Why your supporters are wealthier than you expect. Course details.

It’s the simple things that mean the most

Howard Lake | 19 October 2009 | Blogs

I received two very contrasting communications over the past week or so that demonstrated very clearly to me the difference between good and not-so-good stewardship.

The first was from a charity I had (and I emphasise the had) supported for close to ten years, but had cancelled my Direct Debit in mid-2008 as I had simply stopped hearing from them.

So last week I finally received a letter from them with an update on their activities and in the letter they thanked me “for all my support” this year. That would be precisely nothing at all. All it did was serve to irritate me and to convince me I was probably right to cancel my Direct Debit.

Advertisement

Getting Started with TikTok: An Introduction to Fundraising & Supporter Engagement

By contrast I received an e-mail this morning from IPC Media with whom I have a subscription for a music magazine. All they were doing was drawing my attention to the postal strike and reassuring me that my magazine would arrive – eventually, and giving me a link to get more information should I want it. It just seemed to me to be a smart, appropriate and well thought through use of e-mail that left me (in contrast to the charity) feeling well disposed to IPC Media.

I have noticed this tendency a few times from charities – both those we support, and those we mystery shop – to thank for support that hasn’t actually been forthcoming in the past year, or to over effusively thank for support that might only entail a single, first-time gift of a relatively small amount made many months ago.

It isn’t difficult to amend text to be genuinely appropriate to the audience. With just a little bit more thought, we could leave people feeling that they are really being recognised as individuals and not being lumped in with everyone else, and all treated as one and the same.

 

Loading

Mastodon