An easy way to raise more money: give your donors choices

Why do reply devices almost always have choices like this?

FA RDfront

It’s because giving donors choices is good, as noted on the Passionate Giving blog, at Provide Options in Your Ask:

… a good salesperson will often provide two or three options, including the one she is really wanting the customer to buy. It can sound like this: “Mrs. Jones, as we have talked over the last few weeks about what would really work for you in this situation, I have come to believe that Item B (the preferred option) might be the best choice for you. However, you also might be interested in Item A (2nd option which may be a higher price point) or Item C (3rd option with a lower price point than the preferred option).”

Direct mail aimed at general donors typically gives three choices for giving amounts (plus a fourth that’s a choose-your-own). I’ve seen some testing lately that indicates more choices brings in higher response.

So don’t limit yourself to three! Five, seven, even ten can raise more for you!

But remember that offering a choice of donation amounts is usually the best thing to do!

Hey! Depending on when you’re reading this, you have somewhere around 24 to sign up for my free Moceanic webinar, The Secret Blueprint for Direct Mail that Makes Donors LOVE to Give.

Time is running out! There are still open spots, but you need to sign up now!


Comments

2 responses to “An easy way to raise more money: give your donors choices”

  1. The data on this are, unfortunately, very mixed. There’s this viewpoint and there’s the famous Paradox of Choice argument, typified by the jam study (where shoppers bought more jam when there were six options to taste versus 24).
    So they did a metastudy on this that basically said “sometimes more choices are better and sometimes fewer are better and it’s really difficult to figure out when.” Full study at http://www.scheibehenne.de/ScheibehenneGreifenederTodd2010.pdf
    So, worth testing, but not worth taking as holy writ.

  2. The data on this are, unfortunately, very mixed. There’s this viewpoint and there’s the famous Paradox of Choice argument, typified by the jam study (where shoppers bought more jam when there were six options to taste versus 24).
    So they did a metastudy on this that basically said “sometimes more choices are better and sometimes fewer are better and it’s really difficult to figure out when.” Full study at http://www.scheibehenne.de/ScheibehenneGreifenederTodd2010.pdf
    So, worth testing, but not worth taking as holy writ.

Leave a Reply

What this blog is about

The future of fundraising is not about social media, online video, or SEM. It’s not about any technology, medium, or technique. It’s about donors. If you need to raise funds from donors, you need to study them, respect them, and build everything you do around them. And the future? It’s already here. More.

Blog policies

Subscribe

Get new posts by email:

About the blogger

Jeff BrooksJeff Brooks has been serving the nonprofit community for more than 35 years and blogging about it since 2005. He considers fundraising the most noble of pursuits and hopes you’ll join him in that opinion. You can reach him at jeff [at] jeff-brooks [dot] com. More.


Archives

Blogroll

Categories


Search the blog

The future of fundraising is not about social media, online video, or SEM. It’s not about any technology, medium, or technique. It’s about donors. If you need to raise funds from donors, you need to study them, respect them, and build everything you do around them. And the future? It’s already here. More.

Recent Comments

About the blogger

Jeff Brooks has been serving the nonprofit community for more than 30 years and blogging about it since 2005. He considers fundraising the most noble of pursuits and hopes you’ll join him in that opinion. You can reach him at jeff [at] jeff-brooks [dot] com.

Blog Roll

someone’s blog