Sean Triner's blog

The new big thing in fundraising - Direct Mail

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Mon, 20 May 2013 22:32:00 +0000

The biggest new thing in fundraising: direct mail

There are so many hip new ways to acquire donors in New Zealand and Australia. Twitter, Facebook, face to face, phone, mobile, peer to peer, two-step, payroll giving, email, web sites, Google ads,... but the number one by volume is that new-fangled thing – direct mail.

Seventy charities from the now independent Commonwealth nations of New Zealand and Australia pooled their card file indexes* to study how donors actually behave. They have discovered that direct mail acquired more donors last year than any other form of donor recruitment.

Direct mail has never had it so good, and 2009-2012 saw a 100% increase in the number of new donors acquired through this new-fangled method. Back in 2009, 155,000 of the 267,000 people who made a donation for the first time to one of the 70 charities did so after receiving a direct mail letter (57%). In 2012 that number had increased to around 350,000 new direct mail donors from a total of 508,000 (69%).

Famously championed by social change entrepreneur Dr Barnardo in London in the late 19^th century, direct mail is making a bit of a surge in the Southern hemisphere.

When interviewed, Dr Barnardo was delighted that direct mail had taken off so much.

“I am verily pleased that direct mail is performing well to help waifs and strays in the colonies.” He said.

“With [former] convicts putting their backs into good, honest work to help those even more disadvantaged than themselves, I believe the outposts of New Zealand and Port Arthur [Australia] may well thrive as independent states separate to mother England.”

Looking at individual charities to work out how these donors are acquired, we see most are acquired through ‘premium direct mail’. This describes a method of breaking down the barrier of getting donors to open an unsolicited envelope by offering a gift in return for simply opening and reading the message.

The gifts could be address labels, tote bags, stationery, key rings or pens.

Whilst acquiring donors through these premium packs tends to lead to lower average donations, it also leads to much higher response rates, higher initial net returns and more long term net income.

In the olden days (a couple of years ago) charities were happy with 0.8% to 1.2% response rates from cold mail, but premium packs tend to get at least three times that.

Unfortunately response rates are not covered by benchmarking, but I know that the average response rate from direct mail from Pareto charity clients who follow our recommended strategy is over 4.5%.

Even with lower average donations and lower second gift rates the maths usually work in the favour of the charity willing to spend more per pack on premium direct mail.

Face to face acquisition of regular givers is still huge in Australia and New Zealand, and I recommend still maintaining (or starting) investment in that area, but make sure you have a balanced porfolio - direct mail cash donors will provide a unique income source and will bring you your future bequests and major donors if you follow the right strategies.

Sean

*Please note – the charities were collaborating by analysing giving patterns and behaviour. None of them have breached any privacy rules by allowing any other member to identify donors as individuals; ie donors’ personal information was never shared between partners in this exercise.

Plenary in New Zealand - presentation and useful links

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Fri, 10 May 2013 02:36:00 +0000

I just presented a plenary at the FINZ conference in New Zealand, because Terry Axelrod couldn't make it.

I promised to post my presentation and some useful links...

Here is my presentation, and there are more links below.

To see how charity data is available in New Zealand (and how it should be everywhere - with a few tweaks) check out:
http://www.register.charities.govt.nz/CharitiesRegister/OpenData.aspx

Watch Dan Pallotta's awesome TED talk...

Sign up for Benchmarking for 2014 by emailing Clarke.vincent at paretofundraising dot com.

Check out that great article looking at data that shows that HIGHER admin costs are better for charity outcomes http://giving-evidence.com/,

Even if you didn't make it along, I hope those links are useful.

Sean

Bequest tips from Adrian Sargeant at FINZ

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 09 May 2013 03:23:00 +0000

Good session, as always, for the travelling fundraising academic.

Some really interesting tips on legacies from him, all backed up with research of course...

In 2011, 4200 charities in the UK received legacy income
Top ten of them charities accounted for 32% of the legacies
And the top 50 legacy charities (just over 1%) account for 55%

Grand kids are more negatively influential on will writing than all the good indicators such as volunteering donating etc. make sure you acknowledge this. Childlessness is increasing in USA - Adrian asked if it was in New Zealand, and the answer is yes.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=10773770

'A gift in your will' is a better phrase than 'legacy' or 'bequest' because it is more inclusive, more acceptable no people who think their estate is going to be too small.

Telling people why they should tell you that they have put your cause in their will - 'so we can plan for the future' is not a motivator. NSPCC spells out that you don't need to tell us, but if you do we would love to thank you.

Probably best approach is that which spells put how you will thank.

He also reckons drop the puns - will to help, where there's a will there's a way etc.

Focus on looking after the future - people (generally) are not expecting to die soon.

A good campaign should not look at the same sort of motivations as a gift now. For example, no need to say what exactly you would use the money for ($20 to make a blind man see) - concrete examples are good for donations now, but for legacies be more value based.

Present-
concrete (examples)
subordinate (the building blocks)
contextual (the work that is going on now, the number of families helped)
unstructured

Future-
abstract (values)
superodinate (I missed what this meant whilst I was typing)
decontextualised (more big picture, social change etc)
Structured (like show what you did in 1960s, 70s, 80s, etc and what you are going to do in 20 years time, 30 years etc) though better to say in 20 years time, not 'in the 2020s'

Check out Human Rights Watch 'a lasting contribution to your beliefs in human dignity'

Emotion is fine to use in legacy solicitation but the time between call to action and actual action is longer than other fundraising so does need more logical stuff because 'emotions discount faster than logic'

In 'immediate' fundraising you use negative consequences of not giving, (give us the money or..x won't happen), which is right. But for legacies, talk more about the positive impacts and benefits. This is because people are more optimistic about the future...

