Your mission is the gift. Really.
- Fri, August 17 2012
- Filed under: Fundraising essentials
A week ago I posted on the question, should you give your donors gifts? I got a big response via email. Many people wrote to say they agreed, and that the advice offered reflected their own experiences as fundraisers. A few even told me that their most consistent donors typically decline the gifts they offer. And a bunch wrote me with more questions. I got the most questions about events. I was asked, do the rules I offered on donor premiums apply at events? I decided that I should go to an events expert who was far smarter than me for the answers. So I contacted Jeff Shuck, CEO of Event 360. I have enormous respect for Jeff and his thought leadership, and so I asked him to answer that question for me. Here is his thoughtful response. Thank you Jeff for weighing in. This is good advice and recommended reading for all fundraisers!
Jeff writes:
Katya graciously asked me to weigh in on the use (and usefulness) of fundraising incentives after her wonderful blog post from last week raised several comments on the subject. In particular, she received a thoughtful inquiry about whether the findings of neuromarketer Roger Dooley – that fundraising gifts are actually a disincentive to donations – apply in the peer-to-peer space, where our constituents are sometimes not donors directly but the networkers who connect us to those donors. If donor gifts actually depress donations, does that mean that fundraising incentives like t-shirts, tote bags, and custom jerseys are not effective in getting participants to solicit gifts from their friends?
I should be upfront about my areas of expertise, as well as my gaps: I lead the country’s largest event fundraising firm. What I am not is a neuromarketer, psychologist, or behavioral economist. That said, I often feel like I have taken on a minor career in fundraising swag, and so if Katya is offering me a soapbox, I’m standing on it.
Allow me to first say that from what I’ve observed, fundraising incentives in some cases can be useful in driving fundraising behavior. Many large-scale peer-to-peer programs are powered by t-shirts, and there’s no denying that for some constituents the thrill of a new branded windbreaker or golf towel is a powerful call to action.
But – there’s a but. As my clients and team members will attest, I hardly ever recommend incentives, and I think that on the whole they are a real problem in my industry. Here are a few reasons why.
• Confusion between the reward and the ask. A main piece of evidence that incentives appear to work is the fact that in incentive-based programs there are fundraising peaks at incentive levels. In other words, if your event program gives out a shirt at $100 and a jacket at $500, you will probably see fundraising performance peak at those levels. So the incentive must work, right? However, it is not at all clear if the incentives are the cause or the effect. An organization with incentive levels at $100 and $500 will communicate much more actively about why participants should raise $100 and $500, and about the need for fundraising in general. Is it the reward or the increased communication that has inspired the fundraising activity? Our firm has run programs in which we’ve used specific, mission-based asks in place of incentives and have achieved the same results, with lower costs and higher mission awareness. In my experience, you are just as likely to drive action by asking for action (and creating a powerful case to support it) than by giving away toasters and oven mitts.
• Reciprocity is a poor way to change the world. As Dooley details, fundraising gifts work based on a psychological principle of “reciprocity” – the innate human obligation to return a favor bestowed with a favor given. However, Dooley (and Cialdini, and the Heath brothers, and many others) have also emphasized that reciprocity is, in a real sense, a way to take advantage of people’s altruism. They’ll help you, but they’ll resent you for it. While that is an effective way to hit year-end goals, it is a horrible way to create long-term constituents.
• Incentives beget more incentives. An incentive culture creates, in almost every case, an incentive death spiral. Once you start recruiting people with discounts and motivating them with gifts, you will increasingly find that you turn to discounts and gifts to grow your program. And, it will become increasingly hard to hit “reset” and re-focus your program on mission. This is the same reason, incidentally, that I love Groupon for marketing your nail salon but not for marketing your fundraising program. If I can buy your $100 gala ticket for $50, why would I ever pay $100?
