The Social Proof in Our Email Pudding

At Turnkey, we explore other fields of study to improve fundraising success. The field we draw the most from is social science. Not only do I use it from my chair as CEO, but our bright young minds in production use it as well. Julian May, our senior content editor and ace account manager, let me in on his social science-bolstered copywriting method:

Recently we’ve been reading a lot of great stuff about the value of social proof in fundraiser-facing content. That includes a recent article right here on NonProfit PRO, which I recommend highly. Social proof is when you see a group of people engaging in an action and think to yourself, 'Why aren’t I doing that too? I think I want to do that too.' In simplest terms, it’s the fear of missing out.

Social proof can be an incredibly powerful motivator, but how do we use it without upsetting the other psychological tactics being used?

If you’re tuned in to our way of thinking, you know that we are all about fundraiser recognition, not reward. For those of you just joining us, here is the idea in brief—fundraisers feel a stronger tie to your organization and are more likely to fundraise for you again if you recognize their efforts individually (with verbal 'thank yous' and items that are of insignificant value) in social exchange for the behavior you are requesting. If that sounds crazy, read this. It will help.

Julian said:

In our messaging content, we are looking to create a one-on-one conversation with the fundraiser. We never use plural pronouns or address event participants as a unified group. Addressing them singularly creates a stronger relationship between the reader and the organization from whose standpoint we are writing. The nonprofit is speaking directly to them, recognizing the person’s fundraising progress and giving them that 'thank you.' So how do we effectively employ information about the actions of others while maintaining singular attention and using recognition principles? Here’s how:

When we use social proof in our messaging, we still maintain our singular fundraiser-focused language while divulging to the email receiver what everyone else is up to. We don’t scorn our fundraisers for failing to be part of the herd, which is easy to do when you are effectively drawing a comparison in behavior. Rather, we recognize and praise their unique efforts before sharing with them how their peers are behaving, all in a one-to-one voice. Let’s use a fictional fundraiser named Bill as our example.

Bill is registered for an organization’s walk event, but has only raised $20 over the last couple of weeks. When we reach out to Bill, we give him that verbal pat on the back and thank him for the effort he has shown so far with his fundraising. And, (we ask Bill) guess what other fundraisers have been doing? When Bill learns that others are charging ahead to the highest fundraising levels and earning exclusive organization recognition, we are using social proof. He sees social proof that those higher levels are attainable, because they are currently being attained by the rest of his fellow fundraisers. Unconsciously, Bill doesn’t want to get left out of the popular action. Newly motivated by the one-to-one recognition he just received via email, social proof in force, he’s likely to be fired up, and joins in to reach higher fundraising levels like his peers.

Psychologists use a phrase that helps one visually understand what happens in the head. It’s called "crowding out." Crowding out acknowledges that there are multiple psychological influences at work. When concocting new content recipes using a variety of psychological strategies, it’s important to pick your emphasis. Here, we used recognition as the primary strategy, added a one-to-one voice and seasoned it all with social proof.

And remember, a little bit can go a long way. That’s why we only use a dash of social proof in our email pudding.