Adrian then presented lots of good (and bad) examples of good legacy packs.

Great stuff, thanks as always Adrian.

Irreverent conference session

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Mon, 06 May 2013 21:16:00 +0000

How does this sound?

"Living The Dream. Your investment strategy for a secure future.

Sticking with the theme of sustainability ...we have enlisted a trained stand up comedian and deadly snake rescuer for the Thursday afternoon plenary. Sean Triner will take a challenging and irreverent look at investment strategies for wealth creation for delegates wishing to retire to the good life. Amongst the ideas we'll look at property, equities, bank robbery, smuggling, marrying 'well' and fundraising.

With real case studies and data, Sean will refer to Dan Palotta's recent brilliant Ted talk on how fundraisers should be able to operate on a level playing field with the rest of the market. He may also give some directly useful and applicable tips for you too.

If you get your CEO, CFO, treasurer and/or chairperson to this session you will be doing yourself a huge favour for the long term."

Fancy coming along? If you are in Wellington, New Zealand - see you there! If not but you are interested get me along to your conference to do a plenary / key note!

Sean

The importance of Marginal Costs

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 02 May 2013 05:25:00 +0000

Tom Ahern and I were chatting about fundraising at his home in Rhode Island (which I found is not really an island) and decided to video one of these conversations whilst drinking (ahem) mocktails.

Three minutes long, but hopefully useful in breaking down a useful mathematical concept for fundraising.

Feedback welcome - more of these?

Sean

Are you in Wellington, NZ next week!?

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Wed, 01 May 2013 01:59:00 +0000

Very excited to be off to New Zealand next week.

Andrew Watt and I will be presenting a breakfast debate (I am going to be really mean to him with some tough ethical questions - come and join in if you are in Wellington!) 8:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. on 10 May At the Amora Hotel Wellington Tickets (includes hot breakfast and barista coffee): $35 Register here:

http://www.finz.org.nz/tools/events/details.aspx?SECT=Conference_2013&ID=10210

Sean

Top level information from NZ / Australia benchmarking

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 05:49:00 +0000

The very top level information from benchmarking

In a unique show of camaraderie and mutual support seventy charities across NZ (16) and Australia (54) agreed to pool all their transactional data* and analyse it. This means that they compared actual donor behaviour – including mutual donors.

With around 2.8million donors giving $836 million in 2012 to these charities there is a huge wealth of information and learning.

The charities that pooled their data

Over the next few months I will share some fascinating insights, ideas and tips based on the data but in the meantime here are some top line facts:

Largest fundraising charities in Australia

Looking beyond the benchmarked charities we looked at the annual reports of top fundraising charities (Australia only). We found that the largest, World Vision, really dominates the market. World Vision are also a member of the benchmarking program, having an enormous influence over the giving patterns of the average Australian.

Just short of all fundraising income to the top 50 charities goes to overseas aid. Australians love helping people less fortunate than themselves in other nations. Good on ya Aussies!

How Australians and New Zealanders give their gifts

Australians and New Zealanders gave more money to these charities in 2012 than ever before. From around $365m in 2003 to $836m in 2012 ($637m in 2003 dollar equivalent).

The chart above clearly demonstrates the strength of child sponsorship as a great fundraising ‘product’ However, other regular giving programs and bequests also contribute huge amounts.

Questions

If you have any questions you want to know about Australian and NZ fundraising data - ask away! Attrition, face to face, average donations etc...

I will post lots but your request will move that subject up the priority list.

My Out of Office - tips for next appeal

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:29:00 +0000

Anyone who emailed me whilst I was in the USA at the AFP Conference and a few other meetings would have got this out of office.

I received quite a few follow ups from people who liked it and found it useful so I am posting it in full. Hopefully it will inspire you to think about how you could use your out of office....

...

*Please read – this is not an ordinary out of office! Though please note I am back 19 April*

(Well, the next three paragraphs are normal-ish, but the ones below that are more interesting).

Thank you for your email. I am presenting at the AFP (fundraising) conference in USA, then some consulting and training over there and back to Australia to a series of data benchmarking presentations; should be getting to email in earnest again on the 19^th April.

If you need a response before that and are a client, please contact Nicola.long@paretofundraising.com.

If you would like to be a client, maybe or definitely, or you want me to speak at your event, please contact Clarke.vincent@paretofundraising.com.

If you really need me SMS me on +61 437 015 333 but try not to wake me in the middle of the night.

OK – now the more interesting stuff…

I can’t go without mentioning books. I hope that by now that you have read my mini-novel, Haruki the Knife Maker – it is only 99c, in aid of Amnesty, and available in all e-book stores, and only takes 20 minutes to read.

But I also write fundraising stuff too – including a chapter in a new book Global Fundraising: How the World is Changing the Rules of Philanthropy edited by Bernard Ross and Penelope Cagney. You can get that in p-book form on Amazon.

Now, for you fundraisers – some great tips for your next appeal…

· Personalise. Dear Sean is good, but go beyond. Thank me for my specific actions and give me credit for everything you achieved.

· Tell me a beautiful story, with a beginning, a middle and an end –and don’t leave me feeling it is now fixed. There must be a need at the end.

· Don’t worry about how long it takes to tell me that story AND the points below:

· Make sure there are frequent and very specific asks, like the examples in the presentation. The specific ask should be the right amount for me, not a generic ask amount.

· Take personal responsibility. Write the letter in first person singular. Don’t we on your copy. Remove every ‘we’ replace with ‘you’, ‘my colleagues and I’ or whatever makes sense.

· Repeat the specific ask

· Have a deadline. This is very important. Find a reason, overcome barriers but get one.

· Every. Single. Time.

