Is Royal Mail the Grinch?

When my seven-year-old niece Maya first saw the hairy green 'monster' that is The Grinch she described it as 'a very naughty monkey'.

You may know that the P739 is that red and white card the postie leaves behind if a parcel is too big or needs a signature. I have one in my hand that bears the legend in biro:

PACKet IN ReCyle BiN.

It wasn't of course. Presumably it had been recycled.

I rang to complain and was promised a reply by mail. Two duly arrived simultaneously from Plymouth - I'm in Brighton - and I was further assured by a Royal Mail respondent from Glasgow that the culprit had been tracked down and reminded of correct procedures.

But the packet hadn't been tracked down. And when I enquired what efforts had been made to find it i.e. had they actually contacted the recyclers, answer came there none.

So when you're mailing your Christmas Appeal please remember what it could cost you in lost goodwill if 'white mail' is badly handled. Thanks to Royal Mail I could have been fined and had my name dragged through the courts like this:http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wal...

What effect could a Royal Mail style failure of customer care have on your supporters and prospects?

It may be that Royal Mail isn't The Grinch, and won't steal my Christmas this year, but to me it will always be 'a very naughty monkey'.

How is it for you?

How do Virtual Gifts affect supporter income?

If it’s nearing Christmas it must be A Time for Virtual Gifts. You know the kind of thing, not a merchandise catalogue, but one in which people are asked to gift the charity’s ‘products’ to friends and family, instead of buying them a Christmas present.

And the question is, ‘Do they work?

If you ever wondered what effect asking supporters to buy Virtual Gifts might have on the future performance of your donorbase, you may be pleased with the answer, uncovered by a piece of research by TW CAT using our proprietary benchmarking tool, BenchMach®.

TW CAT developed a Virtual Gift Catalogue for an international charity and mailed it to a random split of donors; one group received the Virtual Gift Catalogue and the other did not but both groups were selected for the next two mailings: a traditional donor appeal and a thank you reminder.

People responded differently; some bought a gift, some didn’t (and some weren’t sent the Virtual Gifts Catalogue).

But what happened afterwards when we plugged the numbers into BenchMach® is the most interesting thing.

Nothing.

Nothing changed.

Donors who’d bought a gift responded to the subsequent donor mailings no differently to donors who hadn’t bought a gift or donors who didn’t even receive the Virtual Gifts Catalogue.

Overall the BenchMach® report showed that the result of the Virtual Gift Catalogue mailing wasn’t noticeably different to an appeal mailing in that it was the best-performing donors who responded.

Consequently it therefore proved a useful way of adding another mailing into a programme that would continue to deliver donations, income levels and a return on investment, exactly as if the catalogue had never been mailed nor the additional income received.

You might call it bunce. (Please email me alastair@twcat.co.uk if you’d like a copy of the report.)

A cautionary tale: It's no good everybody having the same hymnsheet if some are singing to a different tune

As we approach the end of the year it’s time to review objectives not only to see if they've been met, but to see if they've been 'aligned'.

Last year TW CAT was delighted to have sailed through its assessment for Investors in People. But it came with one proviso – that we had clearly to show the link between our organisational objectives and those of each individual member of the team. Alignment was all. So the new Human Resources Manager’s brief includes developing Personal Development Plans that are linked directly to our organisational objectives.

And it comes with a cautionary tale.

When an American organisation launched in the UK its aim was to recruit sufficient members for it to be number one. For a while, it worked – people joined in their hundreds, even thousands, and soon the goal was in sight.

Then it hit a snag. Called ‘churn’.

People were signing up then leaving as soon as a built-in opt-out could be exercised, only to sign up for a second, third or even fourth time – presumably to enjoy the new member benefits all over again.

So we called a big meeting.

All the best brains were there from both their team and the agency. We spent two days re-writing their organisational objectives and a strategy to meet them, hinged around massively enhanced retention activity.

And it came with a warning. If we didn’t stick to the plan, we’d fail. The organisation would fold and at best be taken over by its major competitor. And that’s exactly what happened. The organisation failed and was taken over by its major competitor.

Because the two principal executives involved had personal objectives that were completely at odds with the organisation’s objectives. They were paid per recruit. So ‘churn’ was good for them. Very good for them.

Every time a member left and returned, they doubled, trebled or even quadrupled the executives’ performance-related bonuses.

So, at a time of the credit crunch, recession, collapse of capitalism … call it what you will, it’s worth reviewing your team’s individual personal objectives to ensure they dovetail with those of the organisation.

Because if they don’t, you may not only fail Investors in People, but the organisation itself could fail. It’s happened before.

Ask strategies ...

