Throughout our entire process this year, I never felt that I wanted to donate to Truth Pharm. I simply did not feel a connection to the organization or felt that this was the best place to donate our money. However, after our site visit, I felt a very emotional connection and desire to help Truth Pharm and I decided to reconsider. Before I explain the reasons why I believe they were able to change my mind, I will share information that I have gathered from reading a “classy.org” article titled 3 Psychological Triggers That Can Help You Win Donations.
The first psychological trigger discussed was the “Identifiable Victim Effect.” This is done by focusing on individuals rather than statistics or larger groups. Deborah Small, a marketing professor conducted a study at the University of Pennsylvania together with her colleagues and she found that there is a significantly higher chance that people will donate based on their feelings and not logic. She suggests “introducing” possible donors to people they can connect with. Although all of us have core beliefs and use logic when deciding which charity pitch to donate to, our reasoning for donating is often related to the presenter’s personal connection with the organization or a personal connection we, ourselves, have. For example, on Thursday, Francesca talked about how she knew how much the trip to Madagascar had effected Stephanie and that’s why she voted. Or, I often heard when discussing in our groups after the charity pitches things like “Music made me who I am today so I know how important it is, I will vote for them.” These emotional connections are important to us and if an organization can take advantage of that, they will benefit.
The second psychological trigger was “Goal Proximity.” This talked about how studies had gathered that people were much more likely to donate to an organization if that organization had already collected 66-100% of its goal, than if it had reached 65% or less of its target. This is definitely something that I have considered as I was selected a finalist. HCA was my number one choice to donate to until I realized how much money they needed for them to reach their goal and I thought to myself is 7,500 dollars out of 1.4 million really going to make that much of a difference? Of course every last penny counts and 7,500 dollars is quite a sum, however, Truth Pharm with that sum could create a website. The website could help save lives as it would be more organized and could help those in need find an appointment in an easier way. It can also be used to spread exposure. So what it comes down to is: “Would I rather see a life saving change be put in place immediately or donate and hope that the HCA will collect all the money it needs for the classrooms as soon as possible?”
The final psychological trigger is called “The Martyrdom Effect.” This discusses how people are more likely to donate if they have endured pain and put effort toward a cause because they feel more attached to the organization. “Classy.org” recommends having activities that are difficult and engaging and then lists several physical activities as examples such as a “bike-a-thon” or jumping in an icy lake. However, I think there can be difficult and engaging activities that are not physical. For example, listening to women who are working for Truth Pharm share how they lost their sons or brothers to drug overdose was definitely difficult and engaging. In this case, I feel that the first and third psychological triggers go hand in hand as the women who shared their heart breaking stories with us were the victims and the dealers of emotional pain to our class listening.
Although the writer of the article said that donors are more likely to donate using their heart, rather than their brain, I feel that Truth Pharm was able to convince my heart and my brain. They affected my heart first and then followed it with statistics and other facts and stories that let my brain feel it was okay to follow my heart. I am surprised to say that I believe my vote will go to Truth Pharm, but I will nonetheless keep an open mind for the presentations we will hear this week.
Hey Yann!
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your honesty in this post as I too had apprehension towards Truth Pharm. Being able to put aside your emotional connection towards HCA is incredibly admirable. After checking out your link, I feel that you encapsulated what the article was saying very well. This article stood out to me as each section had a "take away" that you touch upon. My "take away" of your blog post is that I am not alone in what can be considered a change of heart. Honestly, as I said in previous comments, I was biased against Truth Pharm. But after the visits, I had a deeper connection. This connection became much clearer to me based on the psychological triggers as they are called.
