Carrot and stick
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
Face-to-face fundraising has borne the brunt of the media spotlight, but the sector needs to wake up to the potential powder keg lying in telephone fundraising, says Michael Naidu.
So, have we survived the car crash that was the Newsnight exposé on chugging agencies? Time to breathe a sigh of relief and get back to the job of raising vital funds for good causes? I hope not, because faceto- face fundraising isn’t the only contentious form of fundraising annoying the public and whipping up the media’s scorn.
I was pleased to read that the Institute of Fundraising have added to each code of practice a summary to highlight to practising fundraisers the key areas to review. But I fear that most fundraisers do not review the codes of practice when planning or implementing activity. Let’s be honest, I have rarely met a director of fundraising who has read them recently either. Grants and trusts fundraisers have less use for the codes. These are not the same as other forms of fundraising that get into our face or our home and ask us for our hard-earned cash.
The telephone has been an incredibly successful medium, with more charities building relationships with more supporters each year. As with most forms of direct marketing, agencies drive innovation producing better results to attract the everincreasing demand from charities.
Witness the uneasy truce over making admin calls to supporters on the Telephone Preference Service – as long as they don’t complain ‘the man’ will turn a blind eye. How many complaints do the public need to make before the Information Commissioner’s Office enforce the law and limit the opportunity to fundraise? I have heard talk of the need for a Telephone Fundraising Regulatory Authority – a TFRA – funded by the sector to do… something.
But what should the sector do? Having ridden the rocky waves of face-to-face for years I can think of a few questions the sector could consider first.
Is there enough capacity to meet the needs of the sector? The more charities ask for upgrades, sell raffle tickets and discuss legacies, the more likely the public are to receive calls.
Is the public ready for the needs of the sector? The consistent silver medal in the FRSB complaints survey (second only to the godfather of direct marketing – direct mail) shows that some of the public do not like being asked to donate by phone. But like direct mail there doesn’t seem to be any limit to capacity, only decreasing response rates when saturation occurs.
Are current practitioners achieving best practice? Are they abiding by the code and can you prove it? I don’t know about you but I have received a lot of calls and only once have I heard a disclosure including a notifiable amount and disclosure isn’t best practice, it is the law. Being able to prove that standards are high is useful when arguing for greater opportunity to fundraise or challenging constriction on capacity.
What is the legal future of telephone fundraising? Clearly the ICO respect the role that charity fundraising plays. The telephone symposium showed that there is clarity of sorts, for now. Meanwhile in Germany the public are very concerned about privacy, with direct mail and telesales being scrutinised. Laws passed in Germany often reaches into the EU which could ripple out to our blessed Isle. Damn those future Eurocrats!
And the obvious question, who will stand up to be interviewed by Newsnight when they next OD on catnip and realise that charities pay private companies to ring us up in our own homes? I’m not sure if we need a TFRA, but we MUST get a robust debate going and quickly.
Catriona Phillips
15 Oct 2010
I'm a trust fundraiser, so I don't often get stuck into these debates, but as a member of the public I have to say I do really rather hot under the collar when people call me at home. It's far more invasive than someone on the street (although I don't like those people either).
Charities need to be really worried about this. It's very easy to call up a charity to complain, or ask to make a complaint, right on the spot when someone has called you at home. It's far more effort to complain about direct mail or a chugger.
Michael is right. We really need to watch out.
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
21 May 2012
How do you solve a problem like a pension deficit? David McHattie tackles the issue.
15 May 2012
David Davison mounts his soapbox to call for pensions reform.
24 May 2012
Charities, like businesses should be held to account over their environmental standards, says Katy Wing.
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
17 May 2012
Men may have ruled the political panel, but women packed the punches from the audience in the Civil Society...
15 Oct 2012
15 Oct 2012
15 Oct 2012
19 Nov 2012
Michael Naidu
Fundraiser
Mencap
18 Oct 2010
Please be assured that as a fundraiser I appreciate the value of telephone fundraising and will be planning to use it more in the future.
Catriona, much of the growth in unrestricted voluntary income received by charities these days relies in some way on telephone fundraising. It may be annoying to you and others, but many people have a positive relationship with the charities they support through the telephone.
Balancing the benefit with the detriment is not an easy thing to do. But at the moment we aren't even in a position to have a robust debate about where the line is.
As to the telephone fundraiser discounting my rant, you clearly don't know what side your bread is buttered (or don't want to acknowledge it). Arguably, the majority of telephone calls being made today are off the back of fundraisers signed up on the street or doorstep, whether it be a welcome call, upgrade, reactivation or "admin" calls.
The PFRA has published figures showing that engaging supporters signed up by face to face on the telephone reduces attrition, raising the charity more funds. To think that I am using my PFRA status to have a go at telephone fundraising is misguided.
But as you state, I am a major proponent of face to face and I do not have the power to make the sector take this issue seriously (I am sure there are some people out there thinking I have already suffered from "mission creep").
So I'll just keep my nose out of your business then and let this activity go on unchecked and then when the scandal hits I can sit back and watch a key form of fundraising I am many other fundraisers use go to the wall. Is that what you want, cos that is what could happen.
Mike
[Reply]