Continuing on the recession theme, maximising income from donors, whilst not bludgeoning them with a million and one asks is going to become a key driver for many charities in the next few months.

I relly don't like making recommendations without hard data to back them up, so one piece of recent learning has really pleased me.

After a number of years using an ask strategy which looked at using last gift, one of our clients recently moved to using a supporters highest gift in the last three years as the basis for prompt amouunts. Guess what, average gifts to appeals have gone up by over 50% in less than six months. And do you know what else? Response rates have been completely unaffected. So, a simple change to our ask strategy is delivering considerably more income per donor, but not putting people off responding.

I am a big believer in maximising value. In your next appeal, give a highest gift strategy a go - you may like what you find.

Our view on the recession ...

Well, we may as well kick off this blog with something topical, so here is a transcript of a piece I've put together for a few people about the recession and its impact on individual giving.

Take a look ...

The impact of the recession on individual giving

There can be little doubt that much of world is heading towards recession. In the UK most sectors are witnessing a large contraction and the government and Bank of England have officially acknowledged that we are in recession. Many observers are suggesting that the downturn will last throughout 2009. A number of analysts are predicting a much longer period before the global economy recovers.

Charities exist in an increasingly commercial environment, and as in the commercial sector, not everyone will share the same experience in an economic downturn. Whilst many will suffer, smart operators may be able to turn the situation to their advantage if they implement suitable strategies. We believe that the charities that will be best placed to thrive are those that are nimble, efficient and balance short-term tactical measures whilst steering organisations toward existing strategic goals.

We suggest that fundraisers should plan for adverse conditions for the next 12 to 18 months. Some charities are already experiencing a down turn in voluntary income from all sources. However, this experience is not universal. A recent anecdotal survey of 12 leading charities suggested that their experiences in 2008 were equally split across experiencing no change, increasing income, or facing up to a significant decline in donations. There is clearly no universal experience. Our experience, and that of the vast majority of our charity partners, is that at the moment income from individual giving is being maintained. Indeed, many report an excellent 2008 in financial terms. However with increasingly gloomy economic predictions for 2009, and ongoing uncertainty about how long and how deep recession will be means that their will inevitably be an impact. Charities must be braced for this.

A recent piece of analysis by think tank NFP Synergy highlighted that whilst the sector experiences a reduction in income in times of recession or downturn the impact is less than that of the wider economy i.e. charities are typically relatively well placed compared to many other sectors.

MORI recently carried out a poll of adults in the UK. People were asked whether they would be more or less likely to donate money to charity in the current economic climate. The majority of respondents (51%) say they would be neither more nor less likely to donate money to charity; 13% say they would be more likely to donate money to charity; and 31% say they would be less likely to donate money to charity.

Many households are going to experience a difficult time of it over the next year. People will reassess existing financial commitments and carefully consider new ones. As people face uncertainty over their jobs, committing to a longer-term regular gift may become less attractive for many potential supporters. It is also likely that supporters from lower-income and higher risk demographic groups are the first to give up support because of a reduction in disposable income. More affluent supporters will continue to have the funds available to give, but will consider where to place their giving very carefully. Charities may therefore see responses to appeals fall, but average gifts increase as only those most able and willing to give continue to do so.

In summary we believe that recruiting new supporters, particularly regular givers will become more challenging. Before the downturn began, it was a common experience in the sector to witness an ever more challenging environment for successful recruitment activity. However, it is important that charities continue a programme of recruitment even if short-term returns on investment are affected. Those charities who stop recruiting will suffer long-term losses even after the economy recovers and face potential supporters being recruited by other competitor charities.

The above scenario also highlights the importance of ensuring charities keep supporters engaged and on board – it will be doubly costly to lose donors at this critical time. We cannot emphasise this enough – engaging with supporters to ensure their continued support and loyalty is more important now than at any time in the recent past. Charities must listen to the needs and fears of their supporters and respond accordingly. Feedback, update, engage and thank. Without these mechanisms in place, charities will face a decline in response, but even more worryingly, risk donors moving to support other organisations who are better placed to meet their needs.

Responses to these issues include emphasising cash donations in the short term. People give cash with a short-term point of view and in a time of uncertainty are likely to support if they can afford it at that point in time.

All charities must focus on ensuring retention programmes are working at optimal efficiency to reduce attrition. For instance, if a donor contacts a charity to cancel a regular gift why not offer them a payment holiday for 6 or even 12 months rather than accept the calculation straight away?

However, opportunities continue to exist, and will do so in 2009 and beyond. Charities that are quick to act, innovative and that place the donors needs at the heart of their fundraising will be best placed to minimise the financial impact.

Those charities who are bold and decisive will be the ones who win in the longer-term.