Making the ask workshop 2 16-18

Editor's Notes

• #4: purpose: warm you up in talking about your passion for your organization, expressing yourself, finding your voice. How well you listened. LISTEN WITH YOUR HEAD LISTEN WITH YOUR EYESLISTEN WITH YOUR HEART at least 2 partners 45 seconds
• #11: Anne’s interpretation of Sargeant’s work –he assigned weights to donors’ responses. SATISFACTION as in customer compares what was expected and what was delivered, when expectations are met or exceeded. Donors who described their satisfaction as ‘very satisfied’ were twice as likely to make a second or subsequent gift as those who’s satisfaction was ‘satisfied.’ DONOR SATISFACTION is the biggest driver of loyalty, yet few nonprofits actually measure and track levels of donor satisfaction over time. IDENTIFICATION – social identification, the tribe – I belong to this group, I affiliate with this group TRUST COMMITMENT – similar correlation as with SATISFACTION, donors who felt a concept of ‘stickiness,’ keeps customers loyal to a brand or organization even when satisfaction is low. Sargeant would add 2 more that were weighted less than these 4 PERSONAL LINK – how is the donor connected to the organization, begging attention to how well we develop our relationships with a donor who’s LEARNING
• #13: Although many people would like to leave a gift to charity in their will, they forget about it when the time comes.  Our research shows (pdf) that if the will-writer just asks someone if they would like to donate, they are more likely to consider it and the rate of donation roughly doubles. https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2015/mar/23/the-science-behind-why-people-give-money-to-charity
• #14: Look at these names. What is the plan for reaching out to them?
• #15: Brainstorm as a group – ways to reach out to these donors now. What can you do to prime the pump?
• #17: Reach out to your donors now. Talk about how to ask for a match The importance of not having it be anonymous Questions about asking for a match – what have people done in the past A Challenge Grant is paid if and when your organization is able to raise sufficient additional funds from other sources, which may be used to stimulate giving from other donors. This is really what we mean here…not a matching gift. 
• #18: Larger match ratios don't affect subsequent gifts. Which is to say, a bigger ratio such as $3:$1 or $2:$1 had no additional impact relative to smaller match ratios (e.g., $1:$1).
• #19: One study shows that people give significantly more to their university if the person calling and asking for their donation is their former roommate In a running giving tally of online giving, donors were more likely to give larger gifts if the donor immediately preceeding them gave a larger gift eeing others give makes an individual more likely to give and gentle encouragement from a prominent person in your life can make also make a big difference to your donation decisions – more than quadrupling them in our recent study. https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2015/mar/23/the-science-behind-why-people-give-money-to-charity
• #20: Many people are also aware that they should donate to the causes that have the highest impact, but facts and figures are less attractive than narratives. In a series of experiments, it was found that people are much more responsive to charitable pleas that feature a single, identifiable beneficiary, than they are to statistical information about the scale of the problem being faced.  https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2015/mar/23/the-science-behind-why-people-give-money-to-charity See notes below from John Haydon. Better than this for punch https://www.johnhaydon.com/fundraising-appeal-turning-off-donors/ Most nonprofits love statistics. They remind staff and board members why their work matters. And statistics can be helpful when reporting outcomes or applying for grants. But using statistics can actually hurt your fundraising appeals. Statistics can turn a emotionally compelling fundraising appeal into a total bummer. In one study by the University of Oregon, two groups of potential donors were each asked to give money to help end hunger. The first group was asked to give money to help a little girl suffering from hunger. The second group was asked to help same little girl, but were also told about the millions of other children also suffering from hunger. The results were surprising: Even though the second group was presented with a greater need (millions of hungry children), they gave half as much money as the first group. Their conclusion is that people give less when presented with big problems. But why? Donors prefer a fundraising appeal that makes them feel good Why do people who are naturally endowed with rational thinking give less when presented with statistics demonstrating a huge need? We give because giving feels good. We get a little rush of endorphins every time we help others, volunteer at a homeless shelter, or give money to a starving little girl. But statistics in a fundraising appeal can put a damper on those good feelings. According to researcher Paul Slovic, the good feeling from helping the starving girl gets contaminated with the bad feeling about millions of starving people: “If our brain … creates an illusion of non-efficacy, people could be demotivated by thinking, ‘Well, this is such a big problem. Is my donation going to be effective in any way?'” Statistics, while very compelling, actually compete with the good feelings that your fundraising appeal produces. Donors give because of how awesome it makes them feel. Statistics make donors feel less good, causing them to give less. 
