Fundraising News, Information and Blog for Nonprofit Organizations
You are currently browsing the yearly archive for 2006.
Sorry for not posting in a few weeks. Between heavy client load and the Holidays, I’ve been a bit out of communication…and will be until the week of January 8.
Thanks to all who have subscribed and who follow this site on a regular basis. We’ll be roaring back in January with a tremendous amount of new and helpful information. Have a wonderful holiday season. We are excited at what the New Year will bring. Please drop a line. Take care.
- Duke
I read a press release today announcing ten trends taken from Next Now: Trends for the Future, the latest book from Trendspotters Marian Salzman and Ira Matathia. For entire list, follow the link above or click on the “More” link below. I’ve cherry-picked the few trends that relate most directly to our industry.
The trend most getting my attention is: “Single Minded Ethics.” Why? Well, any trend related to our industry is fairly historic, important, and implicative. I trust that anyone (high-profile celeb or not) choosing to “pursue change vigorously” will do so in ways that accomplish our long-term fundraising objectives. Thoughtful fundraising marketing efforts strive to more fully engage donors, create long lasting relationships, and foster deep ties to organizational mission.
Trends for 2007 (abridged version):
SHADES OF GREEN: As environmental responsibility becomes a prerequisite for corporations, companies will battle to become the greenest in their respective categories. Think BP or Toyota, whose hybrid vehicles have given the company gold-star status. Some companies will seek to stand out by promoting a particular cause or natural resource. Bonus points will go to businesses that help consumers understand environmental issues and offer smart, easy ways to make a difference. At gepower.com, for instance, GE explains its energy-saving initiatives. For those companies that don’t act, 2007 will see newly concerned consumers speaking out and taking action.
LOCAL LOYALTY: Globalization is giving us not only a new perspective on the world but also a greater loyalty to our own communities. Remember American Idol Ruben Studdard’s custom-made shirts emblazoned with the area code of his hometown, Montgomery, Alabama? More people will feel compelled to support local businesses, producers, artists and community initiatives. The local-food movement is leading the trend: In Manhattan, for example, high-profile chefs such as Danny Meyer have helped to make the Union Square farmers market a must for locally minded shoppers. Just as globalization has made the world seem smaller, localization allows us to make our hometowns feel bigger and more important.
Single-Minded Ethics: Bono has AIDS, Angelina Jolie has orphans, and Al Gore has CO2. 2007 will see more of us pick a niche and pursue change vigorously rather than skim like a stone across the ethics pond. We believe we can change the world, but we know we can’t change it all at once.
This Tube Is MyTube: More of us will start creating entertainment using formats such as blogs or publicly posted video clips as today’s technology makes it easy for amateurs to express themselves at minimal expense or risk. And it’s not just for fun or, sometimes, profit: Because they cannot be easily reined in, these forms of online media are becoming increasingly vital forums in countries where free speech is repressed.
Click here for the entire list.
MADD is holding a “virtual candlelight vigil” this holiday season that is rather unique and meaningful. The idea here is fairly simple and straightforward:
MADD will be holding an online candlelight vigil during the Holiday Season when you can light a ‘virtual candle’ and submit a tribute message to a loved one or friend impacted by drunk driving. You can even have the tribute emailed to the person or family being honored.
Reading through a number of tribute messages left me speechless and numb. Here is one example:
What does this campaign have to do with fundraising? My guess is fairly little in the immediate sense of the word (although MADD may see it as an email capture strategy.) However, this campaign creates a powerful experience for those left behind and living in the aftermath of such a tragic event. Memories need to be kindled and re-kindled and this campaign helps light the spark.
Excellent series of ads from Amnesty International. Click Here to see the entire series.
When I first ventured into the world of nonprofit blogging, I did so with much anticipation and fear. Anticipation to learn new things, to explore new areas within fundraising, and to share a little of what I’ve learned with a few others. To shine the light so to speak. The fear part comes in because, as with most new things, the unknown can be a bit dark, unforgiving, and can close in on you very quickly. Uh, very similar to a recent caving expedition in the hills of West Virginia. The picture below pretty much says it all. (Yes, that’s me on the left. And you can stop laughing now.)
Oh geez, there are a ton of similarities between fundraising and caving. I’ll spare you. Ok, I can’t resist just a few: wear coveralls because you never know what crap you’ll be asked to crawl through; and…watch out for ‘ol bats - you’ll usually find them CLINGING to the walls. One more: gives data mining a whole new meaning.
I’m done.
Back to my point. Over the past few months, I’ve managed to meet some extremely intelligent, fascinating, and interesting nonprofit bloggers and fundraising professionals. A few have helped me out in so many ways - encouraging email, wonderful posts, the ever-so-amazing links to Donor Insite, and just plain reading what I write.
One such person is the writer (known only to us as “a fundraiser”) of the blog, Don’t Tell the Donor.
I emailed ”a fundraiser” and asked him about the “why” behind the title of the blog. I also wanted a bit more info as to why he began “Don’t Tell the Donor” in the first place. His response:
I was actually being sarcastic with the title at first. By publishing the kinds of things fundraisers try to hide from donors… hopefully I am doing exactly that and brining more openness to nonprofit fundraising.
Writing “Don’t Tell the Donor” allows me to do what I love most - raise funds for great groups…but I’m also a donor. I support (many) charities on an annual or monthly basis. And after working in nonprofits for several years - I was surprised by the tension between the daily secrets fundraisers try to keep from donors and the need to be open and build trust.
