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.
diminishing return. To use the title of
Art Garfunkel's song, “all I know” is the way we've measured and
designed our fundraising is pretty much over. Best Practice, as we've known it, is of little value, look at national statistics on sustaining donor relationships. The rock bands of yesterday don't fill the seats based on their latest hit, they are living off of what use to be. How many bands do you see able to do that for 5 decades? It may work in music despite their venues get smaller. Is your operation a breath of fresh air and original or are you
completely new dashboard and strategy. I had
the privilege in the last month of being part of two board retreats. What was
exciting for me was seeing that the data in the new dashboards were compelling
from a measurement perspective and logical when reviewing the organizations
track record over a decade. Both boards could quickly see that the logic of the
past four decades was simply no longer able to generate the kind of roi needed in today's development effort. One example: we did an exercise on naming a single invoice that could be paid by a participation number. zero
