Donor Behavior Analysis

Why do YOUR donors give? So often, we want to simplify the answer to this question with just one word: Trust. Relationship. Impact. But we all know it’s far more complex. What I'm reading this week as a philanthropy PhD student is...sociology. Insights from Dr. Emily Barman in the Annual Review of Sociology highlight how social contexts shape philanthropic behaviors. Sociologists emphasize that successful fundraising goes beyond appealing to altruism or self-interest. It involves leveraging social networks, norms, and institutional structures influencing giving. We can develop more effective, inclusive, and impactful fundraising strategies by integrating these insights. Micro-Level Factors: Individual characteristics like age, education, and religious involvement significantly influence giving patterns. Fundraisers can tailor their approaches to align with these demographic insights, ensuring our appeals resonate more deeply with potential donors. Meso-Level Factors: The relationships between donors and organizations play a pivotal role. Effective solicitation often hinges on strong, trust-based relationships. Investing in relationship-building efforts can enhance donor engagement and retention. Macro-Level Factors: Broader societal and institutional contexts shape the overall landscape of philanthropy. Understanding the legal and cultural frameworks that incentivize giving can help us navigate and leverage these systems more effectively. Key Takeaways for Fundraisers: ⏹️ Broaden Our Lens: Move beyond focusing solely on donor motivations. Consider the social contexts and networks that influence giving behaviors. ⏹️ Invest in Relationships: Strengthen ties with donors through personalized engagement and consistent communication. ⏹️ Leverage Institutional Knowledge: Stay informed about legal and societal trends affecting philanthropy to adapt our strategies accordingly. Barman, E. (2017). The social bases of philanthropy. Annual Review of Sociology, 43(1), 271-290. #Philanthropy #Fundraising #Sociology #Giving #Nonprofits #SocialImpact #AnnualReviewOfSociology #StrategicFundraising #BackoftheLibrary

🔴🟡🟢🔵 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆 I’ll admit it: I used to treat all donors (and colleagues) the same. I believed if we shared a compelling case for support — everyone would just 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘪𝘵. Right? Wrong. Then I discovered behavioural profiling. Tools like 𝗖-𝗺𝗲, which help people understand different communication and thinking styles: • 🔵 𝗕𝗹𝘂𝗲: Detail-oriented, analytical, cautious • 🟢 𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻: Supportive, values-driven, steady • 🔴 𝗥𝗲𝗱: Results-focused, action-oriented, decisive • 🟡 𝗬𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄: Big-picture thinkers, emotionally expressive, people-focused Understanding this has changed the way I work. 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗗𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗿𝘀: 🔵 People with a 𝗯𝗹𝘂𝗲 behavioural preference will likely scrutinise your financial accounts 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 the first meeting. They’ll want your impact data, KPIs, and maybe even your reserves policy. Don’t bury the facts — lead with them. Be prepared for detailed questions. 🟡 𝗬𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄𝘀 love emotion, vision and big-picture impact. They want stories that tug on the heartstrings, bold ideas, and opportunities to connect personally with your cause. Paint them a picture. 🔴 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝘀 want to know: what’s the goal, how do we get there, and what’s the ROI (in money or impact)? Be brief, bold, and have a clear ask. 🟢 People with a 𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 behavioural preference are relational and thoughtful. They’ll value your values. They’ll want to see trust, ethics, and long-term community commitment. Authenticity and care matter most here. 💡 𝘚𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭 — 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘵. 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲𝘀: I’ve also used these insights to build better internal relationships: • I don’t overwhelm Blue colleagues with big visions without the backing data. • I give Green teammates time to process and space to contribute. • I keep meetings short and outcomes-focused for Reds. • And I bring energy and enthusiasm into brainstorms with Yellows. When we meet people where 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 are, things move faster — and smoother. 🧭 It's Not a Box, It's a Compass Profiling tools aren’t about labelling people. They’re about increasing self-awareness and empathy, so we can communicate more effectively. And in a sector where relationships are everything — with donors, volunteers, trustees, and teams — that’s a game-changer. Have you used behavioural tools like C-me, Insights, or DISC in your work? What’s worked (or not!) for you.👇 #charitycomms #fundraising #donorrelations #leadership #communication #Cme #nonprofitlife #charitysector #personaldevelopment

