Philanthropy in Vietnam

887 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
887
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Philanthropy in Vietnam

  1. 1. Philanthropic Attitudes & Sentiments in Vietnam Today! A report by:A report by: for
  2. 2. The LIN Center for Community Development serves grassroots not-for-profit organizations (NPO) and individual and corporate philanthropists. Through bringing together NPOs & donors, resources such as expertise, knowledge, and funds can be pooled to help local people to meet local needs. Given LIN’s aim to advance a more efficient and responsive philanthropic environment, Cimigo offered to conduct a study amongst the general population of Vietnam to understand their sentiments toward philanthropic activity. This report contains the state of play of philanthropic attitudes and sentiments in Vietnam today. We hope you enjoy this report and continue to support LIN’s mission. 2 This report contains the state of play of philanthropic attitudes and sentiments in Vietnam today. We hope you enjoy this report and continue to support LIN’s mission.
  3. 3. Philanthropy in Vietnam Today... In Vietnam there is a high incidence of giving (82%), but at a low frequency and with relatively small sums. People give what they can, but with 63% indicating they have refused to give to a charity due to lack of trust, clearly this is a barrier to opening up more sources of support. The biggest causes that trigger support relate to disaster relief and charities for children and the disabled. This may cause problems for smaller NPOs that focus on, for example, community development projects as this type of cause is not top-of-mind for the general population. As anywhere, people have a tendency to support causes more when they relate to that person. For example, Senior Citizens are more likely to contribute toward charities that support Senior Citizens. This lends itself to opportunities to increase efficiency of NPO activity through reaching out to people who are connected in some way to that NPO’s specific cause. People tend to find out about charities as a result of direct contact or via friends, perhaps linked to their need for “trust”. But actual engagement with charities is triggered by a very wide range of sources – from local residential authorities through to online. This fragmentation may cause difficulties for smaller NPOs to manage. 3 In Vietnam there is a high incidence of giving (82%), but at a low frequency and with relatively small sums. People give what they can, but with 63% indicating they have refused to give to a charity due to lack of trust, clearly this is a barrier to opening up more sources of support. The biggest causes that trigger support relate to disaster relief and charities for children and the disabled. This may cause problems for smaller NPOs that focus on, for example, community development projects as this type of cause is not top-of-mind for the general population. As anywhere, people have a tendency to support causes more when they relate to that person. For example, Senior Citizens are more likely to contribute toward charities that support Senior Citizens. This lends itself to opportunities to increase efficiency of NPO activity through reaching out to people who are connected in some way to that NPO’s specific cause. People tend to find out about charities as a result of direct contact or via friends, perhaps linked to their need for “trust”. But actual engagement with charities is triggered by a very wide range of sources – from local residential authorities through to online. This fragmentation may cause difficulties for smaller NPOs to manage.
  4. 4. Areas of support for NPOs that LIN may want to explore further… The data would suggest that there are some key areas that LIN and partners may want to explore further to help support NPOs in gaining traction with the general population: Trust: It is difficult for smaller NPOs to build consciousness and credibility with the public, and yet overcoming this barrier is key to triggering support. LIN may be able to help through:  Arranging partnerships with larger brands so that the brand’s image supports the NPO’s  Continue to build LIN’s profile so that it can be used as a “referee” for lesser-known NPOs  Engage with authorities to build an officially recognised register of accredited NPOs. Efficiency: Greater outcomes relative to inputs can be yielded by targeting groups of people who have a closer connection to an NPO’s cause. LIN may be able to help through:  Capability building in the area of segmentation and identification of “target” groups. Social Media: Online social media combines the benefits of personal referral from friends, direct contact from NPOs, and ease of reaching “target” groups. Cost of entry is also low. Consequently, this might become a key medium for engaging supporters. LIN could support by:  Capability building & training on the deployment and use of social media. Donation Channels: It may be difficult for people to donate even small sums frequently as it is unclear where or how to give. LIN could support by:  Exploring new means of making donations, e.g. with mobile money transfer services, that make it possible to conduct national collections of smaller sums with convenience for all. 4 The data would suggest that there are some key areas that LIN and partners may want to explore further to help support NPOs in gaining traction with the general population: Trust: It is difficult for smaller NPOs to build consciousness and credibility with the public, and yet overcoming this barrier is key to triggering support. LIN may be able to help through:  Arranging partnerships with larger brands so that the brand’s image supports the NPO’s  Continue to build LIN’s profile so that it can be used as a “referee” for lesser-known NPOs  Engage with authorities to build an officially recognised register of accredited NPOs. Efficiency: Greater outcomes relative to inputs can be yielded by targeting groups of people who have a closer connection to an NPO’s cause. LIN may be able to help through:  Capability building in the area of segmentation and identification of “target” groups. Social Media: Online social media combines the benefits of personal referral from friends, direct contact from NPOs, and ease of reaching “target” groups. Cost of entry is also low. Consequently, this might become a key medium for engaging supporters. LIN could support by:  Capability building & training on the deployment and use of social media. Donation Channels: It may be difficult for people to donate even small sums frequently as it is unclear where or how to give. LIN could support by:  Exploring new means of making donations, e.g. with mobile money transfer services, that make it possible to conduct national collections of smaller sums with convenience for all.