• #21: advertising which emphasises the proven effectiveness of the charity does not increase giving. Other evidence suggests that the effect of this information can actually be the opposite. https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2015/mar/23/the-science-behind-why-people-give-money-to-charity
• #22: Anne – donor conversations
• #23: 5 Minutes 10:00-10:10 rejuice after lunch - how you interact with people - 10 min? what felt like to tell story, and to listen, people elated, feel connected, moving - that’s the place you’re talking about your org
• #25: Per Salsa Labs, email has the highest rate of return on investment for any marketing channel – that’s $40 for every $1 spent. 5% of marketers believe that email marketing’s ROI will be even higher than it is now by the year 2020. 70% of consumers believe email will still exist in 10 years, compared with 60.2% who believe Twitter will stick around and 56.2% who think direct mail will remain. [If you’ve any doubt about this, check out the resources on my Pinterest board: Email Dead?] 76% of marketers believe that all email messages will be completely personalized in the next 5 years. One study found personalization increased email opens by 244% and click-throughs by 161%.
• #26: Folks today expect personalized messages tailored to their individual needs and interests. This means you should be segmenting e-appeals based on constituent behavior. This may mean whether they’re a prospect or donor, interested in Program A or B, or the fact that they have a special affiliation with you (e.g., past board, alum, parent, etc.). The more personal you can be, the more relevant your email will be perceived. And relevancy = opens and actions.
• #27: The e-appeal above can be visualized completely above the scroll on a desktop. It includes many key elements of a compelling appeal: (1) Comes from a respected individual at a respected institution; (2) Compelling visualtells a story; (3) Urgency and leverage are conveyed right away via a time-specific matching grant; (4) One storyof who the gift will help is told, and (5) Ask is repeated more than once. It could be improved with a specific dollar ask (maybe options were included on the Donation Landing Page) and use of a P.S. to reiterate the ask and the challenge, but it’s a good effort.
• #30: This is how email appeals differ from direct mail appeals – appeal letters actually test better at 2 pages instead of one. But needs to be written well!
• #33: This outlines a number of specific ways the donor’s gift may be used. The visual tells the story; the caption reinforces it. The text puts the donor into the appeal right away, as someone who understands what needs to be done and won’t be intimidated. Later in the letter, the donor is flattered for being “thoughtful” and “generous.” (Flattery will take you far). The year-end deadline to get your tax-deduction benefit jumps out.
• #35: Tell the story about the person in my workshop where you could not see that there was an ask! Have one clear call to action: to give. All fundraising e-appeals should have one call to action—a call for the audience to make a donation. Why that gift is important, how it will make a difference, and why someone should give now is part of the story you weave with the narrative, images, and video. All of those elements should be coordinated to move the audience through the emotional steps to donate. Donors want to know where their money will go and how it will help. Generic appeals that go to generic action buttons simply won’t generate the return on engagement that specifically targeted campaigns will.
• #36: Here the story is all about the donor as the Unsung Hero. And the appeal is to a very human and universal emotion. Empathy. Benefits to the donor include doing something remarkable for their hometown, and getting a year-end tax deduction.
• #37: Donors want to know where their money will go and how it will help. Make it easy to respond Generic appeals that go to generic action buttons simply won’t generate the return on engagement that specifically targeted campaigns will.
• #43: Discuss the focus on alumni as a strategy Also did targeted asks to grandparents, alumni parents, and current parents Letters and emails to Friends multiple times during the year
• #56: More than 50 of the 78 were
• #57: Work backwards from your deadline to schedule a series of email appeals that will get you to your goal. Sometimes organizations will survey their donors and ask them how often they’d like to be approached. Most people will predictably say once a year. This is a great way to lose your donors. Why? Because how people say they’ll behave is often quite different from the way they’ll actually behave. Because research in psychology and neuroscience shows people are more likely to give again when they hear from you repeatedly about (1) the impact of their giving, and (2) your gratitude for making this outcome possible . You can look at tests done by other organizations as a starting point. We do know that large organizations who’ve done this testing are now mailing monthly, with 3 – 4 emails in between. Is this right for you? The only way to know is to try mailing a bit more than you’ve been doing thus far, and see what happens. Remember, you can always offer folks the option of unsubscribing from your mailings. When you comply with this request, you score points for doing what you say you’ll do. This builds trust. And the reality is that very few folks will decide to unsubscribe. People may not read every mailing you send, but this doesn’t mean they don’t like receiving them. In a way, it reassures them you’re still a healthy, vibrant organization that’s out there in the community doing good things. If you stop mailing (or mail infrequently), people are left to draw their own conclusions.
• #59: Share calendar template
• #67: AP – work the Penelope Burk sample thank you letter
• #69: This slide can come at the end when we are talking about stewardship – and planning for follow up and fall
• #70: There is a slide for annual appeal planning that is very similar to this. I think I should add that back in and shorten this one. Constituency Outreach Plan – to include all communications in the year. How does appeal class fit into this? Communications and Marketing Plan slide? Direct mail • Tribute gifts • Telephone • Web-based • Events • Employee giving • Donor clubs/membership programs • Grant proposal writing • Personal solicitation • Bequests