Building off of your points, I chose to look a little deeper into the reasons why we feel how we do after the visits. I felt as if the “Classy” article minimized our emotional connection to a guide of how we feel the way we do. As explored earlier in this course, empathy is essential to our decision making abilities and as you pointed out, head and heart does play into our decisions. Empathy can be seen as the building blocks to our society and I believe that Truth Pharm helps us do this. “The Martyrdom Effect” may be at play here, I agree with that. We felt empathy when the volunteers discussed their children. The stories were able to touch us in ways that are difficult to put into words. Therefore, I feel that it can be risky to classify our feels as these triggers because no two people feel and or act exactly the same in a given situation. Further, I am excited to see the voting process. I too will be voting for Truth Pharm, but I look forward to hearing other responses as well.
Hi Yann,
ReplyDeleteI am very disappointed that I was unable to attend the Truth Pharm visit. Your post gave me real insight into the experience, so thank you for writing so eloquently. I do agree that these can be powerful triggers; I’ve felt their effects myself. However, I do find myself agreeing with Lillie in the sense that our emotions can’t- or shouldn’t- be boiled down to these concepts. As convenient as it is to simply classify ideas as “head vs. heart”, I believe most of our thoughts fall in a grey area. This can be difficult when trying to critically assess our decision-making process, so I do appreciate how you moved to break this down.
I’d like to suggest we look beyond empathy as a tactic to pull in donations. I found a very interesting article titled, “True Empathy is Key to Effective Philanthropy”, which discusses empathy, not as a tool for garnering donations but to improve within one’s organizations. It is by the sharing of experiences that an organization can grow. In this way, empathy moves beyond caring about others and grows into a kaleidoscope of perspectives that all help to inform a certain issue. It is always important to ensure that an organization is informed by the people it sets out to help; it is this partnership that leads to non-profit success. A charity will never be successful if it forces its giving down the throats of its base, rather than listening to what they want. This level of being “in-tune” with what the community needs is one of my (and many others) major criteria in selecting a grant recipient. I hope to find empathy in every organization I give to, but I hope that our grant recipient truly understands the power of understanding one another. I have added the link to the article, I hope this makes you think about what exactly empathy in the non-profit sector can mean.
--
Becca
http://www.jumpassociates.com/learning-posts/true-empathy-is-key-to-effective-philanthropy/
Hi Yann, I am happy that you shared this information with us. You were very thorough with explaining and this article was very interesting and helpful with being that I can definitely see those reasons being some of the things I've done with the class. Similar to you, before Hannahs presentation, I did not pay any mind to TruthPharm, In fact, they were an organization I completely ignored, not on purpose but just pure ignorance. However, with Hannahs chilling spoken-word I was sold for TruthPharm, but what really got me was the site visit when all the rainmakers had a personal impact on opioids because of their families or loved ones. The point where people are more likely to donate if they feel a personal connection or sympathy is totally true. During our charity pitches, every single time there was a personal connection between one of our classmates and the charity of their choice I was hooked and voted for them because we are human and we(especially me) cannot help but feel empathy towards certain causes. Going back to TruthPharm, my heartstrings were literally pulled by the rainmakers. So much that I stayed after the site visit and decided to get Narcan training. Although I realized the opioid epidemic has been prevalent in America, I never truly bothered to pay attention to it because it has never personally affected me nor my family. Despite this still being true, again the beauty of being a human the ability to empathize with situations you aren't in is a great thing.
DeleteYann,
DeleteI'm super bummed I missed this site visit as I heard the visit was very insightful. Like you, I was apprehensive at first to Truth Pharm and its programs. What sparked my interest was Hannah's charity pitch when she spoke so powerfully about the issues Truth Pharm aims to fix. Even though I don't necessarily have a personal connection to the the opioid epidemic, I was moved by her presentation and it made me think about Truth Pharm differently.
I agree with your position on "head versus Heart". While the author of the article argues that donors are more likely to make philanthropic decisions based on their heart, I think that far more thought should go into/usually does go into making donations. For example, our class spends an entire semester reviewing local organizations and assessing them one by one to narrow down who we want to donate to. While much of the decision is based on heart, I think that making sure we are making a well-calculated, informed decision is just as important. I don't believe that philanthropic decisions should be either head or heart, and i think that the two need to be combined in order to do the most good.
