What does it actually feel like to be a donor — and why does it matter more than you think?
In this episode, host Simon Scriver is joined by Steven Dodds (Managing Director) and Paul Seabrook (CEO) of Beautiful Insights, a full-service market research agency specialising in the charity sector. Together they explore one of the most overlooked challenges in fundraising: how do you measure the emotional experience of your supporters, not just the financial data?
The conversation covers:
- Why satisfaction alone doesn’t predict donor loyalty or generosity
- The SAFE Index — Beautiful Insights’ benchmarking tool for measuring non-financial supporter KPIs
- How donors often vividly remember why they first gave, but rarely recall anything about the ongoing supporter experience
- Why feeling “useful” might actually be a warning sign in your donor data
- How charities can compete with commercial brands that have mastered emotional advertising
- The difference between transactional stewardship and communications that genuinely move people
This episode sets the scene for Steven and Paul’s session at the upcoming Individual Giving Conference, where they’ll dive deeper into the specific emotions that drive donor retention — and which ones should have your attention.
Find out more about the SAFE Index and Beautiful Insights at beautifulinsights.com
Join us at our Individual Giving Conference 2026
If you enjoyed this episode, don’t forget to hit follow and enable notifications so you’ll get notified to be first to hear of future podcast episodes. We’d love to see you back again!
And thank you to our friends at JustGiving who make the Fundraising Everywhere Podcast possible.
Transcript
Jade Cunnah: Welcome to the Fundraising Everywhere podcast, your go-to place for fundraising tips and inspiration. Love what you hear? Get more insights straight to your inbox. Subscribe to our email list for exclusive fundraising resources, early access to training, special discounts, and more. Just head on over to fundraisingeverywhere.com/podcast to subscribe.
Jade Cunnah: Now, on to today’s episode. Enjoy.
Simon Scriver: Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the Fundraising Everywhere podcast. My name is Simon Scriver. I am one of the co-founders of Fundraising Everywhere, and lovely to be back again. We’re still, uh, I suppose recovering from the Supporter Experience conference, uh, and drilling into, um, everything that we, we learned there, everything that you guys shared, uh, that attended that day.
Simon Scriver: Um, but we’re also starting to gear up for our Individual Giving conference, and I think a big thing that came out of that Supporter Index conference and, and so many of our conversations before, is this idea of measuring good supporter experience. How do you measure that experience beyond the financial data or before the financial data?
Simon Scriver: And how do you actually put a tangible number on it that you can bring to your team and to your management and actually make decisions based on? And one of the conversations that we- we’ve got into a few times over the last few months is with the wonderful people at Beautiful Insights, uh, who are involved in the Individual Giving conference.
Simon Scriver: Um, and they’ve got a really interesting session coming up where they’re diving into their SAFE index, which I’m gonna explain in a little bit. Um, but really the emotional side of that and how we measure emotion and how we capture emotion. And, and this really struck me as something that, that was worth exploring coming out of the Supporter Experience.
Simon Scriver: So I have invited back two wonderful guests who I always enjoy speaking to. It is the fantastic Steven Dodds, who’s the managing director of Beautiful Insights, and Paul Seabrook, the CEO. So a, a huge welcome to the Fundraising Everywhere podcast. Hello, Steven. Hello, Paul.
Steven Dodds: Hello. Hello, Simon. Feeling emotional to be back, Simon.
Steven Dodds: Thanks so much for inviting us.
Simon Scriver: I think we’re gonna be oozing with emotion today. How are you, Paul? How are you feeling?
Paul Seabrook : Uh, I’m good. I’ll try not to get emotional in the wrong way for this podcast. But, uh, yeah, good to see you again, Simon.
Simon Scriver: We’ll, we’ll try and hold it together. But you guys, uh, you guys, uh, you know, you, you are beyond an emotion.
Simon Scriver: You are researchers. I love that there’s a thing on your website which I love. You describe yourself as marketers working in research, not researchers working in marketing, and that’s what I’ve always found when chatting with you is you really understand this… You know, it’s not just dumping research data.
