Are you inside out?
Are you telling donors what they want to hear, or what you want to tell them?
This question can be simply rephrased as the difference between an orientation of communications that is "outside in" and starts with the donor, or "inside out" and is projected outward from the organisation. It's essential to understand this simple but important difference because it affects how donors perceive us, how they relate to us and whether they want to and, ultimately, do continue their engagement.
There is still a fundamental fallacy within charities that what we say and do will be inherently interesting to donors. Our work, after all, is important. I’m going to argue that it creates a tendency to prioritise internal agendas and preoccupations over supporters’ needs and wants.
When we communicate from our own perspectives, we tend to focus on our brand, our vision and mission, our values, our achievements and organisational “news”. But stuff we might see as interesting, may well not be to our target audience. I’m not saying for one moment there aren’t ways of creating wonderful communications that feature, or are somehow feature or are shaped by any or all of these. They are necessary but not sufficient.
Consider a familiar scenario in which a charity draws donors in with powerful fundraising ads featuring compelling stories of individuals in urgent need. These donors respond with generosity, driven by a desire to make a difference. However, as time passes, they receive minimal updates (or none) on the progress of these particular, often named, individuals, nor in some cases the impact of their contributions in general. Instead, they find themselves confronted with a series of very similar-looking solicitations for additional donations, and feel perhaps, despite their initial enthusiasm, as if they are now seen by us as just another source of revenue. Not as valued partners in the mission.
I have heard donors tell in research of feeling trapped on the "charity escalator," continuously asked to increase contributions without a deeper connection or understanding of the impact of their support, which is what they want. It didn’t just create dissonance. It was resented. Some donors say they gave in spite of bad communications, not because of them. To my horror, one even described how she felt she now had a charity “bill”, a grudge purchase.
I won’t mention the name of one particular charity – to protect the guilty. But, in response to a gift I’d recently made towards their care and support services, I got a reply detailing how my gift had been put to use. I can’t give too much detail, obviously, but, suffice to say, it had helped facilitate a series of workshops between head office and their local offices to disseminate best practice. Did the best practice concern their care and support services? I’m afraid not. It came across as administrative. Please bear in mind this is a charity I like and admire and I know has many fantastic things to say. However, things started very badly. And only went downhill from there.
Now, who among us thinks sharing best practice is a bad thing? But is it interesting to a donor? Do they care about the efficiency and effectiveness of your internal comms, or about the regional structure of your organisation? You would have to work hard to convince me.
The “inside out” approach reaches its apotheosis in the form of the charity newsletter. These unloved artefacts tend to comprise organisational trivia, details of staff appointments and promotions, generic updates and banal self-promotion.
It really need not be that way. The best newsletters feature inspiring stories, personal testimony, evidence of impact and transparent accountability about the financials. I make it sound easy. I do know – from experience – that it’s not. Nor is it the fault of the poor soul writing or compiling them. Rather it is an error in how we conceive the very purpose and essence of the communication itself.
There must be absolutely no shame in getting things wrong. It is easy to be critical. It is just as easy to see how it happens – and it’s almost inevitable. We are each of us at the centre of our own universe and all interesting to ourselves. At least I hope so. And this holds true for organisations as much as individuals. But, we all know that the best conversationalists don’t just hold forth, they engage and not only draw out the others, but draw out the best in them.
The Opportunity
We must place donors at the centre of communications and fundraising strategies. Becoming truly donor-centric involves listening to donor feedback, understanding their motivations and preferences, and prioritising transparency and accountability. In so doing you will cultivate authentic relationships with donors, fostering loyalty, trust, and long-term engagement.
There is so much that I could write here, but I am limited by space, but here are some of the practicable and immediate steps you can take to improve your communications:
Review your communications and, if you have the resources, use yearly donor research to see how they are performing against key criteria (see below).
If you have a ‘supporter services’ department, speak to them – often – about the feedback they get.
If you use external creative agencies, speak to the to ensure they, too, ‘get’ ‘donor centricity’ and that it is embedded in your briefs.
Leave space for free text responses in suitable comms and capture, collate and disseminate the information to your team.
Where appropriate, listen in to telephone calls, or recordings. They can be really illuminating.
And if you are a small organisation and have scant resources, don’t worry. Even a sole fundraiser will have opportunities, perhaps more so, to engage with donors and find out their views.
You will undoubtedly get lots of polite and encouraging feedback. Along with a few things that will give you pause. Remember that it is far better to know than to carry on regardless. Remember, too, Einstein’s aphorism, “In the middle of difficulty, lies opportunity”.
Do’s and don’t’s
To wrap this up, I’m not going to give you a predictable list of “do’s and don’ts”. Oh no. You can have list of things that are Inside Out and Outside In instead!
Inside Out
Our Vision and Mission
Why we need your money
What our values are
What we believe
How you can support us
Why we think you should support us
Our approach
Why we think we are different
Why we’ve been in the news
What we have achieved
How great we are
Outside In
I understand what the charity has done with my money
I made the right decision to support you
I’ve made a difference
I may have changed or even saved a life
I’m pleased to be a partner in this charity’s work
I’m pleased to have been given the opportunity
You’ve made me feel better informed.
You know me. As a real person
You value me, that you think I’m special
That you want me to continue my support, because I can make even more of a difference, not because you just want my money
You’ll communicate with me in the ways I want
That you know why I give and what I care about
And finally
Are you inside out? You might balk at the idea. I do. But the point of this article is that we all are. Every one of us.
Now, what are you going to do about it?
⟶ About Giles⟶ Services⟶ Back to overview