SOFII – The Greenpeace origami whale

SOFII’s view:
Opportunities for donors to actively participate in something appropriate usually pay off. Once you’ve realised this, then the idea of asking donors to construct an origami whale is inspired, but really very simple. And as always, the simple ideas show that they work best with donors.

Name of exhibitor: Matthew Sherrington, development director of Greenpeace USA, Washington from 2003 to 2007; now fundraising and communications strategy consultant with The Good Agency, London, UK.

Email: matthew.sherrington@thegoodagency.co.uk

Name of exhibit: Greenpeace USA newsletter – the origami whale.

Date of first appearance: 2006.

Category/area of fundraising: Supporter retention/ campaign engagement.

Country of origin: USA.

Summary/objectives:
We at Greenpeace USA wanted to use our newsletter to deepen supporter engagement. We wanted to make it more personal and to offer our traditional donors, who gave through direct mail, the opportunity to participate in our campaigns. We also wanted to do better at raising spontaneous donations.

Background:
Previously, the GP newsletter was sent without enclosures as ‘printed matter’ (i.e. as low-cost bulk mail, not sealed) with the address on the back cover, as is the norm for printed newsletters in the USA. It was a small landscape format, focused on short updates and with plenty of visuals, reflecting a belief that supporters get too much information that they don’t want and don’t read. The idea was to offer something short and inspiring that could be digested over breakfast coffee. A survey confirmed that 90 per cent of supporters thought the frequency and amount of information was about right.

While there were promotions on inside pages to join the monthly giving programme, or high-value club, with a response form, there was no reply envelope.

The newsletter was turned into a campaign action vehicle that would engage supporters. We enclosed the newsletter in an envelope and added a covering letter from the supporter care manager, which was written in an informal tone. We added a reply envelope, with a loose insert donation form, and spontaneous donations increased, even though there was no direct financial ask. We then tested adding a request to take part in a campaign. Response rates were four times the average of a special appeal and spontaneous donations increased to cover the costs of the newsletter (still no financial ask).

The campaign actions were often petitions, but sometimes more imaginative. For the whales campaign, supporters were asked to make origami whales and send them back to Greenpeace; 15,000 then featured in a Greenpeace exhibit at an International Whaling Commission meeting. For a campaign to push Kleenex to start using recycled content, supporters sent back the packaging of their last Kleenex purchase.

These activities complemented campaign priorities and on-line campaign activities, but offering campaign actions in the newsletter encouraged further involvement from our traditional donor supporter base – those over 65 still preferred to respond by mail – rather than just serving the younger on-line activist types (who tended not to give money). Donors were previously giving to a campaigning organisation, but not being asked to participate in the campaigns.

Creator/originator: Greenpeace USA.

Influence/impact:
This was part of our desire to reach out to supporters, engage with them, and help them feel they were part of the campaigning mission – make being part of the Greenpeace movement real.

Test details:
To re-develop the newsletter, we tested the changes. Firstly, by enclosing the cover letter and reply envelope we increased spontaneous donations. Secondly, by adding a campaign action we engaged even more people and further increased spontaneous donations.

Costs: N/A.

Results:

Response rates were three to four times higher than special appeals, confirming supporters’ interest in getting involved. Feedback included ‘thank you for getting the petition to me and not asking for money!’
We took the time to record all the off-line non-financial actions supporters did. Over a 12-month period, 20 per cent of our direct mail supporters also responded to a non-financial request to take part in a campaign action (not counting any on-line activity).
As a result of our emphasis on supporter engagement, we increased e-mail penetration from four per cent to 30 per cent of donors and member renewal rates for some supporter segments increased by up to 40 per cent.

Why do you think this exhibit merits a place in SOFII?:
It’s an example of transforming the humble newsletter, with new energy and purpose, to deliver a real involving experience to supporters. Not just petitions in appeals commonly used to lift response – but asking supporters specifically, and only, to participate in a campaign action.

It was highly supporter focused. The format and content reflected the level of information supporters said they wanted. The covering letter introduced a more personal contact with a named staff member. And because there was never a direct financial ask, it was obvious to supporters that the campaign action was authentic and not a trick to prompt donations.

Mal Warwick highlighted the newsletter in his Jan 2007 e-newsletter as an example of innovative practice. Have a look at it, here.