Thursday, March 18th, 2010
The Agitator had an interesting and thought provoking article on crowdgiving. Cancer Research UK is currently implementing the idea. Basically, it works like this. A donor can choose to donate to a specific project. Then the donor is able to track the progress and outcome of the project via the non profits website. The web page is continually updated providing the donor with feedback on how the their donation is impacting the project. I am not sure what the name crowdgiving has to do with the concept of an individual having the power of choice. At any rate.
This sounds like a great idea that can help to begin to form a more intimate relationship with a donor. It offers transparency and inclusion. But here’s the kicker. Does it really just create the the psychological illusion that the donor has some control?
Pondering,
Lucinda
Tags: crowdgiving, donations, psychology
Posted in Donor, Marketing, donations | 3 Comments »
Tuesday, March 16th, 2010
Everyone already knows ALL non profits need revenue. How do donors choose where to contribute?
Meaningful messages are imperative in getting the attention of donors today. Just saying you are providing shelter to the homeless is not enough.
The question is why should I give to you? Give me a compelling reason. Make me believe. Spell it out!
Tell me what my $20 donation will do.
Tell me my donation will provide 3 people a bed for the night.
Tell me my donation converts into $98.15 of food.
Tell me my donation will provide one mammogram for a woman who can’t afford it.
I want specifics. I want the facts. I can get my head around facts. The facts spell out clearly how my contribution changes lives.
That’s what I want: lives changed!
Think about it,
Lucinda
Tags: donations, Donor, Marketing
Posted in Donor, Marketing, Rants, donations | No Comments »
This sounds like a great idea that can help to begin to form a more intimate relationship with a donor. It offers transparency and inclusion. But here’s the kicker. Does it really just create the the psychological illusion that the donor has some control?