Peer to Peer Competative Online Usability Analysis

413 views

Published on

A competitive analysis looking at the space of peer to peer fundraising platforms.

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
413
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Peer to Peer Competative Online Usability Analysis

  1. 1. Peer to Peer Fundraising Comparative Analysis Manager for Project: Brian Tucker Intern: Carolina Beltran1
  2. 2. What is Peer-to-Peer Fundraising?
  3. 3. Empowering your supporters to raise money (from their peers) on your organizations behalf
  4. 4. Why Peer-to-Peer Fundraising?
  5. 5. Psychology
  6. 6. Utilize and Maximize Networks
  7. 7. Creativity and Empowering
  8. 8. Removes Skepticism
  9. 9. Assignment:Create a Competitive Analysis of Peer- to-Peer Fundraising Models Online Usability
  10. 10. Goals:• To establish peer-to-peer fundraising models as a legitimate fundraising channel with multiple successful approaches that have not been maximized.• To see how World Vision has been doing in the space of personal fundraisers and what can be improved to maintain a competitive edge.
  11. 11. Background Research?
  12. 12. 2012 BlackBaud Consulting Peer-to-Peer Athletic Fundraising Benchmarking Insights• Team Members are the most effective fundraisers.• Multi-year fundraising participants are twice as effective.• Retaining participants is a challenge.
  13. 13. What Organizations?
  14. 14. Larger, moreestablished medicalfundraisersSimilar causes andplatform sizes “Competitor Organizations” World Vision Programs
  15. 15. Methodology1) Documented entire process with screenshots of everything. Created aGmail and documented a timeline with all the emails, newsletters, sign-ups, etc.2) Had a $200 Visa and made donations to each website of $103) Created two spreadsheets User Experience - Sign Up Process, Ease of Financial Checkout, Time Span of Communication, Verbage for Ask, Clarity, Ease of Tools, Personality, Social Media Ease Quantitative Experience - Website, Contact Information, Platform, Money Raised, Number of Participants, Amount Suggested to Fundraise, Programs Offered, News
  16. 16. Spreadsheets Available Upon Request
  17. 17. Organizational Platforms
  18. 18. Relay for LifeHighlights:• FacebookSynchronizingAbilities• Clear instructionson what to do tofundraise
  19. 19. • Easy instructions• Clear home platform• Professional and Efficient
  20. 20. Race for the Cure Susan G Komen • Very Cluttered, and Boring • Difficult to Engage • Web platform is not the main focus of the fundraiser• Incredibly Rudimentary
  21. 21. March of Dimes, March for Babies • The ask and verbage is formal • Big focus on company engagement and females • Adorable babies everywhere!
  22. 22. • Clear communication with Team Captains• Made “team captain” a jazzy position • Clear and Concise Instructions for an older generation
  23. 23. Invisible Children • Homepage is a little cluttered • The “Act and Ask” is less clear here than on other P to P organizations • The separation from “dashboard” to actual page is very confusing• Liked that people could have a “live feedback”• Updates on the amount people give
  24. 24. • Love the campaign graphics, yet this does not invoke action • You can’t access this on your personal fundraising page this must be done BEFORE • Only small paragraph description• This visualization of how much people are donating is engaging
  25. 25. Water for People • “Gets the job done” but not interactive • Too cluttered and not engaging• “Ask” and “Verbage” is incredibly informal
  26. 26. • You can upload videos, pictures, and even name your campaign• Beautiful, Engaging, and Creative ideas for fundraising tactics to increase fundraising
  27. 27. 2.1. 3.
  28. 28. Team Compassion • Convio Platform that TWV, 30Hr, Gift Catalog all use • Dashboard separation confusing
  29. 29. Team Samaritan’s Purse • Platform is FirstGiving • Cluttered and slightly confusing
  30. 30. Save the Children • Very new program, called in to get information, could not get any yet
  31. 31. Team World Vision • Convio Platform • Clear and simple
  32. 32. • There are beautiful graphics, relatively easy to use, very simple• Love the “story” being told and dedication to water
  33. 33. • Tied for favorite peer to peer platform• Simple, engaging, clear
  34. 34. • The personal connection to the entrepreneur and the detailed description allows for connectivity• Makes you feel proud of your donation!
  35. 35. 30 Hour Famine • Again, the Convio platform creates a separation between the dashboard and your personal page with is confusing• Does not allow for creativity or usability when telling your story or fundraising
  36. 36. Gift Catalog • The mission of the catalog is wonderful, but it is confusing to navigate and unclear
  37. 37. Revenue (Millions)420410400390380370360350340330320310300290280270260250240230220210200190180170160150140130120110100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
  38. 38. User Experience Clear and Easy OnlineLifeless Engaging Unclear/Cluttered
  39. 39. Scope of Organization’s Revenue $618 M (Organization) $956M $12.3 M N/A (TSC) (Organization) $415M $552 M (Online) (Organization) N/A (TCI) $398 M $400M (Organization) (Organization) $209K (TSP) $131M $1.7M (Online) $212M (Organization) $15.6M $105M (Online) Organization Organization has a Organization has a Relies Solely diversity of diversification of Athletic on Online Financial Fundraising Events and Fundraising Fundraising Financial Fundraising
  40. 40. Conclusion
  41. 41. What are we doing now? Just a few standout things that are being done well: It is a simple interface for the viewerAmazing storytelling and making itpersonal and connected
  42. 42. Beautiful, Simple- to- use, andCommitment to the work through great Interactivephotography There is a real team feeling
  43. 43. Things to note as we move forward* Constant Updating from Organization, March of * Immediate Tax Deductible ReceiptDimes was the best: Military Campaign * Help provide people with creativity and ideas for un-traditional fundraising skills
  44. 44. * Highly Integrated with Facebook, with a step-by-step process * Easy step by step integration and beautiful graphics on all WV platforms * Ability to edit your “Personal Fundraising” page on the website directly without the “Dashboard” component * If there is a “team” component there must be a clear “Call to Action” for the team leaders
  45. 45. Food for Thought• Just because a platform is “boring” or “cool” does not mean this is correlated to their revenue• Every platform conveys its personality and targets a specific demographic• A peer-to-peer fundraising channel is sometimes the core representation of an organization’s brand and identity.• How can other events besides athletic races, events or campaigns leverage a peer to peer fundraising model?• There is something to be said for a seamless, flowing experience on a website platform that provides the user with an enjoyable and engaging experience! Let World Vision capitalize on this insight!
  46. 46. Questions?Brian Tucker: btucker@worldvision.org
  47. 47. Works Cited• http://www.riverwalkchurchofchrist.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Trust- Fall.jpg• http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/03/31/is-the-non-profit-world-teeming-with-fraud/• http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/03/31/is-the-non-profit-world-teeming-with-fraud/• http://www.b2bvoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/futureofbirth.jpg• http://www.trail-loppet.com/files/2012/04/Team-World-Vision1-Medium.jpg• http://social.razoo.com/2012/01/what-is-peer-to-peer-online-fundraising-anyhow/• http://stories.alexanderyellen.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/story.jpg

×