I’m still feeling my way through it. But I think it’s important to say that I see my mission as being the same as Jeff Brooks - trying to teach organizations to respect their donors… or else
I hope my site provides some relief from their frustrations at dealing with the tension of openness with their own donors.
In my book, he accomplishes his mission very well. There you have it, why such a great blog has such an interesting title.
I’m done digging around now.
Cartoon from today’s link: Charity does not begin in poshest suburbs.
I’ve added a widget to the sidebar of this blog as sort of an experiment. Some of my friends at nonprofit organizations believe that it’s just too darned hard, too complicated and not worth the effort to ask current supporters to fundraise on their behalf via the online medium. That is, the technology just isn’t quite “there” yet; that it’s not a priority given all of the other opportunities on the plate; that, although it’s a good idea, it’s not a GREAT idea. There’s just bigger fish to fry.
I totally understand. And yet, I have a few minutes of spare time on my hands (yeah, right) and with some help from friends, ah heck, why not just try. I figure there is so much great, valuable information out there. For example, Beth’s Blog has been educating us on widgets all this month. Her post, “Let’s Go Widget Shopping!” along with her interview with Michael Stein (An Interview with Michael Stein) are must-reads on the subjet of giving this business of fundraising into the hands of donors passionate about their causes. I have always believed that donors are more generous and more passionate than we know.
And then, just when I thought I could hide, doesn’t Mr. Don’t Tell the Donor himself publish a post asking for donations so that he could have the funds to add more value to this world of ours. I love it.
Both great bloggers mentioned (and are using) ChipIn. From the website: “ChipIn is a Web-based service that simplifies the process of collecting money from groups of people. We make this process quick, easy, and secure, and we provide organizers with numerous ways to get the word out about their ChipIn event.” Is it quick? Is it easy? Is it secure? I thought I’d give it a try.
Literally, within a few minutes my “ChipIn Event” was up and running. I decided I would try to raise $400 so that I could purchase 10 pigs for 10 African children. And I’d try to to it by Christmas Day. Creating the ChipIn widget was fairly easy and it certainly was quick.
Of course, I have a plan to use my sphere of influence to help. As part of that plan, I’m asking you. I realize you may not know me but you do know about children in need and you do know World Vision. Please give to my “10 Pigs For 10 Kids” Christmas Campaign for World Vision. Not only do I want to help children, I also want to prove to my friends that maybe, just maybe this idea of the Participant Fundraising is something to seriously consider.
I know a story of a woman in Calgary, Alberta Canada. Her two sons were killed in a car accident a number of years ago. One of those events in life in which there are no answers, no reason, nor rhyme. The death of her sons left with a gaping hole in her heart as large and lonely as a vacant lot. So she picked herself up from the ruins and did something about it. She set up a memorial fund and started cooking Christmas dinner for friends and family. When dinner was over, she asked them to donate to the fund. That was 22 years ago. Well, this past year, she served 1,500 turkey dinners under a big-top tent and raised thousands of dollars for the local homeless shelter. She covered that ugly vacant lot with a huge beautiful tent.
I think that’s what ROI really means, Return on Influence.
Headline
It is estimated that one in three children born in the year 2000 will develop diabetes. While its causes are related to genetics, obesity and inactivity, its effects are most disturbing. Disbetes can lead to stroke, amputataions and even(blurry text)
Copy
Once you understand the effects of diabetes, you may want to learn the causes. www.diabetes.org
Agency: Serve Marketing.
I read with earnest the article below that appeared in today’s Toronto Star (a sort of prelude to an upcomimg book about today’s nonprofit world.) The author muses about the legacy we need to leave - as normal every-day individuals - in light of the recent “epic”-donations from huge, famous, mega-business gods and celebrities. An imprint with both our finances and the involvement of our time. His desperation is felt throughout the article especially as he walks through a number of interviews with charity fundraisers. A desperation haunted by the striking need of humankind. His thinking is that our generation (40-somethings) are giving more, volunteering less and that the coming generation will do less of both.
What do you think? And what do your donors think? I spoke to a donor the other day that remarked how “sorry” she felt because she could only give $75. “I’m no Gates”, she said.
The article is thoughtful, powerful, extremely well researched and factual, and worth the long read. It’ll stir debate and yet his words are an honest look…an outsiders look…into our business.
Here is the Toronto Star article in it’s entirely:
Shaking charity’s foundations — Nov. 19, 2006.
Several years ago I began to notice the word “philanthropist” in obituaries, which, at age 57 (and a half), I now read. I observed that many of the deceased - no matter their means, age or sex - had been rigorously engaged in benevolent acts.
I saw, too, in the news pages, that the rich and famous, from Bill Gates to Brad Pitt to Oprah Winfrey, were toiling cheerfully on the world stage for their chosen causes: treating AIDS in Africa, fighting child poverty, helping victims of tidal waves and hurricanes…
I began clipping articles, making inquiries, and searching the literature. The file grew. My initial interest was personal, fuelled by the death of my mother and our large family’s debates about ways to honour her memory. But as I learned more, I began to think about legacy, what we leave behind, the mark we make.
What I kept seeing was individual generosity on a grand, even epic, scale. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is surely the most powerful charitable foundation the world has ever seen. They had a $29 billion (U.S.) war chest (and that was before Warren Buffett tossed in $37.4 billion) and decided, for one thing, to battle malaria in the developing world. The annual budget of the World Health Organization, at $1.65 billion, looks puny by comparison.
