Building your donor prospect list

November 15, 2013

Filed under: Fundraising — jonathanpoisner @ 2:46 pm

One of the biggest mistakes I see made by both nonprofit staff and board members (and political candidates) is to underestimate their own personal list for who to ask for donations.

Invariably, when you push them, more names emerge.

So how do you “push” yourself if you’re the one needing the list.

Most importantly, don’t build your list purely by asking out loud: “who do I know?”

Instead, run through an exercise like the following:

Go through Your Rolodex: old fashioned, your email address book, your Facebook or LinkedIn connections, etc. Who among these are prospects?

Then ask a series of questions design to bring to the forefront of your mind people who might not have already been captured. Questions can include:

Do you attend any religious institution?
Do you socialize with others from the institution?
Are you involved in it beyond attending services?

Are you in any clubs or organized activities?
What is it?
Who’s in it?

Who do you hang out with socially?
Social networks
Outdoor activities
Watching/playing sports
Games
Book Clubs

What’s Your Professional background prior to your current role?
Do you have co-workers from previous jobs who believed in you?
Were you part of a professional association?
Who are your past employers?
For each, what’s your relationship like with the employer?

For each, list the 5-10 people with whom you most closely worked? What are they doing now/where are they?

Do you have any friends or colleagues from your higher education?
Social Clubs
Fraternities
Honor Societies
Extra-Curricular Activities

Odds are overwhelming that an exercise along these lines will yield a significantly more robust list from whom to fundraise!

Download/View a Printer-Friendly PDF Version

Be Sociable, Share!

Don’t make this membership fundraising mistake

Filed under: Fundraising — jonathanpoisner @ 2:19 pm

I recently was speaking with an organization that had gone to great lengths to identify different levels of membership benefits that would be received by their members based on the level of dollars donated as part of their membership.

Donate $40 and get X.

Donate $75 and get X and Y.

Donate $120 and get X, Y, and Z.

Etc.

They wanted my advice on how to further boost up the X, Y, and Z to make membership more attractive.

My advice — start over and ditch the concept entirely.

This wasn’t  a professional association — it was an organization that could be loosely described as progressive and ideological.  People aren’t joining the organization to gain “benefits.”

They are joining to advance the mission.

The difference between larger and smaller membership gifts isn’t about offering them more benefits.  It’s about (a) the donor’s capacity, (b) the donor’s  understanding of the organization and the impact it’s generating, (c) the donor’s emotional connection to the organization and/or the people involved, and last but not least, (d) whether the donor was asked to give more.

Instead of saying your $75 gets you X where X is something the donor gets, you should say $75 will help us make impact X — by framing it as part of a larger campaign.

And make them feel part of a larger community of like-minded donors so they’ll feel emotionally connected.

If you get them thinking analytically about the size of their donation as one of costs/benefits to them, my guess is you’ll almost always depress the size o their donation, not increase it.

Download/View a Printer-Friendly PDF Version

Be Sociable, Share!

Outcomes Schmoutcomes

October 3, 2013

Filed under: Fundraising,Leadership — jonathanpoisner @ 4:20 pm

I am a big believer in nonprofit organizations measuring the outcomes they achieve.

It’s an essential tool for any staff/board to know they’re having the impact desired over time.

And if not, to adjust their strategy.

I also understand quite a few foundations are looking at demonstrated outcomes as part of their grant criteria.

However, I recently had the experience of having a nonprofit Executive Director tell me (and separately tell one of their board members) that their biggest challenge with major donor fundraising is they haven’t measured outcomes, so they can’t go make the case effectively to potential donors.

To that I say “outcomes schmoutcomes.”

In my 13 years of directly raising major donor money for a not-too-dissimilar organization, I can count on one hand the number of major donors for whom documented outcomes was a big deal.

This particular organization has a great brand, lots of long-term donors in the right age and income bracket to give, and lots of passion.

For donors giving at the $500, $1,000, and $2,500 levels — which is where this organization is focused — the key factors impacting a major donation are: do they share a passion for the mission, do they feel personally connected to the person asking, do they feel the organization is generally competent, and do they feel a sense of urgency that the donation is needed now, not some far off time in the future.  Emotion, not reason, is the dominant force in these donations.

Most likely, if the organization were to start talking with potential major donors with a focus on “outcomes,” eyes would glaze over and major donor meetings would be even LESS successful.

If the organization is not achieving the success it should with major donors, almost certainly there is something else askew.

Download/View a Printer-Friendly PDF Version

Be Sociable, Share!

Smashwords.Com interview

September 10, 2013

Filed under: About My Work — jonathanpoisner @ 4:20 pm

I recently completed a Smashwords.com interview about my E-Book, Why Organizations Thrive.

Admittedly, it was an automated interview, so no human being actually asked the questions.

But it was a fun process and hopefully there’s some food for thought in there of value to those who read it.

