Why charities need street fundraisers

Still not a fan of the street fundraisers, but this is a very good response from the other side. At the end of the day you can’t argue with results, and if they are proving the most efficient then they’re here to stay.

“That’s over 1 million conversations taking place, that otherwise may not have.” Which probably equates to hundreds of millions of times that people are hindered and/or harassed by chuggers every year. Is this worth it for the money that charities raise? Not in my opinion; the ends do not justify the means.

Street fundraisers complete pain. No matter how worthy the cause they are a blight and these donkeys should be banned from approaching people.

Sure thing “Vortex09”, “people are hindered and/or harassed” so that many others may at least have a chance at survival, let alone the chance to be approached by a fundraiser. Love your priorities.

I’m with Vortex I’m afraid – I did my PR Institute dissertation (admittedly in another country and over a decade ago!) on the negative impact of chuggers on reputation… I also took into account the cost of chugger salary, training and ran the $ against amount raised (based on the average number of direct debits before someone cancelled it) and found it not to be as worthwhile as other marketing tools.

The only difference is that Amnesty does require a two way, 1:1 conversation in order to explain complex issues, so maybe the value is in promoting understanding of the issues/ organisation, rather than simply fundraising…

Obviously they’re often a bit annoying, but I think it’s hard to argue with this piece. If people spontaneously donated money or looked deeper into issues by themselves, then street fundraisers wouldn’t be necessary. But evidently, people don’t.

Having to say ‘no, thanks’ to a young person with a clip board every now and then seems a pretty minor inconvenience if it’s how most charities get their funds.

Vortex – did you read the article? Yes, yes it is worth it!

Good on Amnesty International for explaining this to those that would otherwise just complain.

bit shocked at the response that this subject on here.

they are trying to raise money for really really worthwhile causes.

if they didnt do it then these charities wouldn’t be able to do as much good work as they do.

so, if you have to deal with taking 2 seconds out your day to say ‘no thanks’ then you’re a total douche. end of

Well said TV ads. Vortex09 I imagine like many Aussies you haven’t got a clue what’s going on outside your own back yard. I met a woman who’d been raped 100 times by the military police who was supposed to be protecting her after her village was raped and pillaged in the DRC. I met a soldier who had to execute children (there’s 300000 kids under the age of 12 carrying guns in over 86 countries). The list goes on and on..
I was a street fundraiser. I give to 7 charities on a monthly basis and I always stop and listen to what other fundraisers have to say.
It’s sad that people think an opportunity to actually learn something and a chance to personally make a positive difference in the world is them ‘being hassled’. I think it’s people like you that are in fact in the greatest need for an education.
willy loman that’s just offensive. You may have to walk past one or two fundraisers every day. Think about them for a minute; I’ve had people spit at me, tell me to ‘F’ off, get a real job etc, all on a daily basis. It’s not a particularly well paid job for the energy required and the indomitable spirit needed to stay motivated in the midst of such lacking compassion and ignorance. The causes kept me going. Oh, and the thousands of people I signed up every year that thanked me for the experience. I hope none of you haters ever need a charity. You’d be eating a bit of humble pie then hey?

Littlemissm what other marketing tools did you find to be more effective? I saw the Fred Hollows Foundation and Oxfam doing F2F the other week, so I looked up their annual reports. In 2001 the Fred Hollows Foundation raised $5Million. Last year it was $36 Million. Someone there knows what they are doing and a lot of people have had their sight restored because of it. Oxfam raised $12 Million in 2001 and $49 Million in 2012. That’s fundraising, not government money. These people know what they are doing and they are changing millions of lives for the better because of it. Vortex and Willy Loman if you think that is less important than whatever annoyance you may feel, that says something about you.

I think fundraising is a part of the cycle in the society we all live, we are all linked is some way or the other in this society with our earnings and I don’t see any problems in giving some back rather than just taking.. With charity donation happens only if someone encounters you…I bet its not in your shopping list or to do list so we need fundraisers stopping us and asking to donate…

I don’t have a problem with street fundraisers, I have a problem with their patronising style of getting your attention. In fact, I just returned from a walk at lunch where I was whistled at while crossing the street. No not because he liked the look of my backside….because he thought I was ignoring him.
That is unprofessional and characteristic of the fundraisers I always see. That makes me not want to give them my money or my time. If they were honest and said: ‘Hi, we’re fundraising for XYZ charity would you care to donate?’ I probably would.

Organisations like Amnesty International plays a vital role in the world- highlighting horrendous human sufferings, enabling perpetrators to be brought to justice and bringing hope where there is hopelessness. Street fundraising definitely plays a vital role in enable Amnesty and other fruitful organisations out there achieve their objectives. I hope this article has put things in to perspective for all street fundraising skeptics.

We Need Amnesty to keep pointing out gross human rights abuses.

Hmm, can’t comment on Amnesty but when I was a very young and naive teenager I signed up for a sales job with an organisation in Adelaide which did street sales and had 2 clients – a human rights organisation (not Amnesty)……and a credit card company.

I quit after one week for the following reasons:

1. I attended my first sales “rev-up” team meeting which I can only compare to the experience of joining a cult. It is genuinely frightening to attend one of these if you are sane.

2.I made a sale of a credit card to a lady who admitted giggly “I’m terrible with credit cards – always in debt”.

