Fundraising Archives - Page 2 of 5 - Claxon Communication

Researched for you: Unit-Asking [Language Lab]

March 31, 2016 by Erica Barnhart

[The Language Lab makes it easy for you to put research to work for you and your mission. Each installment gives you research-backed intel on one specific way you can work happier, smarter, and more effectively. To stay in the know, sign up to get Language Lab missives delivered directly to your inbox.]

*****************

What is Unit-Asking?

The One Thing You Need to Know: Ask donors how much they would give to help one individual and then ask how much they would give to help a larger number.

What works?

You’ve heard about the power of the Story of One. But have you heard of the Power of Unit-Asking ? Here’s an example of how it works:

Start by telling the story of Monica, a struggling reader currently in fourth grader.
Describe in detail how their donation could turn Monica into a great reader through peer tutoring.
Ask how much they are willing to invest in Monica’s future.
Then explain that that Monica is not alone. She is one of many. (Describe how many.)
Then ask how much they are willing to invest in the futures of kids just like Monica.

That jump from one to many is called unit-asking. And it works like a charm.

What doesn’t work?

Telling the donor out of the gate that there are thousands of struggling readers. Nope, that makes the donor’s brain shut down because it sends the message that this problem is so big their donation won’t be able to make a dent.

Want more?

Here’s a cool inforgraphic on unit-asking and a link to the original research paper from whence the above info was gleaned. If you want help trying out unit-asking in your next appeal, just hit reply to this email.

Nonprofit vs. Non-profit: Does a hyphen make a difference?

February 24, 2016 by Erica Barnhart

Ever wondered whether you should use “nonprofit” or “non-profit”? If you’re in the U.S. or Canada, the answer is: non-profit.

With the hyphen.

I confess I’ve never liked the hyphen in there. It looks clunky. Or sloppy. Or something. So I’ve been a long-time fan of the visually tidier “nonprofit”.

Boy oh boy, was I wrong. At least if my goal was to use a term that would make it as easy as possible for people wanting to market their non-profit to find their way to us here at Claxon. (In my defense, if visual tidiness was my goal, I would’ve been totally justified in eschewing the hyphen.)

Here’s the deal: Using Google Trends, we learn that people search for “non-profit” way more than they search for “nonprofits”. Adding that little hyphen ups your search engine results which, in turn, ups your odds of someone making their way to your website.

Now, what if you’re interested in attracting folks abroad? The hyphen/no-hyphen debate isn’t even relevant. That’s because in places like the U.K., they don’t use either “nonprofit” or “non-profit”. Nope. They use “charity”.

In the U.S., the word charity has a somewhat antiquated feel. It conjures up images of Oliver Twist asking in his most adorable little boy voice if he can please, sir, have some more. Charity connotes a hand out, rather than a hand up.

Not so in the U.K. They have charities. Lots and lots of charities!

So if you’re a U.S. organization or Canadian organisation wanting to grab the attention of donors in the U.K., charity is your term of choice.

This handy dandy chart shows which terms are used most often in each geography.

	US	Canada	UK
Nonprofit	40	7	1
Non-profit	100	63	6
Charity	23	39	100

The graph below will reinforce that if you have a global audience, your hands-down winner is “charity”.

Post Readability Stats: Reading Ease 69.3, Grade Level 6.4

INC. Magazine’s Tips for being Pitch Perfect

February 10, 2016 by Erica Barnhart

There’s a lot of wisdom for non-profits and charities to glean from INC. magazine’s recent article, Pitch Perfect. Sure, the article is geared toward entrepreneurs looking to impress venture capitalists. But fundamentally it’s about how to get savvy people to say, “Now that’s something I’d like to invest in!” Different tax status, same idea.

