December 2007               

INSIDE...

1. Hands On...Seven fundraising myths
     By Bob Knight

2. Hands On...Seven fundraising "myths?" Not so fast!
     By Mal Warwick, Editor

3. Where's Mal?

4. Spotlight...Hospitals in the mail
     By Managing Editor Deborah Block and Paul Karps

5. Blogs!

6. Answerman...Five tips for using personalization 
     By Peter Schoewe

7. Good/Bad!
     By Jeff Brooks

8. Online...Measuring e-mail performance
     By Rick Christ

9. Ask Mal...Fake surveys

10. Copy Corner...Bill's message
      By Managing Editor Deborah Block and Paul Karps

11. Tips!
      By Ivan Levison

12. Stats
 

1. Seven fundraising myths

By Bob Knight

Mama Cass didn’t choke to death on a ham sandwich. The cotton batten in pill bottles isn’t there for reasons of sterility. And Hostess Twinkies don’t have an infinite shelf life.

But people still believe myths to the contrary because, when something is repeated often enough, it becomes accepted as fact. Take these seven myths from the world of direct mail fundraising.

1. "The list is everything."

Once computers made highly segmented mailing lists affordable, early adopters reaped such tremendous benefits they declared that, when it comes to direct mail success, "The list is everything."

But the number of nonprofit organizations has grown tremendously in recent years, while the number of lists hasn’t been able to keep pace. So, today, the Legume Preservation Association is using the same lists as the Save a Salamander Society.

The result? The impact of the list has been diminished and two other factors have gained importance: (1) the message from the organization and (2) the creative execution.

2. "The more you tell, the more you sell."

The pioneers of direct mail—publications and other direct-sellers—discovered that long copy sold more of their products than short copy. That’s not surprising.

In the case of magazine subscriptions, publishers are appealing to people who pay to have something to read. These recipients are happy to read long direct mail copy. In the case of companies selling other products through the mail, they have one kick at the can to make the sale. So they use long copy to list every possible benefit and to push until the sale is made.

But it’s different with fundraising. Most donors just want to be thanked, to know how their last donation was used, and why another one is needed. Few are willing to read page after page of "sell" when they’re already sold on the cause.

And prospects are even less willing to read copious quantities of copy. The last thing they want to do is labor through a long letter about a cause they’re not yet committed to.

That’s why, although an occasional four-page letter can succeed, a two-pager is more likely to work best. And with very loyal donors who only need a nudge to pull out their checkbook, a letter the size of the donation form can sometimes work wonders . . . and save production costs.

3. "Positives work better than negatives."

Some organizations insist that their copy be filled with nothing but positive messages. They only tell readers how wonderfully the organization is doing, leaving the prospective donor with the thought: If they’re doing that great, they don’t need my money.

Of course, you don’t want to go on and on about the terrible plight of abused animals, starving children, or victims of a fatal disease, or recipients will get depressed and quit reading. However, if you’re going to stir them to take action, you have to tell them at least a few not-so-positive things.

These organizations take the same approach with copy, refusing to allow any negative words in the text. But negative words can have a positive effect. Look at John Paul Jones and his famous declaration, "I have not yet begun to fight!" Would he have intimidated the British or inspired his own men if he’d delivered the more positive, "I’ll start fighting soon?" Not to sound negative, but I doubt it.

4. "The tighter the copy, the better the copy."

One of the most inspiring speeches in history was delivered by Winston Churchill during World War II: "We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields and in the streets. We shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender."

Of course, he could have tightened up his speech to read, "We shall fight on the beaches, landing grounds, fields, streets and hills, and win." But would it have strengthened the backbone of his people the way his more verbose version did?

Sometimes it takes some extra words, sometimes repetitious words and phrases, to really make your point. Be too diligent about editing, and your copy will be bled of its emotion and its power.

5. "Four-color packages don’t work in fundraising."

The thinking had been that when donors receive a four-color package, they see red. Why? Because it will appear the organization is wasting money on production instead of spending it where it can do some good for people.

But as Bob Dylan would put it, "The times they are a changin’." With so many organizations mailing four-color packages these days, recipients are now less sensitive to high-production-value mailings.

That doesn’t mean you should go with process color at every opportunity. It just means that if it’s going to help sell the message, you shouldn’t avoid it.

6. "It worked for them; it will work for us."

