Donor Voice vs Penelope Burk

I recently read a blog post over at thedonorvoice that tried pointing out the inaccurate assumptions regarding pace of solicitation that Penelope Burk had made in recent research. This particular post highlights for me the vast amounts of “myths” in the market on this critical topic.

If you are a practitioner who believes that cadence will play no role in retention, I encourage you to test this for all of our benefit by setting up hourly automatic solicitations for your entire donor pool. I suspect not many people will choose this path and most of us would agree for quite obvious reasons. The assertion that pace will play no role in retention is the equivalent of suggesting one could not overdose on heroin. Although sharing data that provides no insight into how to improve the retention problem I guess potentially gives organizations the opportunity to be lost but making great time.

Having spent most of my career building advance models focused on retention and increasing donor retention by over 280% I can tell you that both Penelope Burk and the folks at thedonorvoice are correct, the problem is that they are also both incorrect. If you've never produced retention it is possible to look at statistical studies regarding groups of people and arrive at what would be perceived as logical conclusions. The problem in practice is that while groups of people are predictable, individuals within that group are not.  There is just no 100%, ever.

Retention is achieved through a personal understanding of how each donor will react to designed touch

points. There is no 100% assumption that you can safely drape over any group without a certain degree of statistical error. You just have to determine if the risk of error is worth, well, the risk.

Donor retention is both a serious problem and an incredible opportunity. Our systems, models, and strategies for five decades have been designed to generate transactions not customer satisfaction. We have built a fundraising culture almost entirely on acquisition. Continued focus on transactions only will do very little to impact the retention of your most valuable assets. 

If you are interested in how to have real impact check out this read from Tom Asacker.

In the meantime the point this info graphic makes reminds me.

Modernizing Yesterday’s 8 Basics Of Donor Retention To Achieve Retention

I was recently reading a blog post where the author was commenting on another blog post about the eight basics of donor retention. The author correctly notes that the list of eight has pretty much been the same for almost 2 decades. Well, if the list has been sort of the same, and our retention rates are as dismal as they are, then it is logical that the list may no longer be relevant in its current form.

I have professionally wrestled with this list over a decade and a half ago. My team and I believed that

the items on this list were NOT capable of creating the outcomes we wanted. We wanted to dramatically increase our donor retention rates. After making significant changes in how we approached the items on this list we were able to increase donor retention well over 250%. The adjustments we made to each of these basics were as follows.

1. Listen more (traditional)

We realized we couldn't just listen more we needed to listen effectively. In order to be effective it required us to ask the right questions. What we learned over time was asking the right questions and listening to our donors response gave us the tools to be listened to when we designed a communication for them. Listening more without purpose or design was meaningless. 

2. Produce valuable content (traditional)

Over a decade we produced an incredible amount of content. The kind of content that was read at the highest percentages was content that was of personal value to the recipient. A foundation of any effective donor retention strategy requires content that is of personal value to the recipient. We learned that when you produced something for everyone it was not for anyone. Just producing content was not enough.

3. Communicate consistently (traditional)

After generating thousands and thousands of pieces of content we began to see a pattern. What emerged from analyzing our readership was individuals were uniquely consistent not globally consistent. This meant that if we were going to communicate consistently, and be effective, we needed to define what was consistent by individual donors.

4. Recognize contributions (traditional)

On the surface this seems fairly easy and something that our industry has focused a lot on over the past four or five decades. Recognition is critical, but again that looks different for individuals. Be careful in creating global recognition strategies, while they are appreciated global actions will not have the impact of a highly personalized recognition plan arrived at by asking the right questions and then listening intently to the response.

5. Show outcomes prove impact (traditional)

This seems quite logical yet in building an initiative that dramatically increased retention we learned that we needed to slightly adjust how we approached this item. What we learned was that we didn't need to demonstrate what we had accomplished in the past tense what we needed to do is design a communication strategy that validated the donors investment decision. As close to real time as we could we had our supporters part of major milestones. We celebrated our partnership and are shared impact so it was always clear that we were in this together. Designing communications as if we're partners is a critical element in shaping all conversations and communications with key donors, if your goal is improved retention.

6. Be responsive (traditional)

Our sense was being responsive was a minimal expectation. Who among us doesn't expect a timely call

returned or a gift acknowledged personally and quickly. Instead what would help us stand out in a very crowded philanthropic marketplace is anticipating their needs and being proactive in our communication. This required us to ask good questions listen to the answers and then design a proactive communication strategy that would wow our donors. Designing retention strategies with minimal expectations will rarely reap strong results.

7. Exude positivity (traditional)

Well of course it's important to be positive. What we learned was designing a ride for our donors that was wrapped in a feeling of passion for our shared belief was incredibly impactful in their desire to stay connected and create a tomorrow that we jointly believed was possible.

8. Put the donor first (traditional)

We started believing that this was true, but it turned out to really only being a half truth. Putting the donor first or being donor centered in the traditional manner will not dramatically impact retention. What we learned was what we needed to put first, and this required significant understanding of the individuals we worked with, was who the donor was looking to become. Tom Asacker, friend and author, was interviewed recently where he spoke about individuals each having their own personal narrative that is always evolving. To be effective in donor retention you need to understand the momentum of the individual narratives your donors are creating for themselves. You also have to put that evolution in the context of your mission. Understanding how those two things work together is probably the most impactful ingredient in designing a sophisticated, impactful donor retention strategy. It requires asking the right questions, understanding their life stage and effectively listening in order to create strategy.

Retention requires new thinking drawn from real experience and not traditional best practice.

Connecting or Engagement?

The distinction between engagement and connecting is significant. We have all been to a concert where you liked it but were not wowed.  In contrast have you been to a concert where you couldn't wait to purchase tickets to see the act again? Which one of those connected with you? Each of them technically engaged you.

The idea of engagement has its roots in stewarding our donors on our terms. In many ways is just more of the same type of thinking that brought us the retention rates that our industry experiences today.

Livingston Taylor teaches at the Berklee College of Music in Boston. He has also written a book on the art of building an audience. It is these principles that would serve the nonprofit community well to understand in order to build an emotionally engaged donor base.

Connecting with people in an emotional way that has them wanting more is not achieved through a

statistical number of communications or by a multichannel delivery system. An emotional connection can only be achieved through both the understanding of the individual you're looking to connect with and a delivery that reveals your authentic self.

One of the secrets to dramatically growing your donor retention rates is directly connected to your ability to build an emotionally engaged audience. Take a few moments and enjoy these works of art on how to connect with and build an audience.

Measuring The Impact Of Your First Impression

Over the next couple of weeks will most likely read in many of the LinkedIn groups thoughts on creative ways to raise money. This is especially for those that have a fiscal year-end on June 30. I read one such post just the other day and it got me thinking.

For many organizations this time of year means a laser beam focus on the finish line and implementing strategy to squeeze as much as possible out of their remaining prospects.

I've been wondering if while we're looking ahead at the finish line our prospects are looking backwards and reflecting on how they've been treated leading up to the last minute ask. Is it another example of our industry being out of sync with the people that were looking to engage.

While it's true that opposites attract I imagine if a restaurant only served what you didn't enjoy you

wouldn't go back let alone try it to begin with.

I do wonder if the time to strategize the last minute gifts is actually at the moment when someone makes their first gift. Is the rate of return on our year end solicitations related to the quality of the first and lasting impression we create when someone first supports our organization. What is the old saying about one chance?  :-)

This summer a few friends and I are going to take a deep dive into the business of designing donor experiences and what metrics are required to stay on top of in order to create lasting impressions.