Innovate? Yes - but don’t risk your brand’s reputation by losing control, says Ed Wyatt
It is hard to be impressed by anything less than outrageous these days.
As a child, I sold conkers for charity. I smile now at the vivid memory of one particularly successful afternoon in the sun. The seven-year-old me, a bulging bag of conkers and an even bigger bag full of small change.
As a fundraising activity I would love to think selling conkers would still cut it among my car boot sale-attending supporters, but I have a sneaking suspicion it would not. Why? Conkers are so 80s. Just as the bath of beans was a stalwart fundraiser of the 90s and the skydive was king of the noughties, the boundaries of what we consider to be impressive or worthy are clearly widening.
It is happening right in front of our eyes: an upwards curve toward the extreme, more dangerous and more contentious year on year. Swimming the channel? Ha, Jonny Fundraiser down the road is competing in a global triathlon!
When bigger isn’t better
For the most part, this upscaling of fundraising activities poses nothing but positive opportunities to the organisation. But what happens when it goes too far? Is there a point at which bigger and bolder is not better, and actually pushes charity supporters away?
Let’s take the seemingly innocuous charity calendar as an example. Over the years we have seen the rising success of charity calendars. Whether it be the CountryFile calendar for Children in Need or the WI’s famously suggestive effort, charity calendars provide a big income opportunity, yet require minimal effort. There is an argument that a certain airline took this wholesome format too far: the mix of sexually explicit imagery and a children’s charity is difficult to swallow for some. Yes, it made money for the charity and it got a laugh, but what was the reputational damage?
Working with those who are not bound by the four walls that encase your organisation is tricky. Whether you’re working with big businesses or volunteers, you are effectively loaning them your charity’s brand, and all of your history and hard work is at risk. What becomes clear is the need for a charity to stay in control. It must stay in control of the enthusiasm and the passion of volunteers, the needs of big businesses and the expectations of the supporter.
Beyond the logo
Contracts and fundraising agreements can go some way to protect the brand, but we all know it would be off the mark to suggest this is a complete answer. It may sound simplistic but it is important to make sure you truly know your organisation, including the expectations of all of its stakeholders. In turn you need to make sure volunteers and commercial partners are fully aware of what they are actually dealing with beyond the logo. Make it very clear what is acceptable, whether it be on your website for passing volunteers or in a policy made available to prospective corporate partners. Adventure, innovation and passion must be intertwined with history, integrity and authority.
Cancer Research’s Race for Life is a very good example of finding a balance. A successful tweak on the classic sponsored run format which invites participants to be expressive and wacky has become a successful piece of the CRUK brand. This off-the-wall event – and when it was launched this was truly off the wall – was tasked with sitting comfortably alongside the serious work of serious scientists who are finding a cure for a serious disease.
In asking what is cancer, the CRUK fundraisers and event organisers boldly display that it is not only a deadly serious disease but it is also tears, fear, emotion, expression and quite frankly wacky. CRUK first looked at what their organisation truly is, and then invited the volunteer fundraisers, supporters, beneficiaries and corporate partners through the front door.
The result is not just money but also brand control. Control in the most positive sense. They have achieved a control over what it means to be a part of CRUK. The result is enthusiasm and reputation in perfect harmony.
Ed Wyatt is policy and information officer at the Institute of Fundraising
This article first appeared in The Fundraiser magazine, Issue 18, June 2012