timing our e-appeals to coordinate with snail mail appeals

Christine Weinheimer

We have a well-established direct mail (hard copy) appeal program that we will still rely on greatly for donor renewals and revenue while we build our e-appeal program. We usually do a Spring, Summer, and Fall appeal that includes an initial mailing and a follow-up mailing. We are trying to figure out how to get the e-appeals to complement and not complicate our mail appeals -- for example, should we use them as a follow-up to those who received hard copy appeals or send the e-appeal first and save money by only sending the hard copy to non-responders? Any ideas?

Adam Lemmon

Great question Christine:

Many non-profits struggle with integration of their offline appeals and their online appeals with regards to the timing. One thing that seems to be a good starting point for integrating the two types of appeals is to make sure that you have a reference to the offline appeal in the email that you send out.

For example, if you are sending out an appeal via snail mail, and it has a reference to the new education center with a photo of the building, it will help drive the message home to then send out an email with the same picture and some text copy that even says, "We sent you an appeal in the mail regarding our new education center, we wanted to remind you that there's still time to give, and now, you can give online! Click here to suppor the education center"

In the above example, you would start with the offline appeal and then follow-up with the email. That seems to be the pattern that I've seen other non-profits using when it comes to the timing of offline + online appeals.

Other thoughts from the group?

Adam

Patrick Hansen

Adam Lemmon:

Great question Christine:

Many non-profits struggle with integration of their offline appeals and their online appeals with regards to the timing. One thing that seems to be a good starting point for integrating the two types of appeals is to make sure that you have a reference to the offline appeal in the email that you send out.

For example, if you are sending out an appeal via snail mail, and it has a reference to the new education center with a photo of the building, it will help drive the message home to then send out an email with the same picture and some text copy that even says, "We sent you an appeal in the mail regarding our new education center, we wanted to remind you that there's still time to give, and now, you can give online! Click here to suppor the education center"

In the above example, you would start with the offline appeal and then follow-up with the email. That seems to be the pattern that I've seen other non-profits using when it comes to the timing of offline + online appeals.

Other thoughts from the group?

Adam

Adam's take is spot-on. Here are some additional considerations I've encountered when working with clients to develop integrated appeals:

Most of my clients choose to "chase" offline (direct mail, DM) appeals with complimentary online communications. The timing of this varies, but the e-appeal typically broadcasts within 7-10 days of when you expect the direct mail piece to arrive in your supporters' mailboxes. This is consistent with general marketing principles of message repetition to make sure we "get through the noise" and communicate our message coherently across channels. This general practice has also evolved from the desire to reinforce the overall message in a way that is most likely to improve, rather than suppress, the DM response. While this has become a common practice, it's worth noting that I have yet to see a scientific split test of e-appeals arriving before vs. arriving after the DM appeal.

To your other question - do we suppress online supporters from the offline appeal - my answer would be "no", at least not initially. It's easy to get bogged down in the nuances of managing the data and creating your offline selects based on online response (and vice versa). The organizations that generally put the most effort into this kind of suppression management are membership organizations where your constituents truly expect you to know, independent of response channel (DM, TM, online) that they've renewed their annual membership. For all other integrated solicitations, it's usually sufficient initially to start adding language to your e-appeals like "PS - If you've already mailed a check to support our capital campaign - thank you!" or "PS - If you've already made a gift, please consider telling others about this campaign."

There are two common reasons I encounter for this kind of suppression management:

1. To minimize donor fatigue

2. To minimize the cost of the DM appeal (only sending the DM appeal to those who didn't respond online)

To point #1, it's worth remembering that the person who just gave is also the most likely person to give again. If your campaign is compelling and each message is designed to add new information or momentum to the campaign, then the person who receives a second solicitation (for example an e-appeal) after responding already (for example, via the mail) is most likely to give again.

To point #2, I would just say that unless your online program is large or unless you're truly membership-based, then the cost of managing a more complicated select probably outweighs the marginal benefits of supressing a handful of DM solicitations.

-patrick