Brand and fundraising: a different perspective on Alan Clayton’s and Adrian Sargeant’s report
‘Branding is funny. In one sense it makes all the difference in the world. In another it makes almost none.’
This is the opening line from the recently published ACA Philanthropy and Fundraising report, titled Brand and Great Fundraising: Help or Hindrance? Unsurprisingly our attention was piqued.
According to the report there is no evidence to suggest spending on brand has any positive impact on fundraising income. BUT their own qualitative case studies presented at the launch event by their academic researcher (Harriet Day) contradicted this, with brand making demonstrable impact.
In response, we would be quick to point out that many overestimate the short term impact of brand, and underestimate its longer term benefits. Brand certainly isn’t a magic wand, however, organisations with the strongest fundraising and most impactful fundraising propositions do place brand at their heart.
Just look at Cancer Research UK who raise ￡400m each year and consistently top every brand index going.
The report also suggests image and personality (brand) is given strategic preference over fundraising, which is deemed to be more tactical, and thus receives less attention from the board.
Evidence from our soon to be published Brand benchmarking report, which has been contributed to by over 350 charity communications professionals, would refute this. When asked to identify the major challenges their charities faced, income generation came out top, with as many as 63% citing it as their major challenge.
Even when looking specifically at the ubercharities, those with an income of more than ￡100million or more, 61% still indicated income to be their key challenge.
With this in mind, you don’t expect us to believe those at board level aren’t taking fundraising seriously?
The ACA report concludes that great fundraising teams often position brand as a servant to fundraising. Rather than downgrading brand or fundraising, we would advocate for the amplifier effect of brand and fundraising working in tandem together.
Fundraising doesn’t challenge attitudes, doesn’t change minds, it doesn’t change legislation. Importantly, fundraising doesn’t commission services: one of the biggest income streams for the sector, and practical points where many charities actually touch people’s lives.
When dealing with major trusts, high net worth donors and corporate entities, the questions are going to be the same. Who are you? What do you do? Why should I care?
Fundraising is a piece of the puzzle, but brand provides the vital context.
And when there is poor ROI from brand spend to fundraising impact, it is almost certainly because the brand is ineffective, or being badly implemented.
As we’ve mentioned, brand isn’t a magic wand. However, when the right brand, and a compelling fundraising proposition come together, the results can be spectacular.
Our clients spend on brand is moderate, in comparison with commercial counterparts, yet they experience significant impact. Our co-creative process means all stakeholders are listened to and drawn from, ensuring the right brand strategy is built for each charity.
Recent examples of this include Samaritans rebranding to reassert their role and relevance, and subsequently benefitting from a 124% increase in online revenue, as well as a 42% growth in their social media reach. Similarly, Kidney Care UK have seen a 77% spike in fundraising income, after renaming and rebranding to make sure no one suffers with kidney disease alone.
Fundraising is hard enough without making brand the enemy. As identified in the report, the successful organisations are the ones where the leadership has recognised the potential for conflict and made efforts to build relationships, bringing fundraising and brand closer together for amplified impact, and the benefit of the charity as a whole.