I'm amazed that attitudes towards giving is so surprising to people in the industry!  Reciprocity is human nature.  Everything we do is for our own benefit; I give to charity because it makes me feel good.  I give to the charities that reflect my own beliefs or work for an issue that has impacted on my life. 

People have very short memories.  We all remember watching the Tsunami disaster on TV that Boxing Day, and we all remember how terrible we felt.  Many of us dug in to our pockets at the time, but how many of us are following the story now? Our attention quickly focused on matters closer to home, and now, that focus is our personal wealth; paying the bills and praying the economy doesn't sink in to a depression that sees us loosing our jobs.  Giving to charity is something we can only do when it becomes personal.  When someone asks us to give, we do; either because it makes us feel good about ourselves or because we don't want to feel the guilt that follows saying 'no'.

Millions of people spend millions of pounds on the lottery each week, not because the money goes to good causes, but because there is the slightest chance that they could just win a slice of the pie.  The charity angle justifies the gamble. Red Nose Day works because it makes the nation feel united; it tugs on our heart strings, makes us feel a little guilty, gives us some entertainment as a reward and gives us a sense of inclusion.

Charities need to be opportunists and they need to exploit human nature.  That's why charity balls work so well.  The rich and famous love to part with their money because they get something out of it.  It is a rare creature that gives silently and anonamously.

There is a growing trend towards online giving including free to use search engines that donate part of the revenue you help to generate to charity.  The beauty of this type of giving is that it is free, so it does not impact on my personal bottom line, I can give every day whilst I search the net, rather than when it suits me and it reinforces the bond between me and my chosen charity on an ongoing basis.  With Everyclick (which works for every charity in the UK), my charity has a customised wallpaper on the homepage (see www.everyclick.com/rspb) so everytime I go to my computer I am reminded about the great work my charity does.

Services like these are not being exploited by charities enough, probably because they do not understand the power of the internet and are not linking the possible effects of reinforcing the emotional bond between their brand and their supporters on a daily basis.  In the current economic climate, it is imperative that charities understand the opportunity that this new trend of free giving is offering them.

Of course, it's possible that the people answering were only giving in to peer pressure when they agreed that it's peer pressure that influences the amount they give.

To be honest, this isn't anything new in my view.  When your best mate asks you to sponsor him for a marathon, and you know he weighs in at over 30 stone (old money, me) are you going to say 'no, I don't really want to give any money to CRUK, yeah, I know your mum died of cancer, and they supported you a lot through it, but they just don't *do it* for me., or "donkeys?  Honestly? Dude, wtf?"

Or, I suspect, like me, you'll say, hell yeah mate, of course, and good luck! What and John put in £20? go on, me too.

Now I know that you hate the old F2F ask / method / whatever, and as you know from my posts, I come down on both sides of it, depending. Perhaps because we don't have a lot of them in my patch, or perhaps because I've never had the massively negative experiences sme other people talk about (and I wonder - have people HAD them, or is it a collective memory / urban myth, "my friend was in town that day and SHE SAW IT, well not my friend, but her friend, actually her friend's friend' friend heard about it but it was somewhere else - honest, UFO's are real" thing.

Last week was probably the 'worst', I've ever had, because after the girls good pitch, strong arguments and nice stories, I said well thanks, but I don't think I will right now.  Then she said "but WHYYEE", oh PLEASE", which I pointed out to her as a not winning strategy for me now, or for anyone lon term ,so she said 'good point, well thanks anyway'

I know, I was traumatised, honestly.  And on my lunch break too!

BUt seriously, we know the ask has to be right, and we know that it sometimes / often isn't with F2F, but then is it with everything else always? Better to get people to report and repair the bad asks than ban the whole thing. Because that's what fundraising, and the FRSB, and everyone should be concentrating on.  Asking people in a way that inspires, not 'avoiding asking in case it upsets / irritates / peeves'

All of this is more eloquently put elsewhere, but now the wifi is working, and I'm on a rant...

...and it does illustrate nicely the debate going on about chugging on a previous blog entry. But I have enough confidence in people (I hope it's not misplaced) to think that they'll respond more positively to fundraising appeals if they don't feel annoyed by the charity making 'the Ask'.  And it's my view that chuggers probably annoy more than they do good. 

Adam, Intelligent Giving

It does rather reinforce the view, though, that people won't give unless they're asked.  WHich is why fundraisers are needed (and even face to face ones, perhaps), to go out and ASK.

Hi Adam,

Bear in mind that this is a few tiny snippets from over 40 hours of interviews with fundraisers, donors and normal folk in London, Norwich, Birmingham, Bristol, Boston, Chicago and Los Angeles!

These particular snippets came from a session in Norwich.

The quality and type of ask is something people feel *very* strongly about (some of the rants on chugging could have gone on for hours, if not days). But there does seem to be a clear pattern for the mainstream public.

There are some clear patterns but we'll have more to say on the matter soon. Thanks for blogging it!