CIDSE Presentation, Brussels.

1. Engaging with supporters based on their
behaviour, preferences and needs
Steve Thomas David Williams-Jones
#stevethomas393 _________________
13 May 2014

2. Some of our clients

3. Our partners

4. Today’s agenda
• Introduction – what is
segmentation anyway?
• Part 1: Making the most
of limited resources
• Part 2: Engaging
supporters beyond
money

6. One size doesn’t fit all

7. Why Segment?
Appreciation of motivations
• Communication
• Tone of voice
Facilitates different marketing strategies
• Product
• Media
• Right ‘ask’
Make the appropriate level of investment

8. Look-a-like logic

9. RFV Analysis
Categorisation of behaviour into 3
dimensions:
1. Recency
2. Frequency
3. Value

10. How to segment?
Frequency
Recency
Value

11. 9
Creating segments
8
4
13
6
7
2
Frequency
Recency
Value

12. Part 1: Making the most of fundraising
resources by smart prioritisation

13. Initial findings & recommendations
• Good donor recording on Progress CRM database
• Segment active supporters
• For BD, focussed on Recency, Frequency and Value. But,
– Integrate non-financial support in future?
– Motivations?
• Processes:
– Load donor Journey module
– Data-informed
– Admin-light routine
– Donor-driven

14. Communication Cycle v Donor-driven
Communication Cycle Donor-driven Journey
Driven by Charity needs Donor timescales
Campaign decisions Database rules
Frequency Campaigns and appeals
sent to most
Triggered ‘drip’ communications –
typically weekly/ monthly
Content Newsletters, appeals, e-
comms
Thanking, reassuring, asking,
upgrading
Nature Designed and written for
each campaign
Standard pack.
Digital personalisation.
Priority communication

15. One conclusion:
• Process to routinely convert one time donors
to a second gift
– Reassure that first made a difference
– Pre-packed second gift pack
– Different prompts and copy based on first gift
– Event sponsors have different motives
– Standard packs sent routinely

16. Overall giving since 2011, value:
• Large part of value is with 900 donors (2% of volume)
• Also medium Value is €250 – 999

17. Implications
• 6 segments:
– Very high value
– High value suypporters
– Medium value
– Donors
– Medium level donors
– Low level donors
• Introducing a Donor Cycle for each segment
• Utilise database and suppliers for routine ‘drip’
communication triggered by donor actions
• Progressive lapsing to make sure that we do not spend all of
the donation on newsletters and appeals
• All supporters continue to be treated courteously …
• … but some will repay more investment and engagement
than others

19. Re-balance allocation of investment
• Before:
– Individual donors represent c.36% of fundraising
– Target fundraising ratio of 12%
• Over investing in low value donors – at the expense of HVDs
• Re-balance the investment:
– Increase expenditure on HVDs and MVDs
– Reduce spend on low value base
• Assuming that incomes stay the same. If segnments respond in proportion to spend increase:
– HVD and MVD growth but decline in low level donors
– Major Donors taking more overhead from reduced value donor cells
• Re-distribution of spend creates 19% growth in overall income
• Overall fundraising ratio improves from 13% to 11%

20. Part 2: Scripture Union and
understanding more than money

21. More than money
Give
Act
Pray

22. About Scripture Union
• A Christian charity with a publishing
arm
• Use the Bible to inspire children, young
people and adults to know God
• Income £7m, 85 staff, 3,000 volunteers
• Schools & churches
• Holidays
• Publishing – print and digital
• Part of international movement of 120
organisations

23. Project aims
• Identify patterns of support so that we can
devise a supporter development strategy to
– boost supporter satisfaction
– maximise retention
– increase income
• Make routine using ProgressCRM database

24. Supporter Journeys
First Gift
Became
committed
giver
Joined
membership
Became
committed
giver
Volunteered
Volunteered
Legacy
Pledge

25. Supporters in obvious groups
• Donors
• Product buyers
• Teachers
• On-line resources
• Prayer groups
• Volunteers
• Church reps

26. First steps
• Installed the Supporter Journey module
• Tracked what were felt to be the important
milestones in support – e.g.
– Made their first purchase; first donation; became a
recurring / committed donor; pledged a legacy
• Identified the common patterns…

27. First engagement: purchase

28. Initial findings
• Most common first engagement is buying
something. Of those, 81% do nothing else.
• Legacy pledges
– No obvious route
– Less than 1% pledge anyway
– Of those that do, three-quarters started as cash donor
• Most committed givers don’t buy resources or
subscribe
• Best lifetime value start as Committed Giver (4x)

29. The challenge
• With only a minority donating, traditional RFV measures
inappropriate
• A more holistic view of relationships with supporters:
– Understand behaviours
– Respect supporters’ motivations
– Develop ‘journeys’ to enhance relationships
• Analytical approach:
– Identify and develop appropriate data to collect
– Pragmatic - first and useful pass to put into action
– Learn for further work

30. Feedback & Results
Workshop Report
Data Analysis
Segmentation Propensity model
Segmentation & Engagement Workshop
Touchpoints Triggers
The process

31. The solution - beyond RFV
Categorisation of behaviour into
3 new enhanced dimensions:
1. Recency
2. Responsivity
3. Involvement/Value
1. Recency
2. Frequency
3. Value

