Zen and Inspiration

How to dish up Green Eggs and Ham

2012-01-06T05:07:00.000-08:00

I love Dr Seuss's Green Eggs and ham and rereading it the other day made me think about (albeit simply) the job we have as fundraisers.

Like poor 'Sam the man' our challenge is to try and 'serve' up our cause and offer in a way that will get people to stop, listen and to take the desired action.

If we follow Sam's example then we should ensure we are:

looking at various, but appropriate and relevant channels and more importantly going to where the people are, not waiting for them to just come to us

using new and exciting ways to deliver our messages that will achieve cut through

persevering - mainly because sometimes people don't know they are in the market for something until they are in the market for something

Of course the tale ends with Sam being thanked for his attempts to get his ham and eggs eaten by the nameless character - who loved what was on offer, and of course that is what we strive for too. After all, once someone has finally experienced our organisation we want them to feel that they are so very glad they did, feel that they made the right decision in choosing to support us, and to stay with us.

Thanks as ever for stopping by.

What can we learn from Santa and A Miracle on 34th Street?

2011-12-30T07:40:00.000-08:00

It's Christmas time and setting down to watch 'A miracle on 34th Street' is bit of a tradition - but what I noticed this year was the business strategy that was developed for the fictitious department store and all because of Santa's honesty.

"If we don't have it, we'll find it for you" - sounds a little Harrods I know, but the point is that Santa tells people where to shop and indeed where to buy the toys and gifts at the best prices and as a result the manager receives wonderful feedback from its customers.

"Santa's telling everybody where to shop. If you don't got it, it's too expensive, he's saying where to get it at the right price. Tell Santa he made me a Cole's shopper. I'm coming here for everything but toilet paper. Any store that puts the parent ahead of the buck at Christmas deserves my business. Tell Mr. Cole his Santa Claus ought to get a raise."

Now, I know it's just a film and equally, some could say a risky business strategy - but though a fictitious example, I think there is something that we as fundraisers and communicators can learn from it - not least to be a little more giving and dare I say more supportive of our 'competitors' and more mindful of our supporter's needs.

So, if a supporter calls to fund a certain project which your organisation doesn't have - would it be the worst thing in the world to refer them to organisation x, who you know do work in that area or on that theme? Would that be better than trying to create something that isn't best for your organisation and may cost more in servicing than the value of the contribution itself? It could work very well if you have reciprocal arrangements already established for example.

If there is a campaign going on from another organisation, that is working to do what your organisation is also trying to achieve - then what's the harm in actively endorsing the campaign within your organisation and amongst your supporters?

If you are an 'admirer' of a great campaign or initiative from another organisation (even if it doesn't match your mission and aims), what would the harm be in tweeting about it - or liking and sharing on Facebook to your organisation's 'friends' or 'followers'?

As a supporter I would find it bold and refreshing. As a fundraiser I may feel a little anxiety. Should I not be trying to protect my supporters?

But in truth we all know that our supporters support other organisations, (often several), not just our own so why should we not be the bigger organisation and be proactive in highlighting the good in what other organisation's are doing. As individuals we do - even as professionals, twitter posts are full of admiration and support of what colleagues and peers are doing. I am just suggesting something on a slightly wider scale.

Let your supporters see you as caring more about what you are trying to achieve, i.e. ending poverty, curing illness, stopping cruelty to animals and children rather than your income figures and the benefits could be great. I am not suggesting going over board but I think there are times when such an approach could be mutually beneficial and valuable.

After all in the film, Cole's Store found their income went through the roof and won some amazingly loyal customers into the bargain! So who needs Santa?

Thanks as ever for stopping by and Happy New Year!

A Christmas tale: Does it matter who signs your letters?

2011-12-17T02:17:00.000-08:00

I am asking this question mainly rhetorically but also to serve as a reminder.

The reminder part is that, though we know that the signatory of a communication should be selected because of relevance: to both the supporter and to the issue being raised - I think we can sometimes fail to focus on choosing the right person to deliver the message and instead just go with what's gone before.

Does it matter, does it affect response? I am sure it does because ultimately it is what that message makes someone feel and do that is important and the signatory, though a mere name at the end of a letter is essentially the story teller at the end of the day.

I know this is all obvious stuff - but I was reminded very strongly of it recently.

I am having Christmas early this year because some of the people I care about most will not be with me on the day. I could have called them and invited them - but instead I sent a card, with the photograph of my beautiful son, Noah on the front and he invited them.

Would my family and friends have come anyway, sure they would. But the invitation coming from Noah was just more special. They all called to say yes, and to comment on the lovely invitation. It made them feel special and it engendered a stronger feeling than my call would have done.

So back to my initial question - yes it does matter. Will it affect response - not always (depends on the communication), but it will have an impact on how the people receiving it feel and that is just as important.

Thanks as ever for stopping by and a very Merry Christmas!

For your eyes only..or so it seems

2011-11-15T21:17:00.000-08:00

I have seen a lot of charity communications recently. On trains, bus shelters, cross tracks, on-line and even mailings - and there have been several occasions where I have had to ask the question 'Was this tested in its final format and media before it was produced'?

Obviously by that question, I think the answer is in some cases NO - otherwise I would assert that the design, the fonts, the colours used would have been very different. Equally I know that for some media it is easier to do than others i.e. place your mocked up press ad in an actual newspaper to see how it looks. But my point is more about putting yourself in your supporters shoes and trying to view your communication from their perspective - quite literally view it.

So, what is the value of a piece of a communication if people are not able to fully engage with the piece being displayed because they can't read it without standing right on top of it, or with letter copy without squinting or holding it in front of your face? I would answer, in some cases not as much as the cost of it.

Of course everything looks lovely on the screen of a mac - and I know how much time and work goes into producing it - but the shame is more that that work comes to nothing if it doesn't have the impact it could of had in its chosen execution.

You then have to wonder about the assessment of this creative if it fails... are you disregarding something because the delivery and execution of that message is at fault?

And from a potential supporter perspective - if something is difficult to engage with i.e. read, or even see, your work isn't seen, and people won't be able to do what you are asking them to and then doesn't it just become more communications 'noise' in an already noisy market place.

And doesn't that make all of our jobs more difficult in the long run?

Anyway, it is just something to think about the next time you are getting some creative produced.

Thanks as ever for stopping by.

Do you know what you are selling?

2011-10-24T21:25:00.000-07:00

I was struck by the headline of a recent commentary piece on the return of Oddbins off-licence to the High Street. Which stated "Staff need to know what they're selling" [as a prerequisite for any future survival], and this made me think of the importance of our own personal knowledge of our cause and organisation.

Each person that works for any organisation at some point is a spokesperson or representative for that organisation in the outside world. Thus it is probably useful to be able to speak with some knowledge on all areas of the organisation's work and not just the area you specifically work on.

So, as something that may help assess your own position, ask yourself this question - If your supporter care team (if you have one) passed on to you the latest supporter query to a recent fundraising activity or campaign ,would you personally be able to answer it?

And coming back to my original point, if you were given a more general query about your organisations work would you be able to answer it confidently ?

If you do not answer with an emphatic yes, then it could well be that you want to try responding to some supporter queries and see where your knowledge gaps may be.

As an aside, in a previous work life I was the supporter care function as well as the fundraiser, planner and a data person in one role. I know that in bigger organisations where there are supporter care departments that often that level of knowledge or skill is not specifically required from us. But whether it is part and parcel of your job or not - it probably should be a skill we all have.

In the end it can only be of benefit to you, your organisation and any future supporter you may well meet. It is nice to be prepared after all!

Thank you as ever for stopping by.

Aristotle, Einstein and Supporter retention

2011-10-09T06:11:00.000-07:00

From what I remember from school, Aristotle thought that movement was propelled by motion and once the force 'pushing' ceased then the object would stop.

But Einstein's first theory of motion, proved that the opposite was true and that an object would keep going until forces acting against the movement stopped it. Though for many of us in our naivety, Aristotle could well have been accurate, particularly if you have had any experience of trying to move a large object!

Either way - it is worth thinking about both perspectives in relation to your Supporters (even if my recollection of the science is a little simplistic).

What are you doing to propel your supporters along their journey? Are you giving them choice? feedback, fulfilling on their preferences and asking them what they want and sending them what they need to stay engaged?

Conversely......

What are you doing that is potentially slowing down their journey, making their experience more laboured and slow? Are you thinking about what you are sending them - or could you just be sending and broadcasting because that's what you have always done? The results have been OK, good even but you haven't really reviewed them for a while? And more importantly you have not taken time to see what your supporters want or need and how this may have changed since they first started their support.

Ultimately in both cases it is the supporter that decides to stop their support, but the more barriers you create to their choice and experience the more likely their ceasing to support you will become a reality and a permanent one.

Thank you as ever for stopping by.

Can you have too much of a good thing?

2011-09-12T04:07:00.000-07:00

In short - yes. Is that a bad thing? Again - it can be.

I think it is vital that supporters feel that they have had the choice in what they receive after all they are more likely to look at them if they are not wondering 'why the hell am I getting this'?

And with the sheer amount of communications people receive these days, I think that this mindset is helpful. The issue then is of course, 'I have agreed to receive this but are they relevant to me?' The other challenge is then I think getting the balance right in terms of frequency.

As a supporter of a charity that, put it bluntly, I adore and can do no wrong in my eyes... well sadly they are starting to and part of this is because I am getting too much feedback.

Yes - I know! It sounds mad - but it is true. For me the constant notifications that there is a new update waiting for me is actually making me feel.... guilty. Every time I look at my email and see the subject lines still bold as unopened emails it makes me recoil.

