"Canada is undergoing a renaissance in giving: big gifts are getting bigger while new sources of funding are emerging across the demographic spectrum with everyone from new Canadians to kids choosing to give. At the same time, competition for donor dollars among worthy charities is rising, putting an increasing onus on how organizations engage donors and demonstrate value." Globe and Mail, June 26, 2008
I just paid $51.00 to fill up my Toyota Corolla....
Will the changing economic times impact non-profit dollars?
Without a question expenses are going up. Postal rates, delivery charges, travel and overall cost of operation area all rising. This makes it difficult for non-profit organizations to maintain appropriate cost/program ratios.
Dr. Keith Seel from the Institute for Non Profit Studies at Mount Royal College says that changes to the traditional model of funding is just starting to change in Canada. The traditional model being the "400-year old philanthropic culture that put the responsibility of charitable spending on the shoulders of the wealthy merchant class."
Interesting.... but perhaps I'm jaded. The most successful organizations I work with have a healthy balance between the the "wealthy merchant class" (generally called "major gift donors") and the ordinary Canadian. Organizations built of the faithful monthly gifts of individuals have a strong foundation. $35 every month from 35,000 people makes a big impact.
Public charities can learn a lot from the faith community who has a built in penchant for the "tithe." That setting aside of financial aid for those who need it is a revolutionary idea -- and it illustrates the impact of effectiveness when many people join together to accomplish good.
As the economy changes non-profits will have to be more creative, use more innovative acquisition methods and be centred on the return on investment. I believe that generosity is a part of the human psyche and well-positioned charities will continue to grow.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
No Emotion?
I just received this from a friend who is the director of a small non-profit...
"Raising money for a cause that allows you to use a starving child as the subject that draws on the emotional strings is cool, but what about us who are trying to raise money for a boring old cement and mortar building? A picture of the building wont draw to much emotion, right? I know i am being a bit cynical but reading your blog and the comments it seems to make sense that we need to find the emotional connection in any fund raiser?"
Without a question.... the starving child (or dog), the earth shattering tremors, the devastating flood waters all create the momentum for donations..... BUT let's be honest -- our goal as fund raisers is to raise funds to support the mission and vision of a specific organization. And our mission and vision may not be relief and development.
In some ways, your question is ironic. As I often have people come to me and tell me that it's so easy to raise money for bricks and mortar and so difficult to raise funds for the operating costs of the organization.
But let me start this dialogue with 2 comments:
1. Raising funds does require "emotion," but I would prefer to use the words vision and passion instead of emotion. In many of the web sites and promotional materials I receive, I see people make a very common mistake -- they completely omit the vision and the passion. What is the underlying passion that inspired you? I'm guessing that at the very core of your vision are the lives of men and women; young people and children whose lives will be transformed by the work you do. That's the emotion. The bricks and mortar are simply the frame within your building. To talk only of the program or the buildings is like analyzing a great painting and only talking about the frame.
2. You need to understand your audience. Organizations like universities, colleges, hospitals and schools have two audiences: the funders and the students. Each have different motivations for coming alongside you. As a fundraiser and/or recruiter, you need to understand the needs, motivations and rational for each of the audiences. Then you need to talk to them. There are a couple of dangers. The first is to completely separate the two. This results in a fragmented mission and vision. The second is to try to "sell" the same product to both of them -- this is dissonant to both groups. In small organizations(let's randomly use the figure under $1 million annual operating budget), the organization has to clearly identify the audience and, as much as possible, speak directly to them. The mission and vision should resonate at the core of every communication.
The growth of an organization is a complex thing. It's a bit organic. A good communicator understands that and is able to position the messages in a way that resonates with the audience. The starving child is not the only image that raises emotions.
"Raising money for a cause that allows you to use a starving child as the subject that draws on the emotional strings is cool, but what about us who are trying to raise money for a boring old cement and mortar building? A picture of the building wont draw to much emotion, right? I know i am being a bit cynical but reading your blog and the comments it seems to make sense that we need to find the emotional connection in any fund raiser?"
Without a question.... the starving child (or dog), the earth shattering tremors, the devastating flood waters all create the momentum for donations..... BUT let's be honest -- our goal as fund raisers is to raise funds to support the mission and vision of a specific organization. And our mission and vision may not be relief and development.
In some ways, your question is ironic. As I often have people come to me and tell me that it's so easy to raise money for bricks and mortar and so difficult to raise funds for the operating costs of the organization.