Simon Scriver: It’s not just going into all these, uh, you know, just overcomplicating it. You guys actually bring it back to what we’re doing on the ground and what charities in the sector are actually experiencing and what we can actually implement in our fundraising. So I do always enjoy talking to you. Do you guys wanna give a little introduction about, um, yourselves and, and perhaps a bit more about Beautiful Insights for those of us who haven’t crossed your path before?
Steven Dodds: Yeah. Um, thanks, Simon. Yeah, so Beef Insights is a full-service market research agency. We don’t just work with charities, but most of our work is with charities. We’re lucky enough to work with some of the, the biggest and best charities in the UK, but we work also with charities of all of all sizes.
Steven Dodds: Yeah, I mean, charities are the heart of our work. We speak to supporters all the time. We f- we, we feel like our mission is to kind of bring their experience into the room with fundraisers to help those fundraisers make better conditions and better, uh, to make better, Oh.
Steven Dodds: Decisions. Decisions. Thank you. Yeah. Cripes. And and ultimately to help them raise more money. So excuse the blank, the mind, the mind fog there. That’s crazy. Anyway.
Simon Scriver: Um- An inde- an indecisive brain,
Steven Dodds: Stephen. Sign of
Simon Scriver: an
Steven Dodds: indecisive
Paul Seabrook : brain.
Steven Dodds: Yeah.
Paul Seabrook : Don’t know. Yeah. Um, I’ve … Uh, not much to add to that other than sorry, s- uh, Stephen buffered there, I think.
Paul Seabrook : That was- … that was 10 minutes. Um, thanks for visiting the website, Simon. I wondered who the visitor was yesterday. That’s-
Simon Scriver: Correct.
Paul Seabrook : Yeah, I think in some ways we don’t just do charity, actually. We do sort of commercial as well. ‘Cause don’t forget, some of these supporters, they are also customers of other brands, and they’re always being targeted and uh, you know, kind of having all sorts of messaging thrown at them.
Paul Seabrook : So it’s our job to really sort of try and represent them back to key decision-makers and yeah, bring them into the room as, uh, as Stephen says.
Simon Scriver: Yeah, and I think it’s really important, and your point that, you know, you, you should, we shouldn’t be ignoring, um- The, the commercial side of it, the corporate side of it.
Simon Scriver: I was just saying to someone yesterday, you know, we’re not competing against each other, we’re competing against Netflix, and we’re competing against- Mm … Tesco, and you see them using emotion more and more in their advertising. They’ve almost filled that space. We’re gonna have the Christmas ads launching soon, and, you know, you get these tearjerker ads that- Mm
Simon Scriver: you know, why is the Tesco ad making me cry more than some of these emotional stories that charities are showing?
Steven Dodds: Mm.
Simon Scriver: I mean, how, how, wh- where do you sit in there? How different… I, we’re off tangent already a little bit, but where, what’s the difference between, uh, the work you see with corporates and commercial sector compared to the charities?
Paul Seabrook : It’s a, I have to say, most, a lot of consumer general advertising it’s all about offers. It’s a call to action. There’s a percentage off, there’s a deal, there’s seasonal offers, et cetera. And that’s, that’s something charities can’t really do and don’t really do, is can’t be a, two pounds off this month kind of approach.
Paul Seabrook : So they’ve got quite a different need when it comes to engaging with consumers. And, and don’t forget, a lot of the stuff that consumers have, they need them. They, they have to go and do their weekly shop. They have to have a bank account, stuff like that. So, but charities have a slightly different task, ’cause you don’t need to give to charity from a, you know- Mm A must.
Paul Seabrook : It’s a, a requirement that you, you, you have to have some of these things. So the emotional kind of stop and pause and think is quite a different task for charities. And it’s interesting what you say there about your consumers’ everyday lives and the things they’re being bombarded with. A cup of coffee now is like £4 from any of the main coffee shops, et cetera.
Paul Seabrook : I’m not quite sure that happened, but we sort of buy that almost just subliminally on autopilot. Whereas sometimes if you go out with a, you know, for £4 a month kind of messaging- Mm … with all that’s a bit much, et cetera. But we’ve become sort of programmed just to kind of buy some things on our everyday lives that in some ways shouldn’t really happen to be compete against charities.
