Variety is the spice of life and all that, so, for a slight change, and in no way connected to the fact that I never quite got round to doing it over the weekend, here is my fortnightly round-up of articles worth checking out.
Hope you have a great week and an early happy Easter!
Second step to maximise donor lifetime value over at Happy Donors. Step one is here.
Some great ideas on getting the most out of your London Marathon Runners (applies to all sponsored runners) by Kev Baughen.
Some thoughts on the engagement pyramid at Beth's blog.
In-depth article at Frogloop on engagement and donor involvement.
Jeff Brooks on how to know if a fundraising consultant is lying.
Jonathan Grapsas on copy - p.s. also read this article on the power of the post script.
Make your appeals smell of lemon and watch the money roll in?
Sena questions whether more money for charity is a good thing?
Katya has some great new stats and insights on social media.
Stephen George on the threat to relationship fundraising.
B.L. Ochman on Greenpeace v Nestle
Chris G on why people fail.
Two from Seth: Fear of philanthropy and how to turn a $3 bottle of soap into a $20 bottle.
What's your job as a manager? To help people according to Tom Peters. You can also read an extract of Edgar Schein's book on how to offer, give and receive help here.
Loved this quote on Brand Autopsy: “It’s more meaningful to be provocative to a few than to be broadly boring to many.” You can find out more in the article.
A ton of ideas to test for fundraising in this article on the long term effects of short term emotions.
Good Experience on the value of e-mailing customers.


How not to deal with a fundraising PR crisis
A fundraising storm has brewed up in the idyllic Isle of Wight after the local hospice decided to stop accepting donations from one of their local newspapers.
Officially, the hospice declared that it wanted to give another charity on the island a chance to benefit, but internet conspiracy theorists have linked it to critical articles that the paper had published about the council.
Fair enough you might say. The hospice might have wanted to protect it's reputation or genuinely wanted to give someone else a chance to benefit. However, what really interests me and what anyone can learn from, is the hospice's reaction to the controversy, which, frankly, has been non-existent.
There is no statement on their website, a short, bland, official statement and a resout 'no comment' from an anonymous spokesman, whilst in the meantime the local blog has attracted an incredible 350 comments, many from disgruntled donors and supporters of the hospice who vow never to support them again.
The following quote is typical:
"Oh My God!! Its finally Offical!!
How can a Charity turn their back on people who have raised so much for them, very dissappointed with the puppets (Board of Trustees of Earl Mountbatten Hospice) and the puppet masters pulling their strings. This happens at the same time as IW Gazette is running stories on Council and its so called leader. Hmmmm!! :(. This needs reporting at the highest level and investigating. I will be saving my Donations for the hospice until Graham Elderfield has resigned his post (and please god, don’t pay him off with charity money)"
There are also a number of highly critical quotes of the Chief Exec, but plenty of praise for the nurses and the work they do and pleas not to forget the patients.
So how could the hospice have handled it differently and reacted to the storm?
By burying it's head in the sand the hospice has exposed itself to wider criticism and threatened it's future fundraising support.
If a similar crisis threatened your organisation how would you respond? Do you have procedures in place to manage such a situation? Would you bury your head in the sand or engage with your critics?
Posted at 12:54 PM in Fundraising Comment | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Reblog (0) | | |
|
|
| Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us