Campaigns that should have performed well, but didn't, and pointers on how to build an internal culture accepting of failure.

1. TANKED!
Online campaigns that should
have performed…but didn’t
Madeline Stanionis, M+R
Ben Simon, Greenpeace
Thursday, August 1, 2013
Bridge Conference

2. Page 2
Ben

3. Page 3
Madeline
Been around. Donordigital, Watershed, M+R

4. Page 4
Tanking is hard.

5. Page 5
Most organizations are
really bad at admitting
failure…
…including mine!

6. Page 6

7. Page 7

8. Page 8

9. Page 9

10. Page 10
1. The one where…
…We fell in love with our
super cute, meaningful,
catchy campaign. But
donors…didn’t.

11. Page 11
It went like this…
• Great client
• Timely project
• Receptive audience
• Utterly delightful theme

12. Page 12

13. Page 13

14. Page 14
And…
• Typical open rate
• Few clicks
• Few gifts
• Why?

15. Page 15
Too silly ?
Maybe it’s a
program you
can sign your
kids up for?
Are these
people too
happy and
healthy?
Maybe people
don’t believe
this ?

16. Page 16
So…
• Dialed back the cute (WEEP)
• Amped up the seriousness

17. Page 17

18. Page 18

19. Page 19
It still tanked

20. Page 20
And what’d we learn?
• High concept…didn’t seem to matter
• Education about hunger is still needed
• Their fundraising is largely holiday-oriented. Should
we bother any other time?

21. Page 21
2. The one where…
…We launched a great big
important initiative, and
people didn’t want to
fund it.

22. Page 22

23. Page 23
Sounds great, right?
Who wouldn’t want to support that?

24. Page 24
Attempt #1: Straightforward

25. Page 25
Not so much. Why?
• Narrative and Buy-In Around Webmaker Weren’t
There Yet

26. Page 26
So, let’s change it up.
• Everyone loves kids, right?

27. Page 27
Well, Again, not so much.
WHAT HAPPENED?!

28. Page 28
The video didn’t do it.
• No emotional pull.
• No immediacy to the ask.

29. Page 29
So, we tried something Else:
• Long-term, political theory of change.

30. Page 30
Basic idea:
• Webmaker Success -->
• A future where those in power knows how the Web
works -->
• A future where something like SOPA/PIPA is
unimaginable.

31. Page 31
And it worked!
• But, we can’t quite use that every time.

32. Page 32
So, what’d we actually do?
• -Tried a bunch of different things (good!)
• -Didn't really think through what people's frames of
mind would be (bad!)
• -Got carried away with video (bad!)

33. Page 33
And what’d we learn?
• -More work to do to build up a donations narrative
around Webmaker
• -People don't immediately see it as worthy of support
• -But the case *can* be made

34. Page 34
3. The one where…
…We thought it was
entirely possible that
lightning would strike
twice.

35. Page 35
Some background
• Another warm and fuzzy client
• A surprise hit
• Aha! The key to success!
• Let’s do it again!

36. Page 36

37. Page 37
The first round
• Grew our client’s list by 15%!
• Holy crap!
• Picked up by other venues
• Those kids…loved it
…so we did it again…

38. Page 38

39. Page 39
And…
• Tanked! Tankity, tankity, tanked.
• Why?

40. Page 40
“Tattoo Day”
…is, umm, not
a holiday.
Fulfillment
was, shall
we say, a
Giant Pain
In The Ass.

41. Page 41
And what’d we learn?
• It worked because it was a holiday.
• DUH.
• We let the gimmick get in the way
• Oh. We did it again the next Valentine’s Day. It
worked again.

42. Page 42
4. The one where…
…We jumped on the
bandwagon.

43. Page 43
It went like this…
• Great client (I KNOW, RIGHT?)
• The tools had finally arrived
• Lots of enthusiasm. Demand, even!