· Repeat the specific ask

· Build urgency

· Repeat the specific ask

· Witness the story (ie “I spoke to Bob today and he said…”)

· Repeat the specific ask

· Have a target

· Repeat the specific ask

· Summarise in a PS

· Repeat the specific ask

· SHOW me the need; not all nice fixed stuff – there has to be something that would be bad if I didn’t give.

· Repeat the specific ask in the PS, and spell it out – fill in the form with your details, put in the envelope and send to me by…

Don’t worry about the length of the letter, as long as it is good, engaging and emotional. It is hard to get everything in without using at least 3.5 pages of A4 (including shorter first page with all the header stuff) in point 12 serif font.

Sean

Pareto Benchmarking report released

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:02:00 +0000

Seventy charities came together to share information to improve their fundraising. Many attended presentations of the data in Melbourne and Sydney this week and more will attend in Wellington on Monday and Auckland on Tuesday.

The photo was taken in Sydney with over 120 fundraisers gathered to find out what is happening to giving in Australia and New Zealand.

Most of what we learned was good news. More money from more people than ever before was donated to the 70 charities, and the majority of charities have enjoyed decent growth over the past two years.

Some top level notes from the session:

- online solicited donations still not significant source of donors or income

- swapping is fantastic, with no indicators of donor fatigue etc BUT
let's look at the long term impact

- direct mail acquired donors - the biggest growth area and we know it increased yet again in 2013. Band wagon is being jumped on!

- face to face still rules the roost for new automatics regular donors growing more than 10% from 2011-2012

- the five year value of non-face to face acquired regular givers is much, much more than face to face so charities should be prepared to accept much higher acquisition cost. A direct mail acquired donor will give an average of 51 times their initial monthly donation, where as an average face to face acquired donor would give 29 times their initial monthly donation.

- we knew credit card donors are better prospects for regular giving than cheque donors, but it turns out they are better bequest prospects too!

- nearly all contributions from a person who comes in as a regular giver will be their regular gifts

- nearly all contributions from a cash donor source will be cash, though over five years bequests and regular gifts add a significant portion

- for the first time we are seeing income directly related to the bequest 'pledge rates' - could be enough to start benchmarking that next year. Charities with higher pledge rates of bequests will make more bequest income

- biggest key to success in bequest pledges seems to be being Victorian! Top four were Australian charities based in that state. But really it is having a certain type of program - the 'one page legacy program' which relies on direct mail and phone to drive pledges. Type of charity is not necessarily key.

- second gift rates, payment type, average donations and more are useful - but ratios are really really useful

- older donors are better. Get the best response rates, retention and total giving. Except for face to face, forget younger donors; there are easier ways to help your beneficiaries

- your donors are almost certainly going to be giving to other charities. For example, 60% of all Australian donors who gave a gift in 2012 and were acquired by direct mail, gave to one of the other 53 charities! The figure was about 15% from face to face acquired regular givers.

Charts and more information to come after the New Zealand presentations next week.

Sean

OMG Older People are on Social Media - Drop the Direct Mail Program!

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 23:23:00 +0000

Do you really KNOW who is on social media?

A recent blog by guest blogger George Crankovic on Future Fundraising Now (best fundraising blog in the world) brought to my attention a report from Pew Research about who is on social media.

Titled Do you think you know who's on social media? the blog pointed out that older people who are online are on social media more than you may imagine.

I quote from George’s blog:

“But now for the unexpected findings:

52% of Internet users between 50 to 64 are on social media.
32% of Internet users age 65 and up are on social media."

Check this out (from Pew's excellently constructed and helpful website)

This use of social media by older people may well be unexpected, but what does it mean?

A couple of problems with this kind of research –

1. It is opinion and not transactional. Looking at the scale of the research, and Pew’s credentials it is almost certainly statistically accurate in reflecting what people SAY but it is still not based on actual usage data; it is just what people said they did. This is inherently flawed.

2. What is ‘on social media’?

They decided someone was ‘on social media’ if they answered affirmatively to a question like “Do you ever...use a social networking site like Facebook, LinkedIn or Google Plus?”

There were six questions like that. Answering that you ever use is a reasonable definition of being 'on social media' but it gives no indication of their involvement. This will vary enormously by age, gender, education, job, real world social network and more.

My friend John Lepp in Canada accounts for perhaps as many updates from friends as all my other friends added together but he and my someone like my mum are both defined as the being ‘on social media’.

Mum may use Facebook for looking at photos of grand kids once a year, and nothing else.

Everyone is different, but you can rest assured that the average older social media user (mum) has a different level of engagement from the average younger user (John).

If the Pareto principle holds true, then 80% of social media activity will involve just 20% of people ‘on social media’. In fact, I would bet that >64% of activity is conducted by perhaps <4 areto="" font="" of="" squared="" users.="">

Even if the numbers are not an exact 80/20 split, there is no doubt that the majority of activity will be conducted by a minority of registered users. After all, 50% of my activity seems to be just one friend, John, and I doubt that is unique to me!

Generally speaking, charities have failed to achieve expectations from fundraising on social media.

I think that there are four reasons for this:

1. Charity expectations are huge because big stats like these released by Pew are exciting and overwhelming

2. I believe younger people are much more involved in social media that older people (OK, belief is worse research method than even opinion surveys but come on, what do you think?)

3. In all metrics on giving, older people in any 'type' of fundraising are better givers - better average donations and retention rates etc.

4. Charities think it is free or cheap to fundraise on social media, when in fact it needs a program in place like any other advertising media

If you ever see mind blowing data like this, be really careful with how you interpret it. Ask the questions – ‘what does that actually mean?’ ‘How was this research conducted?’ and ‘What about my donors?’.

You are not going to be revolutionising your fundraising by using social media with your older donors for another ten years or so. Don't get distracted by amazing 'data' about social media... yet. Stick to what you know works, and look out for case studies of how people have made social media make more money for their cause.