I could go on and on, but at the end of the day Katya was right: “The greatest gift you can give a donor is to make them feel they made a difference that mattered.” The number one reason people give to charity is because they are asked; and the most effective asks are rooted in a powerful vision for a better world. Events – and campaigns, and appeals, and donor visits, and mailings, and websites – are supposed to be occasions to ASK. Often we turn them into mechanisms to help us avoid the ask: “We have a budget shortfall – let’s hold a dinner!”
Incentives trick us into missing the real conversation. Should we thank people? Absolutely. And in the right context, colored shirts or jackets or jerseys can be a nice way to recognize people who committed to the world we’re working to create. But every time we talk about t-shirts instead of fundraising, we’re not only missing the chance to talk about our mission – we’re cheapening it, too.
I’ll admit, it is a lot easier to say “raise $100 and get a t-shirt” than it is to ask, “There is too much pain and suffering in the world for either of us, and I think you agree, and so will you raise $100 to help me change it?” But at the end of the day, incentives are transactional; changing the world is relational. A better world, sadly, cannot be bought for a large cotton cloth; nor will someone who participates for the cotton cloth be truly invested in your vision of that world.
You’re worth more than that. Focus on the conversation that matters, and for backing up why it matters with authentic stories of how you’re making a tangible difference. Leave the swag for the sales conference.
@JeffShuck is co-founder and CEO of Event 360, a Chicago-based company focused on helping organizations use events to create a better world. And what a family, right?
Comments
I completely agree. This has been our experience at Cumberland Community Foundation. We help a lot of nonprofits with their endowment building. Sometimes their board members try to come up with gimmicks or incentives to get people to give. (This type of conversation is usually driven by one of their board members who does not give to their organization, I note. Their board members who generously give within their means typically do NOT want anything in return except a better life for someone else and a thank you note.)
Your posts on this will provide the additional proof to justify our position - YOUR MISSION IS THE GIFT!
I totally agree. Premium-induced giving begets more premium-induced giving. It’s transactional and not the stuff of which long-term relationships are made. I like some of Roger Dooley’s suggestions for persuading folks that the gift they receive will be ANOTHER way to help the charity if they proudly display the gift. The primary reasons people give (aside from being asked) is (1) belief in the mission; (2) trust/admiration for leadership, and (3) belief the organization is efficient/effective and making a demonstrated difference. Gifts just muck things up.
Thanks, Jeff and Katya, for a wonderful article. Keep the focus on the mission - good words. Taken to heart. Thanks.
Thanks for getting up on the soapbox, Jeff. For me, another big reason for not offering incentives is that it sends the message - “we are not focused on spending your donation where it matters most.” Sure, without the donations, the good work cannot be done. Like you, I believe it’s better to offer thanks than incentives. I do like the idea of providing (after the fact) promotional items that the supporter can use to help spread the word about an organization they clearly believe in.
I still think that there is the appropriate sentimental gift that inspires the giver to talk about the organization and continue to support the organization, like the coffee mug at work that becomes the conversational piece, or the pen with the logo that the giver will lend but not give away because the organization is personal. I agree trying to match the gift with incentive does not work in the long run; however, when you get the sentimental token correct as a thank you that is rewarding for both sides.
We have found sending small token items to be effective. For instance, we will include a bookmark that has our organization logo, a photo and a brief text about our mission is appreciated by our donors. It is kind of a two-fold gift - it is a tangible item that expresses our gratitude and it is something the donor can use OR give to someone else to help spread the word.
What most donors really do appreciate is a handwritten Thank You note. If you don’t have time to hand write all of them, then write a personal comment on your form letter acknowledgement.
I agree that the focus can quickly turn to only stuff and detract from the mission. I’m also wondering if there are significant generational differences? I’ve noticed that some Matures seem to like (and expect) those little return address labels and mini calendars (but still seem to understand the importance of the mission), while some Millennials seem to want the most stuff – without paying as much attention to the mission. Maybe it would make more sense to just directly sell the t-shirts and the coffee mugs, separating them from the actual “give” but still allowing people who like the stuff to show their support by wearing or using the items – which can still have a benefit for the nonprofit.
