2010 bridge conference primary research


Published on

The VizziniSyndromeUtilizing Primary Research to Drive Fundraising Strategy

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

2010 bridge conference primary research

  1. 1. 2010 Bridge Conference The Vizzini Syndrome Utilizing Primary Research to Drive Fundraising Strategy
  2. 2. “Vizzini Syndrome” Explained  Vizzini Syndrome o Is a tongue-in-cheek reference to a character in the 1987 movie “The Princess Bride”, who believed his intellect and perception was so powerful that he could “divine” the solution to any situation through what he knew about the other person. o For our conversation today, we use this reference to address the way many of us, as marketing fundraisers, may have approached answering the following questions at one time or another: What makes someone support our cause? What do our members / supporters want from us? What motivates our members / supporters to give? What would improve our relationship with them? “Vizzini Syndrome” Explained
  3. 3. Selecting the Techniques  The first of many steps in this journey, is identifying and selecting the relevant techniques you deploy to gather your research data.  Selecting a Primary Research Technique is dependent upon the consideration of several factors: Ultimately, the nature of the objective you aim to achieve Resources Size of the population of interest Types of topics you want to research Amount & Depth of the data required  Selecting the correct technique(s), provide us the greatest chance of shedding light on the question(s) we seek to answer about our donors. Selecting the Techniques
  4. 4. 4 Qualitative Research
  5. 5. Qualitative Research  Qualitative research is conducted with a small respondent sample to obtain a directional understanding of the range of opinions represented within a certain group of respondents. The results are not conclusive as to the proportions for any opinion. In many ways, Qualitative Research, helps to inform us on the direction we should take in our Quantitative Research.  Characteristics: o Exploratory o Inability to generalize Results o More “Blue Sky” & Creative  Qualitative Research Techniques o Live Focus Groups o Online Focus Groups o Ethnographic Observation o In-Depth Interviews Qualitative Research
  6. 6. 6 In-Depth Interview Research
  7. 7.  MBS In-Depth Interview Methodology o The objectives of this research study were to determine what Mind, Body, Spirit subscribers consider their primary motivations for subscribing, whether they would consider giving a charitable gift and in what instances, as well as the giving dynamics associated with donating via newsletter and other channels. o In-depth telephone interviews were conducted from December 1st through December 5th among two groups – Subscriber Donors and Subscriber Non- Donors – with 12 participants in each group (essentially, like conducting two focus groups.)  Participation Incentive: All participants recruited by telephone were promised a $20 cash incentive. MBS Subscribers In-Depth InterviewMBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview
  8. 8.  Male o He donates to the Cancer Foundation and the AF and indicated that they are about equal as far as one being favored over another. He got involved with the Cancer Foundation when he was working as a Federal employee. He has rheumatoid arthritis. o He mentioned that he liked the way the AF does things, i.e. like calling first to ask for an interview and setting an appointment for later. o He reads almost everything online – Washington Post, Newsweek, and his local Milwaukee newspaper. He watches mostly news and sports on TV and listens to NPR radio. o He donates online and is very comfortable with doing so – because he is so familiar with the computer. MBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview – Sample DataMBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview Example
  9. 9.  Research Findings / Observations o Both donors and non-donor respondents said that they would be more motivated to give to the AF if the disease began to affect them or a family member more severely. o A few respondents could not cite a „favorite‟ charity. They hesitate to assign primacy to any charity they support or choose between causes. o A small percentage do a “background check” on the organization before they donate to it, especially to understand how much of their gift really goes to the cause versus overhead. o Several listed the Arthritis Foundation within their top five giving priorities. Other priorities included diabetes and cancer research. o Both donors and non-donors indicated favorable opinions of the AF and identified it as a great source for trusted information – research, medication, treatments, fitness, and community. MBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview FindingsIn-Depth Interview - Strategic Findings
  10. 10.  Tactical Changes derived from the Research o The role of Pain and the Severity of the disease on likeliness to give. o Copy and Messaging strategies around the cycle of pain, and how best it can be utilized to determine what role the organization should be playing for each constituent o Importance of multi channel o Many subscribers may have given their 1st gift to AF online – offline DM and event sponsorship response vehicles were identified as viable as well, and in the case of DM it was preferred o Many give annually or bi-annually o Consider reducing the number of asks an online donors receives after they have reached their annual or bi-annual “quota” of gift giving so as not to alienate MBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview Strategic OutcomeMBS Subscribers In-Depth Interview Outcome
  11. 11. 11 Quantitative Research