I can’t speak for which organisation Amnesty uses but at the company I did that week for the charity and the credit cards were treated the same – as a product. Learn the features and benefits – learn people’s triggers – and sell on them.

I can understand how people dislike meeting charity salespeople who often have been trained to attempt pushy “hard sells” when the customer rejects the soft sell option. Charities ideally would provide more oversight to the training their reps get – but of course that would be a waste of their much needed resources.

An independent study of face to face marketing.
Please note this post is relevant to marketeers / people who like data. Pointless and a waste of time if you are not interested in data.
http://seantriner.blogspot.com.....eally.html

Seems there is a lot of people who are so time-poor (maybe self-centred … maybe cash poor … maybe tight arsed).

So in order for them to avoid the blight of street fund-raisers, why not just add 1% to everyone’s tax and distribute that to worthwhile registered charities and make street fund-raising, telephone fund raising etc verboten? In essence you but back your oh-so valuable time for some additional tax.

Now I just await the backlash.

Jack I’m not against charity or fund raising. I’m against “chuggers” approaching me on a daily basis. Most of the charities who do it have turnover of hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars as you have pointed out. Many charities are just as worthy cannot afford this blunt marketing tool and go about it in a more community based way. By the way are you still in school ?

To TV ads and others, I’m not against charities, I give to quite a few by monthly standing order (no commission to chunts and their employers!) so I have no problem with my priorities whatsoever.

I read last week’s article and mostly agreed with it, but this has changed my mind. Thanks Adam! Being stopped on the street from time to time is a small price to pay for having such important charities doing good work!

Vortex09 – I’m not quite sure that being hindered or annoyed justifies eliminating a very effective tool achieve positive change. The facts are there, I read that for every $1 invested in face-to-face the charity receives between $3 and $5 in return. How is that not worthwhile? Should they put it in the bank and receive 3% interest in return?

Rather than being annoyed try showing some respect to people doing a very difficult job. I’ve seen the ranting idiots out there in the street attacking charities for doing their job. I think your grumblings about a minor inconvenience say more about your attitude in life than about this profession. If you can’t afford a smile to someone trying to do something positive with their life, then try having a look in the mirror.

Reading this article has made up my mind, ‘chuggers’ are the real heroes. We should be grateful to them!

Really great to see an article from the Charity’s side explaining the reasons behind street/F2F sales. Littlemissm it is quite obvious that this method works better than adhoc donations-the benefit of being able to plan ahead on a monthly donation and additional brand exposure etc.
However, I think the nice point about Amnestiy is they seem to have stricter guidelines on who is promoting their charity. Companies like the one Hugo worked for as a naive student are what turn people off. It’s the people not the cause that you should have an issue with.
Most of these F2F workers have a badge number and ID- if they are rude take their details and report them.
It’s not that hard to say “No Thank you” and keep walking one or twice a week in comparison to what some people have to live with.

Very well said NZvoice. You have to also consider that street fundraisers are speaking to about 30 people a day, registering an average of one in ten. 90 % of their time is spent on an inspiring direct marketing experience for nearly 150 people a week per campaigner. Companies would pay through the nose for that sort of exposure.
I get offended by the word chugger let alone chunt. I think it’s verging on trolling. I’m integrous and I did that job. I signed up to one of my charities through an agency -knowing a one off fee would go to them, deservedly in my opinion- as I’d been meaning to support that particular organisation for over a year and never got round to jumping on their website. Check this out if you haven’t seen it already. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bfAzi6D5FpM

Face-to-face is here to stay because it provides ongoing sustainable revenue streams for charities. However, I wonder how many people would sign up with a face- to-face fundraiser if they knew that about one year’s worth of their contribution will be paid as a commission to the face-to-face agency that is signing them up. The cost of employing face-to-face fundraisers is hidden from the donor and that is not honest fundraising in my opinion.

Mark, read the comments above properly and follow the links. Not many people would sign up if you put it like that but I’ve been as slow to sign up as anyone else. Bottom line it costs money to ask people for money. You print leaflets (involves design etc), you post billboards or run tv ads and nobody witch hunts the advertising industry.
Read above properly before you judge

Hi – thanks for the advice. I have read the comments, looked at the Dan Pallotta presentation, etc. I have no qualms about investing in fundraising, quite the reverse. I also understand the importance of sustainable income from regular donors and the importance of lifetime value.

But I still have misgivings about the fact that regular donors are not told that a big chunk of their first year’s donations go as a commission to the face-to-face agency signing them up. It’s a fact that is deliberately withheld from them. Given that the attrition rate of regular donors is high, lets say 50% in the first 12 months, many donors will in fact only contribute towards commission fees. It just does not feel right.

Mark, it comes out of the previous year’s fundraising budget which could be spent on less favourable methodologies like tv and billboard advertising. When people sign up 100% of their donations go directly to the cause. It’s misleading to compare it to one year’s donations in essence because we think in the opposite way Dan Pallotta advocates. Especially with the ‘free’ marketing element at a very personal level.

Hats off to the induction process Amnesty International take their street fundraisers through before hitting the pavement – clearly an educated and passionate fundraiser is what can make the difference. While I’ll strongly support my chosen charities and often say ‘No thank you’ to street fundraisers, the respect is there for those doing a tough job, for an even tougher cause.