On LinkedIn there is a group called Nonprofit Donor Retention Best Practices. There are various conversations within this group between members all focused on this topic. One of the members, Jeffrey Haguewood of Sidekick Solutions, recently posted about getting back to basics. In fact, his article is called "Back to Basics to Improve Donor Retention."
There was an interesting stat that caught my eye from the Association of Fundraising Professionals about growth and retention. Its research states that "every $100 gained in 2011 was offset by $100 in losses through attrition." In Haguewood's article, he reminds the industry that sometimes we just need to get back to the basics. I'll let you read it for the detail, but his basics are centered around customer service being the foundation for achieving good retention across your constituent base.
- Listen more.
- Produce valuable content.
- Communicate consistently.
- Recognize constituents' contributions.
- Show outcomes and prove impact.
- Be responsive.
- Exude positivity.
- Put the donor first.
I cannot disagree with any of these. And, with the exception of No. 1, I feel as though this list has stayed the same over the last 15 years. That's not a criticism — it's more of a challenge. Why does retention seem to be so difficult?
Granted, I believe No. 1 has become a major priority over the last five years, but most nonprofits are not asking the right questions. Furthermore, the use of constituent input within our transactional strategies in direct marketing presents additional problems. However, while I believe constituent input is a critical missing link in the retention battle, I don't believe it is the only thing that matters. The other seven items above make a great list.
I reached out to several colleagues from reputable, trusted nonprofits with varying sizes of programs and revenue goals. I asked them to provide responses to how well they believed their programs were doing in the "basics" defined by Haguewood.
Overall here was their feedback around each one:
1. Listen more
- "This just continues to elude us. We don't have this kind of money in our budget to fund non-revenue-generating strategies — so we rely on other teams in our organization to fund market research. Granted, we get good information, but then no one knows how to apply it — not our agencies and not us. So we end up with a great report, but then nothing changes in the program."
- "Has anyone shown that infusing attitudinal data into direct-marketing fundraising shows improved revenue? I mean, does it really raise money?"
- "I am absolutely convinced that this is part of our issue. We have recently done some of this work and learned things about our processes that were creating a bad experience. We also learned that what we thought about our messaging and its relevance was really not completely true. We know it will take some time for new messaging to sink in — but overall this is going to be better for us, and I know the donations will increase."
Nos. 2, 5, 7
Comments about Nos. 2, 5 and 7 seemed to all meld together since they were about content. There was some "throwing under the bus" but also really valid points from my colleagues.
- "Providing valuable content is really hard when the branding people don't understand what it takes to raise money. (Thump, thump go the wheels.) What is valuable to a donor can be and likely is very different than what is valuable to someone flipping through a magazine and seeing an ad or seeing a PSA. This can be limiting to us as fundraisers, and the arguments can be tiring."
- "I think progress statements are the holy grail for us. The problem is that we need to combine statistics that our organization finds important with the story of how the donor made this happen. We've been talking about this for years, and we're getting closer but still not there yet. We're a large organization, and sometimes there is not progress to report differently every year so it becomes about getting creative in showing donors why we need their support."
- "Sometimes I wish I worked for an organization that sponsored something — children, pets, etc. To be able to show a child throughout the year and how their life is advancing is such a great way to show progress. My charity mission doesn't lend itself to that type of reporting. But our goal has been to speak to all of our donors three times per year about advancements. As a part of this, we don't ask for money — we are literally giving a progress report on where we are spending the money. This is different than progress, but for us, it is working and our donors feel more informed and, therefore, more in control."
3. Communicate consistently
Every person I spoke with immediately went to the challenges of syncing online communication messages with offline communication messages. One person went as far as saying, "Oh, I really don't want to use the word 'integration,' but I have to — it's really more challenging than you can imagine."
But there was agreement that things have gotten better. However, in the end, there was a chuckle in that for decades the direct-mail fundraisers have told the branding people to not tell them how to write their copy ... and now the e-mail marketers are telling the direct-mail people to stay out of their copywriting area. I guess turnabout is fair play, but the general focus has to be that your donors are hearing a story throughout the year across the multiple channels. That story needs to be thought of as a series of chapters — not separate books. It is critical that the organization is positioned in a similar way and communications to similar audiences are coordinated across messaging and timing.
4. Recognize their contributions
Not much was said on this one. In fact, one colleague said, "That's table stakes," which is probably why it is on the "basics" list from Haguewood. However, while these organizations interviewed felt very strongly that they had solid recognition strategies in place, they recognized that the industry has made some tough decisions over the last five to 10 years. They referenced short-sighted decisions about budgets and that some organizations had raised the level of donation that resulted in a "thank you." One also referenced the challenge of how quickly to thank someone. But, overall, the feeling was that No. 4 was in good shape in the industry.
Nos. 6 and 8
This was a hot topic. Why? See the comments below:
- "We have a donor services team, but boy was that a hard budget item to get approved. We originally positioned it as a team who would be accountable for customer service but would also be the staff who would be the experts on who our donors were. Profiles would come out of this team, global stats on retention to the organization would be generated here and trends in engagement across the various programs we offer. Unfortunately, they have turned into a customer service team that updates addresses, changes names and other things like that. We have missed out on the concept of real customer service and focused on the operational needs of the various programs and departments."
- "As an industry, we need to get this shift embedded into the minds of our staff and our execs. The older generation is less focused on the service they receive, but the younger generation is likely to hold it against us if we don't have a way for them to interact with us about things that are important to them. We don't have the money to create a donor services department, but we are looking to our website and even e-mail delivery as a way to stay in touch with our donors and make sure they know we are ready to hear them and this is how they can give us feedback."
- "Our organization has been conducting satisfaction surveys for years, and honestly, the majority of things we hear about are operational. In other words, they tell us what we're doing that they don't like, and this has given us the chance to make changes. I'm not sure it is resulting in more money being raised, but Americans demand good customer service now and we feel that it is the right thing to do."
As you can see, the basics are all perceived to be important — but this group of anonymous colleagues is OK admitting that some of them are still difficult to achieve. With that said, my opinion is that if you are reading these eight items and you feel that you have some serious gaps in any of them, they should be your priorities — ASAP.
Some work in these areas is better than no work in these areas. And as we all know, donors are not monogamous — meaning you just might be compared to another organization that gave them better donor service when they moved and needed to change their contact information. You might get compared to another organization that is very transparent with how money is being used and how progress is being measured. Whatever you do, don't think you are "above the basics." How does your organization measure up on the eight basics?
- Categories:
- Retention
- Companies:
- Association of Fundraising Professionals
Vice President, Strategy & Development
Eleventy Marketing Group
Angie is ridiculously passionate about EVERYTHING she’s involved in — including the future and success of our nonprofit industry.
Angie is a senior exec with 25 years of experience in direct and relationship marketing. She is a C-suite consultant with experience over the years at both nonprofits and agencies. She currently leads strategy and development for marketing intelligence agency Eleventy Marketing Group. Previously she has worked at the innovative startup DonorVoice and as general manager of Merkle’s Nonprofit Group, as well as serving as that firm’s CRM officer charged with driving change within the industry. She also spent more 14 years leading the marketing, fundraising and CRM areas for two nationwide charities, The Arthritis Foundation and the American Cancer Society. Angie is a thought leader in the industry and is frequent speaker at events, and author of articles and whitepapers on the nonprofit industry. She also has received recognition for innovation and influence over the years.