  12. 12. Quantitative Research  Quantitative research connects empirical observations and mathematical expressions, to the data, and ultimately leads to informed strategies and tactics.  Characteristics: o Measure Attitudes or Behaviors o Structured research methodology o All respondents are asked the same questions o Has the ability to encompass some Qualitative topics o Ability to generalize results • Quantitative Research Methods o Postal Surveys o Telephone Surveys o Face-to-Face Intercepts o Online Survey • Quantitative Analysis (Ways of Examining the Findings) o Frequency Analysis (Bars and Pies) o Cross-Tabulations and Significance Testing o Single and Multiple Regression Analysis o Conjoint Analysis Quantitative Research
  13. 13. 13 Survey Research
  14. 14.  MBS Subscribers Online Survey Methodology o The survey was conducted from December 2nd through December 11th among two groups – Subscriber Online Donors and Subscriber Online Non- Donors. After fielding completed, a total of 238 online donors and 749 non- donors had signed in and completed the 12-minute, 34-question survey. It is important to note that participants agreed to take part in this study after being invited by e-mail using Arthritis Foundation‟s internal list of Mind, Body, Spirit Subscribers with current e-mail addresses.  Participation Incentive: Participants did not receive any incentive for their participation. MBS Subscribers Online Survey Cohort Universe Sample Population Respondent n % Response Margin of Error Subscriber donors 3,500 3,500 238 6.8% ±6.13% Subscriber non-donors ~175,000 21,000 749 3.5% ±3.60% MBS Subscribers Online Survey
  15. 15. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample SurveyMerkle / Arthritis Foundation MBS Subscriber Survey –6/1/2010 –Draft 4 Thank you for accepting our invitation to participate in this Arthritis Foundation research. You are adding your voice to many others so the Arthritis Foundation can serve you better. Let’s start with some questions about communications. Q. 1. Please indicate how frequently you read, watch, or listen to the following types of media… Never Seldom Sometimes Often 1. Television     2. Newspaper     3. Magazines     4. Mail     5. Radio     6. E-mail     7. Internet     Q. 2. Thinking about communications from nonprofit health and research organizations, please choose the 3 (three) things you would like most such an organization – like the Arthritis Foundation. 1. Provides me with news updates by e-mail 2. Provides me with news updates by mail 3. Provides a hotline to call about symptoms 4. Enables me to participate in advocacy efforts 5. Keeps communications short 6. Provides access to detailed information if I want it 7. Focuses on practical activities and changes in lifestyle to help me improve my health 8. Provides information and details about the research efforts being undertaken Q. 3. Have you ever given a financial gift in response to a request…? (Select all that apply.) 1. Through the mail 2. On television 3. On the radio 4. On a web site 5. In an e-mail 6. In person 7. At an event 8. Other, please specify: _________ MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample Survey
  16. 16. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample Data  A wide variety of organization specific observations and insights can be identified in the survey research data set. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample Data
  17. 17. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample Data  Additionally, a view into general charitable giving, donor beliefs, and behaviors can be understood. The pieces of our donor puzzle take shape. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Sample Data
  18. 18. MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Strategic Outcome  Tactical Changes derived from the Research o High proportion of MBS Newsletter Subscribers (9 of 20) – said that they never have/or would not make a charitable gift. o Just because you have a large captive audience interested in your newsletters or information, it does not always translate to a viable fundraising opportunity. o More than eight in ten respondents (83%) are female o e-Mail and Website Copy and Messaging changes to reflect the higher percentage of females participating o About half the Online subscribers are on fixed income – either retired, employed part-time, unemployed or disabled; just four in ten appear to be in their wage-earning years o Consider the tactic of reduced ask amounts that are more manageable for those on fixed incomes – combined with age profiling begin Planned Giving cultivation o The notion that online giving reduces mailing costs was selected by the highest proportion of subscribers – more than eight in ten online donors (82%) and over seven in ten non-donors (72%) o Reinforce the cost savings and the “Go Green‟ environmental benefits as well to leverage this finding o Nearly nine in ten online donors (87%) and eight in ten non-donors (78%) report being diagnosed with arthritis MBS Subscribers Online Survey – Strategic Findings
  19. 19. 19 Conjoint Analysis
  20. 20.  Member Conjoint Methodology o The term “conjoint” is a contraction of the phrase “considering alternatives jointly.” The goal of this process is to:  Identify further refinements to membership attributes, including potential tactical additions or deletions,  Determine the individual attributes that drive the value of a membership,  Explore the potential for improved ROI in light of costs and attitudes and perceptions among audience segments.  How it works o Conjoint requires gathering data in an un-coached environment or setting. The conjoint analysis is based on data provided by respondents who spend time with a customized conjoint exercise. o Campbell Rinker utilized two conjoint styles to produce the data for this analysis and delivered a final model of expected behavior.  Two series of choice tasks were presented in successive computer screens in an online environment. , this made the task less complex and more readable. Member ConjointMember Conjoint