Just because a strategy works for other nonprofits, there’s no guarantee it will work for yours.

7. "Don’t repeat an approach that failed for you before."

Even though an approach might not have worked for you in the past, it could perform well in the future because of timing or what the competition has been sending out.

There’s only one way to predict results reasonably well—that’s by testing. And if that’s a myth, it’s one that’s worth believing.

Bob Knight is President and Creative Director of Knight & Associates, 4045 Cummins Place, North Vancouver BC V7G 2N5. Phone (888) 684-6564, Web www.symbiomarketing.com, e-mail b_knight@telus.net.  

2. Seven fundraising "myths? " Not so fast!

By Mal Warwick, Editor

Here’s our response to the preceding article by Bob Knight.

All right, already. Debunking myths is a competitive sport that probably has its roots in the Sumerian court of 3000 BCE—or even earlier. It’s fun, and often it makes us think a little harder than we might otherwise have done. But it’s a risky proposition to take on the accumulated experience of decades in any field. Calling well-established guidelines "myths" can effectively be the equivalent of throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.

1. "The list is everything."

Take this fundamental precept of direct marketing, for example. OK, so the list isn’t quite "everything." But it’s been clear to me since I started in direct mail fundraising nearly 30 years ago that the list is, without question, the single most important controllable factor in determining the success or failure of a fundraising mailing. When I’m forced to quantify that guideline, I say the list accounts for 50%, and all other controllable factors—offer, copy, format, design—together account for the rest.

But I’m not sure that’s even an adequate measure of the importance of the list. After all, in a professional direct marketing program, decisions are made about all those other factors only after we know what list or lists will be used. So, the list is the independent variable, the other elements dependent ones.

One more thing. Though I made my reputation in fundraising principally as a copywriter, I do not agree that copy is even the second most important factor in the picture. The offer takes precedence, and format and design can be equally important as copy.

2. "The more you tell, the more you sell."

True enough: The greybeards in direct marketing can often still be heard to mouth that ages-old maxim, " Long copy sells." These are the people who will tell you in a fundraising workshop—with a perfectly straight face—that you should always write a long letter.

We know better nowadays. There are many circumstances in which shorter appeals are more desirable, but they boil down to two: First, sometimes the message just doesn’t require many words—"Your dues are due," for example; and second, some causes have such high name recognition and compelling branding that they just don’t need long copy to persuade the reader of their worthiness.

However, in the bigger scheme of things, these exceptions are just that: exceptions. Most of the time . . . for most nonprofits . . . writing to most audiences . . . longer copy makes sense. It can easily require two, three, four pages, or more to lay out the case for giving.

Few of us pretend that the recipients of our appeals sit down and pore through our precious copy with bated breath. If we’re sensible, we know that most people skim direct mail copy (and we format accordingly, to make it easy for readers to skim). But we also know that some people really do read the whole letter, and it’s impossible for us to predict in advance just which facts or which arguments will be most persuasive for them.

Now, if you don’t trust my opinion, please trust the test data my colleagues and I have turned up over the years: In countless head-to-head tests of four-page letters versus two-page versions of the same message, the two-pager has almost never come out on top.

3. "Positives work better than negatives."

There are those in marketing who insist that all human motivation boils down to such negative emotions as hate, greed, fear, anger, and lust. Clearly they have their followers in our field: how else to explain the vitriolic letters that have been mailed over the years by some fundraisers (especially those at some political and advocacy organizations)? There’s no doubt these appeals work . . . in the short run. But I don’t think a relationship based on hate, greed, or fear is likely to endure—and it’s our job as fundraisers to build mutually fulfilling relationships that will last for many years.

Now, I don’t mean to imply that Bob Knight resorts to these base emotions in his copywriting. I know better. What I’m saying instead is that if ugly or unfortunate facts are needed to make the case for giving, by all means, include them. But don’t let those ugly facts become the heart of the message.

Case in point: In years past, I received a large number of direct mail appeals from organizations that purported to rescue and care for abused animals. A large proportion of these appeals included horrific photos of maimed and wounded animals. I still see such things from time to time. Fortunately, though, the overwhelming majority of ethical fundraisers in the animal protection field shun such practices. And they know they can raise far more money when they offer hope— when they tell heartwarming stories of rescued animals after they’ve been treated.

