When Relationship Fundraising is Really Direct Mail in Disguise
We love direct mail. Really. If you’ve been following us at all, you’ll know we believe a strong direct mail program can reach thousands of people efficiently, tell your story, and inspire generosity.
Direct mail, and direct response in general, is an important part of the revenue pipeline. It’s also often the first step of the relationship-based fundraising program, identifying new donors and inspiring existing donors to give more.
All that to say: we’re not here to pick a fight with direct mail. But direct mail and relationship fundraising are not the same thing.
Still, in our work, have a few recurring “eye-roll” moments, and this is one of them: we’ll suggest to an experienced fundraiser or leader that they try a touch point that’s geared toward a more personal conversation. Let’s say it’s a letter to a lapsed donor, asking if everything is okay and if they’d like to talk.
They’ll say something like, “We already have a letter like that.” We’re thrilled. But then we see the letter and realize our idea and theirs don’t align.
The letter may have the fundraiser’s name at the bottom. It may even use a slightly warmer opening. But it still looks, sounds, and feels like direct mail. The language is formal. The text has bolded lines and call-out boxes, emphasizing the need for the donor to renew their giving. It doesn’t sound like the fundraiser and, worse, it doesn’t sound like the fundraiser knows the donor.
The question isn’t whether the letter is good.
A beautifully written direct mail letter can be very good at doing exactly what it was designed to do. It might share an urgent need, tell a compelling story, make a clear ask, and give the donor an easy way to respond.
Relationship-based communication has a different purpose. It should feel like it came from a representative inside the organization who knows something about the donor receiving it.
The goal may not even be an immediate gift. It might be to:
Learn something about the donor
Acknowledge a previous conversation
Share something connected to the donor’s interests
Say thank you without another solicitation
Conversations like these require a different approach.
Donors know what marketing looks like
So do all of us. We open our mailboxes and inboxes every day and make nearly instantaneous decisions about what deserves our attention.
When something looks mass produced, we treat it that way. That doesn’t mean it’s ineffective or meaningless. It just means our brains categorize it differently.
That’s especially important when we think about reaching out to an entire caseload. It’s easy to think “simple” and mass produce a letter or an email. Here’s the issue: if every email comes through the same marketing system, every letter looks like the annual appeal, and every communication could have been sent to 5,000 other people, eventually the donor has two pretty easy options:
Opt out, or
tune out
If the “easy” version is a mass email, the donor you’re hoping to relate to personally may unsubscribe. They’ve literally opted out – and now one avenue of communication, email, is cut off.
Or, if the “easy” version is that mass-produced-looking mailing, they tune out. The next note you send may not get opened. Why open a letter that looks like all the other letters you get, knowing (in the donor’s mind) it’s just another ask. You have to differentiate yourself, and mass production doesn’t do that.
Relationship fundraising needs fingerprints
We’re not saying relationship-driven communication must be completely custom every single time. We’re very into innovation and efficiency.
Templates, sample language, talking points, stories and impact numbers are incredibly useful. But they should be the starting point, not necessarily the finished product.
A relationship letter should have some fingerprints on it. Here are some ideas:
Add or change an opening to include something personal. For example, mention the meeting you had last month.
Add a handwritten note about the donor’s favorite program.
Reference a conversation you had earlier in the year.
Maybe the call to action is not the typical Direct Mail Postscript, but rather a personal P.S. that says something like, “The story about XXX really resonated with me, I’d love to hear what you found impactful in this report.” Handwritten, of course.
Sometimes the difference is only a few sentences. But those few sentences can change the entire feel of the communication from: “Our organization is sending you something” to “I thought of you.” That is a very different donor experience.
Make room for both
By the way, this isn’t an either/or conversation. We’re yes/and people.
Great fundraising programs need excellent direct mail and strong relationship fundraising. They should work together.
At the same time, we need to let direct mail do what direct mail does beautifully: reach people at scale, tell powerful stories, invite generosity, and create opportunities for engagement.
Then fundraisers can do something different. Use the tools they have and take the time to communicate and connect personally. This is why it’s especially important that we tier our donors. In midlevel, for instance, with caseloads of 500 or 600, you might not have time for a personal PS on each of them. But guess what? You can make time for your Tier A donors, and maybe even your Tier B.
Because if we simply take the direct mail letter, swap in a fundraiser’s signature, and call it relationship fundraising, we may be missing the connection we’re trying to create. That connection is how a donor feels known. That’s when communication starts becoming a relationship.