To Affinity...and Beyond!October 2011Jennifer Shea, nfpSynergyRuth Smyth, RSPBE: jennifer.shea@nfpsynergy.netT: 020 7426 8...
What is brand made up of?                      Name                     Visual ID                     Messages            ...
Points along the brand journey
Measuring understanding - what does the publicknow about:• What your organisation does   o   Services   o   Campaign activ...
Measuring understanding of specific aspects of your work and values                                                       ...
Measuring affinity• How close do your audiences feel to your organisation?• What do they associate most closely with your ...
Borrowing from projective techniques to measureemotional affinity - Charity B        I think they would inspire           ...
Another approach to measuring affinity                                 x                                         ME
Comparing how close the public feels to your charity,versus comparator organisations                                Not 10...
Understanding the public’s spontaneous associationswith your brand    Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy    Base: All th...
Measuring your brand against public ideals for charities                                                                  ...
Measuring your brand against public ideals for charitiesworking in your sector                                            ...
Using Brand Attributes data to inform corporatepartnership strategy                                                       ...
Measuring the fit between your communicationsmaterials and your brand                                                     ...
Measuring emotional affinity - Charity F                                                    1. Supportive/Support/Support ...
Highlighting barriers to engagement by measuringemotional affinity                                   1. Dont know much abo...
Using Brand Attributes data• What do the public associate with your brand?• How accurately do the public understand the wo...
RSPB’s ‘Outside In’ ReviewHow the RSPB has used the Brand      Attributes Monitor
What I’ll talk about...•   The RSPB•   The ‘Outside In’ Insight Project•   The Sargeant model•   Applying it to the Brand ...
What we do
What we do
Where our income  comes from
...a club for bird   watchers...    ...an animal     hospital...
Brand shift was slow...                          Snail. Flickr Creative Commons:                          Meneer Zjeroen
The Outside In ReviewQuestions:• How and why are perceptions formed?• Can they be changed?• How - and with how much effort...
The Sargeant Model:Differentiation for charities
The Sargeant ModelEmotional    Exciting, Fun, Heroic, Innovative,Engagement   Inspiring, ModernService      Approachable, ...
Using the model: the ideal charity                Heroic, Innovative,                Inspiring, Modern        RSPB        ...
Using the model: comparing charities                 Heroic, Innovative,                 Inspiring, Modern                ...
Using the other data from BA             Boring12%10%8%6%                                     1. Not interested/ not4%    ...
How close does the public feel to charity brands?                   High affinity                     Medium affinity     ...
Outcomes           Arne Reserve, Dorset. RSPB Images
Any Questions?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

To affinity and beyond!

643 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
643
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

To affinity and beyond!

