Livingston

Jul
25
2008

Precision Not Found on Facebook

Attending the Bridge Conference yesterday I was struck by the marked difference in the day’s three electronic media panels. The first and the third showed examples where fundraising on Facebook was stymied (Save Darfur, The Humane Society, etc.), that the social cause application garnered incredible amounts of followers, but few dollars. Why? Well a bad case of shiny object syndrome (see close).

SaveDarfur.jpg

More importantly, the second effort demonstrated how intelligent social media INTEGRATED with 1.0 and traditional marketing initiatives converted garnered fantastic fundrasing results. Key factor here was the social networks and online media were highly targeted towards Gen X. and Baby Boomers who had the capacity to give significant dollars (Greenpeace). In fact, when contact information was garnered online through capture mechanisms, double digit percentages donated with phone calls.

What’s the secret sauce? Not buying into social media/Facebook hype, instead relying on old fashioned marketing skills. Precision targeting with intelligent integrated outreach across diverse media yields results. For example, if donors tend to be women with buying power, wouldn’t BlogHer or Kirtsy make more sense?

Facebook’s Social Cause application, while great for awareness, by its very design is flawed. First of all, while more horizontal than most social networks, its user base is still relatively young. This makes it unnatural as a precision targeting tool for large donors. Don’t get me wrong, this may still be a valuable media property (see the Nature Conservancy’s effort), but is this where high dollar donors are in concentrated quantities?

In addition, the Social Cause app does not let non-profits a) access the contact information of members b) update members on the cause or c) even send them a receipt for donations, and of course, market again. Instead a third party handles all touches. This is a disaster for cause marketers who simply can’t follow up or integrate with other initiatives.

This problem is not a fundraising or charity problem. Rather, it’s an industry wide problem — shiny object syndrome. It’s so easy to say we need to use the Facebook Social Cause application (as opposed to creating your own), or start a social network, or a blog! But good marketers know it begins with strategy… Tactics are often the fun part, but they represent the cart that comes before the horse.

Step back, look at objectives and resources, target your stakeholders intelligently, then select the tools. Precision demands focus. Success demands precision.

P.S. I do want to applaud these early Facebook marketers for taking a chance and experimenting with the Social Cause application. No one knew how it would work out, and they had the courage to do it… And report negative results.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button
by Geoff Livingston | Social Networks |

13 Responses to “Precision Not Found on Facebook”

  • David Mullen Says:

    July 25th, 2008 at 10:17 am

    We all have to consciously fight the shiny object syndrome. It’s easy to get mesmerized by its ultra-shiny shininess. :) Me included, for sure.

    Great reminder to start with strategies before diving into tactics. Can’t tell you how many meetings I’ve been in during my experience where a goal is shared and before a single strategy can be discussed, someone immediately says, “we should do a (insert tactic here).”

  • Beth Kanter Says:

    July 26th, 2008 at 12:13 am

    Here’s my two cents about the problem.

    Okay, I’ll give you the shiney object problem response - but come on .. we all say that. Let’s get a little deeper.

    The real problem is that some apps developers have no F*** experience about the work flows of nonprofit activism or fundraising and have created applications that get in the way of the work flow.

    Okay, that sounds a little bitchy … and I asked myself many times whether or not the problem is that nonprofits or people like me who not kids - just don’t understand how younger folks are doing their fundraising or activism on FB or other places …. I’m knee deep into some research on this topic and I’m undecided, but leaning towards …

    app developers on FB or elsewhere who don’t know crap about fundraising or activism should collaborate more closely with nonprofits.

    Am I full of crap? What you think?

  • Geoff Livingston Says:

    July 26th, 2008 at 6:58 am

    I think you are right, Beth. I mean, not letting charities and arts orgs have access to the database? That’s bullshit. The list is the heart of any social cause, and not being able to market effectively to it is a major issue.

    I also think Facebook is a shoddy place for revenue generation in general because of the medium, and its average user’s expectations.

  • Beth Kanter Says:

    July 26th, 2008 at 8:51 am

    I’ve used Facebook - my individual profile and other techniques to spread the word and as prospecting tool for fundraising campaigns I’ve run. With Facebook, I have to develop relationships and encourage people to give through other channels where we can capture names. I’ve also set up a cause, but it was part of a multi-channel effort and I used more as a fly paper. I’ve been able to raise over $200,000 for Cambodian orphans (case studies are documented here: http://gsp4good.wikispaces.com) — so I think your comments about strategy and good targeting and need integrate a variety of techniques are also right on.

  • Ed Says:

    July 26th, 2008 at 6:48 pm

    Yes — They is shiney-object syndrome … and, yes, strategy comes before tactics…And I don’t know how much input Facebook got from nonprofit in their attempt to do positive things for nonprofits. I don’t think bitching at someone trying to do something positive is a good way of getting them to listen to suggestions.