Research the heck out of every investor you pitch. Translation: Know your donor before walking into a meeting with them. Sounds obvious, but it’s stunning how frequently people skip this step. If you lay the foundation properly early on by building personas, this makes life easier when you get to the one-on-one stage of the fundraising game.
Ask for advice then take it. This is a paraphrase what Susan Howlett has been saying for years, “If you want advice, ask for money. If you want money, ask for advice.” Anxious about chronic cash flow issues, nonprofits often rush cultivation stage and leap to the ask. Taking more time may feel like a waste of time. But if you want to create lasting relationships with your donors, it’s worth it. Ask for advice. Follow it. Loop back and show that you listened. Then ask.
Don’t pitch until you know you’ll nail it. Basically, create a stellar track record and then invite people to invest. This one can be tough for nonprofits who are just starting out because it’s difficult to create a track record without first having some philanthropic support. The takeaway for the social sector is: don’t expect people to be solely dazzled by your vision. Be able to explain your plan for achieving your vision and, ideally, be able to back up that plan with proof.

One other tip? Have a mission statement a donor can easily understand. It’s one of the best ways to accelerate, and deepen, engagement in your work.

5 words that may be wrecking your year-end fundraising

December 9, 2015 by Erica Barnhart

You may very well be so tired of futzing with your year-end fundraising missives that the thought of even one more tweak makes you break out in hives. BUT if you can muster it, I’d highly encourage you check out this infographic from GrammarCheck.

If you can work up to nothing else, scan your communications for the word ‘very’. Very is unnecessary. Avail yourself of the wonderful list of alternatives at the bottom of the infographic!

Fundraising inspiration via Prudential TV ads

August 24, 2015 by Erica Barnhart

Prudential TV ads, retirement, nonprofit, fundraising

You never can tell where inspiration will come from, can you? I mean, who would’ve thought that some Prudential TV ads would offer up inspiration for nonprofits and fundraising. But they did!

Indeed, Prudential did a series of T.V. ads using data visualization and behavioral economics to encourage specific actions like saving for retirement or thinking about the future or paying yourself to do what you love. You’ll note a general theme of thinking differently about retirement but each ad has its own slant on that.

This is the ad to which I want to draw your attention. It shows how tiny investments in your retirement account can add up to big retirement savings.

What do TV ads by a big financial institution and dominoes have to do with your nonprofit and fundraising? Possibly a lot.

Nonprofits dream of many things, among them an individual giving program that has a stream of recurring monthly donations flowing in. You frequently see messaging about how every little bit counts and it adds up. Makes perfect sense. It’s good for the organization and makes it easier on the donor because the payments are spaced out.

And yet nonprofits still struggle to develop an individual giving program with lots of monthly donations. What’s the disconnect?

Maybe it’s the delivery. Meaning, maybe nonprofits aren’t making it easy enough for their dear donors to see and feel and instantly get why those little monthly donations mean oh so very much. It’s one thing to explain the logic. Quite another to drive the point home.

Enter the Prudential ad. By using dominoes, they make the “a little bit can ad up to a whole heckuva lot” point so clearly.

Now, before you start shaking your head and mumbling things like, “But, Erica, we don’t have the money to spend on an ad like this.” No, you likely don’t. But you do have access to tools like Canva and LiveStories, which make it easy peasy to take data and turn it into something inspiring and actionable.

And you likely have a smart phone. Video doesn’t need to be highly produced. It needs good audio and to be authentic.

Be inspired and go out and inspire others. #ALittleIsALot

***Inspired to learn more about how you can tell great stories about your organization? Check out Claxon University!***

A Rant About Research & Ridiculousness

June 30, 2015 by Erica Barnhart

“So you actually did the research for the Wordifier yourselves? Woah, that’s a lot of work. No one does that.”

This is what an Executive Director said to me after a recent speaking engagement.

She works for an organization that empowers women and girls around the world. (For the purposes of this post, let’s call her Ellie…because that has nice alliteration with Executive Director, doesn’t it?)

Ellie had just put the word “empower” into the Wordifier and found out international organizations use the word more than any other sub-sector. She had a hunch it was overused, and they should probably look at other words, but now she had proof!

That’s the power of research–it can turn a hunch into a proven fact. And that’s powerful.