  5. 5. Part1. What is our propensity to give today? Part1.
  6. 6. The vast majority of people (8-in-10) do make contributions to charitable organisations, but with low frequency… Contributed to Charitable Organisation (%) 82 18 Given money, time, or expertise in Past 5 Years Yes No The incidence of giving is high, but the frequency of giving is low, 2-3x per year or less. This may indicate an opportunity to increase frequency through overcoming barriers; barriers could include:  Knowledge – give to whom?  Trust – is the receiver reliable?  Channel – how to give? 6 Yes No Frequency of Contribution (%) 11 20 45 20 4 Frequency of giving over the past 1 year => Monthly 4-5x 2-3x 1x None The incidence of giving is high, but the frequency of giving is low, 2-3x per year or less. This may indicate an opportunity to increase frequency through overcoming barriers; barriers could include:  Knowledge – give to whom?  Trust – is the receiver reliable?  Channel – how to give?
  7. 7. Contributions tend to be monetary, and in relatively small sums… Value of Contributions in Past 1 Year in VND (%) 64 19 10 11 6 Size of annual contribution <500k 500k-1m >1m-5m >5m-10m >10m Not Money People often give what they can and the headline is not meant in a disparaging way. But the low frequency and low sums may indicate systemic problems that LIN and partners could work to overcome:  Trust – are people giving less because of “misuse” worries?  Understanding – do people give money because it is easier or is it they unaware that physical effort or expertise can also be “given”?  Channel – people may not know how or where to give. The sums are too small for banks (and many won’t have bank accounts). Collection points may be too dispersed to be convenient. LIN & partners may want to consider partnerships with emerging mobile money-transfer companies that would allow for national-scale collection with ease & convenience for people, and able to handle small-sum transfers too. 7 People often give what they can and the headline is not meant in a disparaging way. But the low frequency and low sums may indicate systemic problems that LIN and partners could work to overcome:  Trust – are people giving less because of “misuse” worries?  Understanding – do people give money because it is easier or is it they unaware that physical effort or expertise can also be “given”?  Channel – people may not know how or where to give. The sums are too small for banks (and many won’t have bank accounts). Collection points may be too dispersed to be convenient. LIN & partners may want to consider partnerships with emerging mobile money-transfer companies that would allow for national-scale collection with ease & convenience for people, and able to handle small-sum transfers too.
  8. 8. Part2. Which causes are likely to stimulate us to give? Part2.
  9. 9. Vietnamese people are most likely to come together to alleviate a disaster or to support the disabled & children. But this may highlight problems for smaller, community oriented NPOs… Causes Most Likely to Support (%) 42 52 62 Childrens' Rights & Dev. Help Disabled People Disaster Relief Whilst revealing the widespread support for the major causes, it also reveals the difficulty that many smaller, grass-roots NPOs may have in attracting funds. If these smaller NPOs are focused on community development issues, for example, this may not be top-of-mind for people to donate to. This perhaps highlights the importance of organisations such as LIN to help stimulate funding of these smaller, but still worthy activities. 9 12 15 23 25 30 39 42 Community Dev. Healthcare Senior Citizens Environment Education Poverty & Welfare Childrens' Rights & Dev. Whilst revealing the widespread support for the major causes, it also reveals the difficulty that many smaller, grass-roots NPOs may have in attracting funds. If these smaller NPOs are focused on community development issues, for example, this may not be top-of-mind for people to donate to. This perhaps highlights the importance of organisations such as LIN to help stimulate funding of these smaller, but still worthy activities.
