We all have them, profile pictures on our social media pages, FaceBook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter etc. But is yours at an optimal size?
This handy cheat sheet will help ensure your profile picture is at an optimal size.
The Red Pen Challenge
We all write to donors from time to time, we know we need to communicate with them, to keep them informed about what’s happening. But, are we watching how we include them in the messages?
Often messages are full of “I”, “We”, “Us, there’s little use of “You” “Your”.
So here’s a wee test from Marc Pitman – The Fundraising Coach you can do to check your content.
Will you take the Red Pen Challenge?
Do the test and see how you score.
I’d be keen to know your results – share them in the contents below.
Bigger Isn’t Always Best
We’ve all seen them, the oversized cheque used to show how much has been raised or donated. I’ve often wondered about their purpose, especially those used in photo-ops which only show the recipient, ignoring the donor.
And even worse are the cheques that are used repeatedly with the tell-tale sign of previous amounts donated still visible under the new amount.
So after reading the piece from Greg Warner I thought it worthwhile to share what he has said in “Is it time to banish photos of fundraisers and oversized checks?” and Greg’s follow up piece is worth a read too, both I’m sure will get you thinking and wondering if you are doing it right, or if you could change how you use the “oversized cheque”.
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts, are these oversized cheques beneficial, do the ignore the donor, is the cheque about you or your donor?
Leave comments below please.
Tele-Fundraising, Big Oops
You may have read the recent news item about how people being called to support an organisation were treated less than would have been “proper”.
I’ve managed several tele-fundraising teams, and as soon as I’ve heard a conversation that was less than ideal, I would pull the person off the phone and have a chat with them about their manner – after all they are representing the organisation, they’re essentially an ambassador for the organisation and every call should leave the recipient feeling good about it.
What’s more, why weren’t the calls referred to in the article picked up by someone who would likely have been doing random call monitoring?
Call monitoring is an important part of tele-fundraising, it helps ensure the right message is being delivered, that the agent is up to date with any new “stories” that can be used, and, yes, it would definitely pick up any agent who was misrepresenting the organisation or being rude to a person they were calling.
As soon as something is picked up, the agent should be pulled off the phone and the issues discussed, perhaps they need some additional training, maybe they have personal issues outside of the workplace they are dealing with; whatever, there should never be any instance where an agent is rude.
I don’t know why this issue wasn’t picked up sooner, it should have been and the organisation has let itself down.
Charity and the language we use…
Just came across this piece from RSM – and thought it a good piece to share, it’s worth the read.
What’s in a word or a phrase? Well sometimes a lot. Whether we appreciate it or not much of the language we use carries considerable extra weight and meaning due to history, perceptions, and baggage connected with it.
I was fortunate a while back to attend a seminar by Vicki Sykes on the topic of Business acquisition in the community sector in New Zealand. Vicki is an interesting speaker and after 17 years as a CEO of a South Auckland charity she followed her passion to step back and do a University thesis on the topic of her presentation.
One of the quotes that Vicki used (and forgive me for not knowing to whom this should be attributed) was:
“Remember that being a charity is a tax status; not a business model.”
That line struck me as powerful. One because of its simplicity. But perhaps more so due to it making me question my use of the word charity. There are so many assumptions we attach to a word. These are built up over time and become unquestioned. But when we sit back and consider them, sometimes we see that maybe these assumptions and perceptions we attach to a word can hold us back.
When I ask others, especially businesspeople, about the word charity as it relates to organisations, there seems to be a common understanding that this is an organisation that does good. People understand that they exist to serve some social or community benefit. The word charity is also associated with giving without expecting anything in return. A very noble attribute.
Yet these understandings or assumptions about the word charity when considering a charitable organisation also seem to blinker some people in their attitudes towards the organisation and how it operates.
Keep reading here
What are your thoughts?
QUESTIONS EVERY MAJOR DONOR ASKS THEMSELVES AFTER THEY GIVE
On my way back from Christchurch to Auckland recently I got to talking to a couple seated next to me on the plane. They were intrigued by the book I was reading – Chapter One – we ended up have a good conversation about charity giving and the orgnisations they support.
So, seeing this from Greg Warner at Market Smart, is timely, and it covers exactly what the couple and I were talking about.
3 QUESTIONS EVERY MAJOR DONOR ASKS THEMSELVES AFTER THEY GIVE
- “What did they do with my money?”
- “Would my money yield more impact if I gave it to another organization?”
- “Do they make me feel good or bad?”
They said that they often feel some level of concern after making a contribution, mainly around whether the money they have given is going to the right organisation and that it will be used wisely and for the purposes the organisation said they needed support.
Do your donors have confidence in how you are using the support they are giving you, how do you allay any concerns they may have?
19 Ideas to Cultivate Your Donors
I came across this article from Veritus Group and thought it worth sharing, some reasonable ideas. Is there anything you would add – or remove?
By Richard Perry and Jeff Schreifels July 12, 2017
If there is one area of “moves management” that has never set well with me, it’s the word stewardship. Stewardship is what you are supposed to do with donors after they give you a gift. I don’t like it because it conveys a more passive approach to the relationship with your donor.
For instance, I’ve been working with an MGO who told me, “Oh, that donor is in stewardship mode right now, so I don’t have to worry about them.” Huh? Yes you do. If you’re ever going to ask for another gift, your approach with that donor needs to be strategic, focused and donor-centered.
I like to say that you are always in a cultivation mode with your donors. You’re always trying to build and deepen relationships, while providing opportunities for your donors to invest in your mission. There really is no time to be passive… especially after they have just given you a great gift.
So to give you some ideas this summer, here are 19 ways for you to cultivate your donors:
- Research each of your donors and find something unique about them.
