Being a subscriber to a few blogs ensures I don’t miss a thing people are writing about. One of my favourites is written by Jeff Brooks over at Donor Power Blog. Time and time again he nails something that is floating around in my head, and he obviously feels that he can speak the truth and tell it like it is. His post on “Does Brand Kill Fundraising” is a case in point.
He says “…in the real world, branding shackles fundraising. And the more involved the branding effort is, the more damage it does to fundraising revenue.”
He makes a great point about how the very nature of branding is that it is all about you. Which is just great.
But what about your donor? Where is your brand book that is all about your donors? What? You don’t have one?
Jeff closes with, “Keep your brand simple. And not about you.”
I don’t completely agree with him on that. You do need to have a common voice, a common way of communicating with your donor. You need every touch point a donor might have with your charity to be a similar, inspiring and helpful experience – but one that constantly engages the donor and makes it about them… Like Jeff says, keep your brand simple, and focus on what’s most important – your donor…
And I will personally design and put together a brand book for FREE the first charity who wants to create one all about their donor.
I wish I was a charity because that is a heckuva steel!! Too bad most of them don’t know it. Brilliant post, as usual.
Thanks a lot Kim for your thoughts! Let’s see if anyone takes me up on it.
I comletely agree. I’ve worked with a number of charities (who shall remain nameless) that put too much emphasis on their branding guidelines and neglected to focus on what was most important, communicating to their donors and engaging them in order to help the people who benefit through their misssion.
Great offer John! May be an interesting collaboration.
Without a question, donor focus needs to be an integral part of every charity’s brand. I would suggest that considering the brand as a deterrent in fund raising activities shows a lack of insight into donor cultivation activities. It does, though reflect the 70’s version of Direct Marketing. When classic direct marketing is used with brand affinity (brand direct), the results are extremely good.
It’s a complex conversation, but we are seeing significant increases in charity overall income growth (therefore, donor cultivation) when the brand is strong, focused and purposeful. Brand thinking is an excellent exercise to help organizations focus on their core purpose, rather than go off on tangents that are costly and do not generate income. We are seeing many organizations, especially ones that are new and still a little conceptual, receive a high benefit from a strong brand and positioning conversation. gayle
Good thoughts there Gayle. I agree with some of your thoughts – look at the Obama campaign – strong brand – even stronger fundraising. One message.
This is a bigger conversation for sure and I’ve absolutely simplified it – but my overall point remains the same – charities who spend more time making sure their agency use their pms colour and fonts correctly because that’s what their styleguide tells them and less time on crafting a provocative message or case for support are hurting themselves greatly – and i say this because I’ve worked for some of them!