It seemed there was a charity Olympics under way, and the numbers were dizzying. Almost every week came news of another windfall. This wasn’t about one person writing a fat cheque and being done with it. The donors’ hands-on involvement, their knowledge and focus, their travels to far-flung places to observe firsthand how their largesse was making a difference - this zealousness seemed new and unprecedented.
Like a character out of the “Lost” TV series, I somehow stumbled upon this post from The Positivity Blog. As I read the post, “Do you make these 10 mistakes in a conversation”, I couldn’t help but make the transition to fundraising - especially when speaking to our donors - especially our BIG donors. Here is the article in it’s entirely:
Can you improve your conversation skills? Certainly.
It might take a while to change the conversation habits that’s been ingrained throughout your life, but it is very possible.
To not make this article longer than necessary let’s just skip right to some common mistakes many of us have made in conversations. And a couple of solutions.
Not listening
Ernest Hemingway once said:
“I like to listen. I have learned a great deal from listening carefully. Most people never listen.”
Don’t be like most people. Don’t just wait eagerly for your turn to talk. Put your own ego on hold. Learn to really listen to what people actually are saying.
When you start to really listen, you’ll pick up on loads of potential paths in the conversation. But avoid yes or no type of questions as they will not give you much information. If someone mentions that they went fishing with a couple of friends last weekend you can for instance ask:
The person will delve deeper into the subject giving you more information to work with and more paths for you choose from.
Credits:
Title: Invisible
Agency: ACLC Inc., Toronto
Here is my pick of the week from the Salvation Army Canada (sans audio)
Credits:
Title: Invisible
Agency: ACLC Inc., Toronto
Let me introduce you to Lisa Ray and her blog, Two Knives. Lisa is a recent stay-at-home mom living in Minneapolis. I think her blog is extremely well written. Todays post, about her experience this past weekend at a local fundraiser, is very funny, short, and long on insight for those of us in the fundraising community. Here it is:
I spent much of Saturday morning trying to alleviate my guilt over spending about $600 at a fundraiser the night before. Donating, I mean. I donated $600.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all for a good cause. People Serving People is a family homeless shelter in downtown Minneapolis. It was their annual fundraiser - food, drinks, music, and a live auction.
I decided it was a convergence of three factors that led to the ill-fated bid, or as my friend Joni said, I created the perfect storm:
- an auction, which ignited my gambling-addiction tendencies, combined with
- homeless seven-year-olds, combined with
- two (or several) glasses of vodka.
I flashed my bidding number faster than you can say Indian gaming. The prize, which was much more appealing at the time, is an afternoon in local radio studio watching how a live show works. At least my 9-year-old seems excited about going.
I think I’ll have to stay away from fundraisers. At least until I’m employed again.
My takeaway: Sometimes, we’re so sophisticated in our approach to securing the gift - our segmentation, our careful campaign development, our dazzling creative, our whiz-bang back end analysis. Then again, maybe it’s because a couple of unknown factors (I call them “Donation-X Factors”) came together in perfect alignment, like whirling planets in some cosmic convergence, that actually produced the sale, er, donation. I mean donation.
Max Kalehoff has written an excellent article for OnlineSpin, a Media Post Publication and as a post in his blog. “Ten Trends in Transforming Marketing Measurements” explores what marketing via the new media will mean for data-driven, response oriented advertising (and fundraising, of course) campaigns. Here are excerpts from the article:
1. Digital network adoption. Mass adoption of the Internet and digital networks is fundamental, if obvious. Their impact on how we share and manage information is now perhaps the most significant influence on the evolution of metrics, among all that follow.
2. Attention erosion. Our networked society has resulted in massive increases in consumer choice and, from a marketer perspective, an erosion of attention. Many economists postulate that we’re undergoing a transition away from an economy based on shelf space to one based on attention scarcity.
3. Speed of measurement. The near-real-time intelligence delivery that characterized the Bloomberg terminal is permeating nearly all facets of marketing measurements. Even if measurements are not delivered instantaneously in a slick, colorful dashboard, the expectation of faster data and actionable insights is growing. Speed is a competitive advantage.
4. Democratization of data and analytics. There was once a time when access to vast piles of market-research data and processing power was contingent upon huge budgets. While that’s still true in many cases, digital networks have made more data more accessible–even sometimes to the point of open-source or free.
5. Observational measurements. In digital networks, people often passively emit both anonymous and identifiable gestures, whether it’s visiting a Web site, programming a TiVo, commenting in a public discussion forum or a host of other activities.
6. Unstructured data. Included with the arrival of observational measurement is analysis of unstructured data. From news stories to discussion forums to blogs to multimedia-sharing sites, people increasingly publish data abundant with insights and trends.
7. Beyond demographics. Traditional demographics–like gender and age–will always be important, but observational techniques are helping marketers to understand and segment their customers in new ways.
8. Customer-centric measurements and planning. The trends above have one thing in common: customers increasingly are at the center of the universe, versus companies, brands, products or media.
9. Data integration comes of age. With more customer and data touch points come the need for more data integration and better market modeling.
10. Reevaluating relationships with whom and what we measure. Finally, as consumers become more empowered, the disciplines of measurement and research will increasingly cater to them (just as marketers are doing in general).
I recently discovered an excellent blog by Steve Borsch, “Connecting The Dots.” Steve’s thoughtful and informative blog is dedicated to “Guidance, Insight and Ideas in a Time of Accelerating Change.” My take is that Steve’s blog accomplishes his mission statement to perfection.