I know this is not their intention and in the past their off-line feedback has been wonderfully gratifying on all levels. But right now with a new notification of an update generally once a week, sometimes more it is getting to the point where I can't and in fact won't go and view it.

What is the damage I hear you ask? Is there any harm? Would I give more to the next appeal to assuage my guilt? Is it such a bad thing? Well to me it is. My relationship with this organisation is not based on guilt - it never has been.

Did I sign-up to receive the updates? Yes, I did. But what is interesting is how I am starting to change my view on how the organisation works. Whereas before, the feedback felt it was reporting on a success hard won and significant, now the constant updates feel merely like a churn of case studies.

Thankfully, the damage thus far is that I have changed my preference and have opted out of receiving these updates entirely. Partly because there was only those two options: to receive or not - which is a shame in itself.

Interestingly, as I was writing this I found this abstract about the under provision versus the overprovision of partner support in the success of marriages, and it reminded me that people's relationships with the causes they support are very similar to a marriage and it's probably good to bear that in mind.

Thank you as ever for stopping by.

My thoughts on Ken's blog.

2011-08-25T07:01:00.000-07:00

What a good read, Ken Burnett's latest blog post is. And if you are remotely involved in street or door-to-door fundraising then it is a must read.

There was some great ideas and here are a couple of thoughts from me.

1. Righting what's wrong is the hard bit. The impression of street fundraisers rightly or wrongly has been tarnished. If you are not in the market to support charity or the featured charity then you feel you are running the gauntlet just trying to get a sandwich at lunch time.

However, if you are in the market to support a charity you often don't really have the time to 'spare a few minutes' when you are approached. So in order to provide some flexibility, how about the street fundraiser offering appointments. 5-10 minute slots where people can arrange to come back later and have a chat at a convenient time.

As with any thing, you will have some people just using it as a get out, but I think the offer could make a real difference to people who really don't have the time when they are approached but who could be interested. And also it could change the dynamic from a person feeling 'signed up' to them feeling they have made the right choice. The difference between conscription and volunteering.

2. The approach needs to recognise that not everyone is an auditory learner. An obvious statement. But I don't think it helps that much of the street approach is based on conversation and often actually a one way conversation. There were many ideas in Ken's 50 around livening the information up with use of ipod videos, sound recordings, street performance etc but at the start of this, I think there is something in trying to ascertain what type of person you are talking to in the first place to identify what mode of communication will best motivate them.

3. What are you offering? I really liked the ideas around tailoring messages so as well as by gender this could recognise regional differences, or localising campaigns around most generous supporters. The options are endless - and further proof that one size does not fit all and neither should it.

4. The other aspect around the offer is the urgency. Like any fundraising channel, if what you are putting out there is just another ask to support a worthwhile cause while not answering one of the most important supporter questions in fundraising 'why now' then it won't work any where near as well.

To me that is one of the big issues with Street fundraising it appears as a treadmill or conveyor belt - the urgency is just around supporting the on-going work. Great work it may be, but there is often no real urgency or imperative for the supporter. The one thing I do know is that most charities genuinely need support so relaying that case for support in a motivating and attention grabbing way should not be that difficult but is also vital as a point of differentiation.

Reflecting on the fact that I was signed up to an environmental charity around ten year's ago by a street fundraiser. As I wandered out for lunch I had no thought about the charity or wanting to support them. I was stopped by a guy who may or may not have looked like a model, but all I know is that he talked with passion and a genuine knowledge of the work. How did he get me to stop? He asked me if I had seen the news that day and talked about something that was topical. I had seen the news and that was it - I knew I wanted to help. It was relevant to me, it was current and it very much followed the news agenda. I am still supporting them.

Finally though, the importance of a retention model cannot be underestimated. And that should apply to any and all recruitment campaigns not just those with a perception of high attrition rates. Equally, it isn't about creating some elaborate communications stream for the first 6 months that everyone is breaking their necks to deliver only for supporters to merge into the standard programme. It is about making sure your standard communication plan for all your supporters is relevant and delivers on what they need in order to keep them engaged, motivated and supporting.

Thanks as ever for stopping by.

Cheque it out!

2011-08-17T01:34:00.000-07:00

As someone who writes the occasional cheque - the news and debate around them being phased out was of interest. Mark Astarita's comments also struck a chord - many charities are hugely reliant on payments via cheques and considering the future without them should be something we all start investigating.

Now, I have credit cards, and most of my charitable giving is done via direct debit - but usually when I give additional sums to appeals, I tend to do so by cheque. I can't answer why exactly, but I actually like writing them.

So my own behaviour got me thinking about people's choice of giving mechanism - and also raised the question 'Does the method of payment options offered have an impact on what people will and won't respond to?'

For example, simply put if you are promoting an on-line offer to people who include supporters who predominantly give by cheque are you wasting everyone's time? I can't answer that with any facts - but it made me wonder. After all isn't this just about another layer of tailoring and understanding of supporter behaviour that we should know?

Obviously at the very least we should all know how our method of payments breakdown in relation to donations..5% cash 45% cheque etc. so we can all understand the potential danger presented by the phasing out of cheques. The next step be would be trying to find an alternative that offers some of the security and reassurance that many people feel cheques provide.

At the moment though, I am not quite sure where the debate is - but with the abolition of the cheque guarantee card already happened there is very little security or confidence in retailers to accept them..so the future of the cheque looks bleak - that is unless the fundraising community steps in?!

Thanks as ever for stopping by.

"Do you think they'll want my £30?"

2011-08-08T04:16:00.000-07:00

I can't stress enough how important it is to get and use supporter feedback. And even better live feedback from people you know. As usually it will be more honest, free flowing and dare I say more useful.

At the weekend, a friend of mine was mid process of filling out a donation to a charity he supports regularly. He had barely skimmed the appeal letter before getting out his pen to donate. So far so good. Then across the kitchen I heard "do you think they'll want my £30?"

As a fundraiser, I was stunned by the question. I stopped what I was doing and walked over to him. I looked at the donation form and could see what he meant.

In bold black on the donation form was £100 and £150 and other. Now at that point a couple of things occurred to me:

Obviously an attempt to upgrade the gift value (very valid and often very effective)
Project featured in the appeal was £100 so hence the lead amount
Could totally see what the charity was trying to achieve and have used such techniques many times

However, what this approach didn't take in to account was how the supporter would feel.

In this case, it could be that the approach was a little heavy handed?

Upgrades can be based on a number of hooks - a good strong project is one way, also basing the increase on what a supporter has given in the past with an incremental increase built in (my friend usually gives between £30 and £50 pounds to this charity - but every time they ask). Also, a combination of the two and these are just a few ways of doing it.

People may have differing views on this and I would welcome other people's thoughts. But to me though the case for support needs to be strong and thus overt, the tactics employed should possibly utilise a little more subtlety. After all, should the supporter realise what you are doing? Should the technique create such confusion / dissonance? These questions probably should be asked of all techniques we employ.

As for my friend - he continued to give his credit card details - but as he popped the donation form in the BRE, he joked "Well, I am sure they won't send it back!" "Of course they won't", I replied. "They'll really appreciate it." trying to reassure him. But I was a little saddened that a standard technique had been executed in such a way that had potentially made a generous gift feel like a lesser gesture. And I think as fundraisers, we all need to be a bit more mindful of that.

As ever, thanks for taking the time to stop by.

Are you assuming your supporters can't read?!

2011-05-17T12:05:00.000-07:00

Of late I feel I have walked in to a phase of poor customer care (as you may recall from a previous post), and sadly it hasn't stopped! What is worse, it has either been (1) a disregard for me as a customer or (2) under the guise of 'rewarding' my patronage but not. Both can be equally as bad.

Thankfully, these examples are not from the not-for-profit sector, but I felt compelled to type away here mainly because it would be the easiest thing in the world for us to fall into such a mindset - you may even be doing it already without realising it.

Today, I will just talk about issue 1: The disregard for existing customers. With the constant obsession with recruiting new customers / supporters over caring about the ones you already have, I have been stunned by my ISA provider offering a fantastic rate on a new ISA only to learn that it is not available to me, just NEW customers only! Did they think I wouldn't notice? I did, obviously.

For me, the significant thing about this example is that as many charities are continuing to primarily focus on the recruitment of new supporters, I am not sure there is enough awareness and thought given to how these new recruitment campaigns or offers are being perceived - not just by the potential supporters but by existing supporters too?

So, if you think any of your recruitment offerings could provoke any of the following responses from your existing base - then it might be worth thinking about doing something about it:

That's good, but I don't receive that
I am not sure I like the direction the organisation seems to be going
That looks like a great project / work, but it's the first time I have heard about it. Why?
This looks like a complete waste of money. Is this how they use my donations?
I didn't think they did that.. I'd much prefer to support that...

My point is essentially any of the above thoughts could undermine a supporter's commitment to an organisation ... so just bear that in mind when new communications are being developed and maybe ask yourself some of these questions:

With in this is there anything new that we could use to proactively share with our supporters?
How could it be adapted to 'appeal' to our base? (not necessarily asking more of them)
Which of our supporters are interested in that area of work? How could we get them involved?
Are we offering an inducement in our recruitment that would be of interest to our existing supporters or will it potentially make them think we are not valuing them?

These questions are not exhaustive, but you get the idea.

Obviously where campaigns have been developed in an integrated way from the outset then the role of your existing supporters and how you will communicate to them will be a clear part of the plan. But I think the same exercise and thought process needs to be in place no matter how big or small the campaign. Whether it be a full on regional multi channel campaign or just a single insert.

