June 12, 2007 | Read Time: 1 minute
Is it smart for charities to promise less than they really expect to accomplish?
It’s a tough question to answer, but one that may be important to nonprofit groups efforts to market themselves, writes Tom Belford, a veteran fund raiser, on The Agitator.
If a charity promises to complete a modest goal, but then accomplishes much more, it will gain the attention of donors, writes Mr. Belford.
But, of course, it is not an easy approach.
“How do you understate or modestly state your need, its urgency, the unique effectiveness of your approach, or the impact you expect to have, without getting drowned out by your more shrill or flamboyant competitors?” he asks. “This is a huge communications challenge for both fund raisers and advocates.”
He writes that historically charities avoid such soft sells. “Most nonprofit marketers — especially direct marketers — operate in a culture of hype … hyping fear, anger or suffering; hyping urgency; hyping ‘new’ solutions to persistent age-old problems,” he writes.
On his blog, Mr. Belford is soliciting for ways charities can “under promise and still win attention.”
What do you think? Would such an approach attract contributors?