Case in point: I’ve observed similar practices by nonprofit organizations that claim to feed hungry people overseas. Photos of skeletal children with haunted eyes dominate the direct mail packages from such organizations. But you won’t find that sort of thing in an appeal from UNICEF. Nor are you likely to see such disheartening sights in packages from other outstanding organizations engaged in overseas humanitarian relief and development. Why? Because they, too, have learned that donors yearn for hope. They want to be told that their gifts can make a difference—not have their noses rubbed in the dirt.

4. "The tighter the copy, the better the copy."

Thanks, Bob. You’ve made me wonder what it would be like to receive a direct mail fundraising letter signed by Winston Churchill. As I try to envision that impossibility (since the man has been dead for half a century), I wonder if the cadence and timing he put to such extraordinarily good use in his speeches would work in a direct mail package. What do you think? I’m skeptical. As a sometime speechwriter myself, I doubt that the oratorical tricks that keep an audience engaged would have the same effect on a direct mail reader.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m the first to admit that I shamelessly use repetition in writing appeals. Repetition is essential in all direct marketing, and that clearly leads to the opposite of what my eighth grade English teacher would say is "tight writing." But if I’m writing a donor-acquisition package, and I have to cram in literally a hundred facts or more to make a solid case for giving, you’d better believe I’ll have to exercise great discipline and tighten my copy in a number of successive editing sessions.

5. "Four-color packages don’t work in fundraising."

Oh, it’s true, all right—more and more nonprofits are using four-color printing in their direct mail appeals. What’s not clear to me is whether this practice is based on hard-nosed testing.

It’s common for nonprofit organizations to be intensely concerned about their image and to demand "creative" work from their agencies or fundraising staff. (More often than not, "creative" seems to translate as clever and flashy.) Nowadays, nonprofits seem to care as much about winning awards for their direct mail packages in competitions as are the agencies.

Clearly, a lot of this work represents highly professional effort, and at least some of the flashy packages that are to be found in the mails these days must represent rigorous testing.

However, I remain skeptical about the utility of using four-color graphics in most fundraising appeals. Every time I’ve tested colorful, graphically "engaging" packages against plainer versions without the flash, the plain one has always come out on top. I can’t help but think that at least some of these "creative" packages are mailed more for the public relations effect than for the fundraising results.

 6. "It worked for them; it will work for us."

This "myth" is what is known in logic as a "straw man." I have never heard anyone seriously advance this point of view in fundraising. Not in mixed company, anyway.

7.  "Don’t repeat an approach that failed for you before."

Yes, time and again, I’ve found that re-testing has paid off well for my clients.

However, you need to take this statement with a large grain of salt. If an approach—a list, an offer, a package, or an insert—failed dramatically in the past, it is not wise to re-test it. Re-testing is advisable only when you’ve experienced marginal results in the past. Don’t beat your head against the wall trying to rewrite history.


3. Where's Mal?


December 6, 2007 – Stockholm, Sweden
Swedish Fundraising Council
Two half-day workshops:
Morning: Getting the Most from your Investment in Direct Marketing
Afternoon: Raising More Money Through Word-of-Mouth Marketing

January 21-22, 2008 – Zurich, Switzerland
Social Entrepreneurs' Summit
Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship

January 24-25, 2008 – Washington DC
DMA 2008 Washington Nonprofit Conference
Site: J.W. Marriott Hotel

January 29, 2008 – San Francisco CA
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
Moderator: Values-Based Business
Site: S. F. Chamber of Commerce

January 30 – February 1, 2008 – San Francisco CA
Berrett-Koehler Publishers FutureSearch
Site: Commonwealth Club

February 25, 2008 – Delhi, India
Resource Alliance
Mini-course
More info: rati@resource-alliance.org

March 3-4, 2008 – Mumbai, India
Resource Alliance
Mini-course
More info: rati@resource-alliance.org

March 9-10, 2008 – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Two one-day workshops

May 8-11, 2008
Social Venture Network Spring Conference
Site: TBD 

May 23-25, 2008 – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
8th International Workshop on Resource Mobilisation
Site: Eastin Hotel

June 3-5, 2008 – Palm Beach FL
DMA Nonprofit Leadership Summit
Site: Ritz Carlton Hotel

June 5-8, 2008 – Boston MA
Business Alliance for Local Living Economies
2008 BALLE Conference
Site: Boston University

July 23-25, 2008 – Washington DC
Bridge to Integrated Direct Marketing Conference
Site: Washington Hilton Hotel

October 14-17, 2008 – Noordwijk, The Netherlands
28th International Fundraising Congress
Site: NH Leeuwenhorst Hotel
 

4. Hospitals in the mail (Part 1)

By Managing Editor Deborah Block and Paul Karps

Every subset of the nonprofit universe has its own specific challenges when it comes to developing a successful direct mail fundraising program. So in our never-ending search to find out what’s working—and what’s not—in the mail, we wanted to turn our attention to community-based hospitals.

