Back to Good Thinking

---

Building rewarding relationships

Using social psychology in communications is nothing new.  The ad men have been at it for decades, tapping into our innate behaviours to sell us dreams and aspirations. As a case in point, take a look at the bookshelf in Don Draper’s office.

The members of the Mad Men production team are sticklers for period detail, and has chosen to put some interesting books behind his desk. These include Vance Packard’s “The Hidden Persuaders”,  first published in 1957, and hardly out of print since.  The “Fast Food Nation” of its day, the book took an alarmist stance on subliminal advertising.  A contemporary review by “The New Yorker” described it as: “A brisk, authoritative and frightening report on how manufacturers, fundraisers and politicians are attempting to turn the American mind into a kind of catatonic dough that will buy, give or vote at their command.”

Also on there is “The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America” by Daniel Boorstin, from 1961. This bit of pop sociology looked at how the Don Drapers were programming our experiences.   The book specifically focuses on the ways admen shaped the jingles, TV ads, and TV debates of the 1960 Nixon-Kennedy election.  Analysis of those debates provided the first evidence to support consumer psychology theories.

What both these types of books and academic research have demonstrated is that there are several behaviours that are hardwired into us that we rely on when we’re making decisions.

There’s a great blog post on “Social Commerce Today” that explores in more details what these “heuristics” are, the research behind them and how they’re being used by online retail.  (By the way, this piece contains the answer to the “Cookies” question in my Social Media Week presentation).  From a fundraising perspective these could translate as follows:

The psychology: reciprocity.

• The theory:  We have an innate desire to repay favours in order to maintain social fairness.  These favours may not have been actively invited.  For example, it’s the reason we feel guilty if we get a Christmas card from someone we didn’t send one too (even though the sender’s intention may not have been to get one in return).
• The application: This is the “pass it forward” idea: sharing offers, deals and tips with our social networks.  It’s group buying (getting deals together), referral  programmes,

The psychology: scarcity.

• The theory: Our minds are hardwired to value scarce resources; we instinctively assign more value to opportunities as they become less available – part out of fear of potential loss.
• The application:  exclusive offers, upgrade programmes, a high net worth or corporate whereby people donate in exchange for status (the traditional name on a foundation stone type of idea).

The psychology: liking.

• The theory: We emulate and agree with people we like and admire.  This is partly because it helps build social bonds and trust, and partly because it’s part of impression management, managing our image and identity by association.
• The application: Reviews, both by our networks or users of sites we like/trust.  Peer-to-peer recommendations.  “Shop together” – creating a social event around a purchase to share with your network. It’s tapping into key influencers trusted and looked up to by our target audiences. It’s crowdfunding.

The psychology: consistency.

• The theory:  When our beliefs and behaviours don’t match up, we feel psychological discomfort, “cognitive dissonance”, which is a big motivator for trying to be consistent; particularly with any active, public and voluntary commitments we’ve made.  So once we’ve agreed to a small request, we’re more likely to agree to another (perhaps bigger) request.

• The application: It’s starting with a small ask, such as a public association with a campaign (a Twibbon, a status update) then going back with a bigger one, be that a donation, a review, a “refer a friend” request or a request to share content. It could be embedded into loyalty schemes and content curation programmes.

The psychology: social proof.

• The theory: We often look to what others are doing or have done, and take our cue from them. When something stands out as particularly popular or dominant, we instinctively perceive this as social proof that it is the correct, most valid option.  It’s classic peer power in action.

• The application:  Think of those e-commerce tools like wish lists, particularly those with recommendations (“people who bought this also bought that”, “if you like this, you might like that”), popularity lists (most popular/reviewed things on a website). It’s the clear indications of how many people have been involved and how much has been raised.  It’s crowdfunding a capital appeal.

So what’s really changed between the dawn of the Mad Men and the rise of Social Networks? Now we the consumer have the chance to control the message, to talk back.   And we the brands have the chance to listen, engage and adapt our messages.   Social media amplifies who we are as people, and who we are as organizations.

Looking at this as a fundraising model, advertised direct response (tell me what to do) and experiential direct response (show me what to do) are still the bedrock of acquisition.  These should get our potential supporters from initial engagement to donation.  But if we look at what will stimulate people to move on from there to advocacy and a feeling of “brand ownership” we can start to create a ripple effect.

Each organization, each appeal, will be different. But as with any communications we need to consider who we’re targeting, what we want to say and where we need to be saying it.  We also need to think about who we need to say it: who influences our supporters, who do they trust?

Like chess, this model is not a one move game.  We need to invest time and thought if we’re to build a true relationship.  But consider this:

• 77% of UK households have internet access, 12% of adults in the UK have donated online
• 1 in every 5 internet hours is spent on social networks
• 90% of us trust online recommendations from people we know, 70% trust those posted by strangers.
• The share of donations from online channels has risen 85% in 3 years.  But it’s still 3.7%
• Online accounts for 12% of all UK retail revenue
• In 2011, charity:water generated $18,000,000 in donations, 83% more than in 2010.  75% of those donations were online.

Let’s focus on people not platforms. Let’s focus on creating a community fundraising model for the social media age.  Let’s add insight to our tactics to establish Social Giving as a “third way”, standing alongside Individual Giving and Corporate Giving.

Charity | Charlotte Beckett | Digital and social media | Fundraising | Integration