Don't judge a donor by their cover

When you're planning your next fundraising effort, donor relations engagement or communication, does the audience you're targeting play into your method of communication? Do your coworkers always say, "well this is targeted to our planned giving audience so we have to do print."? Not so fast my friend! 

Check out these wonderful statistics, knowing that data should inform our decisions:

 Woah, wait a minute you mean older folks actually give online? Hmm, this sounds like something we've been saying for a while. We can't plan our behavior based on stereotypes. The stereotype that older donors only want print is just as dangerous as other stereotypes that exist.


And older donors also can be driven print to digital, you don't always have to include an envelope and assume they will mail you a check.

Look at those numbers! And how does this relate to planned giving? Well, the opposite is true. 

The average age of a planned giving donor is 49. My friend Michael Rosen has a great blog about 20 surprising planned giving facts. He gives credence to the fact that once a planned gift is made, most people never remove it, making donor relations more important than ever. 

What are some of the other stereotypes that we must dismiss in order to be more effective in our work? Do these numbers surprise you? I'd love to hear from you.

Cheers,
Lynne

Gumption and Moxie

As I travel around and meet with wonderful people, I often wonder why change is not more central to our approach to fundraising. Why as organizations are we so risk averse? In order to change we don't just need new ideas, we actually need implementation of those ideas. Implementing change in our organization takes courage and planning, in reality it takes gumption. 

I liken it to when people come into regularly scheduled meetings, they all have "their seat" and tend to form patterns about where they sit. And as a person who comes in from the outside, if I sit in someone's seat, even if bearing donuts, I have a tough time winning them over. 

Why are we so afraid to fail? What is the worst thing that can happen to us if we thank people in a new and different way? We need more gumption! We need the courage and moxie to impact our organizations in a positive way and to see change become reality. In addition, when someone has the gumption to bring about new ideas, we need to support them and encourage their bravery, not be naysayers and knock every time they try something new.

As Seth Godin would say, "safe is risky". But we don't always have that mindset. Sometimes we get caught up in the idea that safe is easy. How do we break out of this safe place? First we have to be open to new ideas and not afraid to give our donors what they want and need from us. Nationally we're not doing that- Only 22.9% of first time donors give our organizations a second gift. At some shops they are proud because their first time donor retention rate is 45%, but wait, if that was a grade in school we'd all be in trouble. We know that we're raising more money than ever, and we're really happy about that, but are we really happy about what our fundraising culture has become in our organizations? Are we transactional or relational? Do we have and encourage an attitude of gratitude?

I know this may be a bold post, but do one thing by this time next week. Come up with one new idea, support someone else or take the time to realize that your status quo may not be as successful as you think. One you have the idea, support it, nurture it and care for it and don't let it go. And when you hear your first three mentions of resistance, don't stop there. Keep going, grab some gumption and move it forward regardless of the perception of fear, knowing that not only will it bring about change, it will dynamically impact your donors and your organization.

So what do you have passion for that you're willing to have moxie and gumption for? Post your idea below. Need help implementing it? I'm an email away and would be happy to help you.

Cheers,
Lynne

Brilliance- The Reverse Honor Roll

Many of you know about my disdain for honor rolls, or lists of donors. Here is my article that clearly states they are one of the most wasteful practices that our organizations can perform. Well my friend Roberta O'Hara at Rutgers and her team has taken the traditional honor roll and turned it on its head. And folks, its brilliant.

 Check out the messaging that starts the webpage:

They even featured a professor who has the best name ever: Lynne!

Communications and donor relations partnered to demonstrate the impact and tell stories, which is much more effective than a list of donors that no one looks at. Instead, it takes those donors' gifts and brings them to life through quotes from the people that benefit from their generosity. As a donor, you can look at the report in terms of location, area of support and drill down into places you care about.

Roberta says, "It was one of those ideas I had while driving the hour commute home thinking about how to honor 130,000 donors.  And it hit me: what better way to say thank you than to have the recipients say it themselves, so let’s list the recipients instead of the donors." Great idea! She goes on to say, "No one has missed a standard honor roll, and we were able to highlight all the locations of the University, too.   And at the same time we could highlight some key donors by picking students who were on specific scholarships, or faculty who held new professorships, or researchers working in new buildings." Kudos to you Roberta for taking a risk and seeing it through. It takes true gumption and forward thinking to turn an ages old tradition on its head. 

If you're in your shop, fighting this battle and need to know how to think differently, this is a great way. You may not have this scale and resources, but you can make it work in your organization. Choosing one story in each area and highlighting the impact that individual donors have had on them can be truly powerful and can certainly be scaled. 

What are your thoughts? This really appeals to me on a fundamental level of storytelling. I can't wait to see more of this happening at our organizations.

Cheers,
Lynne

Is your organization numb or nimble?

One of the things I find interesting is how unable many nonprofits are to adapt to immediate needs and change. Is your organization nimble enough to be sensitive?
I'll give you a recent example. Lately the weather in Texas has been awful and the loss of life and property tragic. As you begin to prepare your end of fiscal year appeals, are you still soliciting folks in the Area affected? Or is it "too late" to stop the presses? Imagine receiving a solicitation when cleaning the muck out of your home.

Being sensitive to your donors is not just smart, it's a necessity. I remember twice in my life being directly affected by natural disasters, in 2004 with Hurricane Charlie and then again in 2011 with Superstorm Sandy. Both times I distinctly remember receiving phone call solicitations and mail in my mailbox asking me for money. I was offended and hurt. How could they not be aware? Was CNN not on their cable packages?