Sean

Donor Fatigue Fatigue

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 18:16:00 +0000

Please let me tell you a story.

One day, the fundraiser (I will call him Bill) of a small state based charity asked a consultant (Ulrika) to help his charity with their tax time direct mail appeal to mailed in May.

“Of course” said Ulrika. After all, she had helped them before and it had worked well. She had written an appeal that raised more than any appeal before from the 3,000 or so previous donors. However, they had not done another appeal with her for a couple of years after that because the fundraiser changed and they embarked on another strategy.

Bill explained that the other strategy (focused on building awareness) hadn’t really done much, and their money was low. However, they had sent a Christmas appeal in November and it had done well.

“Great” said Ulrika – “that means that there are enough donors still with us, so we should be able to do well with the tax appeal.”

“Oh no!” said Bill. “The May appeal will be mailed to new people; we are worried that we have bothered our current donors a bit too much and there is donor fatigue. After all, the Christmas appeal didn’t do quite as well as the Christmas before – even though we only mailed them once in between.”

Ulrika was quiet for a bit. Oh dear, she was thinking, where do I start?

Can you spot the flaws in Bill’s approach?

Right now I am in San Diego a the AFP conference, with maybe 5,000 predominately American, fundraisers. Chatting to people made me realise that Bill is not alone in misunderstanding a very basic and fundamental, unbreakable 'truth' of direct marketing. The truth is the recency, frequency, value rule (also known as RFV or RFM where the M stands for Monetary value).

RFV is a mathematical rule that gives you three clues about the likelihood of a positive response from a donor who is mailed.

Recency - the more recent a donor donated, the more likely they are to donate again.

The chart below shows this in action on a warm appeal - this is real data. {By warm appeal, I mean an appeal sent to people who had donated before). Although it is broken into years, the rule holds true over months too.

Frequency - the more times a person has donated, the more likely they are to donate again. The chart below is from the same data as the one above, and just looking at those who have donated just once, and those that have donated more than once.

Recency and frequency work hand in hand with the fact that charities that mail more frequently - if they are mailing good stuff - have better 'life time value rates'.

Value - the value of a previous gift gives you the best clue as to the potential value of the next gift. But even high value donors still follow the recency and frequency rules.

The process of acquiring a donor (getting them to give for the first time) is expensive, so charity must maximise the life time value of a donor.

Bill is falling for ‘common sense’ over ‘reality’. He thinks that most donors don’t like to be bothered too much asking them for money. They probably tell him that too. But the reality kicks in with a little direct marketing concept that works across all products, not just charities.

Look at the data, don't make assumptions based on feelings. Generally speaking, mailing more frequently than once a year will INCREASE donor loyalty, not decrease. A charity like Bill's with 3,000 donors should be mailing perhaps at least four and probably six times a year.

Donor fatigue fatigue is when you get tired of people thinking that they have donor fatigue when it simply isn't the case.

Sean

Plugging my Australian masterclass on Mar 7

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:19:00 +0000

FIA Conference is just around the corner. I am really looking forward to it, but I wouldn't mind another three people coming along to my Masterclass on the 7 March.

It is similar to one I have presented at FINZ, at the IFC in Netherlands and AFP in the USA. All got great reviews. Why?

Everyone says stories are important, but how do you get GOOD stories? In this upcoming FIA Masterclass I will show you how to find them, write them and use them.

The Masterclass will be tailored, not generic, I will look at your charity, how it communicates now and how to improve. It is fun, really good fun, but you will learn and have better communications as well.

Don't take my word for it. My mum thinks it will be great

"Sean's presentations are always great" Susan Triner

I got great feedback from charity people too

Director of marketing at MS Queensland, Dan Sweetman liked it, and we are not related.

“Sean’s Storytelling workshop is inspiring, practical, and most importantly based on decades of REAL donor analysis. Sean balances the art of telling stories with the science of what techniques actually cause donors to engage and give more.”

Even those not actually working in a charity liked it...

"My company provides prospects data to the non-for-profit sector. We don’t write copy, but when the chance arises I always try to pick up usable insights I can pass on to our clients.
This is how I found myself in one of Sean Triner’s storytelling master classes in Auckland last year.
As a presenter Sean successfully walks the fine line of being entertaining enough to hold the group’s attention, while simply providing usable bites, on how to tell your own story, in a way your own audience will find compelling.
Be it your website, mailing piece, or phone script we were delivered a toolset to ensure our message would engage our donors.
Being a nuts and bolts type of guy I liked that Sean didn’t preach as an “expert” but delivered case studies, and reference material, on how other non-for-profits had successfully implemented the techniques to improve their donor communications and therefore responses.
From novice to seasoned fundraiser I would recommend Sean’s next story telling workshop to all."Rick Fitzgerald, Alliance Data

(He did ask for a Corona beer after writing that, but he means it).

At $545 it is a heck of a lot cheaper than consulting, and places are deliberately limited (you will see why if you come). If you are interested, please register now for Thursday March 7, my last day as a 42 year old.

Click here to register.

What works should trump what looks nice

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:32:00 +0000

Make it readable

Something about many graphic designers makes them love to write white copy on dark backgrounds. I tell them 'til I am blue in the face that reverse type is simply not on - older donors struggle to read it at all, and it is harder work for younger donors. Two factors not good for response.

Even though I accept it can look cool, the answer is 'No Reverse Type'.

I had a great, unprompted bit of feedback from a New Zealand donor when I interviewed her for a fundraising letter last week. I was interviewing her because she is also a beneficiary of this charity. I will call her Daisy.

The words below are from the transcript of the interview. I have edited identifying bits out.