Here’s why I’ve dedicated a post to Connecting the Dots. Steve has written a FREE REPORT, “Rise of the Participation Culture.” This report is “a high-level trend overview for strategists, leaders and marketers on why the Internet and a new wave of Web applications have been embraced by a tech-savvy generation and spawned a culture of participation.”
Simply put, this report is the BEST primer I have ever read on the history of Web 2.0, Social Media and the related applications for any organization seeking to use this new media to further profit and NONPROFIT objectives.
From the site itself, here’s a more detailed introduction to the report:
In the following pages, the three pillars which have already enabled the Rise of the Participation Culture will be examined: 1) Internet as a Platform: We will observe how core industry standards, hosted application developers and other technologies have already coming together to form ‘the perfect storm’ of enablers that Tim O’Reilly has called “the emergent Internet operating system.” This convergence has also been dubbed Web 2.0. 2) Participation Applications: We will discuss a few of the most powerful emerging applications — and trends - occurring, which have already created a myriad of compelling reasons for people to invest energy, effort, time and money into them. 3) We will present an overview of the People who use and rely on Web 2.0 in order to understand the demographic and psychographic makeup of those driving this culture of participation 4) Lastly this report will consider What’s Next as we acknowledge today’s Participation Culture trends and forecast what we might expect going forward.
Why do I think this is important? The face of fundraising is a-changin’ and we will need to incorporate new concepts, new ideas, new strategies and new media if we are to do our best. My career has been built on the back of a “nonprofit to donor” communications strategy. That is, my client needs to raise funds, a strategy is then developed and the appropriate advertising/fundraising tactics (mostly traditional) are executed and measured against objectives. The idea is generated FROM the charity TO the donor or prospective donor. Do I think this will all go away? Absolutely, absolutely not. These principles are timeless, basic, foundational, measurable.
And yet we are beginning to see, with even greater clarity, how critical, important, powerful and increasingly more simple it is to have donors raise support our behalf. Isn’t this just good ‘ol event or corporate or “friend-get-a-friend” fundraising? Yes, it’s that and yet much more. After all, isn’t a Porsche just another car? ‘Nuff said.
Participation Fundraising happens 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Participation Fundraising uses the tools of New Media (and old) to spin the flywheel of charitable support faster, with more inertia and will less effort. Participant Fundraising doesn’t need gobs of expense budget. Tell me again, how much did Dove’s spend on the Evolution viral video? Participant Fundraising won’t require 6-month leadtimes. All of this, and more, will allow Participant Fundraising to play a larger, more significant role in the diversified fundraising mix.
And yet there are cautions and things we gotta figure out. Blogger’s Blog writes:
The problem for companies hoping to make a viral video is that most of them won’t work and it is getting more and more difficult every day to find success with viral videos. Simple ideas like the Subservient Chicken won’t work as well because everyone has already seen this idea used several times by now. The These Days blog explains viral marketing can be complex.
Nobody understands how online viral marketing really works. Worse: ever since big brands discovered its power, it’s becoming harder every day to succesfully create some buzz online. It’s true that a succesful “word of mouse” campaign is always cheaper to produce than, say, a street ad campaign. And yes, it’s a perfect way to support a bigger ad campaign, or reach a different, more “webby” target group. But if a viral campaign is not handled right, it might hit you in the face, and sometimes even harm your brand. Or worse: be ignored completely, like the majority of them. All you can do is: avoid common mistakes, unleash the virus, wait and pray.
And yet we can’t give up hope and can’t stop trying to make it work because intuitively we know that word-of-mouth has always been the best and most inexpensive form of advertising. Read the Report and then think it through a bit.
Participation Fundraising, when fully mature, just may be our answer to raising more, with less.
I thought I’d try my luck at posting some of my favorite television spots and PSA short features. Maybe along the way, we can both learn how and why television and film can move the masses to our cause and into our donor database.
This Greenpeace spot, “Breathe”, is as compelling as it is beautiful and I like how the visuals move with the audio. Go ahead and click away.
After watching this spot, I may not understand the details of how Greenpeace helps our environment, and the specifics how my donation will help, I do get the connection between my life and the ocean. Click hear for the YouTube Link.
Takeaway: Use the unique power of each medium to the max. In this case, it’s the perfectly choreographed dance between the audio and the visual.
If you could use only audio and visuals, what television spot would you produce for your organization?
Looking back at a botched fundraising campaign, every wonder why things didn’t pan out or test out the way you anticipated? Most likely it wasn’t because you didn’t have enough information, maybe it was due to faulty thinking or poor pre-planning. Maybe it was just a dumb idea in the first place.
The Bad Analysis blog (no joke), has published a list of the ten most compelling reasons why we make bad decisions in an article by that name. You’ll find the full article here. Below are the main points:
10. We’ve come this far… (sunk cost bias) - We all know that the past is past and we can’t get back money or time that we already spent. But many people irrationally take sunk costs, time, money, or other resources which have already been spent and can’t be recovered, into their decision making.
9. Me me me! (egocentric bias) - Putting yourself in another person’s shoes is harder than it sounds for most people.
8. That just proves my point. (confirmation bias) - Isn’t it a coincidence that no matter what happens in the world, politicians can spin it to show why that confirms their opinions? A cynical explanation is that politicians twist the truth to get what they want. But a more subtle explanation is that our brains tend to search for and interpret information in ways that support our pre-existing opinions.