Assuming that your supporters can not read and therefore would not notice what you are saying, could be quite a risky approach. Or put it an other way, by factoring in your supporters in everything you do, will make you see all the opportunities to enhance those relationships and potentially doubly benefit your recruitment activities too. That seems like a good deal to me.

Thank you for stopping by!

Does having a customer services department mean you're failing?

2011-04-20T19:25:00.000-07:00

I am being a little provocative with that question, but after calling a customer service department of a well known bank and coming off the telephone more frustrated than when I initially called, I decided that essentially the fact that many organisations have customer service teams means that they are acknowledging that things will go wrong at some point with their product or services. That they will let someone down.

But rather worse that that, I realised that many 'customer service' departments in the event of service failure actually do not have the people, systems and policies in place that actually put the customer or supporter first. In short we have a long way to go with customer care.

Before I go on, I am not basing this on just one farcical experience but it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

So 4 principles that to me would make a huge difference:

Actually listening to what a customer/supporter is actually asking for. Don't presume you know because someone starts a sentence in a certain way. From my recent experience I repeated the same thing several times, to several different people because the people I spoke to presumed to know what my issue was before taking the time to let me finish.

Tailoring what you can deliver. A big bugbear at the moment is the total inflexibility of certain companies in the face of absurdity. Though on many occasions you may not be able to give people exactly what they are asking for - it shouldn't just be about what you want to give them. There has to be some flexibility and indeed some license for customer care people to use their common sense and discretion. The people dealing with your customers / supporters every day need to be empowered to do the right thing.

If an organisation does mess up and someone calls to raise it, offer solutions to the customer or supporter. Far too many companies when they mess up then expect all the work to rectify the issue to be done by the person already inconvenienced. Even better if you know you've messed up proactively contact them and offer solutions.

Finally and this could be a little difficult, but where possible you should have a rule that if someone causes the problem / complaint then they are involved in rectifying it. From past experience as the person responsible for mailings etc but also speaking to the people who called with complaints or just upset, it was an invaluable experience. As a result, I knew the reason behind every communication and message that we sent and could explain that to anyone who called. As a consequence many supporters who started calls irate and upset finished calls happy and with some understanding.

This is not meant to be exhaustive in any way. There are libraries full of books about customer care. These are just nuances which to me would make a huge difference to even the most efficient customer service outfit. Because it is about people at the end of the day, and being able to resolve problems so well that it isn't the complaint people will share but your fantastic service.

Thank you for stopping by :o)

A place in time

2011-04-16T14:57:00.000-07:00

One of the biggest challenges we have as fundraisers is building empathy. Bridging the experience gap between the situation of our beneficiaries and that of our (potential) supporters. It is a hard thing to do particularly if you are highlighting scenarios so far removed from another person's day to day reality.

'Can you imagine...' only gets you so far because for many the mental stretch from where they are now to another situation is too much.

That's why I really liked the idea behind 'A place in Time' A short film produced by Angelina Jolie. The concept of which was to simultaneously film several countries at 12 noon on a set day for just 3 minutes.

Though the film reads like the who's who of Hollywood the idea of different people or communities sharing the same moment in time (or three), creatively, has legs particularly in raising awareness of the stark differences that exist. Whether in portraying poverty across the world or the disparity in just one country. The difference in the lives of women across the globe or showing the difference between someone living with a disability and someone who isn't. The options are endless.

It doesn't have to be a big budget production.. but could be one useful way of bridging the gap for new supporters and your work, and for existing ones, an interesting way to feedback. Or even a great way to get supporters involved by sharing their own moments in time to help others see the differences and thus helping us to make an even bigger difference in our work.

Thanks for stopping by. :O)

A walk in the clouds

2011-03-10T22:31:00.000-08:00

It is always interesting to see whether people say what they really mean or really mean what they say and some times in order to do this we have to read between the lines. And that is no different when it comes to the letters received from supporters. Both those praising your organisation and those being critical.

That's why I like word clouds. Obviously they are not an exact science but what they do do is visually show emphasis or rather frequency of any string of words you choose to enter. As a result they can be useful tools.

If you use them to scan your supporter comments each month. They could highlight some interesting trends: what supporters are liking, what they're not, themes, word's they are associating and using to describe your organisation and thus you will be able to see whether the prevalent words match what you think you are communicating.

As a filter to see how supporter focused your own communications are. Is the biggest word that appears in the copy word cloud your organisation's name rather than those words relating to your supporters or the beneficiaries of your work? If so, your copy could probably do with a little bit of work.

See whether your social media conversations are highlighting your organisation's priorities? or are multiple tweets and facebook posts concentrated on too many themes or one less than supporter engaging topic?

As I say, there is nothing scientific about them, but the clouds can show up some surprising things - things you and your organisation may want to act on or at least delve a little further into. Obviously, they are no replacement for a genuine supporter focused strategy or indeed a clear communications plan but they can help show how much you might need to develop those things or revisit what you have - which can be no bad thing.

Thanks for stopping by!

My lovely virtual bear hug...

2011-02-25T12:33:00.000-08:00

This is the wonderful 'thank you' communication I received from WSPA. A Bear's life saved because of my support.

On my 'tingle o metre' it ranked pretty high. It brought a tear to my eye, a smile to my face and a sense of pride in what had been achieved for Chowti and the other bears who have been saved from a life of pain and misery.

So what was it about this card that genuinely moved me? And it did. After all, it is clearly a mass produced card, it arrived in a standard windowed C5 envelope, the back of the card was the address carrier - no handwritten outer. On the surface of it, you'd think that actually it wouldn't 'feel' that special, but it was.

Here's why:

It was unexpected. Not the success per se - but as I often receive appeals from WSPA and updates through their supporter magazine, I wasn't expecting this stand alone piece relaying this great news. Unexpected and welcome.
The execution of it. Despite listing the things above that could be seen to detract from the personal nature of the piece I actually liked the fact that it was a good, honest piece of direct mail. At the end of the day the strongest and most important element about it was the story and the transformation that WSPA and supporters like me had helped bring about. The creative show cased that brilliantly.
The photograph of Chowti on the front said it all - beautiful image of a beautiful creature freed from its tormentors. A great photograph paints a thousand words and this one certainly did.
It was a 'thank you' and nothing else - not a thank you and... or a thank you but... just a thank you and as I have mentioned before that it is quite a rare thing.
It was supporter focused. From the thank you strap line on the envelope, headline on the card, and the short but emotive copy inside. It was about me, the supporter. This came across loud and clear but also sounded very heartfelt. After all, It is easy enough to re-focus copy to include a few more 'yous' than you would normally do but it takes more than that to make it sound genuine and genuinely supporter focused.
I opened it and read it - and this is probably the most important point. That is how I know the copy was donor focused and a heartfelt thank you, that the photo was lovely. And that Chowti is now free from pain a suffering.

So why did I open and read it? Since picking up the telephone many year's ago in response to their TV ad, I have never been disappointed. I signed up because I wanted to help end the torture and torment of animals - particularly the bear in the ad. Since then I have never doubted their commitment to what they were 'selling'. They are delivering on what I signed up to..it is as simple as that.

So of course the elements above that made the piece itself great are a good starting point, the harder part is obviously getting such communications opened in the first place. And to do that we need to ensure that we are doing what we say we will and proving it - from recruitment all the way through the on-going communications.

The card now occupies pride of place on my dresser - with photos of my family, friends and baby son. That is how much I loved it.

Thank you for stopping by!

Are your communications coming unstuck?

2011-02-14T07:11:00.000-08:00

Imagine if you will a scenario where you have finally had time to properly read the mail from the charities that you support. You are motivated to respond to the latest request for money. You go and get your wallet and fill in the donation form with your credit card details or find your cheque book and write out your cheque. So far so good.

You then go on to enclose the donation form in the Freepost envelope provided and find one or both things:

That you need to be skilled in origami to get the donation form to fit into the envelope provided and have to fold it several ways to get it in
That after (finally) enclosing the donation form you go to lick the envelope and it doesn't stick so you then have to go off to find some glue or Sellotape

Now this is another pet hate of mine. Because we as fundraisers should be breaking down the barriers to giving not creating them. And though the two issues above are not big things they could in reality make the difference between you receiving the donation or not! And I know because I have experienced them both this weekend.

I wonder, how many Freepost envelopes remain unposted because someone couldn't find or be bothered to find the Sellotape that they were going to dig out later ..but never did.

So please, a little plea. If you are going to provide envelopes to aid response then make sure they stick - just test them yourself. It isn't about buying an expensive envelope it is about providing one that does its job.

As regards the donation form, there has been much written about them, but again, it's about functionality and in the same way you look at what information is vital to capture on a donation or response form and making it as easy as possible for the person completing it - another check is whether it easily fits into the envelope you have provided. Simple.

After all, this is one occasion where 'pushing the envelope' probably doesn't apply.

Thank you for stopping by!

When cracks begin to show

2011-02-04T00:11:00.000-08:00

A little pet hate of mine both personally and professionally is when communications pretending to be personal are obviously mass produced because you can quite literally see the joins!

What I mean by that is that the personalisation i.e. name and address etc is in another font to the main bulk of the email or that the pre-printed backs of letters do not match the lasered fronts - to me it's sloppy and it can be undermining. Particularly if you have spent time and energy ensuring that the copy and messaging is right.

Now the question is do supporters notice? I can only speak for myself here.. but I do. Does it make me want to cancel my support.. No..(well not immediately) that would be an extreme reaction - but it does make me think about how much care has gone into the letter and thus how much they care about my support.