  1. 1. To Affinity...and Beyond!October 2011Jennifer Shea, nfpSynergyRuth Smyth, RSPBE: jennifer.shea@nfpsynergy.netT: 020 7426 8888
  2. 2. What is brand made up of? Name Visual ID Messages Values Mission Vision
  3. 3. Points along the brand journey
  4. 4. Measuring understanding - what does the publicknow about:• What your organisation does o Services o Campaign activity• Your audiences• The way that you work, your values and style
  5. 5. Measuring understanding of specific aspects of your work and values Neutral Somewhat agree Strongly agree Provides people with xxx condition, their families and carers, and the general public, with the help, support and advice they need 35% 37% 20% Speaks up for people with xxx condition and empowers them to speak for 39% 31% 17% themselves Promotes a more inclusive society 41% 31% 12% Is a campaigning organisation 42% 27% 13% Is innovative and forward-thinking 53% 23% 9% Encourages members of the public to get involved in its work 48% 19% 7% Is a charity that is relevant to you and your family and friends 35% 9% 5%Overall, taking all the above into account, how much do you trust this charity? 38% 34% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%“To what extent, on a scale from 1 to 5, do you think Charity A can be trusted to…?” Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: All those aware of Charity A (1,222) among 2,000 respondents 18+, Britain, Apr 2010
  6. 6. Measuring affinity• How close do your audiences feel to your organisation?• What do they associate most closely with your brand?• How do they think you measure up compared to an „ideal‟ charity?• Do your communications tally with their perceptions of your brand?
  7. 7. Borrowing from projective techniques to measureemotional affinity - Charity B I think they would inspire 46% me I would like to talk to them 37% I think we would become 34% friends I would like to get to know 33% them I dont think we would have 9% much in common I think they would intimidate 2% me I think they would bore me 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%“Imagining if CHARITY B was a person, which of the following statements best describes your reaction to them?” Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: All those aware of Charity B (1,506) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, November 2010
  8. 8. Another approach to measuring affinity x ME
  9. 9. Comparing how close the public feels to your charity,versus comparator organisations Not 10 close 9 8.1 8.1 8 7.5 7.0 6.8 7.0 6.7 6.8 7 6.13 5.54 5.75 5.8 6 5.34 5.15 5.32 4.71 4.7 5 3.87 4 3 2 Close 1 Supporters 65+ 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Total Given me/ someone I know help/ assistance/ advice Charity C Comparator“Please indicate how close you feel to (...) by placing where you would like them to sit in relation to you” 1 meansclosest and 12 means furthest Source: nfpSynergy, Brand Attributes Monitor, Nov-10 Base: All those aware of each charity brand among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain
  10. 10. Understanding the public’s spontaneous associationswith your brand Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: All those aware of Charity D (1,526) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, April 2010
  11. 11. Measuring your brand against public ideals for charities Focused Trustworthy Practical Caring / Compassionate Inspiring Honest Reputable 36% 29% Supportive 19% Campaigning 10% 26% 19% 10% 16% 6% Friendly / Welcoming 34% 8% Accountable 9% 2% 14% 5% 9% 16% 16% 14% 13% Passionate Sympathetic The IDEAL charity Helpful Positive Average charity Professional Informative Approachable Determined / dedicated Charity A Effective / Cost-effective“Please choose up to 10 words in each column that you think best describes Charity A” Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: 2,013 adults 16+, Britain, April 2011
  12. 12. Measuring your brand against public ideals for charitiesworking in your sector Campaigning Trustworthy Practical 31% 22% 30% 28% 20% 20% Honest Helpful 27% 27% 22% 20% 8% 20% 27% 8% 32% Effective / Cost-effective Supportive 25% 24% 24% Charity D 32% Professional Accountable The IDEAL International 36% Aid and Development charity Caring / Compassionate“Please choose up to 10 words that you think describe your IDEAL charity working in: International Aid and Development…” Charity D Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: All those aware of Charity D (1,520) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, Nov 2010
  13. 13. Using Brand Attributes data to inform corporatepartnership strategy Established Boring Professional Practical Reputable Modern Greedy / Rich Average score of charity brands McDonalds Friendly / welcoming Traditional Co-op Helpful Trustworthy “Please choose up to 10 words that you think describe ... McDonalds/ Co-op” Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, Nov 2010
