While many of our organizations enjoy substantially higher open-rates and click-through rates than traditional 'spam' marketers, this is an interesting statistic to ponder as we think about the future of our programs. The benefits of having better relationships with our donors and friends don't make us immune to the same fate if we fail to continually strive to offer e-mail communications that are interesting and valuable to our donors.
As more and more orgniazations utilize e-mail as a core part of their strategy it has become easier than ever to become lost in a deluge of e-mails that arrive in our in-boxes every day.
Just what is it that we can provide via e-mail (or any other communications channel for that matter) that our donors and potential donors will find useful and informative? Are we sending e-mail, e-newsletters and other materials simply to do so, or does each communication have value? Sometimes I wonder if we all aren't in such a hurry to deliver SOMETHING that the something we end up delivering ends up being categorized as spam by the intended recipient. And if it is, what happens to our e-mail when we really do have a communication of significance? I think I know, because the 'D' on my 'DEL' key is looking a little worn these days.
It might be a good idea to ask a few donors (and potential donors) just what they want to hear about. What types of information could the organization deliver that would maintain their interest? How often would they like to receive e-mail? Do they prefer a fancy email with video, or a simple note? It's really all about them, not us, and if we heed their advice they might just continue to click!
See the article here: E-Mail Marketing Open and Click-Through Rates
1 comment:
I very much believe in audience research, but find what people report they want and how they actually behave are not always the same. Think about supplementing the asking with a small blind test as well to determine the validity of the findings. Great topic!
Post a Comment