We decided to ask organizational consultant Ann Thompson-Haas, FAHP (Oakland CA) for her insight into this burgeoning area, since she specializes in direct mail fundraising for community hospitals and hospice organizations across the country.

Indeed, Thompson-Haas gave us enough thoughtful information to cover two articles. This, then, is Part 1 of our look at local hospitals—with Part 2 to follow in the next issue.

The grateful patient

At the top of her list of what’s working in this sector, Thompson-Haas cites a focus on "grateful patient" support for healthcare. "The typical donor," she says, "wants to thank the institution for good care—perhaps care that has even saved her life or the life of a loved one."

According to Thompson-Haas, the most productive direct mail programs are focused on strategically mailing to these former patients. "This is the foundation of a successful program in healthcare. "

In general, many hospitals solicit former patients 2-3 months after discharge—when their presumably positive experience is still fresh in the mind. Oftentimes, they then receive 2-4 direct mail packages until they’re dropped from the list, depending on budget considerations.

Interestingly, Thompson-Haas explains that hospitals are split on whether to acknowledge that the organization actually knows the recipient of the package was a patient. Some clearly identify the prospect as such, others are not that specific.

Deciding when and how often to mail to hospice families, who have recently lost a loved one, presents a different challenge. That’s because the organization needs to be particularly sensitive to the bereavement process.

Track response by age

Significantly, Thompson-Haas has found that the grateful patient focus is most effective for the over-50 crowd. For those under 50, it just doesn’t work as well and she tends not to mail to these patients. Indeed, she typically tracks the database by age, breaking down response by decades (50s, 60s, 70s, etc.). Overall, Thompson-Haas sees the best results in the 60+ group.

Be aware—not beware—of HIPPA

Of course, zeroing in on former hospital patients raises the whole privacy issue of what’s allowed, and not allowed, under the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) that went into effect in 2003.

The critical point, says Thompson-Haas, is that HIPPA guidelines permit the use of demographic patient data—name, address, gender, and age—for fundraising purposes. And this represents "everything you need to have a successful grateful patient program." What HIPPA forbids is access to medical records or actual diagnoses.

So, for example, the idea of sending a former heart patient a cardiology appeal, while possible in the past, is now illegal under HIPPA.

Also, Thompson-Haas adds that donors need to be provided an opt-out option in each appeal—and institutions need to keep a "do not mail list."

For more information about the implications of HIPPA for fundraising, she encourages readers to visit the Web site of the Association of Healthcare Philanthropy.

Renting lists

Apart from the grateful patient, the other sort of donor is the person who thinks of herself as a potential patient. Someone who, as Thompson-Haas puts it, "is of the age where she wants to make sure that a high-quality healthcare facility is there for her. And wants to make a gift to keep that local institution strong."

To reach this person, however, requires the rental of outside lists. In fact, Thompson-Haas notes that there's definitely been a growing trend over the years to purchase rental lists—specifically donor names from such groups as the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society.

Part of the reason for this new trend is that, as she notes, "if these are the right lists, they can do as well as grateful patient lists. Plus, renewals can be just as high."

The challenge, however, is that fundraising for a community hospital is, by definition, a locally based endeavor and is geographically defined. In some smaller markets, therefore, securing the necessary volume of appropriate donor lists can be  problematic at best—independent of the additional cost involved.

In Part 2 of this article, we’ll cover trends in individual appeals, testing, converting one-time tribute donors to long-term donors, and more. So stay tuned!

Click here to see a sample hospice acquisition package.

Copywriters Deborah Block and Paul Karps are partners in BK Kreative, 1010 Varsity Court, Mountain View CA 94040, phone (650) 962-9562, fax (650) 962-1499, e-mail bkkreative@aol.com.

