|
No one wants to listen to complaints every day. Whether the complainer is a spouse (“Put your dirty dishes in the dishwasher!”), one of your kids (“Why can’t you take me to the mall?”) or a donor (“Stop sending me so much mail!”), it might seem easier to ignore the situation than to do something about it.
But just as you don’t want your spouse to file for divorce or your child to hitch a ride to the mall from a stranger, you also don’t want a valuable donor to say goodbye to you.
Too many nonprofit organizations don’t deal with complaints in the best
manner, and many complaints end up in the garbage can with no response. What’s the best way to deal with them? Your strategy should first depend on whether the complainer is a donor or non-donor.
If the complainer is a donor, you need to pay extra-special attention to what the person is saying … and how you respond. Probably the most frequent complaint from donors concerns the frequency of solicitations. Too often, organizations respond to such complaints by automatically suspending most solicitations to the donor. This is a major mistake.
Morris Dees, founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center and one of the early innovators of direct-response fundraising, once told me about an analysis he conducted into the giving histories of SPLC’s most frequent donor complainers. He surprisingly determined that these complainers actually were the most valuable contributors on his donor list, with higher retention rates and longer donor histories than other contributors.
Dees realized that instead of suppressing these donors from his mail schedule, which effectively would lower a donor’s likelihood of responding again, he should pursue another strategy. Instead, he developed a sophisticated response system to directly address complaints. In the case of a complaint about the frequency of solicitation, he would send a thorough letter explaining the necessity of frequent solicitations, while also explaining the benefits of SPLC’s sustainer program, which would allow the donor to contribute on a regular, pre-determined basis.
Dees’ strategy resulted in increased donor bonding, with many donors joining the sustainer program and pledging regular contributions. As he explained, donors just want to know they have been heard. A personal and quick explanation on the organization’s part often will be rewarded with even more loyalty by the complaining donor.
But just as you don’t want your spouse to file for divorce or your child to hitch a ride to the mall from a stranger, you also don’t want a valuable donor to say goodbye to you.
Too many nonprofit organizations don’t deal with complaints in the best
manner, and many complaints end up in the garbage can with no response. What’s the best way to deal with them? Your strategy should first depend on whether the complainer is a donor or non-donor.
If the complainer is a donor, you need to pay extra-special attention to what the person is saying … and how you respond. Probably the most frequent complaint from donors concerns the frequency of solicitations. Too often, organizations respond to such complaints by automatically suspending most solicitations to the donor. This is a major mistake.
Morris Dees, founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center and one of the early innovators of direct-response fundraising, once told me about an analysis he conducted into the giving histories of SPLC’s most frequent donor complainers. He surprisingly determined that these complainers actually were the most valuable contributors on his donor list, with higher retention rates and longer donor histories than other contributors.
Dees realized that instead of suppressing these donors from his mail schedule, which effectively would lower a donor’s likelihood of responding again, he should pursue another strategy. Instead, he developed a sophisticated response system to directly address complaints. In the case of a complaint about the frequency of solicitation, he would send a thorough letter explaining the necessity of frequent solicitations, while also explaining the benefits of SPLC’s sustainer program, which would allow the donor to contribute on a regular, pre-determined basis.
Dees’ strategy resulted in increased donor bonding, with many donors joining the sustainer program and pledging regular contributions. As he explained, donors just want to know they have been heard. A personal and quick explanation on the organization’s part often will be rewarded with even more loyalty by the complaining donor.
Companies Mentioned:
 |
|
Social Media ROI
Email Marketing that Works (2nd Edition)
Hitting the Email Inbox
Insurance Marketing: The Competitive Intelligence Report
Secrets of Direct Marketing Testing