Paul Seabrook : I only bring that one up because literally just been looking at, so we’re doing some work with the lovely people at Shelter, and they’ve been using that kind of analogy.
Simon Scriver: Mm.
Paul Seabrook : Showing a cup of coffee and swap this once a month et cetera. You know, kind of stop and pause and think moment. So they have a different job, and I think, FMCG advertising is one of the, the biggest advertisers out there, and they see the results coming immediately.
Paul Seabrook : Complicated networks of distributors that have to be, have confidence that you are advertising your products, et cetera.
Multiple Speakers: Mm.
Paul Seabrook : As you said, we’re going off tangent, but it’s quite a different kind of job and most, if you look at most advertising of FMCG, it’s got an offer in there.
Simon Scriver: Mm.
Paul Seabrook : And that’s something that’s not in the, on the space really for charities.
Simon Scriver: I, I always find it really interesting when you bring in these specific examples. One of, one of the things I like you … in, in your sessions that you present, I suppose most of our partners have the benefit of working with a number of charities. Um- Mm … and so, you know, what, in terms of what you share it’s very interesting to see the comparisons, to see the side by side.
Simon Scriver: One of the things you shared in the past which you’re kind of unpacking a bit at the individual giving conference that’s coming up, is the SAFE Index. And f- and, and for those of us who, who maybe didn’t hear your previous session could you maybe explain the SAFE Index a little bit? The satisfaction and future engagement.
Simon Scriver: This is one of your big projects that you do.
Steven Dodds: Yeah, it’s, um, it’s a benchmarking product ultimately that adds adds uh, non-financial data to the financial picture that we know most charities have around supporter loyalty and value, let’s say. But we know that other aspects of of the supporter are impacting ultimately their, their commitment and their, and their value, which fundraisers can’t see.
Steven Dodds: And the SAFE index is designed to, yeah to focus on those variables which ultimately, um, we believe create, uh, kind of l- loyalty and, and, and value amongst their, uh, amongst their donors, and enables them to understand kind of what good looks like. So how are they faring against the best in class in the, in, in the sector?
Steven Dodds: You know, what’s the headroom for growth? Ultimately we hope that it, it can, it… that data creates investment cases for fundraisers so that they can yeah, that they can see the kind of po- potential return for improving kind of loyalty measures. They can, they can make comparisons and, and demonstrate the uplift to to their peers and to, to those that are holding holding budgets.
Steven Dodds: And they can also drive more accountability around, around the supporter experience, which is- … you know, wonderfully ethereal in, in, in g- in general. And I think that’s the, that’s the key is, is you know, what gets measured gets managed and putting some focus on some of the non-function- financial KPIs.
Steven Dodds: Mm. Um, it w- would hopefully change fundraising behavior or fundraiser’s behavior, I should say. So that’s the thinking.
Simon Scriver: It’s, I mean, it’s 100% something I would’ve loved in my fundraising days- Mm … as something just to bring to my manager and just to bring to my board, you know, ’cause you’re always trying to…
Simon Scriver: we’re often s- trying to convince them that these things are measurable and are… you know, we can have an impact on them, and they, they do- Mm … feed into our loyalty and our supporter base and things like that. Mm. So to have it in a tangible form, I think is really helpful. And then that side-by-side benchmark is so interesting.
Simon Scriver: So you’re, you’re gonna be sharing some of this I guess some of the results from this at the conference feeding into your session, in your session at the Individual Giving Conference, and we’ll link this in the description for anyone who wants to book onto that. Um, you’re talking what emotion really does for donor retention.
Simon Scriver: So- Mm … you’re really drilling down into this emotion. And the SAFE index it’s supposed to measure these emotions, which seem- Mm … almost foreign to me. But why, why is it emotions? Like, why are emotion? We hear emotions talked about all the time in fundraising. Mm. Why? No one really says why.