Timing is everything. I attended a “partner appreciation” dinner last night. It was this organizations way of thanking those who had gone above and beyond in volunteering, financial support, etc.
In this case, most everyone there knew they were being “recognized” at the event. The key for me is, none of them did what earned them the recognition…to get the recognition. I think it meant a lot to the recipients.
Bottom line for me - keep the focus on the mission, on the impact of the donor/volunteer/partner and use special, personal notes or (if necessary) gifts as a “thank you” vs an incentive.
Ric
I have to agree that token trinkets for annual gifts do tend to belittle the mission of the organization, however, I have to disagree with the concept of recognition in the area of planned gifts. If you as an organization are trying to get a handle on what you have in the pipeline in the way of bequests and planned gifts, you may want to initiate a legacy society, open to those who have made provisions for an ultimate gift, and are willing to document those gifts with you. In this case, legacy donors can self identify themselves. It will give the development office an opportunity to continue to steward these donors, so they don’t decide to change the charitable beneficiary of their bequest, or other planned giving strategy, at somne point in the future. Also if managed propertly, the members of the Legacy Society can be instrumental in both identifying other prospective donors and help in the initial ask or solicitation.
If the Legacy Society is properly publicized,and managed by the development office, meaning doing something more than just an obligitory annual luncheon, stakeholders will aspire to become a member of the society and be encouraged to embark on doing legacy planning for the benefit of the organization.
Unfortunately, I don’t think this is a black and white issue. A great deal may depend upon the type of organization, its mission and its donors. A word of caution—- let’s not “throw out the baby with the bathwater,” a cliche perhaps, but a strong consideration in this discussion. For many organizations, the mission is critical but not a basic human service. For cultural organizations and others with a less need-driven mission but no less important, “gifts” may actually play a different kind of and yet very significant role in the development process. They can be a form of outreach, a way to share a mission and a message in a public but acceptable way.
For many organizations, especially one like ours, (The International Wildlife Media Center & Film Festivals), a gift, which may come in the form of a T-shirt, poster, or reusable, earth-friendly, canvas messenger bag, is a wonderful form of outreach. Many a donor appreciates the opportunity to “wear” their passion and their financial commitment. Others love to be able to share their passion with friends and family without being direct. It is what I might call an indirect way of conveying your mission. In other words, not all gifts are bad.
When a donor is excited about an organization which they support, very often, they want to share this with others but in an indirect way - showing off a beautiful wildlife image with the name of the organization, or carrying their very eco-friendly tote, can be a very comfortable way of doing this. We have many donors as well, who as a way of sharing their love of the mission with children and even beginning the process of teaching the process of giving with their young children, may start with a simple T-shirt. Not all gifts are all bad, and that’s my message. As with many things, they may have a time and place. This is truly part of knowing your organization and especially your donor base. What works for one organization, may not work for another and vice versa.
Coincidentally, on the year when we did not have new T-shirts, promoting the mission of the film festivals with the most recent wildlife image, which also promoted new artists so it had a significant cultural benefit, we actually received complaints. This was a “premium” that donors looked forward to, again, because of the nature of the organization, its mission, purpose and ways of outreach.
So the final message is, be tasteful, be thoughtful and understand the big picture with your organization—- the way one organization reaches donors, thanks them and supports them, can take many forms; it can be very different from one type of organization to another and it can be a vital part of fundraising, knowing what works for your particular audience and base of support.
The biggest porblem with donations is that we are not sure what is the amount the end users get as many big organisation spend like 20 to 30% of the amount as administrative charges which is really sad. Also many times we find that the end users also get less material due to pilferages and thefts.We as a company are focusing on ensuring that he end user or the recepient of the aid gets the maximum benefit of the donations give by the donors. We also try and improve day in and day out our products which will give maximum benefits to the recepient of the aid cheaper and durable products.