Response rates in today's environment
Click the questions below to display the answers:
Collapse all | Expand all
What is a realistic expectation regarding the percentage of response to initial mailing?
ANSWER
If you are speaking of an acquisition mailing, you can expect to get a 1 percent to 2 percent response rate if you have a really good package, list, and all the stars are aligned properly! But 0.5 percent to 1 percent is probably closer to the norm these days.
Have you had any experience with variable data (1 to 1) direct mail pieces? If so, have you seen an increase in response or donation levels?
ANSWER
You seem to be asking about what is generally called "personalization." And, yes, I've had tons of experience in this area, as has anyone who's been engaged in direct mail fund raising for many years (30, in my case). For starters, personalized references in donor-acquisition or "prospecting" appeals typically have only marginal impact and may not be cost-effective at all. Personalization works best in appeals to proven donors. But don't be gulled into thinking that personalization consists of using the addressee's name in the salutation and nothing more. Personalization gains value when it encompasses references to the individual's giving history: how long the person has been a donor, how much she gave last time, what interests or preferences she has, and so forth. When properly put to work, personalization of that sort often dramatically increases response and raises average gifts.
We do two direct mailings a year: Membership Drive in the Spring and Annual Fund in Nov./Dec. We mail to about 12,000 for each. They are basic letter style mailings although I have been incorporating color photographs within the letter recently. Response and contributions from such mailings has been steadily decreasing. Any tips on the best way to obtain a response from direct mail pieces?
ANSWER
For starters, I suggest that you rethink your approach to direct mail fundraising. All direct response depends on two overarching realities: (1) that prospective donors have money available to give on some occasions and not on others; and (2) that most gifts are modest in size. These realities dictate that you must solicit your donors frequently. Once a year is not the way to go. The frequency of your mailings, and the extent to which you incorporate donor history into your appeals through personalization will influence the success or failure of your efforts, far more than adding color photos or leaving them out. I suggest you lose the photos and invest more time, brainpower, and even money in data processing (mailing list hygiene).
How important is addressing style in an “ask”, i.e. FL vs. Florida, LN vs. Lane. At my prior position this was very important to the director of FD and I was wondering if this really renders a higher "open rate" amongst DM appeals?
ANSWER
Consistency is most important, and style is personal preference. Frankly, most donors biggest concern in addressing is their name. Correct spelling and title is most important to them - a misspelling screams, "I don't know you and I don't care enough about you to get it right."
If not using abbreviations in the address is causing a lot of extra work for you, do a little test in your next mailing and see if your director is right. I would be surprised if it made a difference, but you never know!
|