My nonprofits in the community - are you planning a donor survey in the next two months? Here are some examples of how you can ensure that the data does not sit silently in your work folders but actually lets it help you take meaningful actions. Example 1: Say your survey question is: "How likely are you to continue donating to our organization in the next year?" ● Data says: If 60% of donors say they are "very likely" to continue donating, but 30% are "somewhat likely" and 10% are "unlikely," this indicates a potential drop-off in donor retention. ● Turning that data into action: Focus retention efforts on the "somewhat likely" group. Create a targeted campaign that re-engages these donors by highlighting recent successes, impact stories, or new initiatives they might care about. Additionally, reach out to the "unlikely" group to understand their concerns and see if any issues can be addressed. Example 2: Say your survey question is: "Which of the following areas do you believe your donation has the most impact?" ● Data says: 50% of respondents say their donation has the most impact on "Education Programs," while only 10% say "Healthcare Initiatives." ● Turning that data into action: Understand the why and promote the success and need for your "Healthcare Initiatives" more prominently, aiming to increase donor awareness and support in this underfunded area. Example 3: Say your survey question is: "What is your primary reason for donating to our organization?" ● Data says: If the top reason to engage is "Alignment with my values" (40%) followed by "Transparency in how funds are used" (35%). ● Turning that data into action: Emphasize your organization's values and transparency in all communications. Regularly update donors on how their funds are being used with clear, detailed reports, and align your messaging with the core values that resonate with your donor base. Example 4: Say your survey question is: "How satisfied are you with the level of communication you receive from our organization?" ● Data says: If 70% of donors are "satisfied", 20% are "neutral," and 10% are "dissatisfied," there's room for improvement in communication. ● Turning that data into action: Understand the "neutral" and "dissatisfied" groups to pinpoint where communication may be lacking. This could involve increasing the frequency of updates, personalizing communications, or providing more opportunities for donor feedback and engagement. Sit with the data you collect. Read the numbers. Read the stories. Read the hopes, barriers, and interests of those humans in your data. The best possibility of a survey is to make the humans in that data feel included and belong by listening and acting on their perspectives. Co-create change with your community in those surveys. #nonprofits #nonprofitleadership #community #inclusion

𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐃𝐨 𝐃𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐆𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐋𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐄𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬? 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 Yesterday, I presented our research at the UCD Geary Institute for Public Policy at University College Dublin, exploring a fascinating question in charitable giving behavior. 𝐎𝐮𝐫 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 We asked participants to distribute money between two real charities focused on improving children's education in Kenya. The difference? Their impact varied dramatically: - Charity A: Increases education by 0.3 days for every 0.50 euro donated - Charity B: Increases education by 30 days for every 0.50 euro donated Despite Charity B being 100 times more effective, our findings revealed something surprising. 𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 Only one-third of donors allocated all their funds to the most impactful charity. Another third—whom we've termed "splitters"—divided their donations exactly equally between both charities, despite the massive effectiveness gap. This raises important questions about donor psychology and how we communicate impact metrics in the philanthropic sector. Even when presented with clear effectiveness data, many donors prioritize other factors in their decision-making. Our complete paper exploring these findings will be released soon, co-authored with my colleagues Janek Kretschmer and Samara Cooper.