-Chloe
Hey Yann,
ReplyDeleteI truly enjoyed reading your post and I can relate to a lot of your example. I took felt very skeptical of Truth Pharm towards the beginning of the selection process. I felt that they were too small of an organization to make such an impact on the Binghamton community and that they were too underfunded to insure some sort of change. The most significant off putting detail I noticed from their grant request was that their head director only started receiving a salary this year. Within the selection process, Truth Pharm was the first grant I read because my group had been assigned to assess it. I believe you were in that group as well with me. I remember speaking with you that Truth Pharm had a lot of potential, but we agreed that I wouldn't go very far in the selection process.
I feel that there were two major experiences that helped transform my opinions of Truth Pharm. Both of these experiences relate to the third and final criteria you mention in your post. I feel that I first experienced the “martyrdom effect” when I heard Hannah’s charity pitch. When she read the poem she chanted at the trail of truth, I began to realize how serious Truth Pharm was and how they attempt to achieve their goals. After her charity pitch, I Googled the Trail of Truth viewed the pictures/videos of the event. I was in shock at how successful the event was and how many people participated. Similar to you, my second experience of the “martyrdom effect” was the site visit as a whole. After hearing the stories of the women volunteers who worked there and their experiences of relatives suffering from overdose, I began to feel more sympathetic for the cause and more impressed with the work Truth Pharm has done to lessen the stigmas of overdose. Their event do seem very successful and educational to the community as a whole. The use of the narcan kits seems highly useful and can be taught to many people. I also love the fact that all of their volunteers are so dedicated and passionate about the cause. They care so much about making a difference and preventing family members from experiencing the suffering that they felt. My overall impression of Truth Pharm as a whole skyrocketed as a whole after visiting the site. My wish is that Truth Pharm can one day leave the church site and establish their own facility in Binghamton to serve as a hub for all those suffering from overdose and opioid addiction.
-Matt Benak
Yann,
ReplyDeleteAs someone who has wanted us to give our program grant to TruthPharm since it became a finalist, I found that I had the opposite problem that you did. But, because of that, I had a very hard time verbalizing why I supported the organization in a way that went beyond a normal pitch and your post really helped me see the side I had been blind to. I had been approaching the organization from someone who already believed in its mission and was sold by all three of the factors that you cite in your post. There was 1) a face to their issue that I know well, 2) they are incredibly close to their goal and with our help can get there, and 3) all the rainmakers and employees are people who have felt the pain of loss from terrible tragedy. Because of all of that, I had a hard time sympathizing with those like yourself who were not sold by their work.
However, reading your post, I am able to see now the above reasons that I support them and why they work so effectively in making the sales pitch for donations. You opened my eyes to a whole new perspective of not just persuasion but the gentle push that opens people up to ideas they had not been willing to consider beforehand. I want to thank you for your frankness and applaud you for being so open-minded and conscious of the methods used that made you feel the way you do now.
Yann,
ReplyDeleteI like the route you decided to take this post with the idea of the three psychological triggers. I think these apply very well to Truth Pharm's mission and our experience visiting their site. I believe these psychological triggers could be applied to all of the organizations we visited in some way, but the emotional pull I felt toward Truth Pharm was easily the strongest of the organizations.
That being said, I think it is important to keep emotion and "psychological trigger" in check with facts and statistics. I am glad that your post pointed out these triggers because the more we are aware of them, the more objectively we will be able to make this decision. In other words, while I am emotionally drawn to the stories of Truth Pharm's rainmakers, I am able to recognize that other organizations also have a strong need within the community, but lack the emotional pull that Truth Pharm inevitably has.