44. Page 44

45. Page 45

46. Page 46

47. Page 47
And…
• An enthusiastic core group responded! Yay!
• About 60 pages created
• They averaged about 2 gifts per page.
• I KNOW. SAD FACE.

48. Page 48
And what’d we learn?
• Peer-to-peer doesn’t work for everyone. OBVS.
• Sometimes we shouldn’t listen to a couple noisy board
members, eh?
• But…they still like having it. And that’s not a bad thing!

49. Page 49
5. The one where...
…no one wanted to
donate after getting a
sticker.

50. Page 50
-Past experience was that after a sticker giveaway,
it was normal to raise ~$1/signup from donations
-Enough to pay for the campaign, or a little more,
while also providing some engagement and
fundraising

51. Page 51
So we did that, but with a twist:
you could get a sticker after taking a "quiz" to
get a set of webmaker projects best suited to
your interests

52. Page 52

53. Page 53
Campaign GOALS:
• 1) Engagement
• 2) List growth
• 3) Fundraising

54. Page 54
Results:
• 1) Engagement! Lots more people tried out Webmaker
projects
• 2) List growth! There were more than 18,000 signups.
• 3) Fundraising? Not exactly.

55. Page 55
Results (Continued):
From more than 18,000 signups after the initial promotion, we
raised only $2,000.
So, we pulled the plug, and stopped promotion on other channels
before it could go any further.

56. Page 56
What we did:
• -Designed a great campaign! Lots of engagement
(good)
• -Assumed something would work based on past
results from other organizations (bad)
• -Laid the groundwork internally for the fact that we
couldn't predict the results (good)
• -Stopped it before it got too out of hand (also good)

57. Page 57
Why’d it tank?
• -Broader issues at play
• -We still hadn't successfully woven a donations
narrative around Webmaker
• -Recipients didn't connect Webmaker as something
needing their support

58. Page 58
What’d we learn?
• -Still had more work to do to build donations narrative
around Webmaker
• -Mozillians like free stuff, but it didn't make them
want to give
• -Tactics that work for other organizations won't
always work for us

59. Page 59
6. The one where...
…we let the cool tools
screw everything up.

60. Page 60
6. AHEM. The oneS
where...
…we let the cool tools
screw everything up.

61. Page 61

62. Page 62

63. Page 63

64. Page 64

65. Page 65
What’d we learn?
• Start simple. Stay simple. Almost ALWAYS.
– What’s the easiest way for my constituent to
participate?
• Don‘t let the salespeople sell you stuff. Except for
when you do.
– Research the orgs they’ve worked with. Call up the ones
who they didn’t tell you to call.
– Show me the data!
• Try try try not to let “what other orgs are doing”
send you down the rabbit hole.

66. Page 66
7. The one where...
…we thought the
people cared.

67. Page 67
It went like this…
• Big, important and (really) terrific organization
• International humanitarian crisis
• Critical organizational issue
• Passion, priority, story, meaningful way for
donors to help…etc!

68. Page 68

69. Page 69
What’d we learn?
• If the news isn’t cooperating, it might not work.
• If the issue isn’t one we’ve talked about, it might be
hard to generate concern.
• What’s critical on the inside may not be critical on
the outside.

70. Page 70
In summary...
…five signs you should
pull the plug on your
campaign...

71. Page 71
1. It isn’t performing.
2. It is tanking.
3. No money.
4. No actions.
5. No money OR actions.

72. Page 72
Building a culture of
failure in your
organization

73. Page 73
Well...
Maybe building a
culture
*accepting*
of failure

74. Page 74
1) DON’T pretend to be the
0racle from on high

75. Page 75
2) Try lots of things!

76. Page 76
3) Establish metrics &
benchmarks
At OFA, we watched the Donations : Unsubscriptions ration.
If subject line tests were worse than 2:1 for donors, of 1:2 for
non-donors, we wouldn’t send (under normal circumstances).

77. Page 77
4) Be open & transparent

78. Page 78
Go forth fellow
losers! Be
proud!