--------------------------------------

Daisy: Exactly. And so I think, you know, Mum wanted to help by giving blood for research. And I think people are happy to give money to research, because it’s so prevalent with [disease], you know, and it can affect anybody. And that’s why I think in fact, the story that they sent out, I think, was about a two-year-old girl. And the reason why I didn’t read it all, because that was … it was handwritten, which is always a little hard to read if it’s not a clear handwriting. And they printed it white …

Sean: Oh, no.

Daisy: … writing on pale-coloured paper.

Sean: That’s just … you have no idea how useful that little quote is for me at work. All designers want to do that, and I’m like, “But no one can read it!”

Daisy: I know. That’s why I didn’t read the story; I read the first paragraph, got the gist that it was a child that had had a stroke, and I thought, “I don’t have the time and I don’t have the energy to try and decipher that.”

--------------------------------------

Of course, I frequently warn that anecdotes are dangerous but this is an anecdote reinforcing something that has been tested (especially by Jeff Brooks of www.futurefundraisingnow.com).

Please don't use reverse type in appeals, or advertising, or anything other than a large font headline.

Although it is handy sometimes, for things that you don't really care if the recipient reads. Though why you would write that I have no idea.

Sean

Best Conference In the World

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:26:00 +0000

TED talks are renowned as probably the most prestigious place for anyone to get the opportunity to speak.

If you have never heard of them, please look into them - they are all videod and downloadable for free from their website. Past presidents, current politicians, inventors and people with awesome ideas and stories are invited along to speak for up to 18 minutes.

I am particularly excited now because Peter Singer - who is the plenary speaker at our very own conference next month. He will be speaking there for a little more than 18 minutes though!

(If you are an Aussie fundraiser, and for some strange reason haven't booked your spot at the conference yet, please do so here.... www.fiaconference.org.au).

I will post his video up later, but he will be better in person.

2013 is going to be a great year for fundraising

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Wed, 16 Jan 2013 05:44:00 +0000

Happy New Year!

On my holidays I read a few novels (all from retired fundraiser Mal Warwick's recommendations - malwarwickonbooks.com but I also read a 'work' book. It took a couple of hours to read it, but it really made me think 'If everyone fundraising from individuals reads this it will be a great year.'

The book is Jeff Brooks' The Fundraiser's Guide to Irresistible Communications.

Please buy it.

Then I got back to work to find that most charities here in Australia have had a pretty darn good Christmas, with a few donor acquisition mailings achieving over 10%. That is amazing from people who have never donated before.

On top of that, great news that a record number of Australian and New Zealand charities have decided to pool their transactional data and make sure that they really understand what is happening to our market - answering questions such as:

* Is face to face still working?
* What is an acceptable attrition rate for my regular givers?
* Are average donations changing?
* What are the main media used to actually get donors?
* Is digital fundraising working yet!?
* Are richer donors giving more or less?

With a couple more massive charities joining for the first time (Smith Family and Red Cross) this data set keeps getting better. Fundraisers from Italy and Ireland were so impressed by the Kiwi and Aussie charities' attitude they are trying to do something similar.

Full list (regularly updated) and more info here.... There is still a little time and space for New Zealand and Aussie charities to sign up too (as long as you can get the data to us this month).

More charities are learning the rules for digital fundraising and finding that actually, the rules are not dissimilar to offline. In his book, Jeff Brooks points out that everyone in the know accepts that longer copy in warm direct mail tends to work better (he says 75% of the time). But also longer copy in emails tends to work better too (two thirds of the time anyway) despite all the nonsense about digital audience wanting short, quick and to the point copy.

Thai-based animal rescue charity Soi Dog Foundation continues to lead the way in digital fundraising - showing a charity can grow from hardly anything to around $2m a year from regular gifts, nearly all through Facebook - but using good old fashioned direct marketing tactics no different to off the page ads in the 80s. Ogilvy would be proud.

Finally, the line-ups for the big conferences of the year are awesome - although IFC and F&P are not finalised I have a little insider information and you won't be disappointed.

FIA (Sydney, March), FINZ (May, Wellington), AFP (April, San Diego), F&P (Sydney, September) and IFC (October, Netherlands) - all are worth attending. Charity bosses - don't be tight now. Access to so many great minds for the price of a day of a senior consultant (plus travel) is a bargain.

At the FIA, for example, we have inspirational and world-renowned ethicist Peter Singer, major donor expert Tony Myers, regular giving leading light Harvey McKinnon and communications guru Bill Toliver. (Hurry though - early bird rates finish on 25 January!)

After such a good start in 2013, and with all that learning available, this year is going to be a good one for charity income, for sure!

Another post just for Aussies

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:08:00 +0000

Thinking of attending the FIA conference next year?

I hope so, and I hope that you can come along to my masterclass on story telling. More information in the video below...

To register, please visit the Conference website here.

(PS, it is cheaper this week!)

A special blog for Aussie fundraisers

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 23:49:00 +0000

I’m writing this blog to extend a personal invitation to you and your team to attend the 2013 FIA Conference in Sydney next March.

The 2013 Conference includes an impressive line-up of fundraisers and inspirational speakers from around the world, including:

* renowned ethicist, Prof. Peter Singer – a personal intellectual hero of mine (and I am doing my best to get FIA chief Rob Edwards to let me introduce Peter!);

* direct mail and donor loyalty specialist Harvey McKinnon – I’ve heard Harvey speak before, and he really knows his stuff, and he is funny as well as knowledgable;

* major donor expert Tony Myers – an exceptional opportunity to learn from someone who has a vast experience – and enormous success – approaching major donors; and

* communications guru Bill Toliver – who has been described as ‘the most engaging and entertaining speaker I have heard in a long time … unorthodox, inspiring.”