**Begin wee rant**

The social good sector invests very, very little in primary research, meaning research you collect by going out and collecting the information yourself about a topic of specific interest to you. For instance, at Claxon we were curious about how nonprofits used language so we pulled every single word off of a statistically significant sample of nonprofit websites. (You can read more about our research methodology here.)

Pretty much ever other industry invests heavily in primary research. Insurance, finance, accounting, education, consumer products, etc etc etc.

Let’s play this out.

Investment advisers don’t sit down with clients and say, “Well, I was thinking about it and, by golly, I think we should invest in this company here. Now, I don’t have any data to back that up, but I say we go for it.”

Um, no.

They say, “I’ve looked at 30 years of research and here’s how I interpret it, and, based on that, what I’d advise.”

True, in the social good sector, we tend to have fewer resources than some of these other industries (#understatement). But we’re also doing more important work. So doesn’t it make sense to have the very best information possible to do that work?!!!!!! (Ridiculous number of exclamation points purposefully added to communicate the ridiculousness of this state of affairs.)

Also true that there is value in listening to our guts. Our gut instincts tend to be very good guides. My contention is: guts+data=awesomeness.

I don’t see an easy, obvious answer to getting more funds so the social good sector can invest in primary research. It’s a long-term investment with no guarantee of near-term positive outcomes, i.e. you don’t know if what you learn will translate directly into feeding more people, curing cancer, or a better education.

But just because there isn’t an easy answer doesn’t mean we should give up. I’m certainly not going to! I’m going to keep my research soapbox handy, yes I am. Because I firmly believe more research will lead to more good in the world.

This belief is reinforced every time I talk to someone like Ellie or get an email from someone who has used the Wordifier, switched up their language and gone on to raise more money, recruit more volunteers and/or finally get their dream board member to say yes to being on their board.

**End wee rant**

Claxon invests in statistically significant research so that people like you who are changing the world know precisely how to change your words. Guessing is inefficient and time-consuming. Changing the world is a big job so you likely don’t have extra time on your hands. Am I right?

Thus, research.

Thus, the Wordifier.

Is this research expensive? Yes.

Is it worth it? Yes. Every penny. Every brain cramp. Every everything.

If you are interested in primary research specific on philanthropy and social good, check out the stupendously amazing work of Professors Adrian Sargent and Jen Shang over at Study Fundraising.

Claxon University’s course Words on a Mission also teaches organizations a lot about how to gather actionable information that will help them better dazzle their supporters and reach their goals. Worth checking out.

I love(rize) you!

February 17, 2015 by Erica Barnhart

Love. A simple word. A powerful word. A word chockablock full of emotion.

Yet not a word we tend to use when referring to donors or supporters or others who are critically important to the success of our organization. Which is weird, when you think about it, because you generally feel “deep affection” for people who make you successful, right?

Likely the word love is too loaded. And too closely associated with behavior that would be (ahem) inappropriate in the context of a professional relationship.

So let’s give Dr. Jen Shang Sargeant a great, big THANK YOU for coming up with an entirely new, entirely appropriate, and entirely awesome word: loverize!

Listen to this week’s podcast and fall in love with the word loverize…

How will you show the people who help you succeed (or just make you really, really happy) that you loverize them?

Why smart fundraisers pay attention to pronouns

September 9, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

“I would love to get together for coffee.”

“Would love to get together for coffee.”

The difference between these two sentences may seem subtle, but it’s actually staggering:.

The difference, obviously, is that the second sentence drops the “I”. Why is this so earth-shattering? And why should you care? Because pronouns reflect power dynamics. Pronouns could reveal just how many cups of coffee you may need to have before they cut you a check.

When you’re in the power position, you use pronouns less often. You’ll drop them altogether. You won’t notice you’re doing this. We all do it subconsciously.