I also remember both times my alma mater, South Carolina reaching out to me to ask if I was ok and if there was any way they could help. Classy move that bolstered my loyalty.
I often say when talking to nonprofit fundraising professionals that it's not about what you say but what you do. How do you rise to the occasion? How does your organization show that it isn't numb to those in need?
What keeps us as organizations from being nimble? One of the factors definitely relates to protecting the "brand" and receiving approvals or decisions by committee for everything we do. I'm a leader in the beg forgiveness not ask permission movement, as I have found that to truly affect change you have to at times make mistakes and also make people uncomfortable in order to advance the cause. When is the right thing to do in direct conflict with the politically correct thing to do? Are they one in the same? I don't always believe so. The lack of adaptation causes us to build on aged practices and to live in a world of having always done it that way. This explains why in 2015 there are organizations that still haven't sent a fundraising email to date. Sigh.

The same holds true in the other circumstance. How are you demonstrating that your organization is nimble and able to rise to the occasion of unusual need? Do you have to jump through 84 hoops and receive sign offs from multiple sources in order to produce a last minute appeal? This could be holding you back from seizing an opportune moment. While you are seeking approval and permissions, others are capitalizing on your missed opportunity.

This is something to think about at all times. Do you have a plan in place for these situations? Planning is essential for your success.

Tell me in the comments how you remain nimble and not numb.
Cheers,
Lynne

Your Ask to Thank Ratio

So I'm an admitted fundraising nerd. That's ok, I tell myself all the time. I base many of my findings on data, I love data. Data doesn't lie and is difficult to dispute. I've been tracking some interesting data for the past 6 months and I have some findings to share with you. It involved donor retention and the fact that our first time donors are leaving us in alarming amounts. Remember, according to the wonderful people at Bloomerang, first time donor retention hovers at 23%. When we ask donors why they don't give again, over-solicitation is the #1 reason.

Well, I now have living proof of that. I constantly ask non-profits what their ask to thank ratio is. Folks, it's really outta whack. Not just hard asks, but those supposed "soft" asks too. Remember, there is NO such thing as a "soft" ask to a donor, that's like being "partially" pregnant. An ASK is an ASK. I gave numerous gifts online on Giving Tuesday, you can see the information here and here is my experience with a few nonprofits from the list.

Oxfam:

Since December, I've received 2 thank yous, and one receipt.  So I'll count that at 3. Since December I've received 19 solicitations. 3 in the postal mail, and 16 emails. 8 emails in December alone.

ASKS: 19  THANKS: 3    DONOR RETENTION: NOT LIKELY

Khan Academy:

Since December I've received 3 thank yous and one receipt. That's 4. I've also received one solicitation.

ASKS: 1 THANKS: 4 DONOR RETENTION: VERY LIKELY

Heifer International:

Since December I've received a WHOPPING 44 solicitations. And 2 thank yous including the receipt. 40 emails, 4 in the postal mail. In December, after I made my gift on the 3rd, I received 23 ASKS IN DECEMBER ALONE.

ASKS: 44 THANKS: 2 DONOR RETENTION: SERIOUSLY?

The opposite is also true. I haven't heard from some of the organizations I gave to in December at all since the day I gave.

Charity Newsies, American Pit Bull Foundation and Caromont Health:

All sent thank yous the day I gave and have never re-solicited me.

ASKS: 0 THANKS: 1 DONOR RETENTION: NOT LIKELY

Many of you are probably asking, what is the correct ask to thank ratio? I don't have a magic answer for you. I think it honestly depends on your donor base. But I can tell you the following: You can't ask again until you've properly thanked the donor and explained the impact of THEIR gift. (See Charity Water for an example of this done correctly. Their ratio is 5 ASKS  to 8 THANKS so far). The first step is identifying your ask to thank ratio, not hard asks or soft ones but asks, period. In thanks you can count a receipt, an acknowledgment and any impact or gratitude piece, I'm generous here.

I would love to hear your thoughts and you can post anonymously the results of your test, ratios abound!

Cheers,
Lynne

Aligning Strategy with Donor Preferences

I'm a big fan of changing the way we work. I think that far too often we build programs for donors without obtaining their feedback about the work we do. It's all very obtuse. Recently, Abila released a study on donor engagement. You can find the complete results here. Some of the observations are really astute and I think directly apply to our work in donor relations. 

Here are some of the most interesting data points I thought I would share with you:

 
Donors feel most engaged when they give and volunteer, kind of seems like a no-brainer, right? But look at the yellow- Thank you notes and personal stories are right up there! Woo hoo! Can you imagine what would happen if we told a story in a thank you note? Also look at how low of a score events are receiving. This underlines my point that most events we hold are not donor focused. 


Here's a chart broken out by generation and how they feel most involved and what kinds of organizations they're supporting.
 


This is a great graphic that shows by generation what is most important about the organizations they give to. Again, there's donor relations right at the center when we talk about using money wisely, and support making a difference, in other words: impact.


 

How are you listening to your donors to determine their preferences? Is their behavior driving your strategy? I'll give you a tangible example of us missing the mark. Last year the ice bucket challenge was a social media phenomenon. We gave online, we challenged via facebook and video, we communicated digitally. Yet two weeks ago I received a direct mail piece from the ALS foundation asking me for a donation to help recreate the ice bucket challenge through my gift in the enclosed envelope. Wait, seriously? Yup. 

Missing the mark is easy to do. How are you avoiding turning your donors away in droves? Are you listening? I look forward to your comments.

Cheers,
Lynne