 

5. Blogs!

TalkingPoint, the electronic newsletter published by CompassPoint in the San Francisco Bay Area, recently highlighted some of its staff members’ favorite nonprofit blogs. Here’s what they had to say:

 The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s Give & Take blog is an excellent list of blogs relevant to NPOs.

 Beth's Blog is self-described as a place to capture and share ideas, experiment with and publish links about nonprofit tech, educational technology, information design, visual thinking, creativity, ICT in the developing world, and much more.

 The NonprofitBlogExchange is another blog of nonprofit blogs.

 Guy Kawasaki’s How to Change the World blog. Always interesting just for the sheer diversity of topics he covers.

 Andrea Seale's the fundit is pretty hip, pretty to look at, and offers some pretty good fundraising tips and resources.

 Britt Bravo’s Have Fun Do Good blog. Well written, always interesting (for both a nonprofit person and the mainstream public), plus with a name like Britt Bravo ya hafta read it.
 

6. Five tips for using personalization

By Peter Schoewe

The greatest waste of money in direct mail fundraising may be the laser-personalized letter that has no variables other than the salutation at its start. If you're going to pay to personalize your mailings, you should put some thought into showing your donors that they are, in fact, receiving a personalized communication. Here are five tips you can use to add more personalization to your appeals:

1. Use a donor’s salutation frequently, but use it wisely.

Often, the temptation is to use the donor’s name at the beginning of a paragraph to make the personalization in the letter stand out. But that can lead to an awkward-sounding sentence. If you wouldn’t write the sentence that way in a letter to a friend, you should cross out the salutation. I like to keep personalized salutations close to the word "you" wherever it may fall in a sentence—such as "DONOR, you have a chance . . . " or "I’m writing you, DONOR, because . . . " Also, don’t forget to put a personalized salutation in the postscript if you can.

2. Turn donors’ most recent contributions into an implied Ask.

It’s no secret that appeals with concrete requests for donations work better than appeals without specific amounts. But, especially with higher-dollar donors, you can face resistance to ask for specific gifts. You can get around this difficulty by thanking the donors for their most recent contribution in the same paragraph in which you ask them for their next gift. This puts a placeholder in the donors’ minds of how much they should consider when they decide to help again. For example, "I was grateful to receive your last gift of LAST GIFT AMOUNT on DATE. I hope you can help in this critical time by sending another gift today." The downside is that this technique probably won’t inspire as many upgraded gifts as a standard Ask string would.

3. Get creative to show donors you know who they are.

Even if your database only captures transactional information, you have more information about your donors than you think you do—and a lot of that information can be added to a personalized letter. If a donor gave her first gift in the past year, you can thank her for being one of your newest members. If she’s been on the file for a long time, you can thank her for the number of years she’s been helping out. If you’d like to invite your most frequent donors to become monthly sustainers, you should tell them that they’ve already given X number of gifts in the past two years. The caution is that you need to be sure your data is correct to avoid donors complaining about your recordkeeping. But don’t let data concerns kill every great idea you have for personalization. If your data is 99% right, the 1% of complaints you’ll get is worth the increased connection you’ll build with the majority of your donors.

4. Track, and repeat back, your donor’s affinities.

If you're already surveying your donors, it can’t hurt to throw in a question about why they support you and why they think you're important. If you can track that information, you can add a personalized sentence to an appeal that will stand out and get your donors’ attention. (Just make sure you have a default sentence for the donors you don’t know anything about.) Think how amazed you’d be to receive a letter that says "You’ve let me know how much you care about ISSUE. That’s why I’m writing you, SALUTATION, with this urgent update today."

5. Make personalized letters look personal.

Postal regulations and requirements are making nonprofit appeals look less and less personal—at a time we know that donors are looking for a deeper connection with the causes they support. If you're going to the extra expense of personalizing your letters, you should ensure—as much as possible—that the Post Office and your lettershop don’t ruin your good work. If you're using a closed-face envelope, make sure you don’t put an address block (or worse, an address block with a bar code under it) at the top of your letter. A personal letter should begin with the date and "Dear NAME," with no address block, Johnson Box, or extraneous design element coming in between. And, of course, a really personal letter would begin with the donor’s first name, rather than a title and a last name.

Don’t be afraid to show your donors you know about them—and that you care who they are. By taking the time to personalize your letters, you may sometimes need to go out on a limb, but you will be rewarded with increased loyalty and passion from those who’ve chosen to give you their support.

