I've
recently been introduced to Child's i (thanks @annemcx) and have been
really impressed by how they are using social media to connect with
their audience.
Check
out the site and get in touch with Lucy (the founder) on Twitter or
Facebook.
Here are
the five key things that I love about the site:
It's
written in an authentic voice and with personality. The passion,
determination and drive of Lucy comes shining through and there is
generally (I'll come back to this at the end) a lack of jargon or
NGO speak. It seems like one person talking to another.
The
site takes you on a journey and presents a compelling story. It's
full of interesting videos, has a clear roadmap of what they want to
achieve (and when by) and explains how you can make a difference.
Cynics
might say 'that's great, but you can't scale it' or 'it'll never work
at my charity' but eventually every charity that wants to fundraise
from the public will have to engage with their supporters in similar
ways or lose out to charities who do.
What
Child's i have done isn't rocket science but very few larger
charities have managed to cut through the bureaucracy and gatekeepers
to allow staff to use social media to talk and engage with supporters
in the same way.
However
I see two big challenges on the horizon.
The
first challenge for them will be turning the followers they are
collecting on their journey into donors. However, by building trust,
permission and continuing to tell an inspiring story then I would
hope that when the time comes for a 'hard' ask enough people will be
inspired and motivated to give.
The
other challenge is maintaining the passion, authenticity and
personality of the charity as it grows. At a certain point it's
going to be hard to keep the personal touch that makes the site stand
out.
Finally,
my one (smallish) criticism is about the one bit of jargon on the
site, which can be found at this post. Whilst I can completely
understand why they don't want to use the word 'orphanage'
unfortunately the reality a 'short-term transitional home' means
nothing to me and I'd guess most people.
I always
subject these things to the 'mum' test. If I asked my mum to give to
a Ugandan orphanage she'd probably say yes, make a donation, feel
good about it, but not ask too many more questions. If I asked her
to give to a Ugandan short-term transitional home then she'd give me
a funny look and say 'What?' and when I'd explained she'd say, 'Why
didn't you say it was an orphanage? Of course i'll give.'
It can
sometimes be hard to accept this (Jeff Brooks writes/talks about a similar
problem with leprosy here), but I think it's vital that you use
language that people understand even if it isn't 100% accurate.
Overall,
I'd like to commend Child's i on a great example of social media in
action and I'll certainly be making a donation towards building the
home.
Donor Behaviour Research
Some interesting findings and points from a CCBfast.MAP direct marketing survey, which posed various questions about donors attitudes and opinions on giving.
In a couple of areas I think it's fair to say that the results vary greatly from my own personal experience e.g. 45% of respondents said they had donated to their chosen cause for over 10 years! Most charities I know would kill for that sort of retention rate.
One of the good things about the survey is it asks the same questions over a period of time and so you can track certain trends. For example the rise in the popularity of e-mail as a communication method.
To me the most interesting table was this one on the reasons people stop giving to charity.
"CCB fast.MAP 2008: Please state the reasons why you stopped giving to a specific charity?
Couldn't afford it anymore 41%
Other, please specify 29%
It wasn't clear to me how my money was helping 22%
Another charity seemed like a more worthwhile cause 14%
Another charity needed my moneymore. 7%
Lack of communication from the charitythat I was donating to. 7%
A lot of media attention about the cause I decided to support instead 2%
Because I gave money instead to a recent disaster/ appeal 2%
When another charity contacted me, I liked its more personal approach 1%
I moved house and the charity did not contact me 1%
Another charity offered a freegift/incentive 0%"
The accompanying text explaining about the 'Other' reasons was especially informative with respondents expressing dismay at being 'bombarded' and charites not respecting their wishes.
Overall, I'd recommend taking a quick look at the report as there are some interesting nuggets of information.
Posted at 09:17 PM in Fundraising Comment | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This | Save to del.icio.us