Posts Tagged ‘Charity’

Tough times ahead for Charities

Thursday, January 7th, 2010

So, just what is on the horizon for us in 2010?

There is of course going to be an election (finally!).  Some say it will be as early as March, others that Brown will push it until the last minute in May.

But here’s the thing… it barely matters which party gets elected, they are all going to have to do the same: CUT public spending. Sorry did I say cut? It won’t be called it that.  A phrase like “a radical overhaul of public expenditure” will be used to gloss over it.

Of the multiple, unpleasant effects that this will have, one will be to put more pressure on the third sector to try and deliver the services that government has unofficially washed its hands of.
 
Our fragile economy has been on life-support for the past twelve months. This is about to be switched off and, if it doesn’t just give up the ghost there and then, one of the early consequences is likely to be a rise in unemployment.

Simultaneously taxation, on those lucky enough to have a job, is going to rise steeply.

Net effect: fewer donors with less money in their pockets.

The great challenge to our sector this year will be to meet ever-increasing demands for resources with a falling income.

We are going to have to work incredibly hard to do that.  And we’re going to have to be open to the idea of working differently. The old way of doing things may simply no longer work.

We are entering a period of huge, dinosaur-toppling change.

Online will be more important than ever as charities search for ways to open up new income streams. 
We’re all aware of an explosion in the use of social media (watch out for the  inevitable cack-handed attempts of political parties to do an Obama with it as we head into election fever.)

Many charities have been cocking a suspicious eye towards Twitter and Facebook, and some (Dogs Trust, Adopt-a-Word, Childs-i, Oxfam, RSPB, Amnesty to name but a few) have grasped these new media with both hands.

Some of the more far-sighted charities have been preparing during 2009 by establishing new digital departments. Good move. While the rest of the sector puts a committee together to agree the wording of their first tweet, they will be well placed to start connecting with new supporters online and to begin developing their digital brand identities.

As well as an election there is another tired old contest about to be re-run this year: the World Cup.   Of slightly more interest, if you’re a techie, is the fact that there are apparently millions of 3D TV sets stock-piled for the event.

2010 is definitely going to be a 3D year.  So here’s another prediction: the first 3D TV ad for a charity. (Heck we might even make it ourselves – any takers?)

To summarize, here’s the whole post in one Twitter-sized bite:  CUTS, unemployment up; income down; online v big; huge change; dead dinosaurs; 3D World Cup: England loses.

Charity video – is anyone watching?

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009

These days, charities are getting a lot of encouragement to have a video presence on the web. Good thing, too.

YouTube, now the world’s second largest search engine, runs an excellent service for non-profits – with the ability to put links in your video that go directly to your website.  It should definitely be considered as part of an effective SEO strategy – rather than just somewhere to shove old DRTV ads and odds and sods of old footage.  Check out Michael Hoffman’s post on the subject to find out why.

One of the most vocal new promoters of video is See The Difference.  If you haven’t sat through one of their infectiously enthusiastic presentations this year – where have you been?  See The Difference, when it goes live sometime this winter, will be a spectacularly shiny environment, with all sorts of bells and whistles, where you can display your charity’s fundraising videos.

It represents what the web is about: fluid communication that allows you to move intuitively from one interesting thing to another, following your whims and hunches, donating a bit here, a bit there?  The only question that keeps nagging at me is whether donors will bother to go there and look.  I really hope they will, because the demo site is seriously cool.

screen-shot-2009-10-27-at-1226121

But – and there is a big ‘BUT’ – people won’t watch your video unless it is emotionally engaging.  No-one will give to your cause as a result of your film unless you have made a persuasive case.  And no-one will want to watch any video online, no matter how worthy, if it’s long, meandering and doesn’t make an interesting point – and fast.

Doing this is simply not as easy as it looks.

If people have got short attention spans nowadays, there’s nowhere they’re shorter than online. (By the way, the optimum length for an online video is between 3 and 4 minutes.)

