opening up in general e-commerce, that might auger well for online giving.

However, I should note that in the retail space comScore sees the growth coming at the expense of offline sales.

Raising once again … how much of rising online giving is substitution for other channels of donating versus ‘new’ money?

Stay tuned!

Tom

Sadly, lots of folks pay lip service to the concept of donor commitment or loyalty, but few really grasp it, and even fewer in the nonprofit sector take any serious steps to do much about it.

The commercial sector long ago woke up to the economic importance of customer loyalty and commitment. A quick search of Amazon reveals more than 1000 books on ‘customer loyalty’ in the commercial world, but just 13 on ‘donor loyalty’ in the nonprofit space.

That’s why we welcome this month’s publication of a fascinating new book, 3D Philanthropy by Canadian fundraiser Fraser Green.

I’ve known and collaborated with Fraser over the years and he really understands the importance of commitment and how to build it. In fact, this book is really a donor commitment manual – full of practical tips and recipes to deepen donor connections and foster the loyalty that results.

Ken Burnett, who’s spent a long and distinguished career studying and preaching the importance of donor relationship management and commitment, says this about Fraser’s  unique book:

“Fundraisers, as Fraser Green rightly says, are better at understanding behaviours than motivations. This book sets out to rectify that, addressing the emotional and motivational dimensions of fundraising in more detail and better than any other I know. It contains more intimate pen-portraits of donors and more analysis not just of how they think and behave, but also of how they feel and why they respond as they do. It deserves a space on every fundraiser’s bookshelf.

“The author hopes this book will give you a new way to look at the good work you do and unlock some doors that you haven’t ventured through before. There’s a lot here for anyone serious about fundraising.”

And Tom Ahern, another of my heroes when it comes to understanding motvation and commitment, sums up Fraser’s insights:

“I’ve never seen a book like 3D Philanthropy. In this truly original work, Fraser takes you on a fascinating journey through the donor’s giving experience. You eavesdrop on the precise intellectual, emotional, and spiritual reasons behind the donor’s acts of philanthropy. This book will forever change your understanding of the donor’s mind — and your special role in helping donors reach their full philanthropic potential. If you’ve ever had second thoughts about your career in fundraising, read this book – and find your inspiration again.”

Building on a fascinating series of vignettes of individual donors, Fraser goes on to backup his theories with detailed survey research conducted by his fundraising firm, Goodworks with Canadian donors, then illustrates the importance of all this with easy-to-understand calculations of the value of donor loyalty and commitment.

The economics of fundraising is startlingly simple. Committed and loyal donors are the economic engine of any charity’s database. Donor loyalty must become the holy grail of fundraising. 3D Philanthropy is really a donor loyalty handbook. To understand ‘3D Philanthropy’ is to know how to build donor loyalty.

Fundraisers who do that right will be the ones who prosper.

Roger

P.S.  3D Philanthropy is available for $29 from Civil Sector Press. Fraser, until those royalties start piling up, you deserve a raise!