• Lindsay May – Sydney Australia

    Agree the bar on canvassing (if i understand the term Canvassing as doorknocking or face to face) seems odd.
    But what about the bar on Direct Mail. Is it correct that there was no Donor preference to recive Direct Mail?
    Odd indeed and opposes the findinsg in Fig 6 .

  • Ruth McCambridge

    the bar on that line indicate that preference and practice are aligned

  • Jenna Overbeck – Abila

    Hi Lindsay,

    Hopefully I can help clarify the figures for you. Figure 8 displays the preferences of donors who are ok being contacted in this way at least once in a while, overlaid with the frequency of the nonprofits we surveyed.

    In reference to direct mail both the nonprofit activity and donor preference of those who are at least ok with being contacted through that channel are aligned. That’s why you are seeing the yellow and blue overlap turning to a green. A majority of donors who were okay with receiving direct mail said the right amount was 2X per year or 2X per quarter, which is consistent with what we found in the activities of the nonprofits we surveyed.

    As for canvassing, I can confirm the data we show is what we heard from donors who were at least okay in being contacted through canvassing. The majority of those donors said the right amount of time for canvassing was 2X per year, 2X per quarter or 2 X per month. The shading is representative of where there was donor preference.

    Hope this helps!

  • Roderick Campbell

    This makes me wonder about the sample size and demographics. There’s a mountain of evidence that email drives the bulk of online giving and I find it somewhat hard to believe that millennials are more readily influenced by TV and radio marketing. Doesn’t match up with anything I’m seeing in the field (i.e. mail appeals and traditional media yielding lower numbers and email growing fast).

  • Jennifer

    So how often did donors want to be contacted by direct mail?

  • daniel donovan

    My word, how much passive voice can you use in one short article? This was not pleasant to read.

  • David Goettler

    This article reminds development professionals, once again, that each donor to our organizations is unique. They have unique perspectives and unique needs. This research is helpful in further defining and understanding evolving preferences of broad ranges of constituents.

  • David Goettler

    This article reminds development professionals, once again, that each donor to our organizations is unique. They have unique perspectives and unique needs. This research is helpful in further defining and understanding evolving preferences of broad ranges of constituents. http://www.goettler.com