  21. 21.  Member Conjoint Audience o Two groups of prospective members participated in these exercises, the two groups are below: I. Lapsed members of the Arthritis Foundation. These recruits had at one time been AF members according to internal AF data records, but had allowed their membership to lapse (with or without their knowledge). II. Prospective members of the Arthritis Foundation. The same names Merkle, Inc. routinely selects from direct marketing lists for use in Arthritis Foundation member acquisition efforts. o Additionally, we also examined one group of recent charitable health organization donors.  Participation Incentive: All completed participants received a $20 cash incentive. Member Conjoint - AudienceMember Conjoint - Audience
  22. 22.  Member Conjoint Findings o Unlike typical survey research, the conjoint respondent creates their own unique dataset. Aggregating the choices generated by multiple respondents produces highly reliable models even with smaller sample sizes. A sample size of say 500, has the ability to produce the confidence intervals found in 10x‟s that sample size of a normal survey. The output of any conjoint task is a series of “part-worth utilities.” The utilities upon which these results are based fall within the acceptable standard error term for conjoint studies. Member Conjoint – Sample Data Recruited Qualified & Complete % Resp. Lapsed AF Members 205 88 42.9% All Prospects (detail below) 263 155 58.9% Prospect List 155 77 49.6% Panel Prospects 108 78 72.2% Total 468 243 51.9% Member Conjoint – Strategic Findings
  23. 23.  Compared to the Arthritis Foundation membership offer (held constant at $0 for comparison), respondents give slightly higher value to a similar Mayo Clinic membership, and considerably less value to one from WebMD. Member Conjoint – (Brand Value)Member Conjoint – (Brand Value)
  24. 24.  Of the possible membership benefits presented to respondents, the Over the Counter Discount Card was most attractive, followed by coupons for ease-of- use products. Member Conjoint – (Membership Benefits)Member Conjoint – (Membership Benefits)
  25. 25.  Another advantage of the Conjoint Methodology is the ability to cut the results data by sub-groups to gain further insight into the topic you are researching. Member Conjoint – (Membership Benefits by Age)Member Conjoint – (Membership Benefits by Age)
  26. 26.  Findings from traditional and conjoint research may be amplified by segmentation analysis, in which audience clusters can be identified. Here, Campbell Rinker assigns a value to respondent opinions using K-means cluster analysis and illustrates their relationship to each other within a grid using discriminant function analysis. Member Conjoint – (K-Means Cluster Analysis)Member Conjoint – (K-Means Cluster Analysis)
  27. 27.  Bargain Shoppers (50%): This is the most price-sensitive group. They are not happy about paying for the membership but are willing to do so because the combined savings from all the discounts will make it worthwhile. This group is least interested in Arthritis Today. These joiners are probably also the biggest risk for lapsing if they feel they didn't get their money's worth. Bargain Shoppers are playing the odds, taking something of a gamble on the payoff they‟d like to get from the value, and if they get information in the exchange, they‟re glad to have it, though it has less value for them. Bargain shoppers are less confident of the value from discounts and coupons, AND the information has less value for them. Member Conjoint – Bargain Shoppers segmentMember Conjoint – Bargain Shoppers segment
  28. 28.  Page Turners (30%): Of all the groups, page turners are more price sensitive. They are glad for the discounts, but are generally less focused than other groups on the savings available. What they really like is the magazine. People in this group might be likely to skew older and less wealthy. Where page turners and Bargain Shoppers come together is that they‟re both price conscious. Page turners, however, see much more value in the content AF provides. Member Conjoint – Page Turners segmentMember Conjoint – Page Turners segment
  29. 29.  Spenders (20%): This group is not price-sensitive. They plan to spend on arthritis-related products, services and medications, and they know they will get their money's worth from a membership at any price up to $40. Ready and willing to use every benefit extended. Likely to skew younger and more wealthy. Spenders recognize the value of the information that AF provides and they‟re willing to spend for it, yet they consider the benefits to be a perk. Spenders know they‟ll get their money‟s worth, and along the way know they‟ll get good information and are glad for it. While Spenders have confidence in the value they also like the information, however the information is NOT what drives their decision. Member Conjoint – Spenders segmentMember Conjoint – Spenders segment
  30. 30.  Membership Simulator o This spreadsheet tool, developed by Campbell Rinker as a byproduct of the Arthritis Foundation‟s Conjoint Research, enables a number of benefits to be measured by relative value to determine which combination would be the most successful. Member Conjoint SimulatorMember Conjoint Simulator
  31. 31.  Tactical Changes derived from the Research o Benefits – Over the Counter Discount Card o As the most favored benefit in this research project, the Arthritis Foundation has begun exploring a number of partnerships in an attempt to facilitate this heavily desired benefit for its constituents o Cluster Segments – Bargains, Pages, and Cash o Beginning to match offer to audience in the DM and Online appeal streams, beyond just messaging o Simulator – Combinations o Not only used to back-validate historical Membership Price Point Testing, but also demonstrated potential ROI for future testing benefit combinations. Member Conjoint – Strategic OutcomeMember Conjoint – Strategic Findings
  32. 32. QuestionsQuestions
  33. 33. QuestionsAnswers
  34. 34. 34 Thank You !