But let me start this dialogue with 2 comments:
1. Raising funds does require "emotion," but I would prefer to use the words vision and passion instead of emotion. In many of the web sites and promotional materials I receive, I see people make a very common mistake -- they completely omit the vision and the passion. What is the underlying passion that inspired you? I'm guessing that at the very core of your vision are the lives of men and women; young people and children whose lives will be transformed by the work you do. That's the emotion. The bricks and mortar are simply the frame within your building. To talk only of the program or the buildings is like analyzing a great painting and only talking about the frame.
2. You need to understand your audience. Organizations like universities, colleges, hospitals and schools have two audiences: the funders and the students. Each have different motivations for coming alongside you. As a fundraiser and/or recruiter, you need to understand the needs, motivations and rational for each of the audiences. Then you need to talk to them. There are a couple of dangers. The first is to completely separate the two. This results in a fragmented mission and vision. The second is to try to "sell" the same product to both of them -- this is dissonant to both groups. In small organizations(let's randomly use the figure under $1 million annual operating budget), the organization has to clearly identify the audience and, as much as possible, speak directly to them. The mission and vision should resonate at the core of every communication.
The growth of an organization is a complex thing. It's a bit organic. A good communicator understands that and is able to position the messages in a way that resonates with the audience. The starving child is not the only image that raises emotions.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Growing Old
What you are doing to attract a new generation?
Hmmmm...who is this "new generation"? For some of our clients, that means opening the door to 60 year olds, for others, it means attracting those in their 30's.
I am the generation that fund raisers talk about all the time -- the baby boomers. They are holding the greatest wealth in the history of North America in their narcissistic little fists. The boomers lived on the cusp of a changing world -- maybe even were catalysts for that change. They watched TV (but didn't invent it); they wore mini skirts -- then traded them in for bell bottoms; they rejected Elvis and embraced the Beatles; they picketed for free love, anti-war and marijuana; they are the generation that talked democracy and community but lived for the "I".
The question fund raisers are asking is: "How do we talk to the baby boomers?
It's a tough question.
The boomers are cynical, tough minded bunch. Yet they are compassionate and want to use flower cards left over from Woodstock days. But unlike the older generation, they are not content to do what you say -- they want to impact change. That means they want to actually have hands on experiences through philanthropic experiences. They will also gravitate to slightly more grass root organizations which they feel are more open to influence.
But these trends are tricky.
We know that boomers want more hands on experience -- but we also have learned that regular "information' (Updates and loyalty mailings) through print does not actually impact increased loyalty to a charity. New projects, excitement because of new growth and new opportunities for growth do build loyalty (like fund offers). They want to be associated with a charity on the move.
We also know that boomers like to use technology. Yet when we assess the increase in web donations, we're not seeing the spike we have hoped for. We see a decrease in giving if the donor only receives e-updates or offers (with the exception of emergencies).
So in the world of competing offers -- how do we build loyalty?
Hmmmm...who is this "new generation"? For some of our clients, that means opening the door to 60 year olds, for others, it means attracting those in their 30's.
I am the generation that fund raisers talk about all the time -- the baby boomers. They are holding the greatest wealth in the history of North America in their narcissistic little fists. The boomers lived on the cusp of a changing world -- maybe even were catalysts for that change. They watched TV (but didn't invent it); they wore mini skirts -- then traded them in for bell bottoms; they rejected Elvis and embraced the Beatles; they picketed for free love, anti-war and marijuana; they are the generation that talked democracy and community but lived for the "I".
The question fund raisers are asking is: "How do we talk to the baby boomers?
It's a tough question.
The boomers are cynical, tough minded bunch. Yet they are compassionate and want to use flower cards left over from Woodstock days. But unlike the older generation, they are not content to do what you say -- they want to impact change. That means they want to actually have hands on experiences through philanthropic experiences. They will also gravitate to slightly more grass root organizations which they feel are more open to influence.
But these trends are tricky.
We know that boomers want more hands on experience -- but we also have learned that regular "information' (Updates and loyalty mailings) through print does not actually impact increased loyalty to a charity. New projects, excitement because of new growth and new opportunities for growth do build loyalty (like fund offers). They want to be associated with a charity on the move.
We also know that boomers like to use technology. Yet when we assess the increase in web donations, we're not seeing the spike we have hoped for. We see a decrease in giving if the donor only receives e-updates or offers (with the exception of emergencies).
