Jul 2009
The Wrong Emergency
Jul/17/09 11:04 AM Filed in: Communications
By Barry McLeish
I spoke to an officer of a nationally known nonprofit organization today who related to me a note he had gotten from one of his donors – the contents of the somewhat abrupt and angry note said (I am paraphrasing):
Under no circumstances do we want to hear from any nonprofit organization we are interested in. We don’t want to receive proposals, calls, notes, visits, invitations, or telephone calls. We do not want to hear from you at this time in any way, shape or form. My wife and I will make our giving decisions this year in November. Until then, please respect our wishes.
What did you think of the note? Have you ever received one like this? What did you do? Could you put yourself in your donor’s situation-haven’t you ever wanted to write a note like that?
Let me make a couple of observations regarding the donor’s note and the situation I believe it represents:
First of all, I think the couple is flooded with requests for help right now and have clearly gotten tired of hearing from everyone. They may even feel overwhelmed. I would be willing to bet that they don’t actually feel angry at all of the nonprofits they have written to but have chosen at this time to lump everyone into the same bucket.
Second, I don’t know the financial situation this couple is facing. They may have lost everything through the financial downturn; on the other hand, they may be doing just fine.
Third, I’ve observed something that is occurring in hundreds of nonprofit organizations right now. Most that I have observed are crying “Emergency” through their solicitations, their field representatives, and through their online communication vehicles.
I have no doubt that many agencies are indeed feeling a financial pinch right now. Services may have been cut, personnel laid off, and operating funds trimmed. Almost every nonprofit institution that I know of is engaged right now in some variation of these measures. Almost all of them need more money and they need it immediately. Consequently, many are crying “emergency.”
Unfortunately, I think this is the wrong tactic right now for the very simple reason that most donors in America feel that they are undergoing some sort of personal, financial emergency themselves. Whether it is true or not is beside the point. The media and subsequent headlines – spoken and read – have told us repeatedly that as a country we are in trouble . . .individuals are in trouble. . . institutions are in trouble. . .all that we know is in trouble.
When I feel I am in trouble I often become oblivious to others who might also be facing catastrophic circumstances. I can’t get beyond my own problems. Perhaps I am selfish. Perhaps it is a weakness. Whatever it is, it is true in my life.
Emergencies are defined by organizations as well as donors. Today many donors are facing what is for them a real emergency. In their hearts, their crisis may be more important than yours. Be careful how you communicate your crisis.
I spoke to an officer of a nationally known nonprofit organization today who related to me a note he had gotten from one of his donors – the contents of the somewhat abrupt and angry note said (I am paraphrasing):
Under no circumstances do we want to hear from any nonprofit organization we are interested in. We don’t want to receive proposals, calls, notes, visits, invitations, or telephone calls. We do not want to hear from you at this time in any way, shape or form. My wife and I will make our giving decisions this year in November. Until then, please respect our wishes.
What did you think of the note? Have you ever received one like this? What did you do? Could you put yourself in your donor’s situation-haven’t you ever wanted to write a note like that?
Let me make a couple of observations regarding the donor’s note and the situation I believe it represents:
First of all, I think the couple is flooded with requests for help right now and have clearly gotten tired of hearing from everyone. They may even feel overwhelmed. I would be willing to bet that they don’t actually feel angry at all of the nonprofits they have written to but have chosen at this time to lump everyone into the same bucket.
Second, I don’t know the financial situation this couple is facing. They may have lost everything through the financial downturn; on the other hand, they may be doing just fine.
Third, I’ve observed something that is occurring in hundreds of nonprofit organizations right now. Most that I have observed are crying “Emergency” through their solicitations, their field representatives, and through their online communication vehicles.
I have no doubt that many agencies are indeed feeling a financial pinch right now. Services may have been cut, personnel laid off, and operating funds trimmed. Almost every nonprofit institution that I know of is engaged right now in some variation of these measures. Almost all of them need more money and they need it immediately. Consequently, many are crying “emergency.”
Unfortunately, I think this is the wrong tactic right now for the very simple reason that most donors in America feel that they are undergoing some sort of personal, financial emergency themselves. Whether it is true or not is beside the point. The media and subsequent headlines – spoken and read – have told us repeatedly that as a country we are in trouble . . .individuals are in trouble. . . institutions are in trouble. . .all that we know is in trouble.
When I feel I am in trouble I often become oblivious to others who might also be facing catastrophic circumstances. I can’t get beyond my own problems. Perhaps I am selfish. Perhaps it is a weakness. Whatever it is, it is true in my life.
Emergencies are defined by organizations as well as donors. Today many donors are facing what is for them a real emergency. In their hearts, their crisis may be more important than yours. Be careful how you communicate your crisis.
0 Comments
Redefining the Game
Jul/10/09 10:49 AM Filed in: Marketing
By Barry McLeish
Every organization wants to be noticed in some new way, hoping to break out communicatively from the pack. However it’s not as easy as it sounds. Here’s a recent nonprofit story that should inspire us all to think more creatively:
A longstanding cause that had sponsored a walk-a-thon on a yearly basis for the last twelve years was increasingly seeing its centerpiece fundraising event slipping in both popularity and dollars pledged per walker. I don’t know about you but in my part of the world, these type of events are a dime a dozen. While almost all of the “thons” represent a worthy cause, they are typically not differentiated very well from each other. Another way of saying this would be to suggest that these causes have become commoditized in their presentation. To the stakeholder they often appear the same. One walk-a-thon seems like another.