Using the example above, the second response would indicate that the donor is still mulling over whether your organization will be on their Philanthropic Hit Parade. They’re holding their cards close to their chest, one eyebrow raised. Their pronoun-free response is their subtle way of saying, “Still on the fence, dear fundraiser. Make your case and I’ll ponder.”

We can figure all of this out simply by looking at a measly pronoun? Yep, that’s right. Pronouns. I, we, he, she, us, them. These itsy, bitsy words matter. A lot.

“I” is the single most frequently used word in spoken and written texts. Indeed, thanks to Professor James W. Pennebaker and his research team, we know that “I” accounts for 3.64% of all words used. That alone is interesting as it reflects what we care about most–ourselves. To be clear, being focused on yourself doesn’t make you a self-centered jerk. It means you’re human and, therefore, hard-wired to focus on survival. Just cuz a tiger is no longer chasing you across a tundra doesn’t mean your brain isn’t fighting to survive. It just looks a little different these days.

Focusing on ourselves is inevitable. And our language reveals this.

Pronouns and the larger category that they fall under called “function words”, are your linguistic BFFs. Paying attention to them can pay off in a big way. The more you use “you” and “your”, and the less you use “I” and “We”, the more you speak directly to what the donor (as a human being) cares about most–him or herself.

If your goal is to engage donors, mind your p’s and q’s and absolutely, positively pay attention to your pronouns.

Retention–Use With Caution (#WordsThatWow)

March 2, 2014 by Erica Barnhart

[This is part of our #WordsThatWow series. We covered which words to avoid, and have been looking at which ones to use with caution, including inspire, impact, and advocate. In this post, we look at another word to use cautiously–retention.]

Retention has been on my radar as a word I worry about ever since talking to Super Smartie Peter Drury a few years ago about his ‘Beyond Cash Fundraising Dashboard‘ (a FREE tool that you can and should download).

Then recently, the ever-wise and insightful Tom Ahern (who has a FREE newsletter that you should absolutely subscribe to if you don’t already) asked if we should be focused on retaining or renewing. Good question, Tom!

In the nonprofit world, we often couple the word ‘retention’ with ‘rate’ to get the all-important ‘retention rate’. A higher rate means more donors are giving a second, third, fourth gift to your organization. This is a good thing. We want more donors giving year after year. The concept isn’t the issue.

The issue is the word ‘retention’ and what it means for the donor experience. When you give to a charity, do you sit back and say to yourself, “Dang, I really hope they retain me.”? Of course you don’t. Retain means to “keep in one’s possession” or “to be able to hold or contain”. Like a plant retains water. Could be totally wrong on this one, but going to go out on a limb and say most donors don’t want to be thought of like house plants.

Tom Ahern’s suggestion, which is thanks to Penny Harris at Renewable Philanthropy, is to focus on renewal instead of retention. Why? Because renewal “puts the focus on the donor’s desire to continue finding meaning through your mission”. That sounds way better than being possessed or contained, now doesn’t it?

As with all the words in the ‘Use with Caution’ category, I’m not saying never, ever use retention again. I’m simply suggesting that you pay attention to when you use it, what it means and, importantly, how the word might translate into a sub-par, donor-as-house-plant experience for your dear donors.

Say it with me: “Friends don’t let friends treat donors like house plants.”

What NOT to do in your year-end appeal

November 13, 2013 by Erica Barnhart

If you want your year-end fundraising to be successful, please, please, please don’t mess with your logo!

See those logos to the left? They are examples from a recent promotion from Vertical Response.

Enticing, right?! You could really do a number to spice up your logo and make it color coordinated with the season/holiday on hand. But stop, and think, what message are you sending to your donors? Does adding a turkey to your end-of-year giving appeal really have anything to do with your mission? Or is it simply a shiny object? Nice to look at (sort of, if you like holly in your Italian food) but not great for brand cohesion and consistent messaging.

You risk confusing your donors. And confused donors are too busy being confused to make a gift.

I’m not saying to be boring with your appeals (or your thank yous). I’m simply saying: unless you’re Google, keep the holly and turkeys away from your logo.