7. That’s easy. (overconfidence) - While overconfidence is definitely a good thing in many situations, it probably means people don’t work on their weaknesses as much as they should.
6. I’m #1! I’m #1! (dysfunctional competition) - Have mixed feelings when you find out your co-workers get a promotion that you weren’t even interested in? You’re not alone. People’s happiness is often a function of what they have relative to others.
5. Mine mine mine! (endowment effect) - Why is it so hard for people to throw, give away or sell things that are past their prime? One theory is that people tend to place a higher value on objects they own relative to objects they do not.
4. Watch out for sharks. (availability bias) - People are suckers for recent and memorable events. So much so, that they think these types of events are more likely to happen than they actually are.
3. If everybody else thinks so… (conformity) - People make decisions based on what they think and not what everyone else thinks, right? Wrong!
2. Lets go hard 8! (illusion of control) - We all know that there’s no difference between my chances in craps if I have the dice or someone else at the table does, right? It should also cause you to question the confidence of your co-workers who know they will hit an aggressive deadline even though there are many factors out of their control.
1. He’s just a moron. (attribution error) - Is the driver that cut you off a jerk? Or is he a good guy who didn’t see you because he’s distracted? So maybe it’s better to withhold judgment about a person until you’ve actually talked to them.
If you don’t have photographs of your real donors (now that’s a shame), then go through several magazines to find representative photos. Tear ‘em out and tape them to the walls of your office or cubicle.
As an example, here’s a photo of two women that may be existing donors to your organization. Take a look. A very long and thoughtful look.
One fundraising writer I know begins every first draft with, “Dear Mom.” This type of approach gives “personalization” a whole new meaning.
Any article or blog post dealing with the issue of not being afraid to ask will automatically get my attention. I really like this post by Amy Kincaid on her blog, Fundraising Breakthroughs. This post is smart, honest, funny and full of insight . Thought you’d enjoy reading it too.
Here’s a quick snippet:
The introductory paragraph ends in “And to make all this happen, we need-you guessed it–money. Perhaps even your money.”
The fundraiser in me got a sinking feeling.It goes on: “So we’re hitting up friends for financial support.”
Holy smokes (sorry, I’m from Kansas City, and we talk that way). Promise me, novice fundraisers, no more violent language. We’re inviting people (aka donors) to join us in work that has meaning.
– Very funny.
The Muttart Foundation recently released their consumer survey report, “Talking about Charities 2006: Tracking Canadians’ Opinions about Charities and the Issues Affecting Them.” The report was released in 2000, 2004 and September 2006.
Highlights for me are:
While reading through a study such as this, I tend to take notes to see how these findings can and should be addressed in organization-wide key messaging and position statements. Moreover, time spent speaking with donors will clarify our own specific issues that must be addressed. In other words, are we addressing key consumer/donor issues or just speaking about what’s important to us?
One particular nonprofit I know uses a “message tree” approach (the longer the communication piece, the more key messages are to be prioritized and included) while another has developed a very deliberate positioning document that is reviewed with communications writers (both external and internal) at the start of each creative development process. While this may not be new, it is critical to keep on track of what we are communicating and what we should communicate given organizational mandates.
“By the very act of not communicating, we are, in fact, communicating.”
Great ad from the MS Society UK:
The copy in the upper right corner might be hard to read:
“When vertigo, numbness or loss of muscle coordination can strike without warning, the last thing you feel is at home.”
Credits:
Saatchi & Saatchi London
Kate Stanners (Creative Director)
Cassandra Yap (Copywriter)
Marion Cohen (Art Director)
Illustrator: Marion Cohen/ Alex Normanton
Retouching: First Base
While I realize there are many nonprofit organizations using viral campaigns to raise funds, I recently came across one worth a closer look for reasons explained later. Fight Hunger: Walk the World is conducting viral video contest. The winner receives a chance to win a trip to film a WFP school feeding project in a developing world.
Nope, this is not a new story — Beth’s Blog has written about it, as has Netsquared and Citizen Brand (I’m sure I’ve omitted others.)
However, here are my takaways:
Has the public responded? I dunno. I searched for the keyword “fhvideo” on YouTube, Google Video, blip.tv and ourmedia.org and didn’t find anything. I’m sure I was doing something wrong.
I’d love to hear from others out there that have had success with viral video or photo campaigns. I guess I’d have to define success, but maybe I’ll let you do that.
The link to an article I posted on October 26 , “Running a Non Profit Like a Business”, (Inside Collin County Business, Plano, TX) caused a few writers in our community to fire up the ‘ol computer. Don’t Tell the Donor, The Agitator and Ken Goldstein had excellent perspectives on the subjects of public confidence in the nonprofit sector and, as the title suggests, running a nonprofit like a business. I recommend reading the posts AND the comments.
And just when I thought the firestorm coals had cooled and I could go back to sleep at night, I read today’s post from Pam Aslund, “Non-Profit Confidence Problem?”
To steal Ken Goldstein’s headline, these subjects are certainly, “Pressing Our Buttons.”
I didn’t realize how a little article could cause such a large, thoughtful and intense response. But that’s why I wanted to enter the blogosphere in the first place: to foster cross-cutting dialogue in the nonprofit industry so that we can express our views and learn from each other.