Peter Schoewe is Senior Consultant, Mal Warwick Associates, 2550 Ninth Street, Suite 103, Berkeley CA 94710-2516, phone (510) 843-8888, fax (510) 843-0142, Web www.malwarwick.com, e-mail peter@malwarwick.com.

7. Good/bad?

By Jeff Brooks

Here’s how I sum up the differences between bad and good fundraising:

  Bad Fundraising

  Good Fundraising

  A form of marketing

  A form of relationship

  Something you do to donors

  Something you do with them


A nonprofit organization focuses on its mission (as it should), but that mission has no connection with its donors. In fact, mission-focused people are often hostile to donors, seeing them as a problem, something they'd be better off without. As a result, fundraising becomes an external discipline, a set of practices they adapt out of necessity, like an ugly old coat that doesn't quite fit.

Mission matters, and so do donors. At an organization that practices good fundraising, the staff works to make its mission and its programs understandable and motivating to non-experts. Fundraising becomes an integral part of who they are, and everyone is responsible to make it happen.

Many organizations get caught up in a "gimmicks arms race." Since they don't share real information with donors, they struggle to get their attention with things unrelated to their missions. Lots of other bad fundraisers are also substituting gimmicks for genuine motivation, so the gimmicks that work eventually become boring and stop working.

A nonprofit organization’s main struggle: how to share so much richness of information without being overwhelming.

Bad fundraising guarantees that its practitioners will have to re-acquire donors over and over again.

Good fundraising promotes an ongoing relationship that deepens at each donor's speed and level of interest, enhances loyalty, and builds long-term donor value.

In bad fundraising, relationships are incidental, beside the point, often avoided.

In good fundraising, relationship isn't everything, it's the only thing.

Reprinted with permission from Donor Power Blog, available at www.donorpowerblog.com.


8. Measuring e-mail performance

By Rick Christ

Are you measuring the right data about your e-mail campaign? The ideas that follow seem basic, but in the crunch of getting e-mails out the door, and everything else that has to be done by most understaffed nonprofit organizations, few regularly review the critical factors that tell them how to improve their e-mail communications.

It's not much more work, however, to get four pieces of data— three from your e-mail delivery system and one from your Web site—that will give you the metrics you need.

Open Rate (# e-mails opened/# delivered): This is a flawed statistic, but nevertheless an important indicator of the delivery of your list and the impact of your subject line. Most e-mail systems can't count the number of e-mails that are opened as text messages. On the other hand, if people use Outlook or some other program that displays e-mail messages in a preview panel, it will count that as an "opened" e-mail even if the recipient never read it. However, these flaws are pretty constant from e-mail to e-mail, so tracking open rate from one e-mail to the next tells you how one e-mail compares to another. If you split your file and send half of them a test subject line, the open rate for each half of the file should give you a good indication of the strength of each subject line. Open rates typically hover around 20%, but good open rates can be as high as 40%.

Click-through Rate (CTR) (# unique clicks on links in your e-mail/# e-mails opened): This tells you how good your e-mail is. Don't divide the number of clicks into the number of e-mails sent. Instead, divide it into the number of e-mails opened. This will give you a good indication of the strength of your e-mail. Naturally, the different nature of the actions requested in an e-mail will impact the CTR. For many nonprofits, non-financial Asks (e.g. signing a petition) will produce a much higher CTR than a request for a donation. For a donation appeal, CTR tends to hover around 10% for many nonprofits. We've seen it as high as 50% for requests to send an e-card, sign a petition, and similar requests.

Conversion Rate (# actions taken on your site/# unique clicks from your e-mail): This depends on your landing page. A cumbersome donation process reduces the conversion rate. If your conversion rate is much less than 40%, it means that either your landing page is hard to work with or there's a disconnect between your e-mail message and your landing page.

Don't use the indices above to measure your e-mail performance against some average. Instead, track your trends from e-mail to e-mail, and look for ways to beat your own averages.

Reprinted with permission from E-Fund News from NPAdvisors.com, available free at www.npadvisors.com.

9. Fake surveys?

Ask Mal:  Since 1994, when the Mal Warwick Associates Web site went online, Editor Mal Warwick has answered fundraising questions posed by visitors to the site. Hundreds of those Q&As are available here. In this new feature, we'll spotlight one Q&A from the most recent month.

Question: How do "fake" direct mail surveys impact an organization?

