Matt at Matt’s Fundraising Blog offers these five qualities he would like to see in the top exec of any nonprofit:

1. The Director must be passionate about a vision and able to communicate that vision in a way that gets people excited.
2. The Director should be a manager, but not a micro-manager. Micromanagement is a disease that will decimate a nonprofit.
3. The Director should be someone who, when in doubt, says "yes."  
4. The Director should be someone who knows how to make decisions.
5. The Director should love funders and fundraising.

These sound great to me. Matt elaborates a bit on each.

How would your Prez or ED stack up against these?

I’ve had three nonprofit bosses in my career. One absolutely excelled at #5. One at  #3. And one at #1. And each of them was great at #4. So when it comes to bosses, I consider myself blessed.

Any qualities to add?

Tom

In their article, each of the following points is examined:

1. Major charities represented, but smaller organizations raised significant funds
2. More places to give online during a crisis creates big range in average gift size.
3. Social media outlets activate immediate, far-reaching support.
4. Groundswell of giving post-disaster ebbs after first week.
5. Donors have specific expectations about how their gift makes a difference.

Re #2, Network for Good reports the average gift across a number of giving channels, including $117 for your basic charity donate page, $30 on a social site like Facebook, $5-10 for mobile giving.

But to me, the most universally applicable point relates to #4, which I’d summarize as: Be Prepared! In the case of Haiti, donations peaked within two days of the disaster, then quickly declined.

Any nonprofit can find itself, its cause or mission suddenly in the spotlight, perhaps with no warning. With the obvious capacity of online media and tools to capture and harness public interest at that extraordinary moment — which might be a very fleeting moment — it is imperative to have an action plan in place to implement immediately.

When calamity strikes, be it a meltdown in Congress or a natural disaster (or your executive director  is subpoenaed … not every calamity is a fundraising opportunity!), it’s already too late for planning. It’s time to push the "Launch" button.

Tom

P.S. Above, I’ve chosen to stress immediacy. But NfG’s data illustrates the "long tail" effect as well. And they make the interesting point that as needs change following the disaster, the relevance of — and opportunities for — various organizations can shift. In this case, immediate disaster relief, for which the Red Cross might be an obvious giving option, will give way to long-term rebuilding, for which the best giving choice might be a lesser-known charity that has an established and effective programmatic presence in the country.

"Tom – interesting that you should talk about AARP and their advertizing campaign:  I just received some materials from them, having joined. very recently.  Among their offerings are discounts on motorcycle insurance of all things.  THAT told me I was in the right place.  And it made me wonder how long that has been a part of their mix.  It seemed pretty radical to me and told me very clearly that this is not my grandmother’s AARP!

When a nonprofit can keep that current it says a lot about the flexibility and capacity of their leadership.  I was very impressed – to your point exactly."

I’ll bet AARP’s welcome package was chockablock full of "stuff."

But what stuck out to Sarah was one tiny item … one small cue in the scheme of things — the motorcycle insurance. Clearly it sent her a confirming signal that she had made the right choice in joining AARP. With that cue, AARP "said" it was modern enough for this modern woman.

Two observations about this example …

First, it underscores one of the most important things a welcome package should do (beyond thanking the donor) … quickly reinforce the positive emotion and confirm the sound judgment the donor initially felt/associated with joining the organization (making the gift).

And note, for some AARP new members, the motorcycle insurance is — I’m certain — a very tangible benefit they will seize and use.  But for most it might simply send  the right signal.

What is it about your nonprofit’s welcome or acknowledgement package (or e-message) that delivers this kind of reinforcement?

Second, it reminds me of one of the first direct mail letters I ever received … and certainly the most life-changing.

The letter came in 1970 from Common Cause, an organization I’d never heard of, which was just launching.

A key theme of the letter was that the Congressional seniority system was a crucial obstacle to both accountability and progressive movement in the Congress. I was a grad student in political theory at the time. And my reaction was that any organization that recognized the key importance of this obscure structural convention was really going at the heart of things … it was the right organization for me.

The seniority system was my motorcycle insurance!

I immediately became a member of Common Cause, began volunteering … and within a few months got my first "professional" job there. And the rest is history!

Think about the "cues" your organization sends in its fundraising and communications materials. What are the words or images that send the strongest cues? What is the signal they actually send? Is it intentional? How do you know you’re "reading" this the same way as your recipient is?

Tom

P.S. Know who was responsible for Common Cause’s direct mail at that point? Roger Craver!

The first, from Brandweek, discusses the new advertising campaign of AARP. It’s hard to imagine any outfit with a bigger stake in understanding Boomers and their aspirations. AARP does a ton research to inform itself.