Ok, I know that’s a goofy title, but it somewhat describes what is happening in our industry of late. These are great days for the nonprofit fundraising sector and for those this industry ultimately serves. Reading though the daily links for the past week or so and we see that:
The Chronicle of Philanthropy reports American largest charities grew an astonishing 13 percent matching the highest gain since the Chronicle has been publising the Philanthropy 400 Survey.
Individuals increased their charitable contributions to health care facilities and organizations by a record 16 percent in the U.S., to $7.01 billion, and by 11 percent in Canada.
Estimated giving by California foundations rose in 2005 to a record $4.11 billion, and a survey of leading foundations projects that their giving will grow faster in 2006, according to a report released Wednesday by the Foundation Center.
Bank of America’s landmark philanthropy survey released today indicates:
Charitable giving increased over the last five years. When asked about the level of their charitable donations, nearly two thirds (65%) of wealthy donors somewhat or dramatically increased their charitable giving over the past 5 years. Less than 12% of high net worth households decreased their contributions.” (For an excellent commentary on this study, head over to Sean Stannard-Stockton’s blog, Tactical Philanthropy.)
And the list goes on and on. Are we getting better at fundraising? Yes. Is the general public more generous? Yes. Are there more prospective donors in the donor pool? Yes. Does the public trust us? Yes, despite what a United Way public poll might indicate (and oh-so thoroughly addressed by Don’t Tell The Donor yesterday.) Are corporations more involved in charities? Yes. And by all the Red and Pink we see these days, it’s now hip to donate. Who’d a thunk it.
Any why am I so excited? Because, in the end, we don’t raise funds for ourselves. We raise funds for those who do not have the voice or ability to ask.
The time is right to:
Growing up in Ohio, we used to say, “Make hay while the sun still shines.” Who knows? The bright sun may soften to sunset tomorrow. But as for today, I’ll set my face to the sun and get after the work at hand.
Just a quick note to point you to a most excellent article by Peter Deitz, “Social Networking and Group Fundraising.” Actually, this article points to the main web post, “How to Use the Internet for Group Fundraising”. Peter has written one of the most practical pieces I’ve read on the subject of how to approach a viral fundraising campaign. Here’s an excerpt:
In the last four years, the number of websites that help individuals design and implement their own group fundraising campaigns has exploded. Networks of friends, family, and activists can now raise money effecitvely and collectively for any number of causes. But with all the options available, sometimes it is difficult to know which platform to choose and how best to put it to use.
This guide features:
- 5 questions to ask yourself before starting a fundraising campaign, and
- 3 factors to consider when choosing a group fundraising platform.
The phenomenon goes by several names: viral fundraising, team fundraising, grassroots fundraising, group fundraising, and even network-centric fundraising. In each case, the concept is the same.
An individual or group creates a page on a website and sets a fundraising goal on behalf of a non-profit organization or project. The initiator then emails friends and family requesting financial support for the cause.
On occasion, friends and family are so enthusiastic that they forward the announcement to their individual networks. Sometimes news of the project reaches the “blogosphere” or catches the attention of a journalist.
Suddenly thousands of people are responding and the fundraising goal is met in record time. Well, that’s the best case scenario. More often than not, close friends, family, and a few anonymous philanthropists come through with the cash needed to meet the fundraising goal.
Very good stuff. Thanks Peter.
Automotive salespeople are typically taught to take a few moments getting to know prospective customers before moving on to The Most Important Thing. Otherwise known as The Sales Pitch. Get to know the family a bit, talk about occupations, the weather, and hockey. A few minutes of customer engagement before spending the next day and a half making the sale.
You see, this notion of “engagement” is really nothing new. Engagement is a new skin to an old, and yet very important concept. Often the issue becomes how we define, plan and execute our donor engagement strategy. (For what it’s worth, my perspective is that Donor Engagement should never take away from direct response principles, but rather add to whatever we are already doing. It’s an enhancement, not a replacement to fundraising excellence.)
This is where Marvin enters the stage. Halfway through his famous song, “What’s Going On”, the lyrics emerge:
“Talk to me
So you will see
What’s going on”
I picture our donors saying this: “Will somebody just talk to me? How about a quick phone call to get to know me and find out what’s important to me. Ask me about my cause and not your cause. You send me direct mail appeals each month that cost a buck a piece. You send me newsletters and magazines and even call me…but that’s when when you want something from me and when you want to talk to me. I’m your neighbor down the street. I want to talk to you for a little bit, to let you know what’s really going on with me and why I supported you in the first place.”
I know of one organization that has seen a 16 percent increase in donor retention and “renewal” rates year-over-year by simply calling each donor, saying thanks, and talking for two minutes about that is important to the donor. Is it costly? Yes. Rather, it’s an investment of three or for bucks that pays off later in spades. And when the next direct mail package is sent out, that donor sees copy directly tailored to what’s important to her.
Isn’t this exciting and radical?
In my mind, this is a bit closer to real donor engagement. Of course, it’s what major donor development/advancement professionals have known since the beginning of time.
“Oh, you know we’ve got to find a way
To bring some understanding here today”
Thanks, Marvin.
In most nonprofit organizations, a tension exists between fundraising disciplines to determine who “gets the credit” for certain types of donor solicitations. In this day of accountability, ROI metrics and budet struggles, stuggling over initial donation source codes has become, sadly, standard operating procedure. For example, departments responsible for lower-end donors (typically direct mail solicitations) find themselves at odds with the major donor development group after the big donor mails in a big check to a routine direct mail appeal.
Enter the online donation transaction and things really heat up.