However, I have realised recently that I am more forgiving of smaller, lesser known organisations than the bigger ones and also on whether the communication is an ask or in fact a thank you.

However, my point is, there is no excuse for such lack of care in supporter communications. Most supporters know deep down that the same letter is going to many people not just them... but we can still make the effort to ensure that the chances of them being reminded of this is reduced.

Such examples as mentioned above are easily ironed out: during the test phase for emails and the laser and proof stage for letters. We just need to care enough to ensure that such things don't go out with such silly errors.

After all we want to inspire and engage our supporters. Not make them question whether we care or not.

Did you miss me?

2010-12-09T00:00:00.000-08:00

Following on from a tweet I broadcast a few days ago - I thought I would just explain myself a little and caveat it by saying that just because I am in fundraising myself - it doesn't make me any less forgiving.

I received a 'reactivation' letter or putting it in layman's terms a letter asking me to resume my support. No bad thing. Getting supporters back is part and parcel of a fundraiser's role - though I have to say personally, more effort should be invested in keeping supporters in the first place. But proceeding with the assumption that 100% retention is impossible, what we do to try and get people to support us again or indeed convince them not to stop, is a very important activity because:

(1) If it is successful then you have another supporter giving time, money and hopefully word of mouth endorsements

(2) If it isn't successful but done well, you will have left your supporter with a nice, non-guilt inducing feeling and thus if they are able to support again in the future they probably will remember the lovely experience and you will be top of their list

(3) If executed well, you will have the chance to learn a great deal about what is pleasing to your supporters and in this case what isn't, so you can potentially fix issues any problems that are undermining the supporter experience.

So, back to the letter. In my case, At the heart of the problem was that the organisation was generalising. Now if you have a database of supporters in the hundreds and thousands then obviously this is a danger but one that needs to be considered as it could be ultimately detrimental to what is trying to be achieved.

"Miss Santer, it's not the same without you" - was pretty much the first line welcoming me as I opened the envelope. A lovely sentiment and one that I would hope to be true - but the fact that I had only made one payment before cancelling and the letter took several months to arrive just made me wonder.

And I think that is so often the problem with some reactivation / recovery processes. They are implemented as an admin function with computer generated letters selected en mass - and while they remain as such rather than being an intrinsic part of the retention strategy, the process will probably never be as successful as we want it to be.

So some suggestions:

Dig a little more deeply into the data - it will tell you much of what you need to know. Who has supported for many years or just one month, the value, the frequency, what else they did during that time if at all... that way you can choose the appropriate messages and also the channel to contact them by.

Accept that some supporters may not resume regular payments - however, do monitor their other behaviour because they could be supporting in other ways - nothing more damaging than sending a we've missed you letter when they have been campaigning and giving to one-off cash appeals all the while.

Instead of assuming that someone cancelled by accident and didn't realise it (would account for a very small %) - start from the point of view that it was your organisation that somehow let them down. Which is more likely to be the case. And then try and establish dialogue to find out what the problems were and if at all possible try to address them.

If you just try to get supporters back without understanding why they left in the first place you are essentially just asking supporters to return to the same unfulfilling experience as before. Why would anyone return for that? Just more of the same! And even if they do resume, how long will they remain giving before they stop giving again?

Also look at extending reactivation process beyond direct debit non-payers - appeal givers not giving again is equally a big issue that should be better understood - yet reactivation processes in the main seem to focus on lapsing/lapsed regular givers rather than other types of supporters.

In short, use the data to send appropriate messages, if at all possible find out why they left and if it was a problem offer to resolve it, if the supporter doesn't resume regular support and that is their only support then send them a lovely thank you and 'au revoir' letter that way you leave them with a lovely sentiment. And if they have cancelled their support make sure you check their other history - communicate accordingly (mail, telephone etc) acknowledging that you know their support extends beyond a DD and how wonderful that is. That to me is a better use of personalisation.

Like any other communication - reactivation processes should be about segmentation. Who you choose to contact, by what method and with what message and caring why people are leaving you and taking the time to find out and address the causes.

Taking a little time upfront with the data will mean you can better focus your efforts and communications in the reactivation cycle and even if it doesn't result in better results immediately - the positive experience given to your departing supporters is more likely to secure their support in the future. You are just laying down the ground work now!

As an aside. The reasons for my cancelling in the first place will fill another post another time.

Thank you for stopping by and Merry Christmas!

Just some thoughts to improve on something that is already great (IMHO)

2010-12-07T00:40:00.000-08:00

I love receiving emails from Lend with care letting me know that £x amount has been repaid. Not because I am getting my money back (would gladly donate it anyway) but because the repayments are symbolic of the achievements of the people I am supporting - ultimately it signifies success and that is a wonderful thing for Akoua and for me, the person investing in her dream. Powerful stuff.

So, how can one improve on near perfection - well I have a couple of tiny suggestions which will hopefully be taken as helpful supporter feedback:

As the money is credited back - it would be great to be able to re-invest the money to assist another entrepreneur - even if it isn't £15.00. Obviously £15 is the minimum at point of sign-up but does that have to be the case when you have already started to invest? I appreciate that the aim is to encourage further investment - but hot off the back of a lovely email informing me of a loan repayment I would like to be able to click and just re-donate the amount in my account to another person even if it isn't a full £15.00, after all that is what the email suggests I can do. Of course, there are probably wireframe restrictions that I am unaware of or of the policy behind the £15 minimum - but I can tell you, it would just aid the momentum of giving and re-giving and would generate more in the longer-term.

I have seen the tweets from @kindaAngels that updates followers on who needs funding - and how far they have been funded thus far. Now this leads me onto my other suggestion. On the site there is a funded page which shows the many projects 100% complete. Great. But although there are a list of entrepreneurs with the '£ amount remaining' listed - for those with little time - it would be brilliant to see a scroll of projects near completion on the website i.e. 75% plus - that way people can swoop in and choose to add the final instalment required. This in itself would appeal to certain people - either time poor or those that want to be the person who makes the final payment. It would provide another way to select who to support and would also be a very motivating one - particularly if twitter people like @kindaAngels tweet "Akoua is 99% funded and needs just £15 to make her dreams a reality".

Anyway, love the site and what it is helping people like Akoua achieve. And my suggestions are purely coming from a user point of view - things that I intuitively expected - and thus thought I would take the time to share.

Keep up the great work!

If a picture paints a thousand words...

2010-11-23T07:30:00.000-08:00

As the song lyrics go 'if a picture paints a thousand words, then why can't I paint you..' Lovely as the sentiment is, have you ever tried to describe a picture or visual content in such a way? It poses an interesting and actually quite useful challenge.

The technique of Audio Description does just that. It is used as a way of capturing the visual elements of a production for blind or visually impaired people. It is quite a skill(as is it a valuable service) and the essence of which, I think as fundraisers we could all learn from.

So, why not challenge yourself? Have a look at some footage on your website or even take a look at a photograph that you may plan to include in a feedback piece and see whether you can describe the scene in a meaningful, motivating and descriptive way for your own audience. Verbally or even in writing.

It is not as easy as it sounds - but being able to do it could not only improve your own story telling and communications but also your understanding of what are the most meaningful elements of them for your supporters.

It is definitely worth a go!

What Christmas shopping has to do with fundraising.

2010-11-07T12:26:00.000-08:00

I was struck by a small article in the The Sunday Times Magazine this weekend which asked the question 'Is it okay to recycle presents?'

Now, I can honestly say I have never done it myself - but then I am sure I have received a recycled gift at some point - mainly because you tend to know i.e. that feeling of 'what the..., they don't know me at all..' All the more annoying for someone like me who loves to buy presents for people and actually goes to a lot of trouble in selecting gifts that I know my friends and family will love.

However, despite this being a cautionary warning ahead of your Christmas shopping it also has a very useful reminder for fundraising too.

Choosing a gift should be about empathy, about how much we understand the person we are buying for. We should first start with the person NOT with what to buy them and the same can be said about our communications to supporters. Starting with the supporter and not the communication.

Find out about them and what they want. Their interests, their likes, their dislikes. Take time to tailor messages. Produce materials that people want to receive and you will be giving the gift of information, inspiration, education, and a sense of making a difference. And as a result we may get a wonderful gift in return: happy, committed and loyal supporters.

Happy Giving!!

Ways to make your supporters 'Tingle'

2010-10-16T07:59:00.000-07:00

'Inspiration' is increasingly becoming a key motivating factor for giving - but the key challenge is knowing whether what we send to our supporters is genuinely 'inspiring'. After all, inspiration is a very subjective thing.

Some things to think about:

Do you know enough about your supporters to know what would, could, should inspire them? If not, then find out - and at every opportunity. We can never know too much about our supporters.

Knowing the difference between magic dust and hygiene factors? What does inspiration look like to your supporters? "Inspiration: the process of being mentally stimulated to do or feel something" - based on this definition to me, it is essentially everything we do as an organisation. Therefore, the most inspiration can be given by living up to the expectations we have set for our supporters. Of course the 'tingle factor' (as I like to call it) will help hugely in any communication - but it is the overall perception of your organisation that will be affected if everything else doesn't deliver and that's no matter how inspiring one piece of communication is.

What keeps you inspired? It is difficult to inspire others if you are not yourself. Inspiration should be a key part of the culture of organisations as should donor-centricity - but whether or not that is the case - it still needs to come from within. So take the time to speak to as many supporters as you can. Regularly visit the work and/or speak to as many people involved in it as possible. Empathy is great but no substitute for real closeness.