Paul Seabrook : Well, the thing I mean, what…
Paul Seabrook : We’ve been running SAFE index for a couple of years, and- What’s interesting is that satisfaction doesn’t automatically mean future engagement. Satisfaction can be quite a, a dry measure. Um, yeah, you know, I, I, I, I get quarterly updates, whatever it might be. Um, I, I have a sense that
Paul Seabrook : they’re doing a really, really good job. Uh, that’s great. But actually when we then ask the sort of questions around maybe share of wallet and future engagement, it’s not a given that high satisfaction equals that. And I think that got kind of through our many, many qualitative hours we spent interviewing supporters and donors, it becomes really clear that, and reminds us that people give to charity ’cause they want to, not because they have to. And there’s something that happened probably very much pinned to an emotion. It could be, you know, the loss of a loved one. The, uh, something that they saw.
Simon Scriver: Anger at the news.
Paul Seabrook : Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, and, and you know, some messaging from a charity that, you know, morally outraged them and they felt compelled to do something and, and give.
Paul Seabrook : And interestingly, we tended to notice that- A lot of people can recall that moment. They may have been a supporter to a charity for decades, and they can often recall the exact moment from decades ago. And sometimes they recall a story about, you know, when they were stopped in the street, Mm-hmm … and, and engaged that way, through to something they saw, through to something that, um, you know, they, they personally experienced, as I say, maybe the death of a loved one.
Paul Seabrook : But the, uh, the emotional journey doesn’t necessarily continue with their experience at all times going forwards. Um, it can become a bit more transactional. Mm-hmm. And I think that’s where we sort of thought we’d need to really understand how that emotion can drive that, um, future engagement, share of wallet and ultimate longevity and commitment towards the cause and the, and the- Yeah
Paul Seabrook : and the
Steven Dodds: charity. When we … Just to follow up there, Simon. When we … Uh, yeah it, as Paul said, some of the many hours of, um, of depth interviews and focus groups we’ve, we’ve run. Supporters v- very rarely can recall any aspect of the supporter experience.
Multiple Speakers: Mm.
Steven Dodds: You know, um, they know they’re getting stuff, but they can’t name anything specific.
Steven Dodds: And we also … We know from other research or stuff that we’ve done, the link between emotion and memory. You know, what is it that drives you to remember something? It’s often because there’s an emotion attached to it. Yeah, the, the hypothesis therefore is that the supporter experience does very little in triggering any emotional response.
Steven Dodds: Certainly not- Mm … to the same extent as that initial kind of entry point to the, to, to the charity. And that that’s where more kind of effort is needed.
Simon Scriver: It’s, it’s funny, even as you say, if I think about the charities who are in my life, I weirdly can remember- Mm … with, I think all of them, the first time that I- Mm
Simon Scriver: you know, someone sponsored a donkey for me or- Mm … someone asked, was running the marathon for them, and I didn’t even know the charity existed. And the- Mm … you know, that, that … I can see how that emotional thing. And then it can be quite jolting when you think about the next interaction is this boring tax- Mm
Simon Scriver: like receipt. And then just these kind of generic things, and I think, what is it? Are we putting in so much effort into acquisition, and then just kind of neglecting it? Why, why do these, um, why do, does the supporter experience sometimes feel a bit flat? Uh,
Steven Dodds: it … My, my, uh, uh, ultimately for fundraisers to to answer, I mean, I think my, my hunch is that, um, and you sort of touched on it there, the, sort of the move to the transactional and the kind of the official that, that- Supporters feel very, uh, sorry, fundraisers feel very responsible to tell donors what has happened with their money and to kind of, you know, the stewardship idea is strong.
Steven Dodds: The kind of feedback idea is strong. And, uh, but it, it becomes more of a list, a list of actions and activities rather than an emotionally compelling story. And I wonder whether that’s, that’s part of it that, yeah that it’s … That responsibility to report is a bit, is almost too ingrained maybe.
Steven Dodds: Um, and fundraisers need to let go of that a little bit and give them- give themselves permission to tell completely different stories maybe that are more of an emotion- ultimately have a, a greater emotional impact. I suspect, a communication that has really deep emotional impact Probably doesn’t have many words on it.
Steven Dodds: It probably is highly visual. It, it probably says more about the supporter than it does about the charity. I don’t think I’m s- really s- d- d- describing there the, the typical sort of newsletter that I get from my the charities that I support.