32. Tracking the new segments

35. Creating segments
Responsivity
Recency
Involvement/ Value

36. Our new fruit salad

37. • Recency – how long since latest activity?
<1 year; 1 - 2 years; 2 - 3 years; 3 - 4 years; >4 yrs
• Responsivity – contact in : contact out
more in-bound than out; in-bound is 30% of out
• Involvement – ‘richness’ of activity
Volunteers; signed-up; purchasing; etc
• More in future - social media?
The solution – segmentation
criteria

38. Recency
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
4
3
2
1
0

39. Responsivity
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
10
4
3
2
1
0

40. Involvement/ value
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
4
3
2
1
0

41. • Model breaks down the silos
– Pray, Act, Give
– Real and virtual
• Most recent activity
Model brings RRI together

42. The solution
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Donor
Purchaser
Volunteer
Subscriber
Bible Enthusiast
Ist Tuesday
Live

43. Back analysed an earlier campaign
– RFV Selected
• Grapes: 30% of volume and lost money
– RRI had identified as lapsed
• Limes: 15% of mail and broke even
– RRI had identified as self-motivated
• Apricots: 50% of mail = 150% of net income

44. Socio-demographics became more clear
Strawberries (4): Segment 4: Strawberries Index
Counts % 0 100 200
Age
Rank 91-100 (Old) 576 5.9 59 ████
Rank 81-90 595 6.1 61 ████
Rank 71-80 742 7.6 76 ██
Rank 61-70 1034 10.6 106 █
Rank 51-60 1135 11.6 116 ██
Rank 41-50 1212 12.4 124 ██
Rank 31-40 1373 14.1 141 ████
Rank 21-30 1160 11.9 119 ██
Rank 11-20 1023 10.5 105
Rank 1-10 (Young) 918 9.4 94 █
Apricots (3):Attributes
Counts % 0 100 200
Age
Rank 91-100 (Old) 2015 11.6 116 ██
Rank 81-90 2402 13.8 138 ████
Rank 71-80 2309 13.3 133 ███
Rank 61-70 2230 12.8 128 ███
Rank 51-60 2004 11.5 115 ██
Rank 41-50 1732 9.9 99
Rank 31-40 1468 8.4 84 ██
Rank 21-30 1141 6.6 66 ███
Rank 11-20 1010 5.8 58 ████
Rank 1-10 (Young) 1101 6.3 63 ████

45. Cardiff
As did geography

46. Row
Labels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 81.71% 0.53% 1.07% 2.32% 3.54% 5.95% 0.22% 0.66% 0.18% 3.41% 0.06% 0.00%
2 0.68% 84.82% 2.22% 5.26% 4.22% 0.09% 0.45% 0.01% 3.48% 0.12% 1.12% 0.00%
3 6.79% 3.27% 91.14% 0.07% 2.17% 0.02% 4.58% 0.00% 1.62% 0.02% 0.09% 0.00%
4 1.40% 1.34% 0.00% 82.80% 8.92% 0.30% 0.00% 13.28% 0.56% 5.75% 1.18% 0.00%
5 6.05% 5.98% 2.81% 7.58% 75.54% 0.88% 0.92% 0.64% 0.32% 0.39% 0.00% 0.00%
6 2.83% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.02% 78.81% 0.90% 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 0.00% 0.00%
7 0.04% 0.00% 2.32% 0.00% 1.76% 1.10% 76.34% 0.00% 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
8 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% 1.17% 0.65% 0.65% 0.07% 65.53% 1.01% 0.30% 0.00% 0.00%
9 0.02% 2.31% 0.22% 0.01% 2.12% 0.27% 5.40% 1.49% 68.12% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
10 0.33% 0.01% 0.00% 0.37% 0.03% 0.78% 0.00% 0.93% 0.00% 85.12% 0.01% 0.00%
11 0.13% 1.74% 0.21% 0.40% 0.03% 10.37% 11.12% 14.08% 24.68% 0.06% 93.35% 0.00%
12 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.00% 0.79% 0.01% 3.37% 0.00% 4.75% 4.20% 100.00%
Also showed how people move
Example: Segment 10 – ‘Walk-in’ Greengages.
Sign-up to Strawberries (4) or purchase and become Plums. Do not naturally donate

47. 12 final names developed by SU team
Greengages Popped-in
Plums Spectrum
Limes Personals
Apricots Stakeholders
Strawberries Browsers
Oranges Wavering
Nectarines Job done
Apples Taken for Granted
Pears Family Time
Grapes Exiting
Raisins Gone
Currants Long Gone

48. What are we doing now?
Analysis
• Sub-segment Stakeholders
even further
• Wide-ranging but high
value

49. What are we doing now?
Creative
• More appropriate ‘asks’ and challenges by
segment, e.g.:
Personals
No cash ‘ask’. Hand-raising pack
Two-stage purchaser conversion pack
Copy test based on generational challenges rather than child empathy

50. What are we doing now?
Donor Journey
• Donor Journey per segment
Stakeholders
I give : I get
Recognition and personalisation per stage
Tracking and managing segment movements
Becoming more investment per segment driven

51. Summary - recommendations
1. Segment your supporter base, messages and asks
2. Track and manage movements between segments
3. Integrate non money giving
4. Communicate on donor terms and timescales
5. Work the performance KPIs
6. Invest according to potential
7. Make progress steadily and keep things simple

52. For more information contact
purple-vision.com