Can you see beyond the obvious? I am sure we have all waited for that fantastic case study or story because we know that it will better move, and motivate people into the action we want. But the practicality is that waiting can some times jeopardise deadlines. Therefore, it is important to view all stories like that, or at least ensure you have the skills to ensure that the most is made of every story, photograph and quote that we have. Obviously certain stories will resonate better than others - but it is a good skill to see beyond the obvious to create something that is still rather good.

Are you using the right channels? We can't inspire supporters if our communications are never opened and seen . Providing communications that people are excited about is key - but increasingly it is also about the channels chosen and ensuring the mix is right. After all the execution and delivery of your messages can be just as inspiring as the communications themselves.

Do you have a 'Tingle-o-metre'? The next time you send out a survey or feedback form to supporters - why not send out a tingle-o-metre for them to complete. That way you can ask supporters to fill in the things about your work that inspires them and mark them on a scale of what makes them 'tingle' about your work or what leaves them cold. Creatively it could be more inspiring than just a survey and it may offer some really interesting insights into what inspiration means to your supporters - rather than what you think it is.

Inspire away!

Why family focused functionality could create more supporters

2010-09-14T04:10:00.000-07:00

I’m a big fan of micro-finance sites and more recently Lendwithcare has captured my imagination.

However, while on my ‘family is important in fundraising' crusade - it made me think about the functionality on such sites and why currently they don’t allow for a family to sign up i.e. Family Fortunes style 'The Santer Family' with each individual member then having their own portfolio of lending.

I am not sure what technically would be required to see this (and it may be financially prohibitive) - but I think it would be a lovely thing to have a family record of the contribution, while offering a great way to promote individual giving to younger family members - even if it is them just being initially motivated to donate their pocket money to one of these wonderful entrepreneurs, and seeing the impact being made.

Obviously some causes and products offer more of an educational element than others in terms of a family context - Child Sponsorship is a great example - but then maybe that is another area of development for charities to build on so that their cause or products will appeal family wide and sites like lendwithcare and other such models could be a perfect mechanism and platform.

For the record it's Mr and Mrs (or Ms)

2010-08-20T12:08:00.000-07:00

Now for fear of sounding like a boring 'new parent'- the one thing that has become even more important to me is the idea of the family unit, what that means but also what that could achieve. And here, I am talking in fundraising terms.

From experience, I know that joint records of Mr & Mrs or even Mr and Ms often behave in a different way to Mr or Miss in the singular, possibly because of the joint nature of the relationship and dare I say the bank account.

In truth though, I don't think we pay enough attention to the joint units on our database - either in the way we identify and target messages or in a way that actually appeals to both parties.

For many charities the only acknowledgement of the two entities on a communication would be 'Dear Mr and Mrs Smith,....

As fundraisers, I think we are missing a great opportunity to engage both parties equally, or at least find out a little more about the dynamics of these joint records and what they would like both collectively and as individuals.

By being more proactive at looking at the life stages of those families on the database would allow better tailoring of the offers made. After all, as time passes and families become 'empty nests' or retire people's attitudes and indeed approach to giving changes as does the amounts of money that people have to donate to charities and good causes.

It may be a little direct, but I think there could be an argument for sending a well crafted letter to Mr and Mrs (Smith) and asking them if we could do more to appeal to both their needs and interests or even adding something on the welcome questionnaire that caters for joint records. I can't see it doing any harm and if done right could be really appreciated as good supporter care.

It is of course likely that Mr Smith has different interests to Mrs Smith based on their own life experiences - but they share a portfolio of giving so we do have the power in the ways and what we communicate, to influence where we are on their list of support by ensuring that we show impact and offer strong feedback.

If we can appeal to both parties individually and as a couple then we improve our chances of ensuring that we are number 1 on their charity list - obviously the aim for all of our supporters.

What would Goldilocks have done without 'just right' ?

2010-08-02T00:00:00.000-07:00

While in godmother mode recently, I was strolling through the children's section of a book shop and there was Goldilocks and the three bears.

As my adult self flicked through the book I was reminded how much I loved that book as a child (probably because I love bears), but I remember thinking to myself what if there wasn't a 'just a right' for Goldilocks? That there was only two beds to choose from or two bowls of porridge for her to try? Would she have chosen any of them or just left - or is there always a 'just right' whatever the range of choice or is a decision made irrespective?

However, I was reminded of my Goldilocks thought recently while reading a really interesting book by Dan Ariely called Predictably Irrational. Essentially, first part of the book explains the idea of relativity and how decisions are based on how the options we have are presented in relation to others.

Now many a marketing offer is based on this psychology - and if you look out for them they are quite obvious - like subscription offers, but how much of this psychology do we try and test in our fundraising?

Recently raised by Craig Linton on twitter asked the twitterverse for ideas around the revamp of his organisation's donation form. He received some suggestions and recommendations. Now I was one of the people that offered up my ten pence worth - on the basis of the importance of a strong case for support being linked to the ask prompts - but would 3 prompts result in a 'just right' scenario for supporters better than 5 prompts?

Equally - how we present a regular giving ask in a script or mailing i.e. 'for less than a cost of a news paper...' or 'for the cost of half a chocolate bar you could...' etc how effective are these comparisons in helping supporters see the relative worth of the ask in real-life context? After all they are still very well used but are they actually effective?

I would be really interested to know if anyone has actually done any real testing on this in their fundraising recently - if you are happy to share.

Thank you.

When is relevant irrelevant?

2010-07-19T00:00:00.000-07:00

I was talking to a couple of friends recently who over a quiet dinner, both relayed their days from hell. Though the situations were quite different the problems in both cases related to a failure in a process and ultimately the choice of communication.

Essentially in both examples, email requests were sent by their staff members, high priority for an important matter and for whatever reason they weren't actioned. The results were disgruntled people, a delay to the service, complaints, and some repercussions at a higher level and a review of the current procedure.

What I thought was interesting was the steadfast reliance to just one mode of communication - and not necessarily the most appropriate or relevant.

This got me thinking about how we as charities communicate with our supporters and sometimes I think that too readily we choose one way, whether or not we are getting a response or not or because we always do it that way.

Equally sometimes we don't take into consideration as quickly as we might what is the most appropriate mode of communication for the message we are sending.

Thus we are probably not as strategic as we could be about trying to capture as many of the personal details as possible to give us more choice in how we can communicate.
And we certainly need to give more thought to the various channels open to us and how the use of these may change as the relationship develops. In the same way they do for us in our personal lives.

For example:

Q1. You want a friend to look after your beloved pet while you go away for the weekend - would you (a) text them to ask them to look after your treasured pet (b) write them an email (c) get on the phone?

Q2. You are at work and the light above your desk has gone and is flashing and making you feel a little queasy - would you (a) email facilities team letting them know about your strip lighting (b) give them a call to let them know (c) pop-down and just mention it?

Now there are no right or wrong answers to the questions above (though some would get you a quicker more effective response than others) - and equally I would say that the answers chosen would depend on a number of things: how good a friend is it, have you asked them to look after your pet before, do they live close by, do they need time check their diary several week's in advance, do they constantly text or are they always forgetting their phone? Or with facilities department - where are they in the building? Two floors away or 14 floors away, are they particularly busy at the moment due to staff holidays or sickness? You see what I mean?

The point is, there are variables that should probably be considered for all our requests to supporters too.

Recently I had the pleasure of collecting the IOF award for best use of the telephone for an emergency campaign. Which asked ActionAid Child Sponsors linked to a region of Pakistan whether in the emergency they would allow us to derestrict their support to enable a quicker response on the ground. The response was overwhelming and I was thrilled that we won.

But when the situation was originally being discussed there was an assumption that it would be a mailing because that is one of the main channels we use to send out our emergency communications.

For me however, there were a number of factors that needed to be weighed up:
It was an emergency, people would be worried about their own sponsored children (a letter no matter how well crafted would possibly raise more questions than answer), the request was urgent and we wanted to get the attention of as many people as possible, it was a potentially sensitive subject and required time for explanation if people had questions about their support, their child even our emergency response.

Therefore, the campaign was much more suited to the telephone and it had the desired affect. Allowing us to speak to our supporters, reassure them where needed and ultimately get them to understand why we were asking for what we were and the difference it would make to the people of Pakistan.

I appreciate that we are often limited by only having certain supporter details and thus there is only one route open to us. However, if we ensure that data capture of key contact information is part of the wider strategy for our supporter communications and look at it as a way of enabling us to better communicate to our supporters - then it is a worthwhile effort.

Of course our supporters will soon let us know if they don't want to be communicated via this means or that..and of course we should give them a choice - but if we have the choice to start with and choose the appropriate channel with the right communication based on their support and the other information we know about them - then I think we may also find the number of 'don't mail me or email me or phone me' exclusions could go down.

Relevant communications are all very well and good but at the end of the day they are only relevant if they get seen, read and hopefully acted upon. Therefore, how we choose to communicate these messages can be just as vital as the messages themselves.

A big thank you to Ethicall in Bristol for doing such a great job on the campaign.

The power of a 60 second critique..

2010-07-12T10:18:00.000-07:00

Over the weekend, an insert I have seen before several times dropped out of the Guardian. I always have a look - but today my boyfriend beat me to it.

A little later - checking that he hadn't put it in the recycling pile, he asked me what I thought.

Now, the conversations I usually have with him about such things are always interesting because other than his voluntary work, his work is a million miles from the not-for-profit sector

and he usually comes at things from a very different perspective (usually a legal one) to the point that we can disagree quite strongly.