I recommend the following article, “Smashing Through Reporting Silos” by, Duncan Rein, CEO of Silas Partners. Here’s a quick summary:
“Organizations that evaluate online success by looking at online revenue exclusively are likely to conclude that their online efforts are more and more successful over the next several years. The Harvard Initiative on Social Enterprise estimates that up to 30% of all donations will be raised online by the Year 2010. Therefore, it is likely that all nonprofits will see their online revenue increase, whether or not they are doing a good job online.”
“Furthermore, we believe that the value of online communication efforts are often under-estimated by organizations that have not instituted a framework for integrated reporting due to the hidden boost an effective online presence gives to all offline communication initiatives.”
The bottom line? Begin now to develop an accurate and integrated reporting framework. Assemple your team to perform a rigorous analysis of how donor communications affect each other and learn how each appeal effort interacts with each other. Tear down the silos. We are in a New Day and we need to give this issue serious attention.
Until this happens, we’re only guessing.
Largest charities saw donations rise 13% in 2005
By Noelle Barton and Holly Hall
Donations to America’s largest charities grew by 13 percent last year, to $62.7- billion, according to The Chronicle’s annual Philanthropy 400 Survey.
That increase matches the highest percentage gain in the 16 years that The Chronicle has been ranking the 400 most-successful charities. At the height of the technology boom, in 1999, charities in the Philanthropy 400 achieved a 13.4-percent increase.
All signs suggest that the pace of giving continues to be strong this year: Among 49 charities on the list that projected a rise in 2006 giving, contributions are expected to grow by a median of 13 percent, meaning that half the groups expect a greater increase and half expect less.
By Andrea Coombes, MarketWatch Last Update: 4:02 PM ET Oct 20, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — Charitable giving got a lot easier for some taxpayers — and harder for others — thanks to some tax-law changes in the recent Pension Protection Act. The good news is taxpayers who are 70 1/2 or older can take up to $100,000 out of their IRA tax-free this year and next, as long as they donate it to a qualified charity.
Meanwhile, taxpayers of all ages face slightly stricter rules when it comes to deducting charitable donations: Next year we’ll have to make sure we document any monetary donations, even if less than $250. And, starting this year, those donating clothing or household goods will need to make sure the items are of “good or better” quality. The real windfall is for those charitable givers who are in their 70s and who’ve got hefty IRA assets. Now they can “take out up to $100,000 per year, give that to charity and not have to include that in income,” said Jere Doyle, senior vice president of wealth management for Mellon Financial’s private wealth management group, in Boston.
I love this article by Paul Loeb in that he demonstrates, from his personal experience, the power of matching grants in a fundraising offer. Typically, matching grants come from corporations, foundations, governments and major donors. However, the Democratic National Committee “has invited ordinary citizens to make modest online pledges, to be redeemed when new donors contributed.” Ok, I’m not endorsing the DNC. But this issue of finding and offering matching donation opportunities to infuse our fundraising appeals is critical. And this approach is innovative. The article goes on to state that this matching offer appeal became the organizations most effective direct mail campaign in the past two years.
Yes, nonprofit organizations are still “prospecting” for new donors and that’s how large donor files are created. But the fact is, the face of fundraising is changing. Our donors are finding new donors. In turn, we’re rediscovering the “new truth” that fundraising by word-of-mouth is the most effective acquisition strategy we can employ.
Great use of outdoor space to promote the Zoo.
I see the light…
Credits:
BBDO West, USA
Jim Lesser (Executive Creative Director)
Brandon Sides (Art Director)
Neil Levy (Copywriter)
Leslie DiLullo (Agency Producer)
Graphics/Editing/SD: David Anderson.
(I encourage everyone to get this report!)
San Francisco, October 17, 2006 - The Direct Marketing Association (DMA) today released its 2006 Response Rate Trends Report, containing some of the most sought-after data on the benchmarks of successful direct marketing campaigns.
“In providing research and information about direct marketing, our most asked questions are what is a typical response rate and what channel will yield the best response for a particular direct marketing campaign,” said Anna Chernis, DMA’s senior research manager. “This report provides a dependable and robust benchmark for a wide range of industries and campaign types.”
In the report, four direct marketing objectives are isolated and reported on separately: direct order, lead generation, traffic building, and fundraising. The report also provides breakouts by direct marketing channel and type of list used (house file vs. prospect), as well as the market (consumer vs. business-to-business) and the industry being advertised.
Among the findings of this year’s report: · Direct Order & Fundraising: For direct marketers whose primary objective was to solicit direct-order sales or motivate customers to make a contribution, Catalog (2.30%) and Direct Mail (2.18%) produced the highest response rates.
Lead Generation: Telephone (2.60%) and E-mail (2.45%) produced the highest response rates for direct marketers whose primary objective was to generate leads.
Traffic Building: Catalog (10.34%) and Telephone (7.83%) have the highest response rates for traffic building, although these figures are based on a small sample of only five campaigns for Catalog and four campaigns for Telephone.
House File v. Prospects: House-file campaigns generally outperformed prospecting campaigns.
Consumer v. Business-to-Business Markets: When used for direct-order generation and fundraising, Direct Mail and Catalog work better in consumer markets. Other media, however, reported their highest response rates in the business-to-business market. Lead-generation and traffic-building campaigns both reported higher response rates for consumer audiences vs. B-to-B. Seven Media, 19 Industry Categories, 30 Products & Services.