Paul Seabrook : Mm. Yeah, I think- Paul? … we’ve been rightly so very focused on, on data, and we can see attrition rates, we can see kind of loyalty rates, the next best action rates, et cetera, and there’s, you know, absolutely the right thing to do.
Paul Seabrook : But I think sometimes just need to remember behind every data point, there’s a there’s a person. There’s a real person with, you know, feelings and emotions and-
Jade Cunnah: Mm …
Paul Seabrook : uh, something that triggered them to engage with charity in the first place. And they’re all different stories as to why that happened, and I think i-i- that the challenge has gotta be not the sort of one-size-fits-all approach and picking up data trends to think these people have done this and this, they’re likely to do this.
Paul Seabrook : W- we know that, you know, there i- there are gonna be strong correlations there. But I think just remembering that it, that it is that, um, some emotional triggers, the, the, the things that people will remember. They won’t necessarily get moved emotionally because a donation journey worked well. Mm. That, that they are the sort of more, yeah, the things they notice.
Paul Seabrook : Uh, they do need some confidence that, you know, th- th- they haven’t been forgotten by the charity. But it is that emotional kind of, uh, uh, measures that we’ve certainly been trying to focus on more so and understand those correlations.
Alex Aggidis: Mm.
Paul Seabrook : There is, uh, that’s … it’s complex ’cause often as humans, we don’t, we don’t really understand our emotions or why we react in a certain way, and we always think we’re gonna be extremely rational every time we see something or read something.
Paul Seabrook : We’re not gonna be, you know, moved to do something we didn’t think we’d want to do. But the reality is completely different. So, um, we, we are really sort of … We’ve been exploring a lot. And as I say, through the lots of qualitative interviews, you really sort of see people sort of go from this uh, yeah, charity’s, um, really important to do our bit, et cetera, but then they stop and think, and then they call those entry points.
Paul Seabrook : They get m- they get much more engaged, and you can really start to sort of almost help them un- unwrap why charities do mean m- so much to them and- Mm … you know, what emotional payback for them is as well.
Simon Scriver: That sounds, it sounds like some of those conversations would actually, would actually be really lovely.
Simon Scriver: Um, and you- Mm-hmm … at the conference, at the individual con- given conference, you’re gonna be sharing a lot more about that, the insights from that, and I suppose what we can implement. So I don’t wanna give too much away at the moment. No. But one thing, um, interesting that you had mentioned that I’d love you to, to unpack was one emotion in the data where it
Simon Scriver: you’d expect it to be positive, but actually you found that it’s negative. Would- Mm. Could you maybe give us a little taster there?
Steven Dodds: By all means, yeah. Yeah, so we, we’ve been, … yeah, we’ve been exploring the s- specific emotions uh, that supporters feel as a result of their support for the, uh, for charities.
Steven Dodds: And the relationship between those specific emotions and their likelihood to say that they are sort of strongly committed to the charity and, uh, their reported kind of value to the, to the, to the, to the, to the charity. Mm.
Steven Dodds: Um, and, uh, one of the, the, the emotions that perhaps is sl- the emotion that perhaps is slightly counterintuitive is is one uh, useful. Um, I guess it’s about the sort of y- you know, feeling useful, feeling kind of like the utility, if you like, of your relationship and of your, of your donations.
Steven Dodds: Yeah, people that feel useful are only marginally more likely than average to be … to say they’re committed to the charity. But they are they are less likely they are less generous than average, um- Sure … uh, in in, in some. So yeah the kind of … you know, you might w- you might assume that you want your donors to feel useful, that you want their- Yeah.
Steven Dodds: their, their donations to be- Yeah … having a utility to them. But the data that we’ve got says that those people are yeah, that those are, those … that people that feel that emotion are kind of less valuable ultimately than everybody else that we’ve that we studied. It could be about the, the donor type and maybe those- Mm
Steven Dodds: those people are kind of giving to more charities than others because they, you know, they enjoy this kind of sense of u- utility, as it were. But yeah there, there are other richer emotions that perhaps I will keep up my sleeve for the for the conference- that are much stronger predictors of, yeah, positive commitment, positive pos- positive value. Uh, yeah.