So in the world of competing offers -- how do we build loyalty?
Sunday, April 20, 2008
the web game
Thanks for nudging me, Phil. It's hard to believe that nearly two months have gone by since the last posting. Perhaps there is a blog topic right in there. But I'm going to leave that for another day.
Just a quick reminder that the Canadian Marketing Association's National Convention is happening in May (12,13,14). For a direct link to Barefoot's seminar go to http://www.the-cma.org/convention/?WCE=C=47|K=228049#GayleGoossen
We're focusing our session on one of the most challenging aspect of marketing and fund raising -- developing a web site that is more than a digital brochure. True engagement is pretty obvious for sites like Amazon and e-Bay. But how do we truly engage our donors to come back and visit our site?
Web sites are an ideal environment to allow donors to "create their own adventure." But too often there is no real adventure -- no experience. I am continuously challenged to think of new ways of looking at digital technology.
If I buy the Enchanted DVD I can watch the movie -- but more than that, I can take digital forays into the magical world of princesses. Disney, synonymous with imagination, gets it. The DVD creates an extended experience that engages the audience in more ways than one.
What keeps fund raisers from creating an adventure for our donors?
Let me suggest a few things:
1. dollars.... it takes time, testing and tenacity
2. skepticism... will it raise funds
3. creativity... let's not beat around the bush... fund raisers are not known for their creativity.
4. experience... there are very few (are there any?) models we can learn from
As I prepare for this seminar, I am opening my mind once more to ideas... I'm not expecting a huge break through, but I know that it all starts with one step forward.
Just a quick reminder that the Canadian Marketing Association's National Convention is happening in May (12,13,14). For a direct link to Barefoot's seminar go to http://www.the-cma.org/convention/?WCE=C=47|K=228049#GayleGoossen
We're focusing our session on one of the most challenging aspect of marketing and fund raising -- developing a web site that is more than a digital brochure. True engagement is pretty obvious for sites like Amazon and e-Bay. But how do we truly engage our donors to come back and visit our site?
Web sites are an ideal environment to allow donors to "create their own adventure." But too often there is no real adventure -- no experience. I am continuously challenged to think of new ways of looking at digital technology.
If I buy the Enchanted DVD I can watch the movie -- but more than that, I can take digital forays into the magical world of princesses. Disney, synonymous with imagination, gets it. The DVD creates an extended experience that engages the audience in more ways than one.
What keeps fund raisers from creating an adventure for our donors?
Let me suggest a few things:
1. dollars.... it takes time, testing and tenacity
2. skepticism... will it raise funds
3. creativity... let's not beat around the bush... fund raisers are not known for their creativity.
4. experience... there are very few (are there any?) models we can learn from
As I prepare for this seminar, I am opening my mind once more to ideas... I'm not expecting a huge break through, but I know that it all starts with one step forward.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
30,000 children die each day...
So how effective is that stat?
You've seen the technique used many times -- gripping picture with a list of stats that amplify the need. Or does it?
Here's what researchers found.
Donors were shown a photo of Rokia, a 7 year-old girl from Mali who was facing starvation. A second group of donors were shown the same image, given the same information plus they were given significant stats that demonstrated the famine and starvation in Africa.
Seasoned fund raisers aren't that surprised that Rokia -- without the stats -- raised more money.
George Loewenstein, at Carnegie Mellon University says: “It really puts fund raisers in a fix. They want to appeal to the mind and the heart. But if they do, there’s a real risk of undermining the heart.”
We all face the tension. In the ideal world, it makes sense to educate while we raise funds. But, in my experience, multiple messages and the desire to educate always diffuses the real need.
Take the opportunity to educate in loyalty materials -- materials that are not focused on raising funds. Coordinating loyalty and corporate communications to supplement fund raising efforts is much more effective than trying to do both at once. (Thanks to the Stanford Social Innovation Review for providing leading edge research!)
You've seen the technique used many times -- gripping picture with a list of stats that amplify the need. Or does it?
Here's what researchers found.
Donors were shown a photo of Rokia, a 7 year-old girl from Mali who was facing starvation. A second group of donors were shown the same image, given the same information plus they were given significant stats that demonstrated the famine and starvation in Africa.
Seasoned fund raisers aren't that surprised that Rokia -- without the stats -- raised more money.
George Loewenstein, at Carnegie Mellon University says: “It really puts fund raisers in a fix. They want to appeal to the mind and the heart. But if they do, there’s a real risk of undermining the heart.”