The DMA 2006 Response Rate Trends Report includes data for more than 1,500 campaigns received in 2004, 2005 and 2006. For the first time, the report includes trend overviews. The report looks at seven media channels that may have been used solo or in combination to achieve specific campaign objectives: direct mail (flat), catalog, e-mail, inserts, outbound telephone, newspaper, and magazine. In addition, information is provided for 19 major industry categories consistent with the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), as well as a selection of 30 specific products and services.
The full report is priced at $245 for DMA members ($445 for non-members). It can be ordered through DMA Book Distribution Center by calling 1.800.344.8328 (US) or +1.610.461.3548 (internationally) and online at www.the-dma.org/bookstore.
Source: Direct Marketing Association
An interesting 2006 DMA Conference article from DM News highlights multichannel marketing’s critical role in reaching today’s consumers and the resulting challenges to determine response metrics. Again, when I read articles such as this I think of how we speak to donors or prospective donors. More than ever before, donors are in tune to various “frequencies” of possible response transmissions — direct mail, interactive, online, print, broadcast, face-to-face. Determining how “signals” work together, and how to attribute proper response metrics for each message transmission is getting difficult to accurately track. From the article:
Casey Carey, senior vice president of Abacus Alliance Solutions, the multichannel database arm of Abacus, spoke to the number of complications that can arise as the available points of purchase and cross-channel marketing efforts increase.
“I say one thing about multichannel marketing and that’s just: complexity,” Mr. Casey said.
By first separating a company’s offer channels from its response channels, marketers can focus budget planning around the offer channels to decide which media mix is the most effective, he said.
It’s my experience that donors are becoming more adept at moving between response channels before making a final donation decision. As well, today’s fundraising professionals are beginning to move beyond the endless testing of small things in traditional channels (e.g. 1st class stamp versus bulk rate postage) and are putting more thinking around determining how individual fundraising efforts work together to create the desired response.
Larry Rowen & Dave Warren’s excellent MediaWeek article, “Embracing the Brave New World,” offers a thoughtful view of message convergence in the new media environment. Applications for fundraisers are vast and deep.
Read through the article. Go through it again, this time substitute the word (or concept) “fundraiser” in place of “advertiser.”
Here’s a sliver of my take: As fundraisers, we realize that branding and direct response fundraising must cohabitate the same space, in the same house…under the same roof. Many charities don’t have the luxury of having separate “branding” and “direct response” budgets. Heck, most barely have enough budget to aggressively grow year-over-year revenue. So? Fundraising must build the brand in an entirely new and complex (rich) media environment. It’s the “new and complex” part that’s got my goat and has me up at night.
“Over fifty years ago, Bill Bernbach came up with the revolutionary notion of throwing an art director and copywriter in the same room and tasking them to come up with effective ads. Today’s advertising agency must now begin throwing branders and direct-response experts in the same room. Their task is still the same: to come up with effective ads. But now those ads need to work on entirely new levels and work in entirely new media.”
Be sure, donors are devouring new media and are responding on entirely new levels. We see it in our direct mail response rates and our DRTV call-in volumes. Donors are responding via online channels at an astonishing rate.
Are you ready for this Brave New World?
Two very bright fellows think you just might.
10 over 100 is a brilliant concept begun by James Hong and Josh Blumenstock. The idea is simple:
“We hereby make a personal promise to you that we will give 10% of whatever we make over $100,000 each year to charity. We’re making this committment because we think it will help make the world a better place, and we’re encouraging people to make the same promise to themselves and to their friends.”
Individuals are encouraged to “take the pledge”..and so far over 2,100 people around the world have done so.
The reason I like this idea: it’s straightforward, simple and from the heart. And it’s based that rare commodity, trust. Finally, these guys aren’t afraid to ask.
In this day of overcomplicated appeals that work overtime to “sell” the offer to uncaring donors, this idea strikes the bell with a pure and clear tone. And this is better than doing nothing at all.
Oct 8, 2006 — Sorry everyone, due to circumstanced beyond our control, all previous entries were inadvertantly lost during this weekend’s database upgrade. As in the past, we look forward to providing you with timely and relevant information to help you grow your organization.
Larry Rowen & Dave Warren’s excellent MediaWeek article, “Embracing the Brave New World,” offers a thoughtful view of message convergence in the new media environment. Applications for fundraisers are vast and deep. Read through the article. Go through it again, this time substitute the word (or concept) “fundraiser” in place of “advertiser.” Here’s a sliver of my take: […]
To Be Married Means to Be Outnumbered - New York Times Married couples, whose numbers have been declining for decades as a proportion of American households, have finally slipped into a minority, according to an analysis of new census figures. How will this affect your donor acquisition strategies? (tags: demographics marriage)
Two very bright fellows think you just might. 10 over 100 is a brilliant concept begun by James Hong and Josh Blumenstock. The idea is simple: “We hereby make a personal promise to you that we will give 10% of whatever we make over $100,000 each year to charity. We’re making this committment because we think it will […]
Giving by the billion as charity goes chic Giving is on the up, it’s dynamic, it’s chic. To say that philanthropic giving is on the rise is an understatement. (tags: nonprofit charity philanthropy bono oprah)
Web 2.0: Ten Ways Non-Profits Can Start Leveraging Social Media Unless non-profits start using Web 2.0 tools from the bottom-up, and by first exposing themselves to what it takes to work with social media, their attempts to upgrade and optimize their communication efforts will only appear a utopian dream that finds li (tags: nonprofit web2.0) ARE YOU GETTING […]
