Katya's Non-Profit Marketing Blog

It pays to be personal

Inside Influence Report, one of my favorite newsletters from the great gang at ASU, reminds us once again why it pays to be personal.

Here’s the story, from Noah Goldstein:

I have a friend who is a medical doctor. Nicest guy in the world. Will do, and has done, anything for anybody. So I was totally perplexed — and as a social psychologist, very interested — when I learned he was having difficulty finding someone to cover his shift on the weekend of my wedding. I asked him if he had ever volunteered to take his colleagues’ shifts, and he replied that indeed he had. Considering all he had done in the past to help them, and all that we know about the power of the norm of reciprocation, it was puzzling that he could not get a single person to volunteer to help him out during his time of need. By the time he had answered my next question, however, the solution to the mystery was clear.

When I inquired how he went about asking for help, he said that he had sent out an e-mail. And it wasn’t just any of type of e-mail — it was a mass e-mail, in which all of the recipients could see all the other recipients.

The problem with this strategy is that it creates what is called diffusion of responsibility. By sending out the mass e-mail in a way that made visible the large number of coworkers being asked, no one single individual felt personally responsible for helping. Instead, each recipient likely assumed that someone else on that list would agree to help. In a classic demonstration of diffusion of responsibility, social psychologists John Darley and Bibb Latané staged a situation in which a student seemed to be having an epileptic seizure during a study. When a single bystander was present, that person helped approximately 85% of the time. But when five bystanders were present — all of whom were located in separate rooms, so no one could be certain if the victim was receiving help — only 31% of the bystanders helped.

Fortunately for this friend, Noah Goldstein knew what to do. He told the doctor to send personal emails asking individual people specifically. It worked. The doctor attended the wedding.

The more your “asks” appear to be made from you, personally and directly, to an individual, the more likely people will support you. So segment your audience. Show you know them. Speak to them like individuals. Try some one-on-one contact with your biggest supporters. Mass, impersonal, Dear Friend emails just won’t do the same job. Just ask the doctor.

Posted by on 04/15 at 05:15 PM

The trackback URL for this entry is:

Comments

I totally agree that communications with donors need to be personal. “Dear Friend” can give a donor the impression that you are too busy to personalize the correspondence or that you simply don’t care. Either way, you lose. It’s too easy to personalize written and digital appeals these days. And if the whole point of fundraising is to build relationships with donors, showing them that you remember their name is a great place to start.

Posted by Sandy Rees on 04/15 at 10:58 PM

I was reviewing a letter that was being sent out and I was making the suggestion that the letter should really be made personal. All the information was there. But I was told no, it was going to cost more to personalise the letter!

I dont think that a Dear Friend, or a Dear Supporter letter or email wont or doesn’t work. But when they have gone to the trouble of telling you their name you should really use it

Posted by Conor Byrne on 04/16 at 08:37 AM

Thank you for printing this article. I must say that it really got me thinking—a lot. We think we are “communicating” with people, but they don’t think so. Why are we so afraid of direct personal contact? Email has made it easy for us to avoid that contact. We get frustrated when people don’t respond to our requests.
It got me thinking enough that I’m now ready to take action. If I want or need something from a customer, donor, volunteer, etc., I’m going to call them. Thank you again.

Posted by on 04/18 at 08:23 AM

Thanks for this post. I have been studying communication for development for a few years now, and read case studies and learn about new technology and how it can help people..., from twitter to laptops to mobile phones, but even after studying this in depth I come back to the fact that it is all face-to-face that really counts making social change. Especially when our technology capabiliites in the west give us such an advantage over people online in the global South.

my blog is : http://com4dev.wordpress.com

Posted by Emily on 04/19 at 10:13 PM

I like such story so much. Thanks for me great feelings!

Posted by Tifany on 04/22 at 01:47 AM

Yes, even although he is a top doctor, yet he lacks social marketing savvy. I never send bulk emails. One email, one person. He needs a new and more effective way to stay in touch with his network of colleagues, maybe he should try blogging!

He would have done better to pick out the 5 most likely candidates to take his shift and texted them or rung them personally, moving on to the next 5 in rotation if need be. Everyone can improve their social skills!

Posted by zowoco on 04/22 at 04:13 AM

With the proliferation of emails, it is critical to personalise otherwise face the issue of your email not being read, or even opened. It is relatively easy to do, even if you have limited software tools available. Any time spent on personalisation is certainly worth the effort. Studies have shown that personalisation improves open rates. People will tend to open emails from people they know - so the “to” part in your email is also important. The growth of social marketing networks reinforces that people defer to people they know and trust to help them in their decision-making.

Posted by Soul Economy on 04/22 at 06:04 AM