I love this online fundraising campaign run by the Salvation Army in the Detroit region.
And I also love the fact that they employ someone (that would be Michelle St. Pierre) with the title, Director of Integrated Marketing! Somebody out there gets it.
This campaign was put together with e-Miles, a web loyalty operation that rewards its members for viewing online videos and responding to surveys afterwards. Members get emails alerting them to the videos available for viewing … they watch the ones they wish to … and get travel points as an incentive … "Miles for minutes" as they say.
The Salvation Army tested two messages to this audience.
More precisely, since e-Miles segments its audience according to zip code, the organization was able to target 70,000 of the site’s registered members in the Motor City area. According to St. Pierre, the test produced a donations conversion rate of 1.15 percent.
All told, 9,729 people watched the video and completed the survey. That in itself is a great conversion rate … perhaps testimony to the strength of the Salvation Army brand. St. Pierre further reports that: "For all the people who opened and completed the survey, 4,316 said ‘yes,’ that they could help us [as volunteers]."
"And we don’t have to stand outside in the freezing cold," she said.
Michelle St. Pierre, you and your team deserve a raise!
Tom
This article was posted in: direct marketing, email marketing, loyalty, online activism, online fundraising, online video, You Deserve a Raise.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Show me the money! I’d like to see all of the costs and all the revenues associated with this story. There’s no way for third parties to evaluate this program based on the information in the story. Without all the facts, no conclusions can be drawn.
I’d also be interested to see how many of the 4,316 people who said they’d volunteer actually show up. My bet? Less than a dozen, if any. That’s not me being cynical. It’s experience with polling numbers and questions about what people’s intentions are, and the value of a promise to volunteer.
What I find frustrating about these reports (and it’s endemic) is the universal absence of results that can be used to evaluate these programs. In this story, in particular, the costs are being deliberately withheld by the Salvation Army.
Am I wrong to be skeptical when key information is withheld? I don’t think so. Not when I have to responsibly advise clients.
Stephen,
Yes, all the facts necessary to judge this an unqualified winner are not on the table.
Yes, I wish fundraisers bared their data for all the world to see … do you?
Yes, I think you’re right to view with caution.
But Yes, I’m confident the Salvation Army wouldn’t be talking this up if it was a loser.
And Yes, I’m still happy to cite this as exemplary out-of-the-box thinking.
Yes, there’s enough info in the post for you to dig into the idea if you are motivated to do so.
And Yes, I think you’re cynical.
Tom
Hi Stephen,
I worked with Michelle & team on the campaign and I think what you want to know is, is it a reasonable cost per donor acquired? The answer is yes, very much so. Actually, it was a profitable acquisition campaign and we sourced more prospects (whether for volunteers or donors) to boot.
The time investment is very minimal and there’s almost no risk, so it was definitely worth it for them. The Eastern Michigan division is always and trying new things, which is a good thing and benefits the whole org.
Cheers,
Molly