Simon Scriver: What is, what is the opposite of that useful feeling? What is, what is the feeling that would be … what is the emotion that would be-
Steven Dodds: I don’t know. Um, yeah. Uh, well, useless,
Simon Scriver: yeah. I mean, are, are you making people feel maybe not useless but almost helpless?
Simon Scriver: Mm. Is that… Very often when we engage with charities, we feel almost helpless and charities are an outlet for that because they know how to help. But what,
Steven Dodds: what’s- Yeah … Yeah. I mean, I think, um, we’ve, we’ve looked at sadness. Sadness plays a pos- Mm … plays a positive role in, uh, in, in kind of value and commitment, and I think that’s unavoidable, uh, given what we do as fundraisers.
Steven Dodds: Mm … a- and it’s the problem solution arc obviously starts with, with sadness. So I think that’s… It’s not that. That’s not- Mm … that’s not the issue. Um, yeah, I think maybe useful falls back more into that transactional space perhaps.
Paul Seabrook : Mm.
Steven Dodds: Um, lot more into the- And we find that people intend to a
Paul Seabrook : very excellent on usefulness Do tend to give to quite a lot of charities.
Paul Seabrook : Mm. Um, they have a bigger portfolio, but they’re not necessarily as connected or committed to them as some of the other sort of emotional metrics that we focus on. I think usefulness is, is, is more ingrained with, as Stephen says, the effectiveness the more sort of functional- … output that they’re giving.
Paul Seabrook : But I don’t th- it’s not necessarily … it sort of, there’s almost a ceiling on that, and it doesn’t go into- Mm … the next level of commitment and connection- Mm … with, with the, um, you know, with the, with the cause or the, or the charity.
Simon Scriver: And I think, yeah, I mean, obviously we have to be careful about reading too much into any one data point, and I think I’m looking forward to your session in terms of you guys bringing it all together, drilling down into those emotions.
Simon Scriver: I’d love to hear things around, like, how happiness versus sadness plays, ’cause that’s obviously a conversation that comes up a lot. But obviously the point of this exercise, I mean, the safe … and, and charities can get involved with it. Um, you can go to beautifulinsights.com to find out more about it, but essentially you guys help assess their own supporter base, and then provide that report back and provides those insights and comparisons to make decisions.
Simon Scriver: So in the… What kind of warnings are coming up when you look at that data? I mean, I suppose that’s one of the big things that you’re spotting in there, is there are these, like, almost health warnings for charities in there.
Steven Dodds: Yeah. There are some, there are some negative uh, ne- negative signals, if you like, um, that indicate that indicate a kind of li- greater likelihood to lapse or, or a kind of, um, less generosity.
Steven Dodds: Not feeling an emotion is one of those. So none of the above as an, as an answer option in, um, in, in terms of the emotions that you feel in support of a of a charity. And guilt and anxiety are other kind of key sort of predictors, if you like- Mm … um, that you’re sort of damaging, damaging the relationship ultimately by by yeah, ki- prompting those, uh, those emotions in your, in your supporters.
Steven Dodds: So yeah, the, what you mentioned earlier about the- The, the balance, if you like, between between positive and negative emotions- Mm-hmm … um, is obviously something to be to be looked at. But yeah. There’s, there’s- Mm … the if your supporter base uh, if your supporters are reporting higher levels of guilt or anxiety or no emotional register uh, than other charities, then you’re, you, you’ve got, you know, some potential lapse risks, uh, there.
Paul Seabrook : Yeah. And I think none of the above is almost … So that’s sort of indifference, isn’t it? And I think in some ways- Yeah … that’s more dangerous than sort of actually un- uncovering what the negative or the disappointment- Yeah … was. Mm. It’s just indifferent. So it’s not really engaging me emotionally in any way.
Paul Seabrook : It’s a very transactional relationship that they’re having. Which I think we know isn’t really gonna sort of lead to, long-term commitment and connection.
Simon Scriver: Mm. Well, what do you do about someone who, who’s indifferent as an organization? Do you know, if you feel your supporter base is a bit indifferent.
Simon Scriver: I mean- Mm … is, is it just you’re talking to the wrong audience and it’s time to move on? Or is that something you can really work to engage with?