  10. 10. 17 32 35 49 Senior Citizens - 15-24… Senior Citizens - >50… Children - Males Children - Females Causes Most Likely to Support (%) Some Demographic Differences Targeting groups and segmenting donors may help in the efficiency of gathering donations… Some variations were observed within demographics, but in largely obvious ways. For example older people were more likely to support Senior Citizens’ charities than younger people. This suggests, as with marketing branded products, a segmentation of donors is likely to yield greater efficiencies. LIN and partners may be able to help NPOs identify target groups that will be more responsive to engagement with that particular NPO and cause. 10 28 39 47 57 17 Education - HCMC Education - Hanoi Disabled - Hanoi Disabled - HCMC Senior Citizens - 15-24… Some variations were observed within demographics, but in largely obvious ways. For example older people were more likely to support Senior Citizens’ charities than younger people. This suggests, as with marketing branded products, a segmentation of donors is likely to yield greater efficiencies. LIN and partners may be able to help NPOs identify target groups that will be more responsive to engagement with that particular NPO and cause.
  11. 11. Part3. Who are we likely to give to? Part3.
  12. 12. Whilst international NPOs, religious bodies, and government agencies have most support in total, it is clear that there is room for independent NPOs as well... Your 1st Choice for Donations (%) 32VN Independent Orgs. (e.g.local orphanages, disabled schools...) Perhaps with government agencies in the North and religious organisations in the South, there are few surprises in the geographically driven differences. It is interesting though that Vietnamese independent organisations are well supported too which shows the potential for grassroots NPOs to gain engagement. 12 9 23 30 13 25 9 13 17 30 32 Corporate Programs (e.g. Vinamilk fund; Vina Capital Foundation fund) Intern'l Orgs (e.g.Operation Smile, Handicap international) VN Govermental Orgs. (e.g. Fatherland Front,Women's Union) Religious Orgs (e.g. Pagodas, Churches) VN Independent Orgs. (e.g.local orphanages, disabled schools...) HCMC Hanoi
  13. 13. Issues with reliability and transparency have caused 6-in-10 people not to give to a charity at some point… Ever Refused to Give to a Charity (%) 63 38Refused to give? Yes No Reason for Refusal (%) A reason for some of the major governmental and religious bodies to be a first choice may be due to their longevity of establishment and thus supposed trustworthiness. With 6-in-10 having refused to give to charity at some point, clearly there’s an opportunity for LIN and partners to support the perception of credibility of many other NPOs. 13 Reason for Refusal (%) 2 12 22 63 65 Other I don't know how to Not enough time or money Process of funding is unclear Organisation is not "Reliable" A reason for some of the major governmental and religious bodies to be a first choice may be due to their longevity of establishment and thus supposed trustworthiness. With 6-in-10 having refused to give to charity at some point, clearly there’s an opportunity for LIN and partners to support the perception of credibility of many other NPOs.
  14. 14. A way to stimulate trust as well as funding may be to work hand in hand with manufacturers or other brand owners… More Likely to Try a Product If Profits Went to a Charity (%) 4% I would give it a try If given a choice between two products, with one having some of the profit go to a charity, nearly half of people said they would try that product. With smaller organisations perhaps struggling to demonstrate credibility, it may be possible to partner with established brands for mutual benefit. The benefits are not just in the funding from the brand owner, but also the halo effect of a trustworthy brand supporting a lesser- known NPO. 14 47% 49% I'd still need to consider other factors (Price,brand,etc) I would not try it If given a choice between two products, with one having some of the profit go to a charity, nearly half of people said they would try that product. With smaller organisations perhaps struggling to demonstrate credibility, it may be possible to partner with established brands for mutual benefit. The benefits are not just in the funding from the brand owner, but also the halo effect of a trustworthy brand supporting a lesser- known NPO.
  15. 15. Part4. And how can we get the word out… Part4.
  16. 16. Online social networks may need to become a key channel as they can be “mass” and yet still maintain direct & personal contact to build necessary trust… Sources of Information on Charitable Organisations (%) 33 38 Friend Referral Direct Solicitation Perhaps because of the “trust” factor, direct contact with a charity or friendships are important sources of information. However, these approaches are people-heavy and difficult to turn “mass”. Given that the vast majority of young people and higher-income groups are now online in urban areas, NPOs probably need to consider this channel, particularly via social networks, to get their cause heard & supported. Social networks combine the factors of direct approach, friend referral, and ease of access. Social media capability building could be a key area of support that LIN and partners could provide. 16 22 9 24 26 33 Other Radio Newspaper TV Online Perhaps because of the “trust” factor, direct contact with a charity or friendships are important sources of information. However, these approaches are people-heavy and difficult to turn “mass”. Given that the vast majority of young people and higher-income groups are now online in urban areas, NPOs probably need to consider this channel, particularly via social networks, to get their cause heard & supported. Social networks combine the factors of direct approach, friend referral, and ease of access. Social media capability building could be a key area of support that LIN and partners could provide.