  14. 14. Measuring the fit between your communicationsmaterials and your brand Boring Established Responsive Traditional Conservative Reputable Supportive Practical Friendly / Welcoming Informative Helpful Campaigning Positive Charity E Brand Trustworthy Honest Charity E advert image Professional Determined / Dedicated Caring / Compassionate Passionate FocusedPlease choose up to 10 words that you think describe the Advert Image/Please choose up to 10 words that you think describe Charity E Source: Brand Attributes, nfpSynergy Base: 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, November 2010; All those aware of Charity E (1,264) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain, November 2010
  15. 15. Measuring emotional affinity - Charity F 1. Supportive/Support/Support families “Giving practical support and care to vulnerable people” “Such a great support to many sufferers and helps families to cope” 2. Helping people/families 3. Caring/ Caring charity/ Compassionate “Bringing care and sensitivity to support “A great help to people at a traumatic people to manage difficult situations” time in their lives” “Such caring and supportive people. “There to help” They are people who must be angels on “Helping to make life a bit easier earth”“Which of the following faces best represents how you feel about Charity F/ “This is because” Source: nfpSynergy, Brand Attributes Monitor, Nov-10 Base: All those aware of Charity F (1506) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain
  16. 16. Highlighting barriers to engagement by measuringemotional affinity 1. Dont know much about them/ Charity C 2. Not well known/ not much media coverage “Don‟t know what they do” ” Not a charity I know a lot about I just am “Not sure what theyre doing aware of the name” now, no publicity” “A great charity but I don‟t know much “Not in the public eye as much about them!” as it used to be” Caring/ Caring charity/ Compassionate Helping people/families 10% 1. Sad/upsetting subject (18%) “Bringing care “It makes me think of people who have and sensitivity to “A great help to people at a traumatic support peopledifficulties” difficult to manage time in their lives” situations” “I think they deal with a lot of sadness” “There to help” “Such caring and supportivedependants on the charity” “Feel sad for people. “Helping to make life a bit easier They are people who must be angels on earth”“Which of the following faces best represents how you feel about Charity G”/ “This is because” Source: nfpSynergy, Brand Attributes Monitor, Nov-10 Base: All those aware of Charity G (1,181) among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain
  17. 17. Using Brand Attributes data• What do the public associate with your brand?• How accurately do the public understand the work you do?• How do public perceptions measure up to what the public say they want from a charity in your sector?• Benchmark brand perceptions before a major brand refresh or rebrand• Understand how your campaigns tally with public perceptions of your brand• Build upon this knowledge to increase engagement with your target audiences
  18. 18. RSPB’s ‘Outside In’ ReviewHow the RSPB has used the Brand Attributes Monitor
  19. 19. What I’ll talk about...• The RSPB• The ‘Outside In’ Insight Project• The Sargeant model• Applying it to the Brand Attributes Monitor• What it led to• Handout – with notes & contact details
  20. 20. What we do
  21. 21. What we do
  22. 22. Where our income comes from
  23. 23. ...a club for bird watchers... ...an animal hospital...
  24. 24. Brand shift was slow... Snail. Flickr Creative Commons: Meneer Zjeroen
  25. 25. The Outside In ReviewQuestions:• How and why are perceptions formed?• Can they be changed?• How - and with how much effort?Method:• Multiple sources
  26. 26. The Sargeant Model:Differentiation for charities
  27. 27. The Sargeant ModelEmotional Exciting, Fun, Heroic, Innovative,Engagement Inspiring, ModernService Approachable, Compassionate, DedicatedVoice Ambitious, Authoritative, BoldTradition Traditional
  28. 28. Using the model: the ideal charity Heroic, Innovative, Inspiring, Modern RSPB 2 Ideal Charity 1.5 1 0.5 Approachable, Traditional 0 Dedicated Ambitious, Authoritative, Bold
  29. 29. Using the model: comparing charities Heroic, Innovative, Inspiring, Modern 2 RSPB 1.5 Charity A 1 Charity B 0.5 Traditional 0 Approachable, Dedicated Ambitious, Authoritative, Bold
  30. 30. Using the other data from BA Boring12%10%8%6% 1. Not interested/ not4% relevant/ dont like birds2% “It is not an exciting charity”0% “Not relevant to me” RSPB Charity A Charity B “Not a charity very close to my heart” “It is for bird people”
  31. 31. How close does the public feel to charity brands? High affinity Medium affinity Low affinity“Please indicate how close you feel to (...) by placing where you would like them to sit in relation to you” 1 meansclosest and 12 means furthest Source: nfpSynergy, Brand Attributes Monitor, Nov-10 Base: All those aware of) each charity brand among 2,000 adults 18+, Britain
  32. 32. Outcomes Arne Reserve, Dorset. RSPB Images
  33. 33. Any Questions?

×