- Update your donor data system with all of your donor communications, to allow you to know what you’ve done with each donor.
- Call three of your donors every day just to thank them for supporting the mission.
- Write five handwritten thank-you notes every day to donors on your caseload.
- Invite some of your donors to see your programs first-hand.
- Ask a donor to help you solve a problem.
- Know the hobbies of your donors, and use it to send the donor information about that hobby, telling them that you are thinking of them.
- Take your donor to a sporting or cultural event that you have tickets for.
- Figure out ways to get donors to see your mission, and arrange for them to have a visit.
- Help your donors pass on their giving legacy to their children: recommend ways to talk to their children about giving, along with a good consultant to advise the family about multi-generational giving.
- Ask a few of your donors to talk to your board about why they give, and why they love the organization.
- While they’re at it, ask your donors to give your Executive Director and board some solid critique of the organization and how it could be better.
- Look for connections in your donor portfolio where you could introduce donors to one another. Help your donors network with one another.
- Think of ways to foster business relationships between your donors, and arrange for meetings.
- Have the CEO or ED call each of your A-level donors at least once a year to thank them for giving.
- If you have a relationship with a celebrity or VIP, have that person call your top 10 donors or write a special note thanking them for being involved in your organization.
- Look for ways to honor your donors publicly in front of their peers (provided they will like it), and publicize it.
- Always acknowledge milestones in each donor’s life.
- Arrange for a program person to call your donor and give them a first-hand account of what an impact the donor is making on that program. Tell the donor she is a hero.
There you go – 19 ideas to proactively cultivate your donors so that you will continue to foster and deepen the relationship with them. With 150 donors on your caseload, there is no time to sit back and be passive. Hopefully, these 19 ideas will spark others as well.
Please feel free to share more cultivation ideas with the Passionate Giving community!
Jeff
P.S. – Want to go further? Check out our free white paper on “The Art of Soliciting a Donor.”
Looks Like a Charity Beat Up
A New Plymouth (New Zealand) charity – Roderique Hope Trust which provides emergency housing has recently leased a property to house people in urgent need of housing. But, this doesn’t seem to have gone down too well with others who have properties on the street.
One person, who’s daughter has a property on the street, has apparently threatened to sue if the value of her property decreases because of the Trust providing accommodation.
How can this be ok to even think about? As one person who commented on the item on Stuff.co.nz has said, “Do the residents of the street vet ALL people buying or renting in “their” street? I bet they don’t! How do they know that “that sort of person” became homeless due to accident, illness, redundancy or other reasons, and are perfectly respectable people? This looks like a severe case of Nimby-ism”. This commenter is right in his/her thinking.
All too often we see community organisations taking action to help others in the community only to face a backlash, this time it seems as though the threat of legal action is only one part of the potential backlash, but it also seems that this could be a media beat up.
It would appear that Roderique Hope Trust have tried to keep the local residents informed, the fact that a meeting was planned for a long weekend is perhaps not a good thing, although it wasn’t organised by the Trust; but whoever organised it should have taken into account that some “players” wouldn’t be available.
We need organisations like Roderique Hope Trust helping in the emergency housing area, but we run the risk of others taking a step back if threats such as the one in this article are made to other providers.
Let’s hope there’s a good outcome to this and that the Trust moves ahead with their plan, it would seem that the owner of the property has no issues, only a handful of local residents who seem to feel they have been left out of discussions.
Let’s hope common sense prevails.
Email Marketing, Be on Point
We all get them, emails, email updates, simple to the point outlining what an organisation has been doing; then we get the solicitation emails – love them or hate them, they’re a fact of life and we have to accept that when we subscribe we will get them.
As an organisation, you’re relient more and more on emails as a means of communication, simply as it is cheaper than postal updates and appeals.
What is important is that you address them correctly, do you know how your subscribers/donors like to be addressed? Mrs/Ms/Mr, or is it ok to simply use their first name?
But, first off – The Subject Line is an all important part of an email – get this wrong and more will be sent direct to the bin – deleted, with all your hardwork wasted.
Have a read of what Michael Rosen says, yes, it’s in American speak, but he makes sense and has good points and, pointers on how you might get a better readership and response if you take time to plan what you want to send your subscribers and donors.
Click here and read
What are you doing with your email and DM campaigns, are you targetting everyone on your database or are you segmenting it to those who want updates and donors as two separate categories?
Are you further segmenting it to send something different to those who have given recently?
Who’s in Your Advertising
We’ve seen it recently, and no doubt we’ll see it again, a community group using images that portray the peeople they support – yet, doesn’t actually use their images in promotional material, instead opting to use either stock photos or models.
Is it right or is it wrong?
We don’t see models being used for breast cancer campaigns, we see the real people. We don’t see models being used for promotional material of children suffering in far flung places, we see the real children.
So why, in the latest case models used in adverts for homeless charity a ‘kick in the guts’ has this organisation chosen not to use the real faces, the real people they are there to assist? Was it too hard, was it perhaps seen as possibly demeaning to use the real people; who knows. I’m sure they will have some spin out soon as to why, but for now all we can do is specualte as to their reasoning.
On the day the article appeared I heard homeless people talking about it, saying they felt cheated, that they are the real face of homelessness yet were being sidestepped, and they want answers.
I’m picking Lifewise will being getting a few visits from their clients asking why.
When you run your next campaign, will you use people representative of, from your organisation or will you get online and secure stock images, or call an agency for some models to portray the work you do?
If you opt to use people other than those you actually work with, be prepared for some flack, and possibly egg on your face when people start talking about it. And, sadly some of this talk will potentially end with your supporters voting with their wallets, taking their support elsewhere. Can you afford the gamble?
charitymattersnz.com 