    But I think there is also a chicken-and-egg thing going on. You are not really going to understand how the shiney object might fit into a strategy until you understand the shiney new object. And the only way to really understand it and the potential power of it is to test it out. And if it doesn’t work, and you don’t think it will work for you in the future, you move on.

  • Geoff Livingston Says:

    July 27th, 2008 at 4:29 am

    Ed: I’m a marketer so I am going to analyze failures and strengths of tactics. You can call it bitching, I call it good strategy and generalship. I don’t give non-profit marketers a break because they are trying to “do something positive.” That’s a cop out for getting no results. We have enough of those non-profits here in DC already.

    Marketers jobs are to get results. Experimental marketing is just that (experimental), and that’s why I applauded these causes for reporting poor results in my P.S.

    At the same time, I think effective marketing goes cross-channel, is integrated, and involves calls to action or word of mouth. Since these were fundraising efforts, it’s the prior. This tool is inherently flawed because it is not cross channel and cannot be integrated. Further the call to action is inherently weak.

  • marguerite manteau-rao Says:

    July 28th, 2008 at 12:43 am

    Here is my take on this:

    When I go on Facebook, I leave my credit card behind. And I am willing to bet lots, that I am not alone.

    Facebook is for being social, making connections, showing off one’s activities, accomplishments, jokes, etc. Facebook is not for selling stuff, or any remotely financial transactions, including for good causes. Of course, this represents a HUGE problem for Facebook, not just for the causes trying to use the site. But that’s matter for another post . . .

  • marnie webb Says:

    July 28th, 2008 at 12:03 pm

    Good post and discussion here.

    Personally, I think the problem is that Facebook Causes is two different things to the people on either side of the equation — to nonprofiteers: it’s a way of raising money. The Facebookians: it’s a way of showing affiliation with or support of a specific cause.

    I suspect that people on the Facebook side like the Cause application better than the nonprofiteers do: it’s like everything else on a facebook profile — it’s creates a picture of who the user is — the music they like, the friends they have, the movies they see, and the causes they care about. It works fine there.

    So, the trick is either build a different application (Beth’s comment) or go with the flow of this one and use it as a way to gain awareness — measuring other kinds of conversions (click-thrus to the website, signing up for an event) than just conversions to donors.

  • David Mullen Says:

    July 28th, 2008 at 1:02 pm

    I think Marnie hits it on the head. I’m currently helping a non-profit client in the arts space to create a group on Facebook and, while it’s not a “cause,” we established our goals for the group with the same thinking in mind as Marnie’s observation.

    It’s not to sell performance tickets. It’s to raise awareness, empower our fans to easily share our info with their friends, ask some why the don’t currently attend events, ask others why they do attend, give away a couple free tickets a month to group members, etc.

    For us, the Facebook group is about helping our evangelists spread the word to more of their friends and to create a focus group community where fans can share their thoughts, frustrations, and advice for making the experience better.

  • Jon Stahl Says:

    July 28th, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    I think it’s possible, but too easy to blame the app developers (although Beth is certainly right that most of them don’t know beans about organizing).

    I think the fault lies with those of us at the intersection of nonprofits and technology, who tend to focus too much on the technology and not enough on the underlying processes. That’s our responsibility to document and communicate for the app developers. And so far, we’re mostly failing.

  • Geoff Livingston Says:

    July 29th, 2008 at 12:40 am

    Marnie: I think you are right, too. Good insights on awareness versus fundraising. That being said, if I was fundraising, I don’t think this app is the right answer. It maybe for brand awereness.

  • Daniel Says:

    July 30th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

    I agree with Marnie and David Mullen: Facebook, at the moment, is not a platform to fundraise with. Even if the most active demographic on the site felt they had extra money to donate, the process to do so isn’t easy or intuitive. Most of my activist, progressive friends, too, are frustrated with always being hit up for money. They’d like to help change the world for the better, but are disenchanted with the options presented to them currently. Awareness is something they like to do, especially if it can be followed up with concrete action.

    With that being said, however, I think there still is tremendous potential for Facebook and other social networks because of two things: the sheer amount of my personal data it has, and how it maps my social graph. Neither of those will fit in a Salesforce database, and I don’t think Facebook will ever let you export the data you would like. Remember Scoblegate? Huge privacy concerns.

    Facebook, and other social networks, are powerful tools, but only when they are used effectively. Learning how to do so will require rethinking their purpose.

  • Beth Kanter Says:

    July 31st, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Daniel,

    One of the issues with the interaction design on some of the fundraising apps on Facebook is that the invitation to join the cause is “donate now” - it doesn’t allow for engagement strategies or relationship building first before you ask for money unless you do it manually -which is labor intensive.

Leave a Reply