Steven Dodds: It’s a good question. It’s a good question. It’s another … I mean, it’s, it’s a, it’s a … We’ve got other data on, on kind of what w- you know, what is motivating donors, uh, and whether, uh, to support uh, your charity and whether, Yes
Steven Dodds: it’s the right kind of motivations, if you like. So that’s another … That’s a subject for another conversation, Simon, I think. But yeah. I mean, I think with all of this, I think there’s always, there’s always headroom in uh, around emotional engagement with your supporter, with your supporter comms, I w- I would argue.
Steven Dodds: Mm. Um, it seems to me that there’s not huge amounts of best practice out there. Like I said we’ve talked about the kind of transactional focus. And yeah, I think it’s about designing your, your comms with the emotional reaction in mind, rather than the sort of, what do we feel we need to tell donors by way of what their money’s done.
Steven Dodds: Um- Mm.
Paul Seabrook : Yeah. And I think also b- always being … Remembering why they first gave. There was an emotional moment and trigger there probably-
Steven Dodds: Mm.
Paul Seabrook : Yeah … when they first gave. And you, you can’t just completely replay that, you know, every time there’d be some communication, but it does give us a clue. Um, th- but there’s also the
Paul Seabrook : This is where sort of segmentation Needs to play a role sometimes about accepting that some people will, will just be a little bit indifferent. It’s not gonna mean they don’t stop, they’re gonna stop giving. It’s like in, in non-charity space, you know, the- these people might be very indifferent towards the brand, but still buy it.
Paul Seabrook : Just happy really, as much as anything else, and it’s a sort of a low-risk thing to buy and they just keep doing it. But you’ve gotta be realistic on the headroom with those folk, and also realistic in that if we don’t, let’s … You know, are they gonna be like that indifferent with absolutely every charity they give to?
Paul Seabrook : ‘Cause most do obviously give to more than one charity. We will never know that necessarily, because we don’t know who else they give to and how they feel. But- Right … there is poten- you know, the mission of thinking I, I want to move you from being indifferent to something else” c- could be quite hard. Mm.
Paul Seabrook : And you could spend a lot of time and effort and money trying to do that, when actually people are looking, some people are looking for just a bit of a one-step-removed relationship. Mm-hmm. And I think that needs to be re- you know, respected, and some of the clues can be there to, to help define that. But that entry point here will always give a bit of a clue-
Simon Scriver: Yeah
Paul Seabrook : as to what it was that moved somebody to take action.
Simon Scriver: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. That’s really helpful. And I always appreciate y- your beautiful insights, the realism you bring to this data. You don’t … You know, that it’s not just these sweeping statements about, uh, about the top-line data, but you actually drill down into what this means about how we should com- be communicating.
Simon Scriver: And at the Individual Giving Conference, I’m gonna plug it again, we’re gonna be unpacking lots of ways to keep our, um, supporters from becoming indifferent, from keeping them engaged, and from, uh, uh, for converting them, uh, into long lifetime donors. Um, so beautiful insights. Thank you so much. That you’re gonna be part of that event.
Simon Scriver: Pleasure. Just to finish up on that, I do have another question here that, I, I suppose a caveat with all this data, ’cause I get carried away with all this data. Um, and I just is there anything that, that people should remember as we, as we enter your session at the conference? What should we be keeping in mind when it comes to all of this data?
Steven Dodds: Are you looking for health warnings or, uh, or just a, just a, just a witticism of some sort, Simon, uh?
Simon Scriver: Yeah, I think, like, what, what’s the common mistake that we’re all making? Do you know? I’m, I’m sure you’re dealing with- Yeah. I, I- … the same, the same hurdles come up every time.
Steven Dodds: Yeah, I mean, I think for me, it’s we tend to see the supporter journey as steps on a ladder, where- whereas I, I think it might be more fruitful to see it as the massaging and creation of, of certain emotional states. Mm. That’s, that’s the sort of … That’s what this data’s telling us, and how I think a sort of, uh, a different perspective could, yeah, add a lot of value to, how fundraisers think about the supporter experience.
Paul Seabrook : I, I, and I think, just to add to that, as I think we said it just now, but always remember behind every data point is a human, and a human trying to do some good in their own way. Um, that’s not just for the charity. That’s for themselves as well. You know, we know there’s a sort of emotional payback from giving.