A while back I met with some lovely people from a medium-sized charity who had just made a See The Difference do-it-yourself-style film.  They opened the laptop and pressed play.  I watched footage, which ran for several minutes, without any voiceover, then stopped abruptly.

Apart from the missing branding and lack of logo (you might easily be left wondering which charity it featured), the missing case for support (who knows what they were actually going to do with your money?), and the fact that in their film everyone seemed pretty happy and healthy (you do have to illustrate some need when you’re fundraising) – it wasn’t too bad a piece (a bit worthy and dull, but not, you know, awful).

Perhaps these were basic errors that many charities would avoid?  I’m not so sure.

The thing is, charities are often so passionate about the change they create, and so convinced of the need, it often makes them incapable of taking a critical view of their fundraising and realising potential donors might need a bit more persuasion.

But consider this: technology has brought production costs down so much now that making a video is within the reach of just about anybody.  This means more and more people churning out their own mini productions (hence the phenomenal growth of YouTube).

Although that’s great for charities, it’s also going to make it harder and harder for your cause to stand out and be noticed.  And it’s also going to get more and more difficult to persuade the average person to give up three minutes of their life to watch your film, instead of someone else’s – not to mention to watch it and donate.

What’s the solution?  An old one I’m afraid.  Unless you’re an expert yourself, find someone who is.  As media channels have proliferated beyond all recognition, certain things have never gone out of fashion: ideas and craft.

No, you don’t have to spend a fortune on film any longer; a home video camera will do (or even a mobile phone).  But you still have to work damned hard to get someone’s attention.  You still have to think.  You still have to use your imagination.

Frustratingly, this can’t be done with a checklist.  Making a film like that is a bit like painting by numbers – it looks like a painting, but it doesn’t make you feel anything.

Moving images are still the most instantly emotive way to connect with people.  Cleverly used they can make you cry, laugh, gasp with amazement and have you diving for your wallet.

So, remember, while you’re cutting costs, that you still need to invest in the skills required to make this medium sing sweetly.  They’re worth their weight in gold (or pounds sterling!).

Why it’s worth learning to write for Twitter

Wednesday, August 19th, 2009

When I look at my Twitter-stream, I find that there are some people whose tweets regularly stand out. They offer a beguiling mix of information and wit that burst onto my screen like verbal fireworks. Beautifully formed thoughts that give the impression of having just rolled effortlessly off the keyboard.

A friend of mine, Mark Wnek, who moved out to The States to become Chief Creative Officer of Lowe NY, is a masterful Twitter writer.  He’s got a brilliant mind, a razor sharp wit and doesn’t suffer fools. His tweets sometimes read like the verbal assaults of an ego-maniac, but they’re always underpinned by self-deprecation and humanity.  Love him or hate him, his tweets are a joy to read. How the hell does he do it?

Well, for starters he’s a copywriter with 25 years experience behind him. A writer who’s taken years to learn his craft.  If you come from a background of press ad and poster writing, you can’t help but feel at home on Twitter.  (The optimum length for a poster headline is 6-8 words.)

For the would-be Mark Twain of Twitter there’s a lesson in this: follow the right people. Make sure you read at least some top quality tweets each day for inspiration.

But, like the spoken word, tweets barely even exist before being swept away by a never-ending torrent of newer posts.  Does it really matter what you write? Well, unless you’re happy talking to yourself, yes it does.

So, what makes a good tweet?

It’s a remarkably difficult question to answer.  Inevitably, it’s a combination of factors: brevity; wit; interesting information; timing; personality.

If you have  established an engaging tone of voice, then a few words from you can have a huge impact.  Stephen Fry, for example, sounds witty saying almost anything.  Easy if you’re him, but since you’re not, you’ll have to work at it.

If you’re tweeting on behalf of your charity, you need to ask yourself:

1. Are your tweets the optimum length?
2. What should the mix of messages be?
3. How often is it okay to ask for support?
4. How do you write a tweet that will get re-tweeted?
5. How do you track your tweets?

(Answers at the end.)

