IBJOpinion

FELDMANN: Fundraising trends to watch for in 2011

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Derrick FeldmannWell, it’s that time of year again: time to gaze into the crystal ball and predict what trends will dominate fundraising in the year ahead.

Before we do that, though, let’s take a look at what shaped the fundraising landscape in 2010.

• Text campaigns: The Haiti earthquake inspired mobile users to give more than $35 million for victims of this natural disaster. Organizations that thought they could emulate this success realized quickly that it requires a specific recipe: impulse opportunity, specific needs and media/awareness.

• Social media: If you’ve not heard about the power of social communities, you must be living under a rock. Not-for-profits that have embraced social media are wrestling with the question dogging everyone: How much do we invest—in money, time and staff—in this trend?

• Transparency: Talking openly with donors about how their gifts are used and how they made a difference yields better relationships. It’s no longer enough to say, “Give because it’s for a good cause.” The top U.S. award for websites—the “Webby”—went to not-for-profits that developed new ways to use the Web to communicate the impact of donors’ gifts.

• The multi-channel donor: Donors no longer interact with organizations through one channel only (direct mail, social media, e-mail or events). Donors who give through traditional methods use websites to get information. Those who receive e-mail or online-based communications also give offline through direct mail. And there is a growing trend of older donors who use the Web without giving online.

Having covered what happened in 2010, let’s predict the trends for 2011.

• The technology trifecta: Organizations will look at communications and fundraising through the lens of the technology trifecta: Web, mobile and social media. They’ll test concepts in all three technologies to discover the right recipe for their own constituency bases. Mobile will gain momentum as technology and techniques improve. Social media will provide better donor communication and stewardship, and the Web will offer a tool for transparency and donor interaction. Testing and experimenting will be key to implementation. Organizations must manage expectations and define effective donor delivery methods without simply copying others’ tactics.

• Communication preferences: Organizations will let donors select how they receive communication. This practice will have the added benefit of strengthening donor relationships.

• Smaller consecutive gifts: Donors will seize opportunities to provide smaller amounts of support several times during the year. Organizations that enable impulse giving will see more dollars and stronger donor relationships.

• Giving transaction time: Organizations will decrease the time between the giving decision and the actual transaction. One-click gifts, instantaneous giving and other impulse-giving technology will gain popularity. However, this trend comes with a caveat: Making it easy on the front end doesn’t give organizations a license to decrease stewardship activities.

• Donor networks: We will see the rise of donor networks—donors who come together to support causes, volunteer and engage in other activities to promote organizations. These networks will be small and intimate groups of donors who come together to help many causes. Organizations must discover existing donor networks and engage them by introducing them to their cause. Network members will want to meet and understand the causes they support—and that requires in-person delivery.

• Impact reporting: Organizations will rely more on ongoing and real-time reporting of impact, and less on annual reports. Using technology and other communication methods, organizations will inform donors regularly about how their dollars are used and how people are affected. In an instantaneous society, waiting for an annual report to learn about impact will not suffice.

Of course, all these predictions are just that: predictions. Even if these trends do emerge, they might not affect every organization in the coming year. Still, at some point, all organizations will need to incorporate aspects of these practices. Otherwise, I predict they’ll find themselves falling behind, in both fundraising and donor engagement.•

__________

Feldmann is CEO of Achieve, an Indianapolis-based consulting firm for nonprofits. He can be reached at dfeldmann@achieveguidance.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.

ADVERTISEMENT