Paul Seabrook : I think as well it’s remembering that, you know, the, the purpose of insight, the purpose of campaigns is it’s not just to help charities raise more money and, and hit targets. It’s to help charities then build better relationships-
Alex Aggidis: Mm …
Paul Seabrook : going forward. And if you can build those better relationships, then the money will follow because future engagement, et cetera- Mm
Paul Seabrook : will be more committed. You know, I think there’s almost that often people will, will, will e- enter a charity because of sadness or moral outrage. They probably stay because of, of hope. Um, and then- Mm … they, that sort of, that journey leads into pride and, uh, they feel they’ve been on a journey with that charity.
Paul Seabrook : And so sometimes it’s around, you know, when, when planning campaigns it’s what emotion are we looking to create with this campaign? Um, not just the uh, you know, the kind of, right, this is what we want people to do, we want people to, um, you know, kind of X donations as a result of doing this. It’s the emotion that we want to create with this campaign, because that has to, it has to think
Paul Seabrook : still be in place for people to to react. We, we often talk about, and I may, I may have repeated something I said already, but it is the head that listens and notices, it’s the heart that responds. Mm. And that’s not just charity it’s in all sorts of decisions that we that we make.
Paul Seabrook : So yeah, what, what’s the campaign emotion we’re looking to try and create? Mm. Uh, to strengthen that relationship.
Simon Scriver: Yeah, I love that. And I love the, the phrase, Paul, you know, people staying for hope. Uh- Mm … and I think that’s, you know, a really, um, um, nice way to end this. You’re gonna be back, you’re gonna be back with us at the Individual Giving, Giving conference, going into more detail with us, giving some, us some practical insights.
Simon Scriver: So I’m really grateful for that, and so, uh, we’ll link to that in the, in the podcast description here. Um, but where’s the best place for people to find you? Obviously we have beautifulinsights.com, which we’ll also link to if anyone wants to find out more about what you do, get in touch, or to … I highly re- recommend looking at the SAFE index, really do.
Simon Scriver: Um, there’s a section on the website there that I I recommend people check out. But Steven, uh, where else can people find you?
Steven Dodds: I think the best place is, uh, in my inbox. S- Steven @, with a V beautifulinsights.com. Yeah.
Paul Seabrook : And also subscribe to the Beautiful Bulletin- Yeah … which is something that we send out on a, about a monthly basis.
Steven Dodds: Yeah.
Paul Seabrook : Um, sharing some insights that we’ve maybe uncovered that month. Yeah. Often our lovely clients will let us share some of the findings from work we’ve been doing with, uh, with them as well. So, um, uh-
Steven Dodds: Sign up via the website. Sign up via the website
Paul Seabrook : Absolutely. What Steven said.
Steven Dodds: Yeah.
Simon Scriver: Amazing. Thank you, guys.
Simon Scriver: Uh, we’ll link to that, and yes, I, I, I third that. Um, go and sign up to it, and do come and, uh, listen to Paul and Steven speak at the Individual Giving Conference. We’ll link to that. Um, but that’s it for today, guys. Thank you so much for being on here. So lovely to see you, and I hope I get to … Well, I might get to chat to you at the IG conference, but otherwise I hope I get to chat to you again soon.
Steven Dodds: Many thanks, Simon. All the best. Yeah.
Simon Scriver: And thank you all for listening. Lovely to have you back. I hope you have a very hopeful rest of your day. Um, you do … will- you will find those links in the session description. As always, if you need anything from us, you can find us at fundraisingeverywhere.com. Always happy to hear from you what you wanna hear more about.
Simon Scriver: But until then, I’ll see you at the Individual Giving Conference. Thank you for listening. Bye. Bye-bye. Thank you so much for listening to the Fundraising Everywhere podcast. If you’re enjoying this podcast, why not share it with a fundraising friend? And if you would like to give us a little like or subscribe, it really helps more fundraisers like you find us.
Alex Aggidis: Thank you so much. See you next time.
*************
This transcript was created using AI. If you spot any mistakes, please reach out. Thank you!