This is a simple diagram I’ve created recently to explain how you can identify what to ask for money to fund.

If you don’t know exactly what is wrong with the world, or what needs to change… you should ask for money for research.

If you don’t know exactly what the solution should be… you should ask for money to develop a concept.

If you have an idea for a service but have never trialled it… you should ask for money to trial it.

if you have a solution that works, and want to use it to reach more beneficiaries… you should ask for money to rollout or expand the service.

I recently used this to identify that many of the activities which internally are represented as “business as usual” can in fact be represented as new things that won’t happen unless we have funding.

Givv.org allows you to pick a bunch of charities… and then each month those on your list will receive the amount you have nominated them to get. Be that $2.11, or $45.26. Each month you can then play with the list, and the donation amounts… so you’re totally in control of the amounts you are giving.

The prickly direct marketer inside me is furious that one of the benefits that Givv.org are promoting is “keeping off a fundraising list”, but setting that aside… I am left wondering “where the heck are the supporters going to get feedback from?”

So I have written to them and asked.

My hopes are that this is a slice of social media heaven as the site does facilitate users sharing on their profiles who they give to and even how much. This in turn is used to create popularity boards which help new users decide who to give to.

I have often joked with friends that people’s attitudes to giving to charity is often a great way for me to judge my compatibility with them. If this site helps people to share this as part of their identity both on this site and on Facebook… then it may start to encourage a system by which people could be persuaded to benchmark their giving levels against one another.

My hope is that charities can integrate this site with their other social media strategies… which should include sharing video stories and pics + text movies of how money is helping the charity beneficiaries. If the site allows charities to post up videos and pics so that supporters and those interested can browse them each month… it could be onto a winner, and charities will be forced to compete on the basis of their stories.

My fear is that the site has been created without an awareness that supporters actually benefit from learning what the charity is doing with the donations provided. If the site has been created purely from the perspective of an angry donor who doesn’t like mail packs…. then it will rely on its users being interested / savvy enough to follow the charity’s facebook page / blog / etc instead of connecting them to the very stories that will keep them giving month after month.

Given that the site says “if you see an advert for Amnesty international on TV you can then add them to your list that month…” I fear that the site creators may not have understood the power of storytelling.

I shall post their reply here!

It reminded me of the trials and tribulations I faced when helping manage face-to-face campaigns for the likes of Christian Aid and NSPCC. We used to get complaints. Some were about the street fundraisers allegedly drinking from beer cans, which were pretty straightforward to address. Others were more subjective affairs. It helped me to realise that:

- Some people will feel bad when they are presented with a need in the world and asked to donate.
- Some people will feel bad when they are presented with a wonderful solution and asked to donate.

I believe these people feel bad because they believe they are being judged as a person. They could donate but they chose not to, and so they are left wondering whether the fundraiser thinks they are a bad person. In extremes, they realise that actually they rarely donate. They always sneer at The Big Issue seller. And they let other parents handle the after school clubs. It’s these people who get pretty riled by their lunch break being interrupted by some “pushy backpacker”.

It’s fair enough really. Turning down another American Express credit card doesn’t really change how we see ourselves. Turning down a social invite from a friend in need can cause our impression of ourselves to drop. Turning down a stranger asking us to help find a cure for cancer…. well that apparently may take us a little closer to being brutal concentration camp Commandants, and frankly few of us like that self-image do we?

It is good to acknowledge all these tangled emotions and perceptions. After all it is because of them, not despite them, that people donate.

Love them of course.

If you let them spend time in or on behalf of your organisation – then you have to love them. If you didn’t really want to use them but you did – tough. You still have to love them.

How do you do this.? Well I have been doing lots of thinking about this and reckon I have an awesome idea. It is called a Volunteer Relationship Management approach. It must be good because it has an acronym already – VRM.

Apparently you can already take courses in it.

Courses… really?

VRM for me is doing a review of my SRM (Supporter Relationship Management) approach and adapting it for Volunteers.

Meet them – make sure you get their details and assign tasks based on what they’re good at and their availability

Understand them – make sure you know why they’re interested in your organisation, and create the relevant feedback communication (guess what – it will probably be similar to the stroy you used in your latest SRM communication).

Value them – Make sure that the tasks are meaningful, appropriate, and that you explain the worth of their efforts to the organiation’s success…. and the beneficiaries. And say thank you. And personalise that thank you.

Remember them – send them an update reminding them what their efforst achieved. And stay in touch with opportunities of how they can help again.

Check out this report on volunteering to get some more evidence of why you should treat your volunteers nicely. More than one third (36%) of volunteers reported they had not had any recognition for their good work in the last month of their volunteering

Sometimes they mean ‘working for a corporate’. Often they mean ‘working for a supplier to the charity sector’.