Says AARP marketing chief Emilio Pardo: "This generation is at a moment in time where aspiration and setting goals so that you can live the rest of your life in the best way [possible] is a big issue. It means you’re not done at 50. Not only are you not done, but also the insights and experiences you gained throughout your life better prepare you to take the next step … We are redefining what 50 is, and that comes with the aspiration and belief that “I’m not done yet. I want to take advantage of my life. I want to move forward.”

I like the "I’m not done yet" theme. And it’s one that many nonprofits could adapt as they converse with older donors.

And this report from marketing firm Brain Sells delves into the Boomer psyche with observations that ring true to this Boomer. Here are a few …

• Boomers are at a time in life when they really don’t want to compromise their authenticity.
• For Boomers, process is at least as important as the end result. They want "the ride."
• Boomers like to inspire others. Help them feel helpful.
• Boomers have been around long enough to know there are few absolutes, little is black or white.
• Accentuate personal style over rote action or blind ritual.
• Boomers are oriented to the human dimension, that’s the only real thing. They can see the humor in most situations.
• What Boomers really dislike is feeling put upon by arbitrary power, feeling trapped, conned, boxed-in, and being thought of as one of the masses.

This profile fits most of the 60s street protesters I know.

Combine "you’re not done" with "and don’t let anybody tell you you can’t do it " and you have a message with pretty powerful appeal for Boomers, I’ll wager.

Tom

Millward Brown uses an index based upon trust and recommendation to build its list.

Find anything to quarrel with here?

Who hasn’t bought a book on Amazon … then another … then another? Have you ever NOT gotten what you ordered?

OK Toyota … but they note the research was done in 2009, pre-meltdown. But wait, can Toyota’s problem be any worse than Tylenol? Both were immensely strong brands before controversy hit … Toyota will be back, like Tylenol … think American Red Cross.

And diapers! Who could be more trusted than the folks who cover your baby’s butt!!? Come on! Two of the top ten spots. And while we’re thinking soft as a baby’s butt, there’s Downy taking a third spot. Got a better set of tactile brands?

Then there are the folks who reinforce their dependability every time you call upon them — FedEx and UPS. Nothing but customer satisfaction. It must be boring as hell to wait for customer complaint calls at the call centers of these outfits!

That leaves Tide, with a million years and probably billions of dollars of advertising behind it …

And WebMD, which I confess is a mystery to me. Can anyone help me on that one?

While you’re at it, how about your list of top ten nonprofit brands?

How would you choose?

Is Amnesty International more "trustworthy" than the ACLU or UNICEF? Does any of these provide more "customer satisfaction"? What donor "experience" could a nonprofit provide that would cause you to refer or recommend it? Isn’t awareness a rather significant precondition? Are any of your top ten less than twenty years old?

Ok, you’ve jotted down your own personal list. Now share it with your fellow Agitator readers!

Tom

Diane Sawyer sets forth an absolutely charming and moving story  about a Lake Forest College alumna named Grace Groner who died in January  at age 100 and left the college $7 million.  According to Lake Forest’s president the College never had a clue.

For fundraisers this is also a cautionary tale about over-reliance on traditional methods of screening,  just what information is available and  helpful and what is not.  Had Ms. Groner’s name passed through a traditional wealth screening process the search would have drawn a blank.

• Because 80% of  most wealth screening depends on real estate values Ms. Groner’s modest home valued at $152, 356 (here’s her property assessment sheet)
• And certainly there would be no SEC insider shareholder information because Ms. Groner owned 3 shares of Abbott Labs, purchased in 1935 at $60 a share.  Today worth $7 million!

But, as Tom and I have preached over and over, often mega-gifts spring from the well of loyal, year-after year giving regardless of the size of those loyal gifts.

Bingo!

I went into DonorTrends TrueGivers  database and found that indeed Ms. Groner was a loyal donor to a variety of causes in her community. Here’s a slice of the TrueGiver record that may have tipped off a fundraiser or researcher focused on alumnae with loyal giving habits.

The generosity and loyalty of Grace Groner is more than a beautiful and moving story.  It should serve as a reminder to all of us that actual giving, loyal giving, more than artificially induced ‘screening’ using massive databases of unrelated information, can help find the needles in the haystack.

Roger  

The report notes that up to 12 January 2010 about $1 million had been donated to various causes and charities via mobile text. Then in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake, this amount soared close to $50 million, with gifts limited to the $5-$10 range. From that, the report estimates that in the neighborhood of 6.5 million gifts were made.

Most striking, but not surprising, is the demographic profile of this mobile text giving …

17% of Gen Y, 14% of Gen X, 3% of Boomers and 3% of Matures made gifts via mobile text.

It occurs to me that mobile text provides a sort of "training wheels" serving to help younger individuals get comfortable with donating.

The gift amounts are readily affordable, the "need" (in the case of a natural disaster) requires no explanation, the situation is ripe for an emotional impulse response abetted by a convenient, at-hand technology.