The insert in question is the UNICEF 'Please Pick Up' which I think visually is really compelling. But I am always interested to see what non fundraising people think. So with some devil's advocacy thrown in...the conversation went something like this:

Me: "What do you think of it?"

Peter: "Powerful photo and message - but it was ruined by the amount of copy inside it - unnecessary. Too much and not saying anything."

Basically a page of copy giving context and making the ask for £2 per month - several times (as he pointed out).

Me: "Don't you want to read about the what UNICEF is doing and the case for support to make the decision to support or not?"

Peter: "No, you don't need it - no child should be in that position. That's enough of a story."

Me: "But doesn't it tell you how you can help children like him and what is needed?"

Peter: " No - just goes on about £2 a month, probably not helping the little boy at all.

It's all about the organisation and nothing about how I will be making a difference specifically AND the copy font is far too small for anyone to find it comfortable to read (considering the size of the insert actually quite true). The original impact of the photo is weakened by the text."

Me: "Are you going to sign-up?"

Peter: "If I do, would need to know a bit more about where my donation would actually be going and what impact it would make - it's pretty vague."

Now this conversation took probably about a minute and hardly a detailed critique - but it was clear that Peter was not convinced. Now this is just one person's perspective - but it is still valid because for him there is something in the way of his support - and it could be easily rectified.

Now I am guessing that this is a pretty successful insert for UNICEF because I have seen it before, and I wish them the best of luck in their recruitment. But it made me wonder whether, despite the relative success of our banker communications, we do enough to test them in order to make sure they are as strong as they can be and I don't just mean the sign-up rates but also on-going retention figures.

And just importantly, thinking that all charities should probably have a Peter or a group of them to call on - ideally before work goes out, just to check whether we are ticking the necessary boxes with our advertising - which would be no bad thing at all.

Sorry...but thank you seems to be the hardest word

2010-07-04T13:24:00.000-07:00

Now in my day to day job as the Head of Retention and Development as well as a supporter of many charity organisations, I am frequently stunned by the communications I receive and read - but quite often not in a good way.

There are many elements that could and should be included in a supporter communication to make them as effective and engaging as possible - but the one I lament the absence of more than any are the words or at least sentiment of Thank you.

Now to me it isn't rocket science - far from it - it is one of the simplest ways to show appreciation yet it is still the most underused.

Without our supporters we couldn't do what we do. Yet why do so many communications and additional requests for support not start by thanking supporters for what they already do. Even on a practical level, acknowledging their support up front and thanking them for it would make any additional request much easier to make after all.

So a plea, the next time you are sending an email or mailing etc asking for them to take part in an event you are running or asking for support for an appeal, please check to ensure you acknowledge them for what they already do - with a big Thank you!

For those to which I am already preaching to the converted - the next thing to do is to ensure that everyone that is involved in any production of supporter communications also understands this and has bought into it. It is an organisational wide buy-in you need - otherwise you and your team may be the only ones sending thank you infused communications - with other communications undermining all your hard work.

Of course there should be additional parts of your supporter programme that are just thank you. Not thank you and or thank you but... but a wonderfully celebratory, unmistakably clear thank you only. But for everything else you communicate there is no reason to ever not include it.

THANK YOU!

All is fair in love and supporter relationships

2010-06-07T00:00:00.000-07:00

I was reminded of a presentation I gave to my international colleagues last year in order to share with them key learning about our UK supporters and why we all have a role in keeping our supporters engaged and supporting us.

One of the most successful and indeed entertaining parts of the session was when I asked the audience what they thought were the main reasons for relationships failing.

- Infidelity
- leading separate lives
- nothing in common any more
- lies
- love letters found for another person..

There was much laughter and comic answers during this session - but my point was that like personal relationships - it is similar things that cause our supporter relationships to falter and end.

So though this isn't new, I think it is a useful reminder.

7 tips to help keep a supporter relationship alive:

1. Make time for your supporters This is an obvious one - but if you don't then you don't get to know your supporters and what they like, don't like and of course what they are interested in. This is even more important in today's multi-media connected world - where people are exposed to tens of thousands of messages a day - so it is even more important to ensure what you are offering is what your supporters are interested in.

2. Keep listening and talking Without communication most relationships are pretty much dead. Two ships that pass in the night is all you will end up being. Actively encouraging your supporters to feedback and tell you what they think is vital. Charities also need to respond actively to this feedback and use it as an opportunity to build dialogue.

3. Show your love and appreciation regularly I cannot stress the importance of thanking your supporters enough - and that is just the start. The other key element is ensuring you are not making excessive demands on your supporters. Quite often we can be so busy targeting certain supporter groups because they have done x,y and z for us in the past.. that we just reward their generosity with just more and more requests.

4. Show you know them Data, data, data - for this one it is crucial that your data is up-to-date and accurate - in the same way that appropriate personalisation and little touches can enhance any relationship - the wrong name, date, personal detail could tear apart any sense that you know or care anything about your supporters.

5. Don't take the relationship for granted This is about keeping the relationship fresh and alive. Not just what you are saying and doing but how this is being conveyed. If everything starts to feel like a conveyor belt of churned communications - with no link or narrative - then you might find yourself with a note stating they are leaving you.

6. Surprise them We all like nice surprises - and supporter relationships should not be any different. In the same way people learn and respond to information in different ways: visually, auditory and kinesthetic - creatively we can ensure that we mix up the communications our supporters receive - offering a multi sensual experience or even better, finding out what a supporter's preferred mode of communication is and appealing to that. Essentially if you tell someone who is kinesthetically motivated that you love them - then it won't mean as much as if you actually show them!

7. Have an open mind to a fling Now, before you think I have lost my mind - let me qualify this by saying that what I mean is even the most impromptu and unlikely relationship could turn out to be the love of your life - and the same can be said for supporters. The important thing is that no matter how a supporter arrives at your door you need to ensure that there are systems in place to ensure that the quality follow-up is there in the same way it would be for a planned recruitment campaign. A lovely thank you and a warm personal follow-up could easily transform a fling into a long-term relationship.

Finally - though I am not going to make this tip 8, the recovery / win back stage is also critical but may I say from my own experience very much neglected.

The truth is if done well, the recovery process will provide useful information that could help restore and revive some of the failing relationships and just as importantly help to ensure that the same mistakes are not repeated in the future.

It's what you leave behind that counts..

2010-05-30T08:57:00.000-07:00

Now, I know the title of this post could sound a bit like a (poor) legacy campaign message - but actually it's not. It is essentially the key message of an organisation that I stumbled across this morning called stuff your rucksack. And I have to say I was really taken with it.

Basically it is a small charity offering a meaningful role for people who love to travel and who care about the countries, communities and people they meet.

As someone who works for ActionAid who often has the privilege to visit communities in the countries where we work overseas - I have frequently known that feeling of wanting to make a tangible difference there and then - and often, as the work of ActionAid demonstrates, it can be the simplest thing that can make the most difference.

What really stands out for me though is the fact that stuff your rucksack is giving people an opportunity to support projects and work as part of their own life plans, not an add-on or an interruption. It is offering something that can be integrated as part of the planning and thus someone's actual travel journey. With the benefits for everyone involved being profound and lasting far beyond the duration of the trip.

Obviously this is the raison d'etre for this organisation - but I think it is what every charity should be striving for. As the site states, 'One day I want people to say: ‘Have I got my visa? Have I got my passport? Have I checked the Stuff Your Rucksack site?'

Now, that is a supporter journey I do like the sound of.

Can I have a bath of beans with that welcome pack..?

2010-05-23T09:25:00.001-07:00

I have recently been reading about the new breed of extreme adventurers for whom the traditional is not just too easy but apparently not exciting enough.

You just have to read about Dan Martin and his 18 month round the world triathalon plan that will see him swimming the Atlantic just as a starter. What used to be a challenge for many is now seen as old hat. An ascent of Everest or a trek to the South Pole? Nah! Been there done that or rather too many have been there and done that! And I guess the point is that we need to make fundraising more exciting and relevant too.

In Jeff Brooks - The curse of unremarkable fundraising post he quite rightly laments at the lack of imagination in some fundraising and indeed the apparent desire of many organisations to remain attached to fundraising models that in some cases aren't even yielding growth.

For me, though a great start, it isn't good enough to just give people a choice in what they support but we should also be looking at giving supporters a choice in how they choose to support that work, cause or project.

So why for example can't someone sit in a bath of beans if they want to and raise money for their monthly committed giving? I am sure if asked, many organisations would accept the income but is it actively promoted and encouraged and more importantly supported?

Now that isn't to say that our supporters aren't doing this kind of thing all the time but such fundraising is usually confined to incremental support of events that require thousands of pounds of sponsorship such as a marathon place or an overseas trek.

Now whether or not an approach like this is or isn't suitable for smaller products and offers would need to be tested - but broadening the horizon to how we enable supporters to give to your cause could and should be explored.

The benefits for example of an approach like this could include:

Inherent multiplier effects - friends of friends of friends all getting exposure to your cause
Positive ways to engage supporters in an active way
Different and varied ways to acknowledge what the supporter has done and to share this with other supporters (I can imagine the great content being generated)
To offer an opportunity to engage supporters who may feel they can't afford a regular gift the standard way - but could be inspired to be creative to fundraise in other ways and have some fun in doing so

This is just one example of what I am talking about i.e. giving people choices and support to raise and give money their way - and of course there are downsides. My point is we need to just be a little more adventurous about what we offer that will appeal to the fundraising adventurers out there - and possibly attract a new breed of supporters entirely.