When this happens to a cause, you know the cause and its fundraising machinery are in trouble.
So, finding their organization and themselves in this predicament, what did the cause’s leadership decide to do? Did they give up? Abandon the idea of a walk-a-thon?
No, in fact they did something far more creative and satisfying.
First they re-branded their walk-a-thon by renaming it and changing its appearance. Then, rater than abandoning the walk–a–thon concept they redefined it. Where in the past the event had required the participant to walk one, two, or five miles, the event was now going to be a uniform three city block walk right through the center of town. This move was surprising to me. That meant the walk was now not very far and certainly did not require much athletic prowess - in fact, anyone could now do the walk.
The second change the organizers introduced was the element of real fun. Where you would normally expect a longer walk-a-thon or a run to have water stations or refreshment stations along the route offering water, Gatorade, or fresh fruit, the organizers hilariously put refreshment stations every 100 feet or so, offering donuts, bratwurst, pizza, and everything that a serious walker or runner would never want during an event. There were grills smoking, smells wafting and ketchup flying.
The third change the organizers delivered was in the number of volunteers. They almost tripled the number of volunteers, each wearing a bright, branded t-shirt on the day of the event, each individual highly noticeable and remarkably energetic. It seemed they were everywhere.
Finally and perhaps most importantly, the organizers allowed many more to enter the event than a typical walk might have. On the day of the event, you had those decked out in sportswear, you had men and women walking having just left their office, you had shopkeepers wearing their store’s logo wear – everyone was welcome. And remarkably, most of the walkers had sponsors.
The event warranted front page in the “City” section of the local newspaper. What’s more, a sidebar column was devoted to talked about the disease whose eradication was the real reason for the event,
More money came in for the cause than had come for each of the previous eight walk-a-thons. There was tremendous publicity for the cause in the town and wonderful good will. My guess is that they will not have a problem in redoing this event next year.
It is a great story isn’t it? And, it has a couple of lessons for me:
Every organization wants to be noticed in some new way, hoping to break out communicatively from the pack. However it’s not as easy as it sounds. Here’s a recent nonprofit story that should inspire us all to think more creatively:
A longstanding cause that had sponsored a walk-a-thon on a yearly basis for the last twelve years was increasingly seeing its centerpiece fundraising event slipping in both popularity and dollars pledged per walker. I don’t know about you but in my part of the world, these type of events are a dime a dozen. While almost all of the “thons” represent a worthy cause, they are typically not differentiated very well from each other. Another way of saying this would be to suggest that these causes have become commoditized in their presentation. To the stakeholder they often appear the same. One walk-a-thon seems like another.
When this happens to a cause, you know the cause and its fundraising machinery are in trouble.
So, finding their organization and themselves in this predicament, what did the cause’s leadership decide to do? Did they give up? Abandon the idea of a walk-a-thon?
No, in fact they did something far more creative and satisfying.
First they re-branded their walk-a-thon by renaming it and changing its appearance. Then, rater than abandoning the walk–a–thon concept they redefined it. Where in the past the event had required the participant to walk one, two, or five miles, the event was now going to be a uniform three city block walk right through the center of town. This move was surprising to me. That meant the walk was now not very far and certainly did not require much athletic prowess - in fact, anyone could now do the walk.
The second change the organizers introduced was the element of real fun. Where you would normally expect a longer walk-a-thon or a run to have water stations or refreshment stations along the route offering water, Gatorade, or fresh fruit, the organizers hilariously put refreshment stations every 100 feet or so, offering donuts, bratwurst, pizza, and everything that a serious walker or runner would never want during an event. There were grills smoking, smells wafting and ketchup flying.
The third change the organizers delivered was in the number of volunteers. They almost tripled the number of volunteers, each wearing a bright, branded t-shirt on the day of the event, each individual highly noticeable and remarkably energetic. It seemed they were everywhere.
Finally and perhaps most importantly, the organizers allowed many more to enter the event than a typical walk might have. On the day of the event, you had those decked out in sportswear, you had men and women walking having just left their office, you had shopkeepers wearing their store’s logo wear – everyone was welcome. And remarkably, most of the walkers had sponsors.
The event warranted front page in the “City” section of the local newspaper. What’s more, a sidebar column was devoted to talked about the disease whose eradication was the real reason for the event,
More money came in for the cause than had come for each of the previous eight walk-a-thons. There was tremendous publicity for the cause in the town and wonderful good will. My guess is that they will not have a problem in redoing this event next year.
It is a great story isn’t it? And, it has a couple of lessons for me:
- Don’t be afraid to change a tradition if the situation warrants it. Get rid of golden cows if they have stopped providing gold for your organization.
- Be collaborative and inclusive – let as many individuals as possible be a part of your causal events.
- Create celebration and have lots of fun.
- And perhaps most importantly, when you find your cause along with others in a commodity situation “act” and change the circumstances.