There’ll also be plenty of familiar faces from the Australian fundraising sector, including Jan Chisholm, Vision Australia; Marcus Blease, Cerebral Palsy Alliance; Pareto’s own Fiona McPhee; Martin Paul, More Strategic; and Jannine Jackson, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead – and I’ll be presenting a Masterclass on Storytelling.

I’ve attended every FIA since 2002, and I can assure you it’s a very worthwhile investment. If you book before Friday, 14 December (ie RIGHT NOW!), you’ll qualify for the early-bird price. If you’re an FIA Member, it’s even better value.

The theme for the 2013 Conference is ‘Aspire to Greatness’. So what are you waiting for? Please, Click here to register today.

I’ll see you there.

PS: The annual FIA Conference is well worth your investment of time and money; I should know – I haven’t missed one since 2002. And if you register by Friday, 14 December, your ROI will be even better. Click here to register today.

The Reverend knows how to thank his donors

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 05:02:00 +0000

It is not often you get beautiful, heartfelt stories from passionate people in our sector. We all work hard to make stories wonderful and involving but they seem to come naturally to many Clergymen, but Rev Graham Long bashes these out quite regularly apparently. I was forwarded this from a member of the ‘Inner Circle’. This is a lovely, involving thank you letter.

See what you think, and read my comments at the bottom.

Dear Inner Circle,

Just now there was a woman standing in front of our Op Shop. Although she had a blouse on, her arms were not in the sleeves which caused the blouse to be worn more like a scarf, leaving her upper body entirely exposed. As I moved toward her to see if I could perhaps find her something to wear she bent down as if she was picking up a baby and laid it on the seat out front. By the time I reached her, she was nursing an invisible baby. A homeless fellow said to her, "Luv, if you put your arms in your sleeves you'll be able to do what you're doing without showing the world what you've got." She politely thanked the homeless guy and put her arms in her sleeves and then resumed feeding her invisible baby. I backed off because we had a couple of highly skilled female staff around and they didn't need my help. As I plough through this day however I can just imagine the kind of heartache that this dear lady has brought to us today. I'm so thankful for so many skilful and safe pairs of hands around here.

Robyn and I celebrated 41 years of marriage this week and in my romantic style, I worked late on the night in question. Yesterday at lunch, some staff members called us both up to the roof where we found a table set for two, with candles and a menu to rival the best restaurant in town. On the table was a card from our support team who had decided to surprise us in this way. There are some beautiful people in the world.

Last weekend was spent with my Mum in a dementia ward. The ward could be called "Hogans Heroes" because escape was on the mind of most of the residents, including my Mum. At one stage Mum introduced me to a lady who just needed to get out to check on her house that was quite near the nursing home. She said that a gentleman who was a resident had a car that was just in the car park so that all I had to do was let them out to get on with their business. The gentleman with the car appeared with his shoes on the wrong feet which didn't give me confidence in this particular plan. My dear Mum is well enough to know that she's locked in but not well enough to live anywhere else. The Southern Cross Oaklands Park Lodge in South Australia provides the most fabulous care for Mum and all of their residents. My sister, Heather, who lives near-by, carries a heavy load of love which she embraces like the five foot nothing giant that she is.

Thank you to the many who came to hear the Salem International Choir from Chicago last week. I thought we'd have a success if 200 people showed up. We had 400 seated and 160 people standing plus the choir which was another 80 people. What a once in a lifetime opportunity that we shared together! What an outpouring of joy and love! I wrote to the Pastor this week saying, "I think our faith is not taught but caught and I'm sure you left behind a pretty serious infection." I will treasure that gift for the rest of my days.

I was talking to a woman this morning who is living in a bus shelter. She said, "There isn't much privacy but I have great access to public transport." Meeting the odd saint like this helps to keep my petty whinging in check.

How glad are we to have you as part of our inner circle? Plenty glad!

Graham

Rev Graham Long

Pastor and CEO

The Wayside Chapel

Kings Cross

http://www.thewaysidechapel.com/

For sure, this will make you feel glad to be part of this inner circle. I guess the technology (training, database or equipment – not sure which) needs a little help though: My Inner Circle friend has a name; why is it not personalised? And then it could have been great to add a variable acknowledging whether she went to the Salem International Choir or not.

But, is better to get a non-personalised but beautiful personal email like this than a technically clever personalised but dull non-personal email isn’t it? But imagine getting a fully personalised, beautiful personal email too! I do hope the good Reverend gives some techy person a holy tap on the shoulder to make this real!

PHOTO: Reverend Graham Long

(Thanks to Wayside Chapel for permission to reproduce the whole letter – if you want to receive lovely emails like this become a member of the ‘inner circle’ here.)

Sean Triner

Even super huge clouds have a silver lining

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 06:11:00 +0000

Superstorm Sandy has wreaked havoc on more people in the USA than live in England.

My thoughts are with those people, strangers and friends from the Carribean through USA and into Canada who have lost loved ones, homes businesses and communities.

As I write this the media and still showing dramatic images, lots of sad stories - but also lots of gorgeous 'human spirit' bits that we always see after natural disasters.

It must be very hard to see any positive outcomes from such natural fury but I am going to try.

Climate Change
There is no way anyone can say that Sandy was a direct consequence of human caused climate change. But there is plenty of evidence that the frequency and severity of such storms is expected to increase due to climate change.

As New Scientist reported...

Such devastation could increase in the future: climatologists say that slow-moving storms like Sandy will become more common as climate change increases the occurrence of "blocking patterns" that slow down weather systems.

"We expect that hurricanes may move more slowly in the future than they do now," says Kerry Emanuel at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Slow-moving hurricanes dump all their rain onto a smaller area, causing severe flooding, with coastal regions taking the brunt. "This shifts rainfall towards the coasts, and increases it at the same time," he says.