When ten minus three equals thirteen!

2010-05-11T08:00:00.000-07:00

Just caught up on a fascinating article in the Times Eureka Supplement last week - the cultural context of maths and the different ways the world counts. Despite a sense that counting is a universally agreed method - tell that to the Suyá people of the Amazon.

If you had ten fish and gave three away - how many would you have left? Most people in the western world would say 7. To the Suyá tribesman asked that question the answer is in fact 13. To him if he gave 3 fish away to his brother, his brother would have to pay double back in return - so to him it isn`t a loss but actually a gain.

“Why is it that ‘giving’ is always seen as ‘minus’ for white people?” another Suyá asked the researcher in the article.

A good question. And In relation to charitable giving probably one of the biggest in terms of how our supporters see their support and indeed what we as fundraisers are doing day-to-day to ensure they feel they are getting more in return than they are giving.

One day it would be great to see a charitable donation actually appear as a credit on the bank statement...instigated by our own supporters perhaps? But until that point it certainly made me think that if giving was seen in the same way as the people of the Amazon saw it - even more of the world would be happy to 'give' to charity. The fact that as fundraisers we have some control of this is a very positive thought indeed.

From Threepenny opera to £5 per month direct debit..

2010-04-24T13:13:00.000-07:00

I like opera..though I don't go nearly as often as I'd like. But as I was looking at the English National Opera website this weekend, I was struck by something.

No, it wasn't a great piece of functionality or something whizzy (though I am sure there are examples of both) - it was something much more simple and dare I say obvious than that - a chance to listen to some of the music in the featured opera.

Now what's the big deal? Well actually I've not seen Tosca yet and for me there was a chance to
listen to three little snippets.. an opportunity to get a sense of the experience I was thinking of buying into. For others who have seen Tosca many times before it's an opportunity to remind them of why they should see this particular production and pay £80+ for a ticket.

Either way, music and performance is what they are selling, so it makes sense to showcase it and use it as a way to persuade or remind an opera goer of what they would be hearing on the night.

Just out of curiosity I then randomly visited several charity websites - the reason really was to see whether any of them had something similar that was essentially offering a 'preview' of what supporters could get /achieve from supporting the cause in an immediate and easily digestible format i.e. without reading the entire website.

Though there was some great content on display: video, photos, stories, games and campaigns very few focused on giving the supporter a feeling of what they personally could be making possible, achieving, receiving and feeling from supporting charity x - all in a bite size chunk.

Of course summing up a cause and giving a prospective supporter a role in that support in a clear and immediate way (whatever the medium) is probably more challenging than selling an opera. But my point is that when we are producing content for anything, that we do so with the supporter in mind rather than merely relying on it being a moving story, or photo.

Without contextualising the content into something relevant to the people reading your communication or visiting your site - it will just remain a great story or great example of your work - it won't bring the supporter any closer to that work or set the scene for the great experience you offer (hopefully) and that you want supporters to buy into for £xx per month.

That's the challenge - a supporter focused elevator pitch - though one I think is well worth the time and thought to crack.

A fundraising tale of two cities...

2010-03-27T10:59:00.000-07:00

Whilst on the metro during a recent trip to paris, a couple got on. Nothing odd in that. At first they looked like any other 60 year old couple that you might see across the world and all seemed to be just so. Then the tambourine and the violin started up.

The reaction that followed was no different to what you would see on the London underground. So as the first rendition started - something from Carmen - I noticed a lot of people shift uncomfortably, avert their eyes and just looked desperately for an escape route. For me, my first reaction was to actually check to see whether I had any spare Euros.

Now, of course a huge assumption was being made by the whole carriage. The assumption being that this couple were playing music for money and it was a fair assumption. For me, what was quite interesting was that despite how lovely the music was, I couldn't enjoy it or engage with it until I knew I could afford the experience.

By the time the couple performed 'La Vie en Rose' the people on the metro were much more receptive and as the hat went around our Euros went in.

Back in London and on the 'misery' line just yesterday, I had a similar experience. This time it was a man in his mid twenties, a little scruffy and dirty in appearance got on. This time no music was played, just a heartfelt plea for some 'change' to help him with a hostel for the night. For many the reaction was the same as in Paris; no eye contact, uncomfortable glances and ipod volume up.

Now just a few observations from my Paris and London tales in relation to fundraising:

With so many communications coming at supporters these days - there is probably an assumption that everything is an 'ask' of some kind. Now this is all very well if it is, but if the communication you're sending is a feedback or just a plain old 'Thank you, you are fantastic!' Then unless we do more to make that clear at the outset - the likelihood of these vital communications being seen is very small.
Likewise. If we are asking for money, we need to be more upfront about it and not cloak it as something else. People who support you know you will ask them for money at some point and if done correctly and well it isn't a problem.
Be relevant - now this is an obvious point - but it was made even clearer to me when discussing the French buskers with my sister, who said that she was moved to donate just as much about the music choice as the quality of the music being played. Not to say she wouldn't have given if they were playing Pachebel's Canon or whatever, but actually the music was a motivating factor. So we can't underestimate the worth of finding out as much as we can about our supporters and going to them with information and areas of work in which we already know they are interested.

The London experience showed a bit more of the 'we've seen and heard it before' cynicism so whether this man was genuinely in need or not, for many it was nothing new and many remained unconvinced. I think often we are guilty of doing this with appeals. For our supporters it is probably all too frequently what has been seen before. The challenge therefore for us is about making these 'asks' more innovative and dare I say genuinely urgent - after all putting urgent on something doesn't make it so.

The other difference between Paris and London was also around the concept of knowing what your money was for. In Paris people were paying for the entertainment, the music and even if the couple were as in need of the money as the man in London, that's not really why they were giving. For the man in London faced with the cynicism around homelessness etc his case for support was not enough to reassure the many that the money was going to where he said it was needed. Donor fatigue? Just not an original case for support? all these things need to be considered in relation to your communications plan.

Finally the biggest observation from these underground travels is that people really don't seem to like being put on the spot to make such decisions as to whether something justifies a donation or not...of course people still do - as I did, but it is about control and choosing when and how. People are much happier with that.

And just because it is such a great song and it reminds me of Paris - enjoy!

Happy Easter!

Do you know what your supporters are doing?

2010-03-15T12:39:00.000-07:00

Oscar Wilde once said that a cynic is a man that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing... now I am not saying that all of us in the fundraising world are cynics and in fact a healthy dose of cynicism helps us keep our wits about us.

However, in some cases I do think we as fundraisers can be a little prone to put price before value i.e. we can judge an activity on its cost and income rather than the true value an activitiy can yield both from the supporter and the value to the supporter.

Take appeals for example - they will have a clear spend attached and a corresponding income target based on xx number of supporters being mailed and xx% response rate and of course in simple terms these are the main measures of success.

However, one dimension of such activities that we don't seem to be so focused on is how we measure the bi-product or rather bi-behaviour of such activities. Instead we focus on the behaviour we have planned for and are expecting. And really - since when do people behave completely as we would expect?

We know that measuring any response to recruitment requires a recognition that people today engage multi modally across channels - so having seen a DRTV ad they are as likely (if not more so) to follow-up on-line as they are of phoning or texting.

The point is the same can probably be said for how people choose to 'respond' to your communications. As we acknowledge the value of integrated channels in recruitment for example - we probably need to apply the same logic in measuring response to supporter activities.

So, next time you run an appeal or any activity for that matter, do some digging in the data to see how many people who didn't formally respond to your appeal chose to do something else in the same time period while bypassing your donation form or response device. Who:

Increased their dd payment permanently instead of making a credit card payment

Chose to take up another offer or product instead of sending in a cheque

Decided to leave a legacy in their will to you instead of uplifting their DD for one month only....

Sent in a donation using an old donation form ie not the one for your most recent appeal?

Now part of the solution is of course ensuring that your donation form / response device is more than just a mechanism for a one of gift - but facilitates any number of ways people may want to respond to one of your requests for money or time. By doing so and ensuring upfront that all parts or methods of response are part of the data capture and thus part of the on-going reporting, means you would be capturing all of this information automatically.

That said though there are certain behaviours that it is more difficult to monitor like the example earlier of someone choosing to use an old donation form to respond to your latest request. It is probably more common than we realise and yet often the only way you may find out about these responses is when you see money showing against an old activity in the monthly accounts.

Meanwhile without a proactive eye out for such eventualities the likelihood could be that the thank you letter relating to that old appeal has gone out with little relevance to the reason why the supporter gave this time.

I won't labour the point to heavily about the importance of the donation form and making it work better, because everything from fonts, ask levels and cancel your dd asks have been shared already at queerideas at askdirect or at Sofii - and much can be learned from all of them in helping to perfect your form or at least to test.

However, what I am ultimately suggesting is that in order to truly measure the value of an activity we need to look beyond the ROI . We should look at all the ways your supporters are behaving in response to any given activity - even if indirectly and ensuring that processes and triggers are in place to monitor them. That way we will see the wider value of an activity and will be better informed to make decisions about their future direction and strategy.

Like a back of a bus

2010-02-20T10:38:00.000-08:00

The other day I found myself running for a bus - which typically started to leave as I just got there. A back of a bus moment..

I decided to wait for the next one - it was cold, it was dark and I was a little early for where I needed to be. Time passed and several glances at the bus timetable later - 45 minutes had passed - I was now cold, a little peeved, now late and no closer to where I needed to be.

Why did I decide to wait ?
Why didn't I just start walking after fictional bus 1 and 2 failed to materialise?