  17. 17. People became engaged with a charity through a very broad range of sources making this a complex area for smaller NPOs… From local authorities at residential areas From workplace/school From television Sources of Engagement on Last Charitable Activity Made (%) As can be seen, a wide range of sources triggered our sample’s last engagement with a charity. With this diverse range of potential engagement channels, NPOs may need support and capability building in the area of managing this. Mass media is desirable, but may be difficult for grassroots organisations to mobilise. Therefore, for such organisations a focus may need to be on other channels (e.g. online) that are open and can be used to effectively reach various interest groups in the population. 17 21% 20% 10%9% 8% 8% 5% 19% From television From the press From the Internet From friends/family From churches/pagodas Other As can be seen, a wide range of sources triggered our sample’s last engagement with a charity. With this diverse range of potential engagement channels, NPOs may need support and capability building in the area of managing this. Mass media is desirable, but may be difficult for grassroots organisations to mobilise. Therefore, for such organisations a focus may need to be on other channels (e.g. online) that are open and can be used to effectively reach various interest groups in the population.
  18. 18. Appendix Respondent Profiles and Detailed Charts Appendix
  19. 19. Gender Ratio of Respondents (%) 51 49Gender Male Female Geographic Ratio of Respondents (%) 46 35 19Geography HCMC Hanoi Other Demographic Profile of Survey Respondents Data collection was conducted by a mixed-mode method of Telephone and Online interviewing. Total number of respondents was N=1028 19 Male Female Age Ratio of Respondents (%) 28 25 33 13Age 15-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 HCMC Hanoi Other
  20. 20. 45 43 48 41 46 47 54 20 23 17 25 20 19 14 4 6 3 7 4 3 2 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 None 1x 2-3x Frequency of Giving in Past 12 Months (%) By Key Demographics of Gender & Age 11 10 11 12 12 8 9 20 18 22 17 18 24 22 0 10 20 30 40 Total (N=864) Male (N=404) Female (N=460) 15-24 (N=272) 25-34 (N=354) 35-49 (N=164) 50-64 (N=74) 2-3x 4-5x => Monthly 20
  21. 21. 56 51 42 42 61 53 35 42 64 51 49 35 Total (N=528) Male Female 15-24 Disaster relief Help to disabled people Child's Rights & Development Poverty & Social Welfare 61 50 40 44 67 53 46 44 65 55 46 33 50 47 30 30 35-4925-34 50-67 Causes Most Likely to Support (%) By Key Demographics of Gender & Age 42 31 27 26 19 6 42 34 25 22 14 13 35 27 25 24 15 10 Poverty & Social Welfare Education Environment Help aging & Senior citizens Health care Community development/ Improvement 44 29 27 17 14 18 44 23 20 22 13 11 33 32 19 25 16 7 30 42 41 32 16 13 21
  22. 22. SOS Children Village (Làng trẻ em SOS) Red Cross (Hội Chữ Thập Đỏ) Disability Resource and Development (Chương trình Khuyết tật và Phát triển) UNICEF Vietnam 47 40 28 23 41 44 22 24 52 37 32 22 51 38 28 28 43 42 27 18 44 42 28 32 49 38 28 20 Total (N=528) Male Female 15-24 25+ Hanoi HCM Specific NPO Support (%) By Key Demographics of Gender, Age, & City (Asked of Online respondents only) VN Fatherland Front Mặt Trận Tổ Quốc) Youth Union (Đoàn Thanh Niên) Audio library for the Blind (Thư Viện Sách Nói Cho Người Mù) Cycling for the Environment club (Câu Lạc Bộ Đạp Xe Vì Môi Trường) Women’s Union (Hội Phụ Nữ) 16 12 7 6 5 21 14 6 5 2 12 10 7 7 8 9 13 6 8 3 23 10 8 4 8 21 7 4 4 5 11 13 12 8 6 22
  23. 23. 52 19 13 Direct solicitation Friend referral Online 38 33 33 40 35 30 31 38 39 49 19 25 53 22 33 30 43 31 Total (N=831) Male Female 25-34 35-49 Hanoi HCM50-67 26 49 43 15-24 35 31 36 Sources of Information on Charities (%) By Key Demographics of Gender, Age, & City 29 18 4 25 TV Newspaper Radio Other 26 24 9 22 24 21 9 23 28 24 6 21 24 21 14 28 30 20 11 17 22 25 8 18 26 28 9 15 27 26 9 21 23
  24. 24. The Voice of the Customer www.cimigo.com joewheller@cimigo.com Managing Director www.cimigo.com joewheller@cimigo.com Managing Director

×