We all face the tension. In the ideal world, it makes sense to educate while we raise funds. But, in my experience, multiple messages and the desire to educate always diffuses the real need.
Take the opportunity to educate in loyalty materials -- materials that are not focused on raising funds. Coordinating loyalty and corporate communications to supplement fund raising efforts is much more effective than trying to do both at once. (Thanks to the Stanford Social Innovation Review for providing leading edge research!)
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
youtube and facebook
social media
changing faces of technology
grassroots efforts
How are these things impacting our marketing and communication schedules?
Can we track increases in funds raised?
I'd love to hear your stories!
changing faces of technology
grassroots efforts
How are these things impacting our marketing and communication schedules?
Can we track increases in funds raised?
I'd love to hear your stories!
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
funding deficit
This was a headline in the New York Times today:
"Facing a $200 million operating deficit, the American Red Cross is preparing to cut as much as one-third of its headquarters staff, up to 1,000 employees, and pare regional management."
To get this in perspective, they raise about $3.45 billion annually -- most of us are out of their league. But before we push the thought out of our mind,I think we'd do well to consider a couple of issues.
Between 911 and Katrina, the Red Cross had some pretty good years. Raising funds for high profile emergencies is much different than the hard, systematic work of cultivating long term donors. Our studies show that emergency donors are a unique breed. They are not interested in being committed to one organization. Rather, they respond to highly profiled need when it happens. They rarely transform to long term donors. Your loyal supporters will also respond at an increased level to emergencies that are perceived to be gi-normous (to quote my daughter). Your fiscal planning must take into account the highs of emergency situations.
In response to increases, Red Cross increased their staff -- not necessarily their effectiveness.
Watch your numbers. Return on investment and prudent, strategic acquisition and cultivation cannot be underestimated.
I know, spread sheets are really sexy. They don't make headlines like "$1 million gift given to..." Cultivating monthly donors is not that sexy either. Charity Village never features Mrs. Smith who has given $35 a month to one organization for 50 years (That's $21,000). The organization that has 50,000 Mrs. Smiths is raising more than $21 million each year!
While we need to ensure that our organizations are equipped to respond quickly to emergencies -- we also need to respond with integrity. Doctors without Borders stopped their fund raising for the Tsunami when they hit their response capacity -- good for them! BUT they didn't stop fund raising. Instead, they stuck to their central mission and helped the general public understand that the Tsunami was certainly high need -- but it was one of many humanitarian disasters in the world.
The fund raiser's job is to effectively tell the stories of the organization's real work and inspire people to respond. We need to be innovative, engaged and focused on effectiveness.
"Facing a $200 million operating deficit, the American Red Cross is preparing to cut as much as one-third of its headquarters staff, up to 1,000 employees, and pare regional management."
To get this in perspective, they raise about $3.45 billion annually -- most of us are out of their league. But before we push the thought out of our mind,I think we'd do well to consider a couple of issues.
Between 911 and Katrina, the Red Cross had some pretty good years. Raising funds for high profile emergencies is much different than the hard, systematic work of cultivating long term donors. Our studies show that emergency donors are a unique breed. They are not interested in being committed to one organization. Rather, they respond to highly profiled need when it happens. They rarely transform to long term donors. Your loyal supporters will also respond at an increased level to emergencies that are perceived to be gi-normous (to quote my daughter). Your fiscal planning must take into account the highs of emergency situations.
In response to increases, Red Cross increased their staff -- not necessarily their effectiveness.
Watch your numbers. Return on investment and prudent, strategic acquisition and cultivation cannot be underestimated.
I know, spread sheets are really sexy. They don't make headlines like "$1 million gift given to..." Cultivating monthly donors is not that sexy either. Charity Village never features Mrs. Smith who has given $35 a month to one organization for 50 years (That's $21,000). The organization that has 50,000 Mrs. Smiths is raising more than $21 million each year!
While we need to ensure that our organizations are equipped to respond quickly to emergencies -- we also need to respond with integrity. Doctors without Borders stopped their fund raising for the Tsunami when they hit their response capacity -- good for them! BUT they didn't stop fund raising. Instead, they stuck to their central mission and helped the general public understand that the Tsunami was certainly high need -- but it was one of many humanitarian disasters in the world.
The fund raiser's job is to effectively tell the stories of the organization's real work and inspire people to respond. We need to be innovative, engaged and focused on effectiveness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