As I pondered these questions, I was reminded of an article I had read some year's ago about the cognitive tricks our mind plays - how we reason and take decisions. Take bus stop lingering - the decision to stay rather than walk is often not just down to shoes or weather - but what you have already invested, in my case 45 mins of time.

So as I waited.. I realised that waiting for a bus rather than walking - was quite a good analogy for fundraising communications and the supporter experience.

My bus stop ponderings:

Bus timetables are both a wonderful and a terrible thing - on one hand you know there is a level of service in place (in theory) and that it provides a guide or estimate of the type of service you are likely to get. On the other hand - the sight of one, establishes expectations of the service being offered, which if not met will lead very quickly to dissatisfaction and frustration. So when people sign up to support your cause you had better be aware of what you are offering and what expectations are being raised - and be sure that you are delivering on them.

The journey for me started even before I arrived at the bus stop - and therefore judgement started before I even got on the bus - doubly compounded by the fact the bus was late. With any supporter relationship the same can be said of everything about your offer - therefore it is important to consider the quality of every aspect of your programme. Not just one part. Questions to ask include whether the rest of the communications a supporter receives are as good and relevant as the ones specially engineered for the welcome process? Or that the excitment and messages and content that recruited someone to your cause initially, are carried on throughout the relationship?

And then consider if you will finally getting on the bus only for you to be stuck in dreaded traffic because gas and water companies have dug up the same road again within days of each other. Another analogy this time for poorly coordinated communications internally from departments all wanting their share of the supporters in-box or door mat without any sense of what this may feel like to the supporters receiving them and just as damaging potentially conveying the lack of priorities in your organisation.

As a Londoner - gripes about fares and increasing travel costs are pretty standard - but this is more about value for money. Fundraisers frequently use Return on Investment as a measure of activities or campaigns - yet rather interestingly we rarely look at this in relation to returns of our supporters' investment into us - whether it be financial, time, emotion, commitment, reputation or all of them. We don't acknowledge their contributions as an investment - they have just 'given a donation' or 'taken an action' - yet investment is a word that really conveys a vested interest and any communication to them should clearly convey what their support has made or is making possible. Whether this could be approached creatively in 'investment' language could be interesting to test - particularly if someone is considering leaving you - but that is another post for another time.

My bus eventually arrived and the bus driver mitigated any grumpiness I had by being happy and cheery but apologetic. This leads rather nicely onto the importance of supporter care in all of this and more importantly, proactive supporter care. So, for example if a supporter is expecting a report or feedback that is going to be late - then tell them, and tell them before they phone you asking where it is. Simple philosophy again - but can make such a difference to a supporter's expectations but also how they view your organisation.

It's amazing what occurs to you while waiting for a bus - but some small things to think about that will go a long way to ensure much happier passengers in the longer term.

By the way, some clever people have actually worked out the maths of waiting for a bus (if you are interested).

Back to the Future..and back again.

2010-02-05T13:02:00.000-08:00

I have always loved the film ‘Back to the Future’ – the one about 80s teenager Marty McFly being transported back to 1955 in a plutonium-powered DeLorean time machine.

Having watched the film again recently - this time travelling business got me wondering and I think we probably could do a bit more of it in the fundraising world – and a perfect use for it – is in the development of the Supporter Journey.

Now ‘supporter journey’ is a much (over) used phrase – and though the detail will vary across each organisation depending on products, audiences, segmentation and communication permutations and possibilities, ultimately it is about clearly mapping out a meaningful journey for your supporters in order to maximise engagement and value.

However, from experience it seems there is tendency to see communications planning in a very linear fashion, getting from point A to point B.

A pretty typical example could be:

• There needs to be x number of feedbacks – because that is what we tell people they will receive as part of their support

• x number of retention / stewardship communications – because of course we want to thank them and feedback on what their support is achieving

• x number of supporter magazines – we all have them – though some purposes are clearer than others..

• x number of satisfaction surveys and opportunities for people to tell us what they want in terms of frequency and type of communications - (within the parameters of the data systems we operate in)

• x number of asks – response to which will take them off on to different pathways etc

The results when mapped can look like an ordinance survey map – and though at the end we may have a map of what people could receive depending on their preferences I am not sure that we will really get supporters to where we want them to be and more importantly get them to where they want to be with their relationship with us?

At ActionAid we have many thousand child sponsors – but can I say that they each have had the same experience? Feel the same about us? Or are at the same stage in their relationship with us just by virtue of the fact that they receive the same communications. Yet this seems to be the assumption to many a journey or communications plan. We try to plan what we think is best without really looking at what we want to achieve.

We need to take our imagination and our vision at least 5 years into the future and decide what it is we want our supporters to be doing, feeling and saying about our cause, and then work back from that point.

By doing this it will help ensure that:

• A network of communications are developed and introduced to better ensure that this vision is achieved.

• Key communications are developed with a very specific function and need from the start – because in knowing what we want to achieve or engender 2, 3, 5 years down the line will mean that we can ensure everything from subject matter, tone, look and feel of the communications will ensure that each communication is working towards that.

• Sharing this back to the future strategy in all creative briefs to agencies will ensure the wider strategic imperative for each appeal or feedback is clear and understood – not just the isolated targets for each activity.

• In the event we offer complete choice, we will be able ensure that all communications a supporter has opted in to receiving, again achieve what they must to meet the needs of the supporters. The fundraising equivalent of a balanced diet no matter how few the ingredients.

• It will give us a reason to time travel regularly in order to ensure that what we are trying to achieve is also taking on the intelligence and learnings of the markets and audiences that we are working with.

What I am sharing here is quite obvious - in fact it is pretty standard strategic planning - I am just often surprised by what is often a tactical approach taken to the planning of supporter communications - when it is one of the most important elements of ensuring that supporters are happy, stay with us and tell their friends about us.

But if you needed more proof that time travel is possible then take a look at this

What I learnt about 'thank you' from my Aunty Violet.....

2009-12-21T13:50:00.000-08:00

Up until she passed away, I wrote to my Great Aunt Violet every week. Just a little note asking how she was and an update on how things were with me and the family.

She was probably the only person I did write to with any regularity but as I think back.. I had written to my aunt for almost my entire life - putting pen to ink smudged paper even before I could complete a full sentence.

Every birthday, Easter, Christmas..without fail, she would send me a gift.

Thoughtful presents and so reliable that you could set your hallmark clock by their arrival. Once the time passed I would sit down and pen a little note of thanks to Aunt Vi. Obviously when I was younger this took a little more work from my mum and the note was probably something like

Dear Aunt Violet

Thank you for the pretty necklace. Mummy put it on for me.

Lots of Love

Amanda xxxxxx

As I grew older I was able to realise and see my aunt as a special someone in my life - the content of my little notes grew and developed... it wouldn't just be a thank you, but also about why the gift was so important i.e. thanks for remembering that I liked Duran Duran - they are my favourite group at the moment..or something equally as insignificant - but to me meant the world.

The point of my little tale is really as a reminder that a thank you communication is a crucial element of communication plans and should be so much more than an admin function that punctuates a gift that has been received, but instead evidence of on-going narrative and relationship building.

Like with Aunt Vi, my initial letters were very much about the act of thanking - but I didn't really know her - they said what was needed and it was heartfelt, but as my knowledge of her grew and so did our relationship the letter became a thank you and so much more, an opportunity to share my world and her to share hers.

I have read a number of posts recently that state various advice and tips on thanking and I would agree with all of it.

There are indeed many ways to ensure that the content of the thank you has the right balance and is something that engages the donor and reaffirms their decision to donate to your worthwhile cause as a good decision and actually thanks them. There is some great advice to be found here on SOFII (you should register if you haven't already) and here with a great check list.

Where I think we are not going far enough is in how we use the Thank you as a way of demonstrating that we actually do know the person to whom we are writing. Often thank you letters sound like they are to strangers. Yet before we have got to that point of sending one, we have jumped through all nature of production and data hoops to prove the exact opposite.

We personalise appeals to segments of one, we quote how long people have supported, we play back key information about the nature of their support, we even personalise donation forms (and I don't mean with just names and address and SRN). We are becoming cleverer about pulling in pertinent information in order to build relationships which will help to solicit a certain response, most frequently a donation - but then the thank you is produced and it remains for many a rehash of the appeal they have seen and responded to.. and I think we can do better than that.

Ultimately, as our relationships develop with supporters so should the thank you - so much so, that this approach should be based on the entire value of their support not necessarily purely financial and not merely for a one-off gift. So some things to consider:

What is the entire nature of this supporter's relationship with you - ok - they have given £xx to your recent appeal but chances are they have done so much more too - which is not necessarily ever acknowledged. Is this the time? Or what other opportunities should and could be used to do this?
What is the best way to thank this person? The phone is a great way to thank someone and get useful feedback into the motivations of why they gave - but you need to ensure that you manage expectations

Once you have set the standard of the thank you i.e. personal call or hand-written letter from chief exec to those who gave over £xxx amount - you should probably think about how these people will feel about any less personal letters in the future. After all - their overall support won't have diminished even if their one off gift may be a little less next time.

As this is a labour of love for me at the moment, I would like to caveat this post with the fact that what I am suggesting is not straight forward. I know. There are often many systems and processes in the way and I am not just talking about the letter going over to another page.

My point is that we have to start somewhere. By recognising that we can do this a whole lot better and starting to look at thank you communications as a key to your development and retention strategy not merely as a letter, would be a great place to start.

Thank you :O).

PS Wouldn't it be great if there was an actual award dedicated to this kind of stewardship - I for one, would be very proud to win that award at the IOF!