The good news is we have an acquisition control package that has resulted in the strongest response rates we've had in six years. So why do we need advice from Mal?

Well, some of our marketing colleagues are concerned that the survey included in our acquisition package is not a "real" survey but rather a solicitation device. Let me assure you, we in development have attempted to explain the purpose of this particular engagement device. However, our marketing colleagues feel that using this strategy has a negative impact on our brand. To support their belief, they are quoting research gathered from individuals who received a direct marketing survey from a financial institution (we know, not comparing apples-to-apples). The research was conducted on non-responders to the "fake" financial services survey. These non-responders felt so negative about this financial institution's fake direct marketing survey that they said they would never give their business to this particular financial institution. Have you ever encountered concerns about the negative impact a direct mail survey has on an organization? Its brand? Has any research been done on this subject?

Mal Answers: These fake surveys are often a good news/bad news proposition. They almost invariably boost overall response, but the long-term impact of their use is uncertain.

In one sense, surveys that are designed purely as involvement devices are similar to front-end premiums in their effects. That is, they increase response and often (not always) lower the average gift, but frequently the combined effect is to lower the acquisition cost. That's why they're so heavily favored by direct marketers. However, like many front-end premiums, such surveys might bring in donors of lower long-term value—and they might do damage to an organization's brand.

There has been extensive study of the long-term effects of premiums but, to the best of my knowledge, not of fake surveys.

To my mind, this question boils down to what might be termed an ethical question: Should your organization conduct its fundraising efforts in a totally honest manner? If you subscribe (as I do) to the belief that successful fundraising rests on honest, mutually supportive relationships between an organization and its donors, then you're likely to answer the question in the affirmative. That would mean avoiding the use of such devices as phony surveys.

Can I prove that such practices damage a nonprofit's brand? No. I can only speculate that those in your organization who fear the long-term effects of your survey are in the right.

10. Bill’s message

By Deborah Block and Paul Karps

Bill Clinton has generated a lot of attention over his new book Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World. And, as far as we’re concerned, rightfully so.

After all, anyone who serves to shine the national spotlight on the significance of broad-based philanthropy is okay with us.

Two passages in particular stand out. The first reads: "We give because we think it will help people today or give our children a better future; because we feel morally obligated to do so out of religious or ethical convictions; because someone we know and respect asked us; or because we find it more rewarding and more enjoyable than spending more money on material possessions or more time on recreation or work."

Then a few pages later, Clinton concludes, "Who’s happier? The uniters or the dividers? The builders or the breakers? The givers or the takers?

"I think you know the answer. There’s a whole world out there that needs you, down the street or across the ocean. Give."

Good stuff, huh? But, you may be thinking, what does all this have to do with direct mail fundraising copy? Glad you asked. Because here’s our take on what Bill’s message means to those of us on the frontline of the "giving" world.

No need to be coy

Assuming the act of charitable giving does indeed make a person happier, there’s no reason to be defensive, self-conscious, or apologetic about the primary intent of your direct mail package: to ask someone to send you money.

Look at it this way: You’re giving your reader the opportunity to do something that she’ll find rewarding and enjoyable—and will make her feel positive about herself.

That means your primary Asks (and that’s right, we’re talking about multiple Asks) should be direct and straightforward. Ask for money—not just "support" or "help." Though in the case of a new member acquisition, it’s okay to ask someone to "become a member of XYZ today."

What’s more, don’t bury the Ask with other copy. Rather, keep it in its own paragraph and make it stand out by indenting or boldfacing it.

Give donors credit

If making people feel good about themselves is the ultimate goal, you should go out of your way to give donors the credit for your organization’s success. That’s how you can reinforce the message that giving your group money is a worthwhile endeavor and will make them happy as a result.

Position your accomplishments as being a direct outgrowth of the donor’s participation in your mission. One way to do this is to begin each accomplishment with a "Because of you" or "Thanks to your commitment." This makes donors feel like insiders.

In addition to linking the donor with past accomplishments, you can also articulate your future agenda as being contingent upon the recipient’s generosity. If you’re including a bulleted list of activities, you can begin by saying, "With you by our side, we can:" If you want to go into more depth about your various plans, use "Through your help"—or some variation—as you introduce each issue.

Provide specifics

Apart from giving credit where credit is due—that is, to your loyal donors—don’t be afraid to get into the nitty-gritty of programmatic detail. People like knowing the specifics of how their gifts are being used and how they’re going to be used in the future. And, of course, this can be done without making the Asks restricted to that particular program, service, or effort.