Well… after twelve years or so of working for marketing agencies… eight in agencies that only worked with charities… I have joined a charity.

I am now working for the Inspire Foundation. I am the Director of Fundraising and Communications.

I hope you check out our website.

And I hope you try really hard to find the donate button.

But I doubt you will try hard enough… so of course feel free to leave me your details here and I’ll let you know when I’ve had it moved.

And please wish me luck or even ask me questions about what making the switch is like.

Phew.

The more I say it, the more acceptable it is. Because of course I did not walk into the pitch with a plan for “when I lose”.

I just lost a live pitch in front of around 200 people at a conference of people who work in charities. I pitched a poster idea for a made-up charity and so did some dudes from The Works. On paper a terrible loss of face. But of course, already the main feeling I have is… “I had to try”.

The thing about pitching is that you have to be prepared to give up all your power. You transfer all your power onto your audience. They determine whether you succeed or fail. The temptation to avoid pitching is therefore huge.

Furthermore pitching isn’t just about whether an idea is good or not. You have to work hard to get the audience to pass the power back. You have to convince the audience that they should yield to your idea and that by going for you and your idea – they will feel good.

In my case I failed to persuade the audience that they should feel good saying “yes” to me. Well except those who knew me already. Since I broke a few of my own fundamental rules… I figure I should share them here.

1. Never let your idea be shown until you have set the scene. It is important to get heads nodding before you get to the idea.

2. Read out your work. Do not assume that the audience have seen everything. Even if the point of your pitch is to produce a poster. Yes it is true that in real life no one will be there to stop cars and explain what they should be reading. But in the pitch you are there. And you should read it. Every word.

3. Don’t fail to seek feedback. It is important that before the audience are asked to decide which idea they like… they actually talk about your idea. This provides an opportunity to further discuss the merit of your work further.

There we go.

Better skill next time!

Image courtesy of John Hyatt http://johnhyattillustration.com

The advert above is often applauded as a successful advert. It is said that it generated over 5,000 applications for Shackleton’s adventure.

I learnt today that the advert may actually be a fake. Not just the illustration above which is of course fake (the English spelling of ‘honor’ is honour) but in fact that Shackleton may have placed an advert something more akin to:

“Hands wanted for long voyage in small boat. No pay, no prospects, not much pleasure.”

What the fake and the probable original share is raw honesty. Whilst none of us would suggest that charity marketing is full of lies. We should not neglect to tell our supporters exactly what the situation is. For example, if no breakthroughs have been made, we should explain why. Furthermore if we cannot explain why our service works, then we’re clearly not ready to be trusted with people’s money.

What the fake does offer though is hope. It presents the harsh challenge alongside the possible glorious outcome.

Honest challenges and hope – two more ingredients for successful fundraising communications.

This wonderful ad was spotted in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph.

There beneath the inevitable article about Obama… was an advert for the hair removal product ‘Veet’, and the simple line “Goodbye Bush”.

I share this because it reminded me that sometimes it pays to think about when your audience will be zoned into your cause, and so it often pays to have a “quick-fire” strategy already mapped out for taking advantages of these moments of high interest.

This doesn’t need to be limited to charities delaing with crises or disasters.

A health charity may feel it appropriate to advertise when a celebrity dies – it doesn’t have to be done without sympathy. A doggie rescue charity may keep an eye out for a famous celebrity losing his or her dog. An environmental charity may use a newspaper heading to spark a new campaign.

Think about your potential spikes in interest, and then develop a strategy for ensuring you can respond quickly and creatively.

You can look more closely here at this inspiring reminder of the importance of timing here…

Simple combination of message and channel results in this great anti-censorship ad for Amnesty International.

Call to action should have been to go to website.

I’m often asked whether charities should spend time developing product or campaign names. I believe that the answer is often to consider whether it is a trick question or not!

The question above is of course, a trick question.

If you are going to remember, recognise, and value the support of ‘regular givers’ you are going to need to acknowledge their act of regular giving, and probably their status as a ‘regular giver’.

So… rather than use a piece of unfriendly, generic jargon such as ‘regular giver’ to personalize your communication.. why not spend a little time developing a unique name for them.

Here are some examples… if you would like more details of why I have grouped them the way I have, ask me for my opinionaid!

Group 1: Futuremakers, Full Stop supporter
Group 2: Field Partners, Discovery Partners, Frontline Member, Friend of PAWS, Golden Hearts supporter
Group 3: Human Rights Defenders, Frontline Member, Child Sponsor, Heart Saver, Kennel Sponsor