Are You Ready for Scrutiny?

Several recent articles in the Chronicle of Philanthropy describe potential new regulations to direct what charities must disclose -- from costs to raise funds to options for donors to makes gifts restricted to specific projects.  Still, few organizations seem to be taking the initiative to be more transparent BEFORE they are forced to by state and federal lawmakers.

What are people waiting for?  An organization in the private sector would jump at the chance to be ahead of the curve and use a market trend to help differentiate itself from the competition.  Why are we so unimaginative?

Customer Service: Two examples . . . for-profit and not-For-profit

Two examples of customer relations in the last two days.  Each was very impressive.

Apple, Inc.  I was purchasing a laptop computer on line and had difficulty with the process and called the -800 Apple help line.  An incredibly friendly, competent, smart young man walked me through the purchase, accessing records of mine and talking through options.  He made my on-line confusion seem like the most regular thing . . . no sense of operator error or the need for me to apologize. And he followed up the purchase with not just a form receipt from Apple, but a personal email from him at his personal Apple address.  I responded to thank him and he responded.  Wow.  I am incredibly impressed.

I can hear a not-for-profit response; actually, an excuse: "But Apple has a lot of money to do things well.". . . Right! And that's why Apple has a lot of money . . . they do things well.

My not-for-profit story is about LIFT, an organization founded by a young Yale graduate, which "combats poverty and expands opportunity."  I made an on-line gift in honor of a friend and at the suggestion of one of their major donors. I didn't get either an on-line or paper acknowledgment or receipt. But I did receive a fiscal year-end solicitation. So I wrote to them, copied the CEO, and said I thought they were missing the boat in basic solicitation and stewardship. I received an immediate response from the communication team, a follow up from the LIFT development office, and a personal email from the CEO. All within a couple of hours, all sincere, well-written, and focused on discovering the source of the problem and solving it.

I left the experience impressed and more than willing to give again.  

In each of these examples, personal attention was the key to what was a great experience with Apple and what turned out, in the end, to be a positive experience with LIFT. Both increased my willingness -- even enthusiasm -- to purchase/give again.

Transparency -- Cumbersome? Maybe Coming? YES

Today's Chronicle of Higher Education featured a story on higher education's opposition to HR 2146 (full article requires subscription to the Chronicle sorry ) which requires greater public reporting on federal spending.  Even if the requirements are cumbersome, no doubt they are --when are federal reporting requirements not cumbersom? -- they are coming to a grant or gift near you. 

And higher education, of all entities, has the human brain power to be ahead of the game.  So let's find ways to be proactive and not reactive on providing transparency. 

Choices - Do Donors Want Them?

The Chronicle of Higher Education recently featured an article by Thomas Barlett, partially entitled..."Save Us From Our Own Decisions."  He summarized a recent presentation by Dan Ariely, Eldar Shafir, and Sheena Iyengar (Ariely and Iyengar are featured on End|Start's resources link).  Two obvious take-aways for nonprofits are:  too many choices can overwhelm, deter, distract, a donor; people respond better to more concrete choices -- save one particular life than "end poverty for one million people."

Many organizations give donors a menu of possibilities -- sometimes under the guise of donor choice, sometimes because the internal politics of choosing one program over others is too overwhelming, sometimes because the organization is so large and complex.

But choice is, I believe, the future.  Giving will, in fact, be more and more directed.  With increasingly sophisticated consumers who are used to having more and more choice in how they spend their dollars, the change is coming.  Get with it, get ahead of it, or get caught in it by not being ready, open, and creative. 

Choice is key to engagement; engagement is key to support. 

Return on Engagement

The social networking community refers to "return on engagement" as an alternative to "return on investment"in measuring impact.

I think it works equally well for assessing how and when and why to invest in working with donors.  It relates directly to the classic fundraising strategy "If you advice, ask for money.  If you want money, ask for advice."

Engage someone -- in what is going right and what is going wrong (remember admittingfailure.com?) -- and you will build loyalty, establish trust, increase brand recognition, maintain attention, and get their investment.

You could just as well delete the "R and E" and say Turn on Engagement.  One of the hard realities that we have yet to truly face as fundraisers is that engagement is not static and that donors are more and more "not the marrying kind" i.e. they are more likely to lapse and have higher dissatisfaction and expectations when they make their first gift.

Donors Want Data -- Great Option for Design

Donors do want data but not if it is mind-numbing.  It should be clear, honest, and relevant.  It should tell a story. It can tell a story.  Check out Nicholas Felton, data design guru, and his personal annual reports.   MUCH MORE INTERESTING than corporate or non-profit annual reports. 

Storytelling -- non-fiction -- is what generates the emotions that inspire giving.

Ariana Huffington and the 20+ generation

Yesterday at the annual Council of Foundation's meeting being held in Philadelphia this year, Arianna Huffington spoke -- quite early indeed -- about the the critical need people have to be involved -- to take action.  Even with technology providing ways to communicate in faster, better more constant ways, people want to engage.  Actually they want both -- technology but not replacing human interaction.

This was a theme of the Millenium Donors Report 2011 that was released by Achieve and JGA.  It was their second such report and they found that Millenials prefer to give online or using online tools but that they also volunteer in person and their giving follows links to their volunteering.

One of the other findings was that organizations have to prioritize gaining and maintaining the trust of their donors.  Some of  their suggestions to do that?  endorsement by family or friends; report financial condition, opportunities to meet leadership.