There are some tweeters who come totally left of field.  One of my favourites is Drsamueljohnson.  He (or she?) writes every tweet in the style of the esteemed 18th century author.  Believe it or not, it works.  The tweets are unmistakable and often hilarious.

picture-1

One of the ways to become a good writer on Twitter is to become a good listener.  What I mean by this is learning to spot subtext.

There is a constant stream of people ready to denounce Twitter for being banal.  Even Ken Burnett recently, rather wickedly, described Twitter as ‘drowning in a sea of trivia’.  He was being deliberately provocative, I know, but the point I want to make back to Ken is: learn to read between the lines, you’ll get a lot more out of it.

For example, I saw a tweet the other day from someone who’s a real social media ‘pro’, which read (I’m paraphrasing):

“Goodness it’s 3.30, where has the time gone?”

Can you get more trivial than this?

Think about it again.

This is a guy who keeps up a pretty constant stream of tweets and has a huge following.  He’s been off air for hours.  His tweet is telling me that he’s back (sorry if he ignored me in the interval); he’s telling me that he’s up for a chat; he’s telling me that he’s been incredibly busy; he’s saying hello.  Trivial?  I don’t think so.

There is another reason it’s worth honing your craft when it comes to Twitter writing.  It will make you a better writer – period.  Being brief, concise, witty, attractive and informative all leads to writing that is more effective.  If you can write for Twitter, you can write for anything.

Now, back to those questions I posed earlier.  You can get the answers to all of them, plus a whole heap of really useful tips, at Writing For Twitter, the course I’m running on 5th October.  Hope to see you there.

Cheapskate Cliff Richard Fans

Monday, August 10th, 2009

What’s wrong with the following statement?

“We are mailing half as many people this time round, so we need to halve the income target”

Now, I guess that sounds entirely reasonable, but in fact, it isn’t.

If the number of people you mailed was in a direct proportion to the number of people that responded, then it would indeed make total sense. But fundraising doesn’t work that way. Why?

Let’s say I ask this question:

“Who wants a free ticket to see Cliff Richard?”

sircliff

There is a finite number of people who would be interested in this question. Some people would probably take you up because it is free; some people would take it up because it is Cliff Richard; and some people would take it up because it’s free AND it’s Cliff. We have three distinct groups here:

  • Cheapskates
  • Cliff Richard Fans
  • Cheapskate Cliff Richard Fans

The best responders will naturally be those who admire Sir Cliff and like free tickets. That’s a reasonable expectation because this offer is, like, ‘so totally up their street’.

There is a finite number of people who are ever likely to take you up on your offer – whatever that offer is.

Response rates are funny things. I could, for example, get you a 100% response rate by only asking myself and responding. However, that would just be me and Sir Cliff, which would be pretty uncomfortable for us both.

If you had the money, you could also contact everyone in the whole country. You would certainly have asked all the right people, plus a whole lot more.  But the point remains – it’s only going to be people in those three groups who are ever likely to respond. Of course, you’d get a few randoms… people who were just passing, some lost tourists and the like, but they are going to be in the minority. However, even including this minority, the number of people interested in your offer is finite.

So what is wrong with the original statement?

The point is you need to optimize your outbound communications. Doing anything else results in what some people call junk mail. It is also what I call a terrible waste of money and you shouldn’t do it.

Regardless of that, at some point, you will hit the maximum number of people who are ever going to take you up on your free Cliff ticket.

I’m going to take the next section very slowly. Simon, who’s almost allergic to numbers and is looking pretty blank at the moment, is my litmus test. If he gets this bit, anyone can.

The relationship between the volume compared to response is not linear, it starts getting further and further apart the more people you contact.

(Simon’s nodding doubtfully).

In other words you’ll get a worse and worse response rate, while the costs go up and up.  Knowing how and when to judge this optimum point is a real skill. When you hit it just right – you can get some brilliant results. The nifty thing here is that when judgement is applied in this area by someone who knows what they’re doing (alright I am talking about me, not Simon), you not only get brilliant results, but you know in advance that you’re likely to get these kind of results. They’re wonderfully predictable.  You can’t predict what one person will do, but you can predict what 10,000 people will do.