Even though there are still people who don't 'believe in climate change', most will begin to hedge their bets. Really, the whole world needs the US to 'believe in climate change' if we are going to ever take serious global action.

Tragic climate events - even if not directly connected - can bring awareness of the awesome powers, and having them not just on our doorstep, but in our home is a true slap in the face.

US high school teacher, Greg Craven, got it right with his fabulous website, book What's the worst that could happen? and great video "The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See". He takes a logical approach to the disagreement about climate change.

As you can see from his little sketch below he is advocating action whether you believe in climate change it or not. He assumes action on climate change (scenario A) costs money.

I think that Sandy will help push more people who are sitting on the fence into deciding that the risk of a longer depression is better than the risk of a global catastrophe.

Here is his logic:

Economy

For all of us, wherever we live, the US economy is important. Sandy has caused billions of dollars of damage in the USA. But Americans are resilient, tough and community spirited. Despite economic woes, donations are flying in from everywhere and the rebuilding cost will huge - but a great stimulus package. New jobs will be created, business come into being and old businesses rebuilt. I have no idea if this will be a net positive to the economy. I am no expert on this kind of Keynesian thinking - I am not even sure it is Keynesian; but there will definitely by a great 'pulling together' spirit as we saw in Australia after our recent floods and fires.

Whatever happens, this storm will hit the insurance companies. Whilst they will put up premiums, there is only so much of that they can do there. However, it is the impact of this storm on insurance companies that could have the biggest and most important impact on the future of our planet.

The Insurers and Climate Change

Insurance companies 'believe in climate change' - they see it as a serious threat. Back in 2007, the boss of the Reinsurance Association of America, Frank Nutter gave evidence at a select committee on energy independence and global warming "The insurance industry's financial interest is inter-dependent with climate and weather."

Andrew Castaldi, head of the catastrophe risk unit for the Swiss Re America Corp, said "We believe unequivocally that climate change presents an increasing risk to the world economy and social welfare."

Let's hope that since common sense and science have not created the action we need on climate change, this tragic catastrophe and the economic imperatives of the insurance companies will help push through some change that would position the United States as world leader on action on climate change.

Stop Global Warming | Greenhouse | Red Planet

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 01:05:00 +0000

Sometimes a charity (in the case campaigning organisation in Indonesia) comes along with such an amazing TV ad you just have to share it. This has got to be one of the most bizarre and amazingly abstract ads I have ever seen.

I am sure after watching it you will take immediate action to stop climate change, it just makes so much sense.

Click the link here: Stop Global Warming | Greenhouse | Red Planet | WE LOVE AD

Sean

Why an ROI of 1.0 in acquisition could be a bad thing

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:20:00 +0000

Direct mail is having an amazing resurgence in Australia. Charities have been used to large volume acquisition mailings pulling maybe 1.0% response rate. An initial return on investment of 0.70 would be considered really, really good.

But more recent innovations - particularly using 'premium' packs - have lifted response rates considerably. Many charities are achieving response rates unheard of on large volumes; 3.5% is now met with a little bit of appointment even though it is fantastic.

These packs tend to be large, with lots of elements such as these two examples posted out recently.

Even though they cost more to print and post, they can do very well indeed.

Recently, we have had quite a few actually break even on acquisition - something very rare not long ago.

When the results below came in, Pareto staff and clients were jumping up and down with joy... (the results are NOT one of the packs above, they are different examples).

This means that the $215,000 raised covered the cost of this pack in total.

So why am I saying this is not a good thing!?

Well, as a one off it isn't - but if we keep getting ROIs of 1.0 it really means that we are not taking advantage of a great opportunity. It means we are not targeting enough people, not going 'deeper' into less responsive lists and donor sources. It is good news - but only if we interpret it correctly: that it is an opportunity for more acquisition.

Christian Language for non Christians

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 01:16:00 +0000

I have read many a post, article or heard words of wisdom that people who partake in religious activities tend to be slightly more generous than those that don't. It is hard to get concrete data to back that up in Australia, but a quick look at any big picture giving data from the USA (like Giving USA) certainly backs up this theory.

In Australia, the USA, UK and Canada by far and away the largest majority of donors who worship are Christians. But those countries have all got substantial non Christian communities as well – atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and more.

The odd line of scripture or quote from the Bible is said to increase response rate from Christians, but how do you do that without putting off non-Christians?

One approach is to look at some the Bible lines or sayings (or interpretations of sayings) that have come into everyday use. Many Christians will relate to the sayings, but non-Christians are unlikely to recognise the saying as a quote from the Bible. Provided it is a good quote, in context, and helps the appeal it is therefore likely to have a net positive impact.

I have never seen this tested but it all makes sense.

Here are ten such sayings that you should be able to weave into copy without causing problems. Note, they are not all direct quotes - some are alluded to.

"It is like the blind leading the blind!" (Matthew 15:14).

"Going the extra mile" (Matthew 5:41).

"Wash my hands of it" (Reference to Pontius Pilate at Jesus' trial. Matthew 27:24).

"Salt of the earth" (Jesus' words at Matthew 5:13).

"Written in stone" (Moses and the stone tablets - the 10 commandments at Exodus 31:18).

"Turn the other cheek" (Jesus' words. Matthew 5:39).

"It is better to give than receive" (Jesus' words recorded at Acts 20:35).

"It's like feeding the 5000!" (Reference to the miracle of Jesus at Matthew 14:13-21).

"Nothing but skin and bones" Job 19:19-20

"United we stand, divided we fall" Matthew 12:25

For more Bible sayings that could be useful.

http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/biblesayings.htm

Sean

Regular giving or one off donations: which to go for?

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Sun, 02 Sep 2012 07:47:00 +0000

Fundraisers need to grow their databases, but should they invest in regular giving (automatic debits) or one-off donations?