Once again, it’s your job to do whatever you can to create that "feel-good" sensation in the mind—and the heart—of your reader. If, in fact, Bill Clinton’s message has any merit, your existing donors and sympathetic prospects alike want to hear from you. They want to know what you’re up to. Most important, they want to give. So offer them that opportunity. And in the process, everyone will be happier!

Copywriters Deborah Block and Paul Karps are partners in BK Kreative, 1010 Varsity Court, Mountain View CA 94040, phone (650) 962-9562, fax (650) 962-1499, e-mail bkkreative@aol.com.


11. Tips!

By Ivan Levison

Here are five quick copywriting tips to remember:

1. Keep it simple

Your prospects don't want to think about your message. They want to understand, quickly, exactly what your product or service can do for them. So don't use long sentences when short ones will do. Don't use long words when short ones will do. Explain benefits clearly. Strip off the verbal fat and write rock-hard, muscular prose that gets results!

2. Keep it short.

Some years ago I used to write long selling-letters for clients. "The more you tell, the more you sell" was my watchword. And the long stuff pulled just great.

Now things are changing. Readers are less patient. Their attention spans are shorter. Which means that the sales letters, e-mail, etc., I write are getting shorter too. Does this move to a shorter format bother me? Absolutely not! The only thing any direct response copywriter should care about is what works.

3. Keep it lively.

Hey, it isn't a crime yet in this country to have a little enthusiasm or a sense of humor. If your marketing materials are flat or boring, bring a little personality to the party. You know, your sales letters, e-mail, etc., need to communicate more than features and benefits. They have to truly engage the reader and connect at some emotional level. So don't be afraid to write with a little punch. The spark you or your copywriter bring to a project can make all the difference!

4. Keep it real.

"Creative" advertising agencies—the ones with the hip bubble-gum machines and barber chairs—are often into puns, jokes, double meanings, metaphors, cleverness, and hilarity of all kinds. The ads and commercials they create are meant to be fun. Chances are, though, you will do much better being direct and down to earth. When you’re selling your product or service, resist the urge to get "creative." Keep your feet on the ground, be direct, sell with conviction, and all will be well!

5. Keep it persuasive.

You must never forget that to be successful you have to become (or hire) a terrific sales person. What’s the best way to sell someone something? The answer is face to face, one on one.

When you're right there with a prospect, you can "read" them, answer their questions, overcome resistance, and perhaps most important, close the sale! But we can't be everywhere, selling in person. This means our ads, e-mails, sales letters, and the like are proxies for us. They are, as someone once said, salesmanship in print. Make sure that all your sales materials are selling hard and the coming years will be profitable indeed!

Reprinted with permission from The Levison Letter, available free at www.levison.com. Copyright 2007 by Ivan Levison. All Rights Reserved.

12. Stats

Inside Direct Mail Editor Steven Boldt, writing in Who's Mailing What! Archive Insider, admits that fundraising is "my favorite part of the mailstream, for it usually represents what's great about direct mail." He calls it "lovingly stubborn, often sticking with the same type of controls that have been working wonders, from minor to major, for years."

Analyzing the January to August period in each of the last four years, Boldt remarks that "not a lot has changed for fundraising mail in general—and, again, that’s a good thing." Nonprofit packages made up nearly 12% of the total mail in each year, except for 2006 when it increased to 14%. What’s more, the last three years have seen premiums offered at a steady rate of slightly over 13%, as compared to a higher rate of 21.5% in 2004.

Boldt does, however, say that the use of personalization has risen this year to 52.1% after being in the mid-40s the three previous years.

 ¦  ¦ Sign Up ¦ Contact us ¦ Newsletter Archive  

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoratative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is distributed with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is require, the services of a competent professional should be sought. (From a declaration of principles jointly adopted by a committee of the American Bar Association and a committee of publishers.)

Mal Warwick's Newsletter: Successful Direct Mail, Telephone & Online FundraisingTM
(ISSN 1067-9316) is published 12 times per year by Strathmoor Press, Inc.,
2550 Ninth Street, Suite 103, Berkeley CA 94710-2516,
phone (510) 843-8888, fax (510) 843-0142, e-mail info@strathmoor.com.

Copyright © 2007 Strathmoor Press, Inc. All rights reserved.