Why do people give? It's the million-dollar question in fundraising (sometimes literally). We often focus on the 'how' of fundraising, but understanding the 'why' can be transformative. After years of studying donor behavior, here's an insight that might surprise you: People don't give to the neediest causes. They give to the causes that make them feel needed. Let that sink in for a moment. This isn't about manipulation—it's about tapping into fundamental human psychology. We all want to feel that our actions matter, that we can make a difference. So, how do we apply this insight? 1. Frame your ask as an invitation, not a plea Instead of "We need your help," try "Your support can make this happen." 2. Be specific about impact Don't just say "Your donation helps." Say "Your $100 provides a week of meals for a family." 3. Offer meaningful involvement Beyond money, invite donors to contribute ideas, volunteer, or spread the word. 4. Celebrate the donor's role In your impact reports, make the donor the hero of the story. 5. Create exclusive opportunities Offer behind-the-scenes looks or special events that make donors feel like insiders. Remember, at its core, philanthropy is about love for humanity. By making donors feel needed, we're not just raising money—we're nurturing that love and creating a community of engaged supporters. Now, I'm curious: What's the most surprising donor motivation you've encountered in your work? Share your story in the comments. Your experience could provide valuable insights for all of us in understanding the complex psychology of giving!

HALF of donors don’t return after their first gift. Why? Because most nonprofits treat donors like ATMs, not people. Here’s how AI-driven personalization can help: 1. AI analyzes donor behavior, preferences & giving patterns. No more generic “Dear Supporter” emails. 2. It segments donors intelligently. Big givers, monthly donors, one-time donors, each gets tailored messaging. 3. It automates personalized outreach at scale. Birthday emails. Impact reports aligned with donor interests. Smart thank-yous. And the results? Nonprofits using AI personalization see retention rates increase by up to 20%. Even better: Personalized emails deliver 6x higher transaction rates than non-personalized ones. What does that mean for you? More recurring donors. More predictable revenue. Less time spent chasing one-off gifts. With purpose and impact, Mario

DONOR PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH ROUND-UP In case you missed it, here's a roundup of some of our latest research findings on donor psychology & effective and ethical fundraising: * Identification with (1) other donors, (2) beneficiaries, and (3) fundraisers can all promote charitable giving, with some conditions: https://lnkd.in/gaWAjzcd * Thank you gifts in fundraising appeals may backfire, while offers like matches and recognition should promote giving: https://lnkd.in/ga6ihdAU * Eight key factors influence which beneficiaries generate the most financial support - (1) temporal proximity, (2) young age, (3) female gender, (4) misery, (5) innocence, (6) ingroup status, (7) identifiability, and (8) high proportion: https://lnkd.in/gRMZWt2M * Mass market fundraising methods that involve interpersonal interaction are linked to lower donation values over time, possibly because people feel pressured to give: https://lnkd.in/gcPtenB3 * Fundraisers walk an ethical tightrope by having to consider the needs of three key stakeholders - donors, beneficiaries, and fundraisers: https://lnkd.in/d6yxEh-H * Donors' motivations for giving vary across cause types: https://lnkd.in/g6CZi3Us Almost all of these articles are open access (i.e., can be downloaded for free) and we have snappy summary videos or blogs about most of them on www.donorpsych.org - If you haven't already, please subscribe to the website and we'll send you a research round-up of the latest insights a couple of times per year.

Fundraising Innovation Always Lags Behind Donor Behavior We're clearly in the middle of a massive shift in how donors want to engage with nonprofits. But where's the innovation in advancement? History shows us the pattern: 🔵 Donors embraced credit cards in the 1970s, nonprofits adopted online giving in the 2000s 🔵 Social media exploded in 2006, most nonprofits didn't master social fundraising until 2015 🔵 Mobile giving became possible in 2010, many organizations still struggle with mobile optimization Now AI is transforming donor expectations, but we're still using fundraising approaches from the direct mail era. Donors increasingly expect: ✴️ Personalized communication that reflects their interests ✴️ Transparency about impact and organizational challenges ✴️ Multiple ways to engage beyond writing checks ✴️ Authentic relationships, not transactional interactions Yet most nonprofits are still: 🔵 Sending mass appeals with minimal personalization 🔵 Hiding organizational struggles behind glossy materials 🔵 Treating donors like ATMs rather than partners 🔵 Using AI to automate relationships instead of deepen them The question isn't whether donor behavior will continue evolving. It's whether advancement professionals will adapt fast enough. Those who understand and respond to changing philanthropic realities will thrive. Those who don't will watch their donor base age out. #fundraising #donorbehavior #philanthropy #advancement