In Australia, until around 2002, the answer was simple because regular giving was a tiny part of the fundraising mix. Some charities tried acquiring new donors straight on to regular giving, to mixed success. Some just added an extra line to their direct mail acquisition appeals offering the opportunity to become a regular giver.

Then face-to-face arrived. Not only did it acquire hundreds of thousands of new regular givers, it actually created an entire new ‘type’ of donor – a younger demographic.

Brilliant fundraising expert and blogger, Jeff Brooks picked up on this in a recent blog where he noted that: “There are younger donors ... just not in America.” He goes on to say that, “In Australia, more than a third of the charity collected each year comes from what's called Down Under "regular giving," otherwise known as monthly giving or sustainer giving.”

He is right indeed. About a third of individual income to professional fundraising charities appears to come from regular giving. World Vision reports $195m of it’s $345m income in 2011 was from regular giving. The Pareto Benchmarking report, looking at around $330m of other charities’ income, shows that over one third of that came from regular giving. This report studied 48 different charities’ data.

Even though face-to-face has been the engine behind this growth, there still many regular givers acquired in other ways. One significant way is by asking current donors to become regular givers, usually through a combination of phone and mail.

This ‘regular giving conversion’ process is so effective that some charities think of their ‘normal’ database as simply the means to generate leads for regular giving conversion.
Charities often make a choice as to whether they should focus on regular giving or not, but the latest data from Pareto’s benchmarking shows that this is the wrong approach. You don’t need to choose between one or the other.

One reason is that most regular givers come from face-to-face. These donors are younger and hardly ever do anything except upgrade when they are phoned. In addition, they are also poor major donor prospects, with very rare exceptions. Furthermore, they are not good bequest prospects, because they are too young and not yet interested in supporting charities in this way.

The chart below shows the percentage of donors in various categories who have informed the charity they have mentioned the charity in their will.

In general, face-to-face donors are clearly not interested in putting charities in their will.
The other reason you don’t need to make a choice for or against regular giving is that nearly all non-regular donors will not become regular givers, no matter what you do.

The chart below shows second gift rate by charity within 12 months of acquisition. It shows the proportion of those second gifts that were the beginning of an automatic payment method (blue), or another one off donation (organe). Each column is a different charity. The black lines match the right hand axis – this is the number of new donors acquired by each charity, the orange block is the percentage that had made a second gift within twelve months, and the blue shows the percentage whose second gift was the first of their automatic debits.

Put simply, most new non-automatic debit donors don’t become regular givers within 12 months – even for those charities trying hard to get them to do so.

On the other hand, what of people who came straight in as regular givers? The chart below shows the total contributions of all donors acquired straight onto regular giving by the channel that was used to acquire them. Face-to-face accounts for well over two thirds of these donors, and only a few per cent are from online.
The little crosses go with the right hand axis and show the ‘ratio’ of giving compared to first gift after four years. The left is the average total given by donors acquired through that channel straight onto regular giving.

For example on average, face-to-face donors will have given around 25 times their first debit – about $650 - after four years whereas a donor acquired straight to regular giving from a direct mail piece will have given around 45 times their first gift - about $900.

The blue is income from regular giving, and the orange is additional income from other donations. The face-to-face donors across these charities gave insignificant amounts on top of their regular donations and the direct mail donors gave about $50.

So, we see that most of the value from regular donors is from those regular gifts and little from additional donations.

It is hard to get regular givers to give additional gifts and it is hard to get non-regular donors to become regular donors. But you as a fundraiser really need both types of donor.

Don’t choose between regular giving and one off – do both.

A world beyond fundraising for charities

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 02:29:00 +0000

Last week I was at the Nonprofit Strategy Forum in Brisbane which looked at some of the challenges facing nonprofits (I still prefer the term 'charity') but mostly not from a fundraising point of view. I was on a panel with two others challenging the current paradigm; one encouraging charities to not be scared to borrow money and another looking at how charities should not just look at income but also social capital - having impact beyond monetary things.

The idea was that we were meant to debate and be controversial but we kind of struggled to disagree with each other.

The borrowing money is a fascinating concept. Particularly for fundraising. From a commercial lenders point of view, in the scheme of things to invest in, professional fundraising is generally a pretty safe bet; failures are rare and returns are very good compared to other business ventures.

Many of the big international charities here got their foot into the fundraising market in Australia via a loan from their Paris or Geneva based 'parents', but other than that there are few others willing to borrow.

There are also people from the Myer Family Company, Vision Australia's board chair, the ACNC task force (new charity regulators) and someone from Opportunity International talking about microfinance options.

A great mini conference for CEOs, finance people and board members. Tickets still available, Sydney 12 June and Melbourne 15 June.

Oh - and if you are a subscriber to this blog, quote STPF12 to get a discount. Eg from $330 to $275 (+GST) on a single, small charity ticket. Call 02 9555 4203 and tell them you would like a discount.

More information here.

Sean

Big Macs and Giving

noreply@blogger.com ('Sean is always learning') — Wed, 23 May 2012 23:29:00 +0000

A bit of fun: Who gives the most?

The Big Mac Index is used by the Economist and others to measure purchasing power of a currency.

Some fundraising friends of mine are building a Global Giving Wiki and they are starting with a Big Mac Index on giving - ie comparing average donations to the price of a Big Mac.

In Australia, looking at average gifts across around 40 charities we can see that the average regular gift is around $28, between six and seven Big Macs. How will that compare to various countries?

The answer will be revealed at the end of the year, when lots of people have filled in the survey - people like you!

(Bizarrely I didn't know, and nor did anyone in the Pareto Sydney office know, how much a Big Mac cost. I had to get the answer out of our Brisbane office).

Please complete it here, it takes about 3 minutes.

Sean