"W is for Worldview": Nonprofit Research & Seth Godin's Alphabet

In an August 3 Seth’s Blog posting entitled “post-industrial A to Z digital battledore,” marketing guru Seth Godin somewhat playfully suggested a kind of post-modern alphabet for those whose mission or professional responsibility is to communicate, persuade and “sell.”

Stimulated by Godin’s piece, Tom Belford, editor of The Agitator blog, in his own posting on the same day, drew the attention of nonprofit fundraisers to the alphabet entry “W is for Worldview.” Belford’s central point was to underscore that, whether in the profit-making world or the nonprofit sector, not understanding the worldview of those to whom you are trying to communicate, persuade and “sell” something surely will lead to failure of the effort.

Belford sets up his piece with a full quotation of the “W is for Worldview” entry from Godin’s alphabet:

“W is for Worldview: I first encountered this term via George Lakoff. Your worldview is the set of expectations and biases you bring to a situation before any new data appears. Some people hear a politician say something and hate it, while others are thrilled by it. Is it the thing that was said or the person who said it? Some people hear that Apple is about to launch a new product and they get out their wallets, others flee -- before they even know what it is. If you don't understand the worldview of the people you're selling to, you will fail.”

According to Belford, “Fundraisers should focus on the last sentence: ‘If you don’t understand the worldview of the people you’re selling to, you will fail.’”

Belford asks fundraisers: “What steps are you taking to really understand your donors … and, through them, your prospects?

He queries further: “Do you:

    •  Conduct surveys or focus groups?
    •  Talk to your volunteers and clients?
    •  Read your white mail and 800# logs?
    •  Engage donors and members face-to-face?
    •  Solicit feedback routinely in any way?
    •  Read “the literature” on your target audience?
    •  Analyze what they pay attention to on your website?”

Finally, says Belford, “Out of all this, you should be able to formulate a pretty accurate picture of your donors’ worldview … the lens through which they process whatever you’re throwing their way.”

I read Seth Godin’s blog piece on his “post-industrial A to Z digital battledore” and reacted as did Belford, making note of those items that carried wisdom for professionals laboring in nonprofit advancement. Clearly, Godin’s perspectives, while focused principally on the profit-making world, also have something of value for nonprofit organizations in their relationship and communication with clients and donors (“investors”).

Belford is right on the money in highlighting “W is for Worldview” for its significance to those in nonprofit fundraising, but the points he raises should not be lost on those who focus exclusively on marketing and communication for nonprofit organizations. In fact, that gets to this author’s personal “worldview” of the nonprofit advancement process -- that fundraisers also should be marketing- and communication-focused and the marketing and communication folks also should be fundraising-focused. It’s all part of the same fabric. Despite the specialization that necessarily characterizes their roles, these professionals all should feel they are integral parts of a single team.

To Belford’s point about understanding donors and prospects, there have been numerous past Agitator discussion threads in which the focus was on the importance of research in donor-file and prospect-list management. Commentary consistently made the point that not knowing what motivates the giving behaviors of those on donor lists is to beg for failure overall. The thought process in those past threads often was prompted by concerns about direct-mail fundraising outcomes. That makes sense, because the direct-response methodology long has played a major and critical role in nonprofit fundraising and has been the object of wide and deep research. Nevertheless, those in nonprofit advancement should remain dedicated to careful constituent/donor/prospect research in all methodologies, from face-to-face and online solicitation to planned giving and special events. To operate without such intelligence is to ignore the worldview --- and the more local view --- of the constituent and to accept the failure Godin promises in the “selling” effort.

In his queries to fundraisers, Belford covers much of the waterfront where research to “really understand your donors … and, through them, your prospects” is concerned --- from surveys, web-clicks analysis and focus groups to dialogue with volunteers, solicitation of feedback and face-to-face interviews. There are other such techniques, and all should be considered. None of this type of activity should seem burdensome or mysterious to nonprofit advancement professionals, because it can be carried out in a virtually seamless manner when it is woven into the substance of nearly all engagements, interactions or “touches” with constituents. Such contacts should, in fact, be the goal of all organizational communications and relationship-management initiatives --- with the aim of discerning the constituent’s worldview and more local view.

With all due respect to Tom Belford of The Agitator, there are at least two other items in Godin’s post-industrial alphabet that should have special meaning for those in nonprofit advancement.

“C is for Choice” suggests that nonprofit organizations always must strive to differentiate themselves from their competition (both within and without their particular mission focus) in their marketing/communication and fundraising case articulation to potential constituents and current donors. The differentiation message must always be based on fact and reality and not on fantasy and hyperbole. Otherwise, prospects (and currents) might decide to walk and choose to support another organization!

“D is for Darwin” suggests that nonprofits must be constantly and consistently vigilant where changes and evolutions in their external environments are concerned. As Godin points out: “the nature of information and a connected society means that 'everything' might change in just a few months. Ideas that spread, win and organizations that learn from their mistakes lead the rest of us.” Clearly, another vote for maintaining the good habit of well-executed constituent, donor and prospect research in the nonprofit realm.