It might not be easy to track down these mobile donors and to coax follow-on gifts from them … though that effort should certainly be made.

But nevertheless, if mobile text giving is habit forming (not that anyone wishes for disasters), then perhaps it will help younger donors progress over time to more substantial and considered forms of donating.

Once you learn to ride a bike …

Tom

For those interested in keeping their "bad practices" lexicon up-to-date, the equivalent heedless behavior in the email channel  is referred to as “spray and pray.”

Fortunately, sophisticated direct mail fundraisers keep track of the ultimate costs of burn and churn. Lower retention, lower lifetime value, higher costs, etc.

And, even if the savvy direct mail fundraiser is forced by a dimwitted or short-sighted board, CEO, or finance director to “meet the total income numbers,” there are established, predictable ways to mitigate the stupidity through reinstatement/win-back programs, etc.

The time has come to start measuring and dealing with the same phenomena in the email channel. While firms like Convio and Blackbaud are contributing valuable and helpful metrics on the growth of online fundraising and on the use of some techniques, we all need to pay more attention to the email channel specifically.

Why? Because even though The Agitator covers the “exotics” like online video and social media, the fact is that email for most organizations continues to be the main new media workhorse.

Thus, with organizations struggling with shrinking budgets placing more and more emphasis on "cheap" email,  this piece from Marketing Daily is worth a "read and heed" … and some serious thought, given the shocking and surprising results  of a survey conducted by the Chief Marketing Officers Council on consumer attitudes toward email.

• 91% of consumers are opting out of commercial emails.
• 41% of the 91% say that irrelevant emails make them “consider abandoning the brand entirely.”

I know, I know. You’re saying, "Well, consumer targeted emails are not e-appeals" etc., etc.  But, forewarned is forearmed. 

For me, the most disturbing part of the CMO Council Survey isn’t that "junk email" drives customers away, it’s that marketing officers (shall we also say fundraisers?) admit to frightening ignorance:

• Only 46.5% of the marketing folks surveyed say they have insights into their retention rates;
• More than 66% are plagued with customer churn rates higher than 5% a year;
• YET….67% have no system for trying to reclaim lost or dormant customers.

Of course I know that Agitator readers are far smarter than their soap-selling, electronics-hustling colleagues in commercial marketing. And you’re not about to send out gazillions of emails just because they’re cheap.

I’m just asking:  Do the e-fundraisers among us measure the effect of e-appeals on retention rates – not only on the e-channel, but also on direct mail donors exposed to e-appeals? Do you have a plan for reclaiming “unsubscribes” and dormant donors who’ve swum in the e-channel? And one more very key question –  is your e-message/e-appeal relevant to that donor’s previous interest in your cause?

At the same time, I’m rejoicing that so many fellow Agitators — that would be YOU — are contributing testing data and insights  on your experiences in both the online and integrated realms.  Keep it up, please.

Thank you.

Roger

Denny’s checklist is 58 items long, so it’s pretty comprehensive. For example, here’s #2: Does your copy contain some or all of the 13 most powerful and evocative words in the English language? [Denny's checklist tells you what they are!]

Many of the items seem so, well, DUH!

But as Atul Gawande establishes beyond doubt in his book, that’s exactly why we need checklists!  Says Gawande:

"In a complex environment, experts are up against two main difficulties. The first is the fallibility of human memory and attention, especially when it comes to mundane, routine matters that are easily overlooked under the strain of more pressing events."

You might want to print out a hard copy of Denny’s checklist!

Tom

The two firms looked at 1750 events with nearly one million participants to answer these questions:

1. Do integrated Facebook® tools help make event participants more successful online fundraisers?
2. Is Twitter® an effective fundraising solicitation tool for event participants?
3. How can a YouTube® video displayed on participants’ personal fundraising pages impact their fundraising success?
4. What are the differences between fundraising with traditional email tools versus using newer social media tools?
5. Which segments of event participants are adopting and using social media tools for their fundraising efforts?
6. Who are donors most frequently giving to through these new social media channels?
7. What are best practices for promoting social media tools to event participants in order to help increase adoption?
8. What future trends can we expect to see involving social media and fundraising for special events?

Tantalized? Read the report. Chock full of important data.

OK, here’s a teaser … Event participants that adopted integrated social media tools increased their fundraising by as much as 40 percent compared to their peers who weren’t using the available online tools.

Now are you interested?!

Thanks Blackbaud and Charity Dynamics.

Tom

P.S. You might even want to check out their March 31 webinar on this topic.

P.P.S. Some of you had trouble opening the McKinsey article on "behavioral economics" yesterday. Go to The Agitator post and re-try … it’s the same link as yesterday, only now it’s working! Don’t ask me why.