Far from reducing your income target, you could well be in a position to increase your income at the same time as you cut your costs. It is possible to achieve a greater net income by asking half as many people, as long as you cut out the half that was not likely to respond.

(Nod and a wink from Simon.)

So if, by some curious twist of fate, you actually are wondering who to contact to get rid of a barrel load of free Cliff Richard tickets, the answer is: cheapskate Cliff Richard fans.

An open letter to the next beautiful intern

Friday, July 31st, 2009

Dear next beautiful intern,

Since today’s my last day at Beautiful World and you have yet to start work, this letter is the best way I could think of to do some kind of a handover to you.

I won’t be going through all the ins and outs of working here. The partners of Beautiful World don’t suffer fools gladly and they all come with built-in bullshit detectors. That’s why I’m confident whoever they pick as the next intern will be a pretty clued up person to figure it all out.

What I will do is flesh out my version of the beautiful intern specification and share some of my experience, in the hope that you can use it to make the most out of your time here.

First of all, you have to bring something to the table, like an opinion. If it also makes the partners laugh, it’s a real treat. Their laughter is infectious and it’s the best thing you could hear in the agency, other than news of winning pitches, raising millions for good causes and getting paid.

Therefore, having a sense of humour helps tremendously, because working for the greater good does make you want to tear your hair out sometimes.  Add to that bags of unwavering enthusiasm and you will never lose sight of why you’re really here.

Take initiative. Roll up your sleeves and do as much work as is humanly possible. When you’re done, ask for more. While the partners can do the tasks given to you much better and faster than you can, they sometimes forget that they have way too much on their plate. You’re here to help, so help them. You’re also here to learn, and I guarantee you’ll learn a lot by getting stuck in.

The great thing about working in Beautiful World is that you even get to run a few ideas of your own. If it wasn’t for me, the beautiful pouffe would still be called a footstool.

RHah

Other very useful skills to have are great attention to detail, being highly organised and super efficient, as well as making a gorgeous cup of tea/coffee.

Upon reflection, here are a few highlights from my experience:

Best moments
I know it sounds cliché, but it has to be everyday at Beautiful World. There aren’t many places where you go to work happy and leave work happy, so I’m one very lucky intern.

Greatest challenge
Deciphering Rachel’s handwritten notes.

Biggest regret
Making horrendous coffee for our beautiful visitors. It’s a fact I’ve learnt only recently and I fear the coffee could have been the deal breaker for some of our new business pitches. The partners might have to invest in a ‘million pound coffee maker’. No wait, that’s Adam.

What I’ve learnt
The past few times I’ve been asked the all important question, I couldn’t give a straight answer. I can only hope the words ‘muppet’ and ‘tosser’ didn’t spring to mind.

Some key discoveries:

  • The kettle takes years to boil
  • Chas and Dave
  • ‘Quick’ and ‘dirty’ are words you can also use to describe data

In all seriousness, I’ve learnt more than just recency, frequency, value and not to mention, propensity models.   A lot of what I take from the internship is through observing how the partners all work together and how effective they are in conjuring up really great solutions for the challenges that clients have.  It’s been a great eye-opener and a huge inspiration for me to do the same, if not better.

I’m really grateful to have had the chance to work with the partners of Beautiful World, and to Simon for relinquishing creative control over this letter. They’re really nice people and I know you’ll like them as much as I do.

I do hope that I’ve left Beautiful World a little bit better, more organised and a livelier place to work in and my wish for you is that you will make Beautiful World better in your own way too.

Finally, if any of the partners threaten to superglue you to your chair at the end of your internship to keep you here, it might not be such a bad idea to say yes to that.

Sincerely,

Rebekah

home
clients
work
what we do
people
events
blog
press
jobs
contact

RSS Feed

connect with us:

beautiful world on Twitter
beautiful world on Facebook
beautiful world on Flickr
beautiful world on Posterous