Try as you might to avoid annoying, offending, or undervaluing our donors—the lifeblood of your organization—it still happens. Even if you have the best intentions and feel as though you always put the donor at the center of every decision, someone is going to be upset about something at some point. You simply can’t please all of the people all of the time. And, mistakes will happen. That’s just a fact of life we all have to accept as humans. It’s going to happen. It HAS happened. And it WILL happen again.
But the good news is, this doesn’t have to be bad news. Instead, consider it an opportunity. Because what you do in response to negative donor feedback can help inform better decisions down the road, and actually help strengthen your relationship with ALL of your donors in the long run.
Each complaint should be assessed and categorized. Is this a “you can’t please everyone” type of complaint? Or is it the “we made a mistake” kind? Determining that will help drive your course of action.
You Can’t Please Everyone
Donors might complain about messaging, creative concepts, frequency of communication, and method of contact. You probably don’t need to address these issues with the donor directly (unless it’s a major donor or you see the same complaint from multiple donors), but you shouldn’t ignore them completely. If possible, document and categorize constructive feedback in a central location. Over time you will have a database of complaints and donor correspondences that you can mine for trends in perception about your organization or about certain ways your organization communicates.
You shouldn’t change your communication strategy based on a few complaints from donors, but the feedback should be food for thought when crafting new touchpoints or fine tuning your plan. And, if the donor is a significant contributor, they might appreciate a brief explanation of why you do things a certain way—not in defense of what you do, but as a means to engage them as a partner who is connected enough to merit a behind-the-scenes look at your methodology. It can actually be an opportunity to connect on a deeper level. If you explain that a certain type of messaging brings in more revenue than others, you might broaden their perception and deepen their understanding of your cause. If the donor who complains about receiving too much mail understands that your direct mail channel generates the most revenue for your organization, they might be more amenable to receiving more from you. They’ve demonstrated that they’re interested in supporting your mission, so in theory, they should also support the strategy behind how you raise the money that allows you to fulfill that mission.
Preferential complaints also give you an opportunity to think about the stories you share and the topics you use to generate support for your organization. Do they resonate with a wide audience or cater to just a certain subset of donors? If you’re hearing a lot of negative feedback about a supporter or spokesperson you choose to represent your organization, you might need to find someone who is less controversial but still tells the story you want to share. At my shop, we recently featured a political activist in one of our appeals. We felt that she really personified who we are as an organization, but some of her advocacy work (not related to our cause) didn’t sit well with a few constituents. In the end, we decided to keep her as our feature because her overall appeal and positive message about the importance of activism and philanthropy far outweighed the criticism her profile generated from a few select donors. In this case, it wasn’t enough to merit a change, but it did give us pause and led us to implement a few new steps in our vetting process to help minimize future objections.
Mistakes Happen
Human error is a fact of life. No matter how collaborative your internal structure is, how many safety nets you have in place, or how “foolproof” your data mining practice is, mistakes are going to happen from time to time. But if your non-profit has a plan in place that allows you to respond appropriately, mistakes won’t be devastating to your fundraising efforts. In fact, they can become opportunities to improve.
Whether it affects just one major donor or entire segments of broad base donors, a mistake can put a wrench in your fundraising efforts. Resolving major mistakes with minimal long-term impact is completely possible, but you need to act quickly. And if you are transparent and positive, you may even be able to turn the mistake into an opportunity.
If the mistake affects a wide audience, do not hesitate to address it directly with the donors involved and take steps to fix the issue as soon as possible. Immediacy is critical. If your appeal salutations were wrong, or if you sent appeals to donors who have recently made gifts, or if you incorrectly documented past giving history, acknowledge the mistake immediately through the channel through which the error occurred—either a written note of apology or an email. Apologize for the mistake, explain how it happened (a glitch in your data, a timing error, etc.) and demonstrate that you’re taking measures to ensure it doesn’t happen again. And above all, use words that reassure the donor that you do appreciate their gift and you do have an accurate record of their giving history. Follow the apology with a corrected appeal or acknowledgement, then follow that with touchpoint communications that remind donors that, although you may make a mistake or two, you are still an outstanding organization that’s making a real difference in the world—one deserving of continued support.
Internally, review why the mistake happened and evaluate the area of breakdown. Determine what changes you can make to your process that will help eliminate similar errors in the future. It may mean adding extra review or proofing tasks, tightening up exclusion criteria, or utilizing a formal project management tool that tracks when tasks are completed and by whom. Every mistake gives you a reason to re-evaluate and improve your methods.
If the mistake affects one major donor, you should also address it as soon as possible. A phone call is the quickest and most personal method. It may mean having a difficult or uncomfortable conversation, but it will allow you to demonstrate your appreciation for the donor and convey sincere remorse for the mistake. Nothing feels better than a real conversation—a written correspondence or an email will never capture the appropriate tone. And a verbal conversation gives you a chance to highlight some of the recent good work you’ve accomplished or share details about a new initiative. It also gives you a chance to ask questions that help you see your processes from the donor’s perspective, which in turn may drive you to put practices in place that allow you better market to and steward your donors.
For example, consider what your organization might do in this situation: A small local non-profit I’m involved with recognizes its top donors with an annual year-end gala. It’s designed to acknowledge and celebrate the significant contribution these major donors make to the organization. Historically, invitations were only sent to donors who made cash gifts. In-kind gifts were not considered or recognized in that way, largely due to the fact that in-kind gifts were rare. Last year, a donor who had made a significant in-kind gift to the organization (a car) voiced his distress at being excluded from the event simply because of the type of gift he made. He felt that his contribution was just as valuable as the equivalent cash gifts made by donors who were invited to the party. And he was right. The donor’s complaint—and the frank discussion with the Stewardship Director that followed—led the organization to expand the criteria for the event invitations, as well as for their major donor recognition society. One donor’s complaint prompted the non-profit to develop a more equitable stewardship plan that recognized gifts of all kinds as equally important.
When something goes wrong, it can feel frustrating or even devastating. Focusing on the positive outcomes you can generate in the aftermath will help you resolve issues faster and less painfully. Mistakes are opportunities to revisit practices and improve policy, which will help you run your programs more efficiently with stronger results. So, while you obviously don’t want mistakes to happen, don’t overlook the benefit: in the long run, they make you stronger.
