The Pentera Blog
Experts Russell James and Claudine Donikian Discuss Words That Encourage Planned Giving
On May 28, planned giving researcher Russell James of Texas Tech University and Pentera CEO & Chief Marketing Officer Claudine A. Donikian will present a session on "Words and Phrases That Encourage Planned Giving" at the annual conference of the Philanthropic Planning Group of Greater New York (PPGGNY). The presentation is based on new research by James and on Donikian's research of Pentera clients and expertise in marketing communications.
What follows is the inside scoop of how the May 28 joint session came about - based on actual e-mail comments between the two experts.
Claudine:
Hi Russell, hope this finds you well! I read the description that you sent in for the PPGGNY session in May about the best words and phrases to encourage planned giving. It sounds very interesting. I remember from our conversation at the Pentera dinner at NCPP about how people sometimes hear advice about how marketing copy should be benefits-oriented and more "touchy feely," which certainly is true. But then it seems this concept is taken to an extreme and then people think that details or tax benefits should be avoided altogether in marketing materials as a result. If my memory serves me right and if I'm explaining this well, you and I agreed that readers/donors do want the details and tax-benefits but maybe later in the educational process.
Russell:
Claudine, this is fantastic and really thought-provoking. You are absolutely correct that the results I am sharing relate only to the initial reaction to the concept for a general audience. They don't test anything about what happens later in the process where, ultimately, details and technicalities can become necessary and important. I feel like we should do a joint session on this topic ... where you could give more details on "the rest of the story," i.e., what happens after the initial reactions piece that I am studying.
Claudine:
I'm a huge proponent of and an author of engaging headlines that draw readers in.
Russell:
Yes, I am mostly studying "headlines." In other words, people are expressing their level of initial interest after reading a single sentence. That's it. But even in that context, mentioning the presence of tax benefits is quite positive and powerful.
Claudine:
But we also find that donors want the details about gifts - and request them.
Russell:
Yes, we are on the same page. My thought is that people tend to make decisions instinctively (i.e., heart reaction) and then spend time verifying the reasonableness of the decision through the details part (i.e., head reaction). It's almost like a two-stage decision. Stage one is, "Am I interested at all?" Stage two is, "I think I'm interested, now let's figure out the details." My results deal only with getting past stage one.
There are different donors with different approaches, but all the "gory details" should be easily accessible, which, with Web sites, is pretty easy to make that a click away, but not front page headlines stuff.
Claudine:
What do you believe is "later," and is this point covered in your topic?
Russell:
I don't have any results on this, and I haven't figured out a good way to test it yet. Mostly what I do is to just emphasize what the actual results are about, i.e., they are about initial reactions and, to use your word, "headlines." So, for example, I think a great application of the results would be how to phrase an e-mail tagline. It's just a single sentence that is sent to a general audience, which is exactly what we are testing.
But to your point, stage two (what happens after generating initial interest to investigate) isn't really in my presentation. At that point I would be more sharing opinions than results from research, so I have to stick with stage one. That's why we need to do a joint presentation!
Claudine:
I certainly don't mean we should send the "VCR instruction manual" of PG vehicles out to prospective donors as a way to market to them, not at all. But we know that donors aren't shy to request pretty comprehensive explanatory guides and that they want those details. What are your thoughts?
Russell:
Yes, I think it is really important to have all of those resources available and accessible. In other words, the "VCR instruction manual" needs to be instantly available at a phone call or Web site link. I think you want the initial simple story (simple words, stories), with access to a separately located more detailed explanation so that each donor can instantly customize their "post-initial-interest" journey. For those who like details, it is obvious where those are instantly available. For those who want to react, trust, and act, they are not slowed in the process. Clearly, the results from initial reactions tests can be misinterpreted. After doing a presentation for a university development department I had an obviously fresh-out-of-college young fundraiser say to me later, "Thanks so much for your presentation. I'm glad I don't need to know what all those technical terms mean." Uh, no. No, that's not what I meant (sigh).
Claudine:
One example I always remember is that a donor called a client of ours, a huge and well-known hospital, because she was on their planned giving Web site and couldn't find "gift annuities." She was in her 70s. Turns out it wasn't an issue with her not knowing how to navigate a Web site because gift annuities were front and center on the home page, but they were referred to as "gifts that pay income." This was a few years ago, when it was very trendy to avoid using terms like the actual gift names "because no one knows what they are." I told our client that no one knows what they are except the donors they had been educating through marketing - and they are likely looking for them on your Web site!
Russell:
I think it is generally a good idea to avoid "insider" language and instead use "donor" language. Of course, some people get so involved that they become insiders and become familiar with the language. I noticed this in some of the more recent (study) results about job titles. The use of "planned giving" in titles was actually quite positive, especially among older adults, even though I would have thought of that as a bit of an insider term.
Claudine:
With the donor who couldn't find gift annuities, we changed the client's Web site home page feature to say something like, "Gift Annuities - a gift that pays income," in order to appeal to the novices as well as the educated.
Russell:
That sounds like a good compromise. These are some really fantastic points. And I am serious about doing a joint presentation at PPGGNY!
For those attending PPGGNY, the session is on May 28 at 11 a.m., and the complete title is "Words That Work for 2015: Statistical Analysis of the Words & Phrases That Encourage Planned Giving." See https://ppggny.site-ym.com/?PGDay2015Innovation