Here’s the link to the interview.

 

Be Sociable, Share!

Tips for fundraising letters

July 31, 2013

Filed under: Communications,Fundraising — jonathanpoisner @ 2:15 pm

Clients regularly ask me what goes into a good fundraising letter sent to previous donors.

Here are some tips, in no particular order:

  • Spend time thinking about the opening sentence or two.  It should be engaging, interesting, and provocative.  Don’t save your most engaging material for a third of the way into the letter.  Open with your strongest stuff.
  • Make the ask.  At least once per page in a multi-page letter.  Letters that provide an update and then just softly suggest donations are almost never effective.
  • Make the ask specific.  Don’t ask for “generous support” or other similar wishy-washy terms.   If you can, segment your list to make the ask at an appropriate level for different levels of past giving.  If not, you can ask for a several specific levels (e.g. “give $35, $50, $100, or whatever you can afford.”).
  • Personalize it.  Don’t send it to “Dear Friend.”  Send it to “Dear Susan.”
  • Thank them.  If the thank you can be personalized, all the better.  For example, some organizations as part of a mail merge can personalize based on how much they last donated (e.g. “Thank you for your most recent gift of $50” – with $50 being a field inserted from the mail merge unique to that donor).
  • Write it from a person, not the organization.  It should be first-person singular from the author, not “we” from the organization.
  • Create urgency by noting some monetary need of your organization with a deadline.  Create an artificial deadline if necessary.  Make it clear donations in the next few weeks are critical.
  • Tell a story with visually arresting language.  But the story shouldn’t be over – the ending should depend on donors stepping forward to complete the story.   The donors should be the hero(s) of the story, not the nonprofit.
  • Focus on the mission-impact you’ll be making on the world with more resources, not the process or internal organizational benefits.
  • Close with a strong repeat of the ask.
  • If the author has time to actually sign each individual letter instead of printing one, then it’s worth doing so.  I found this to be a painless activity to do while watching a movie or tv show at home and am pretty sure donors appreciated when they could tell an individual signed it, not just the computer.  This also gave me a chance o write 1-2 sentence personal notes on any letters where I knew the person receiving it.
  • Use a PS that once again repeats the specific ask and the urgency/deadline.
  • If the volunteers are available, experiment with having half your letters hand addressed by volunteers and sent first class.  See if the extra dollars generated by higher returns justifies the extra postage and volunteer time.   If so, make this part of your standard practice.

Download/View a Printer-Friendly PDF Version

Be Sociable, Share!

Making them move

July 25, 2013

Filed under: Communications — jonathanpoisner @ 2:37 pm

Lesson 7 of Why Organizations Thrive is to become a very good public speaker.

Here’s one public speaking tip that I’ve found useful over the years: make the audience physically move.

Rather than being a distraction, this almost always will increase their mental and emotional connection to the speech.

When giving my annual presentations at the Oregon League of Conservation Voters Gala, more than once I determined that movement was going to be a powerful way of increasing the audience’s excitement about the dinner that was unfolding.  I felt that the motion of their standing up en mass with others would help generate excitement and make them feel “part” of the speech and not just listeners.

So I asked a series of questions (another way to increase audience engagement) that I knew would over the course of 30 seconds get the entire audience standing up and feeling good about their collective power.

The two times I used this trick (several years apart), the sense of increased excitement in the room was palpable.

Of course, if you’re giving an annual presentation, you can’t use this “trick” every year or it will start to feel stale.

But in putting together your presentations, think about what you’re trying to accomplish and whether some movement can increase the audience’s engagement.  In addition to standing up, movement could mean raising their hands, having them introduce themselves to the person next to them, having them stand up and turn once around and sit back down, etc.

If you’ve used this technique or seen it used with real success, let me know what worked as I’m always trying to add to my own toolbox.

 

Be Sociable, Share!

“I was waiting for . . .” is not a valid excuse

July 24, 2013

Filed under: Leadership — jonathanpoisner @ 4:58 pm

Pet peeve of mine: Using “I was waiting for” as an excuse.

Too often somebody who’s not meeting a deadline responds that they’re failing because: “I was waiting for John Doe to do X first.”

Sometimes the precondition is totally legitimate.   They really needed John Doe to do X before they could do what they promised me.

But then too often the following exchange happens:

Me: “Why isn’t John Doe doing X.”

Them: “I emailed asking him to do X and I didn’t hear back.”

Me: “Did you pick up the phone and call John to confirm he got the email to make sure it’s getting done?”

Them: “No.”

Me: “When it was clear John wasn’t doing X by the time you needed X done, did you make any further effort beyond email to get X done by them or figure out another path forward?”

Them: “No.”

 

 

Be Sociable, Share!

