Excerpted from my e book, The Cash-Elevating Nonprofit Model: Motivating Donors to Give, Give Fortunately, and Carry on Giving.
You’ve in all probability seen photographs very like it earlier than. It’s generally utilized in fundraising by city rescue missions in the USA.
It was found within the misty early years of direct-response fundraising. To those that have labored with rescue missions, it has a reputation: “Previous Man Consuming” — usually shortened to OME.
An aged, bearded male, sitting at a desk and consuming. This photograph has been a key ingredient for elevating cash for rescue missions for a very long time. For many years, missions have been testing in opposition to it.
I’m bringing this picture to your consideration as a result of there are two issues about it that trigger issues inside rescue missions:
- The outdated man isn’t typical of the folks served by most rescue missions. Their clientele are principally younger adults and moms with youngsters. The aged sometimes make up 10% or much less of these they serve.
- Many individuals who work at rescue missions are fed up with Previous Man Consuming, and really feel he undermines their credibility and provides their pet hamsters rickets. (Effectively, not that final one, normally.)
That second downside isn’t an actual downside — it’s an perspective, and never a helpful one. There’s a delusion widespread within the fundraising occupation that something outdated and steadily used is unhealthy. There’s no good purpose to consider that. If there’s any correlation between outdated/new and unhealthy/good, it’s the opposite means: The outdated clichés have caught round as a result of they work. The brand new makes an attempt, particularly these born from the necessity to make insiders really feel higher, are much less more likely to work.
The vast majority of new concepts, new companies, new political events, and sure, new charities don’t work out. There’s nothing flawed with newness. It’s simply that chance is in opposition to new and untried issues. Most concepts are flawed in methods we don’t perceive till we strive them.
Sadly, we are able to’t dismiss this allergy to Previous Man Consuming, as a result of it’s strongly felt within the mission world. The urge to desert him in all probability prices hundreds of thousands in misplaced income yearly.
To make issues much more vexing, in case you ask donors whether or not it’s extra essential to give attention to serving to homeless outdated males or homeless youngsters, they normally say youngsters. But donor acquisition efforts for rescue missions that characteristic photos of homeless youngsters seldom work. OME outperforms children time after time. (The issues donors say and the issues they do are generally fully totally different.)
The picture that touches folks’s hearts, that motivates them to offer to city rescue missions, is Previous Man Consuming. Despite the fact that he’s not the entire image of the necessity. Despite the fact that these similar donors know that serving to youthful folks is extra needful. And though mission insiders have grown to hate it.
The truth that it’s the “flawed” picture has no bearing. As a result of the choice to offer is emotional, not rational. Emotional triggers, not rational ones, drive charitable giving. And OME is a potent emotional set off. I’ve heard a number of theories why it’s, however these theories aren’t verifiable. And why isn’t all that essential. OME simply works.
What do you have to do in case you work at an city rescue mission and you’re feeling Previous Man Consuming is the flawed picture? You’ve got three decisions:
- You possibly can stubbornly insist on displaying photographs extra typical of the necessity and anticipate “reality” to finally win out. I hope you received’t, although. Doing that may cripple your capacity to do your work by lowering the variety of donors who be part of you. It might be malfeasance. It might result in extra struggling in your neighborhood.
- You possibly can spend a zillion {dollars} attempting to “educate” each donor concerning the “actual” downside till finally a extra correct photograph works higher than OME. Yeah, proper. You don’t have a zillion {dollars}. (When you did, I hope you’d spend it combating homelessness and poverty; you might put an actual dent in these issues with that sort of cash!) Anyway, it wouldn’t work. The donors already know the reality you need to educate. It’s not a difficulty of information.
- Or you’ll be able to meet donors the place they’re — not the place you would like they’d be. Put forth the picture that motivates them to reply, and gratefully settle for the items they offer.
Placing apart your preferences is what separates the fundraising professionals from those that simply undergo the motions. In order for you photos that enhance your fundraising effectiveness, there’s no different means than utilizing the pictures and approaches that donors reply to, even when they rub you the flawed means.
The Cash-Elevating Nonprofit Model is obtainable at:
(This submit first appeared on February 6, 2020.)