The point comes before the story

Filed under: Communications — jonathanpoisner @ 11:15 am

Readers of Why Organizations Thrive know that I’m a big believer in nonprofit leaders becoming excellent public speakers and organizations knowing and telling their stories.

When giving a speech, which comes first: developing your point or your story?

I recently stumbled across a blog by Rich Hopkins that convincingly made the point that the point comes first.

Stories are only as valuable as the point they are trying to convey.

When crafting a speech, start with your point and then figure out what stories help illustrate it.  Don’t start with the story.

Hopkins writes:

“…no matter how great your story is, if it doesn’t match the point you’re trying to get across, it’s nothing more than a diversion, and in the worst cases, can completely derail your speech.

Building a speech for the real world means having a real point to share. Granted, it may start with a story you want to tell – surviving abuse, climbing Everest, passing the 400th level of Candy Crush – but ultimately it must have a takeaway point – a spine on which the muscle of your stories can always attach.”

Read Hopkins full blog entry and let me know if you agree or disagree.   

Be Sociable, Share!

Quick thoughts about e-newsletters

July 9, 2013

Filed under: Communications — jonathanpoisner @ 4:10 pm

Because I try to stay in close touch with both current and former clients, I subscribe to a large volume of e-newsletters from nonprofit organizations.

There are a lot of great ones.  But I also see clients repeatedly issue newsletters that violate some of what I believe are best practices.

Here’s five examples of mistakes I see being made on a regular basis.

1. Writing with a neutral tone.

Your donors/volunteers should be superheros.   Unfortunately, many e-newsletter writers received graduate training in public policy or other fields that train you to write neutrally.  Neutrality is not your friend in enlisting others to support your cause.

2. Writing to be read, not scanned.

The vast majority of your readers will scan your content, not read it.  Think Huffington Post, not New York Times.  Someone scanning your e-newsletter should get the essential story from the headlines/photos without having to read the full text.   Before issuing the e-newsletter, look at it without the text and ask: what would my reader come away with?  If nothing valuable, then work harder on your headlines and photos/captions.

3. Writing about process, not the ultimate goal of the organization.

Particularly with advocacy nonprofits, fights over process tend to absorb significant time.  Those in the middle of those fights often become passionate about them and falsely assume their donors/supporters will share that passion.  In reality, donors/supporters are almost always focused on the end goal/mission the nonprofit is trying to achieve.  Avoid process stories.

4. Pictures that don’t connect

Pictures are good, but not all pictures help.  Given how people are reading e-newsletters (many on mobile devices), focus on pictures where you have just one or two people and you should be able to see their eyes (and hopefully they’re smiles if appropriate).  Pictures of large groups where you can’t see anyone aren’t as effective in my opinion.

5.  Long sentences with parenthetical clauses

Many of us in college learned to write complex sentences that embody multiple ideas and show the relationship between those ideas.  These are almost always a bad idea in an e-newsletter.  My rule of thumb: if it can be broken into two separate short sentences, do it.

Let me know what other mistakes you see and think should be avoided?  I’ll cover them in a future blog entry.

 

Be Sociable, Share!

Thinking about triggers in work plans

June 19, 2013

Filed under: Strategic Planning — jonathanpoisner @ 2:02 pm

I’ve previously written about the importance of generating work plans once wrapping up strategic planning.

One of the most useful tools in a work plan is the concept of triggers.

Too often work plans focus on end products without thinking through what other steps must be completed before a specific tactic can be accomplished.

One of my clients this summer, for example, is using “tabling” at public fairs/festivals as a tactic for the first time.  The initial work plan simply said: identify two tabling opportunities, recruit 5 volunteers and table.  Of course, it soon became clear that this also meant developing the necessary materials, setting up new systems to identify/train volunteers, finding a table/chairs, designing/printing a banner, etc.

Another client recently discussed with me her experience putting together the organization’s first corporate sponsorship packages for an event.  Because no work planning had happened, she hadn’t identified the triggers that had to be done in advance of actually asking corporations to sponsor (updated materials, agreement upon sponsorship levels, relationship-building, etc.).   The process therefore took her considerably longer than they had anticipated.

Rather than just creating a to-do list, good work planning identifies the outcomes you want and then works backwards to identify all the triggers or precursors that must be accomplished along the way.    In addition to making sure steps are done in the right order, on time, making explicit all the triggering steps that must first be taken is essential to make sure the work plan is making realistic assumptions about how much staff time a project will take.

More than once I’ve watched organizations go awry when they fail to plan in this way and find themselves 2-3 weeks out from a major milestone scrambling because a trigger wasn’t taken into account.

Occasionally, there are brilliant people whose minds can do this all in their head.

But for mortals like me and you, putting pen to paper or fingers to keyboard is an essential step to make sure the work gets done in the right order on the right timeline.

Be Sociable, Share!

Content © Copyright 2010-2013 • Jonathan Poisner Strategic Consulting LLC. All rights reserved.