I also appreciate the question you raised as to whether or not we would want the program grant to go towards a new website for Truth Pharm, as I also have contemplated it. At first, I did not think a webpage was something I'd want our money to go towards. Truth Pharm is a small organization with a ton of potential to save lives and I would love to see our money work directly in saving lives; however, after thinking on it I am coming to realize that each of the organizations we are assessing know their organization better than we do. Truth Pharm knows what they need in order to carry out their mission and if right now a webpage update is what they need, we are still supporting their mission if our money goes toward the update.
Hey Yann. When I went to Truth Pharm I felt the same way that a lot of people in the class did. They were definitely winning over my heart, hearing the different women's stories, my eyes immediately kept getting watery. I know what it is like to lose someone to a downward spiral into drugs and things of that nature.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I felt weird because as much as I saw how much my heart felt for their organization, I did not actually feel that they should be the finalists still. From when we first went to ACA, a lot of their organization reminded me so much of what it is like to have a nonprofit with so much potential but little to no grants. I’ve started two nonprofits with my dad throughout my life, and I know the work it takes to try to get grants and attention from people to help out or to even keep the organization consistent.
Then, I used the steps you gave us in making my decision and my mind still goes back to ACA. As much as I still felt for TruthPharm, I thought maybe the decision on where they wanted to allocate the grant to going towards their website, did not necessarily seem like the smartest decision to put this money. Especially, considering I have created websites myself and I’ve seen people design websites and for cheaper prices, and believe they could find another route to pay for someone to do their website, and allocate the money elsewhere.
Maybe that is just me, which is why also this goes about perception and things that we know as people. If I did not know the stuff I do from experience with working with other nonprofits or websites, I would have probably supported them using the grant for the website.
I know we have to make a decision so soon, which is why I am starting to get nervous and “making the right decision”.
Yann,
ReplyDeleteFirst off, allow me to congratulate you on a very thorough and thought provoking post. I very much like the fact that you went out and found resources that allowed you to tactfully and accurately form and deliver an argument. I think the psychology involved with philanthropy is something that is often overlooked. At several points throughout this process, I found myself leaning toward or away from certain charities for reasons I never really thought about. Honestly, until I read your blog post I never really wondered why I was finding these underlying preferences and actively following them and advocating for them. But after reading your post and evaluating each of the psychological triggers, I was able to trace my thought processes and finally determine the source of my tendencies.
Furthermore, I must say that your example utilizing the Truth Pharm site visit is extremely accurate and paints a wonderful diagram of the psychological triggers you have reported on. Like you, I at first was not so sure whether or not I would pick Truth Pharm as a final recipient of the grants. But after going to that site visit and hearing the stories and seeing how dedicated and invested each member of Truth Pharm was, they also shot to the top of my recommended list. Again, after reading this blog post I suppose I can attribute this to the “Identifiable Victim” and “Goal Proximity” effects that I had no idea existed. I know a few people who have lost someone to drug complications, so the first effect applies to me in that aspect. Also, I see myself as a very goal oriented person, so it makes me happy to be able to check something off my list. The fact that the grant would have an instant effect on Truth Pharm’s goals also entices me very much. These psychological effects have definitely changed my perspective on the process as a whole for the better. I now feel that I am much more well informed to make a conscious and effective decision.
Great work!
-Thomas Houghton
Hey Yann,
ReplyDeleteI'm impressed by the thought you put into how you change your mind and figuring out how other change their mind. I definitely saw the effects of this during your charity pitch, where you put those three considerations into action.
I also wasn't very fond of TruthPharm when I heard of it for the first time during a charity pitch. But just like you, after visiting and hearing the stories from the rainmakers that worked there, and then hearing the statistics and research that supports TruthPharm's work, I was moved and my heart followed their cause while still being able to think with my head, that this was a worthwhile organization.
The other similarity I saw which compelled me to comment was the 66-100% "rule" you mentioned. HCA being so far from their goal was such a turn off to me, and the reasoning for why seemed so obvious. But your posts shows that the framing of an organizations goals can be used as a tool to gain support or perhaps even lose it. It was an interesting consideration and view of something I had previously considered a given. Thank you for bringing that perspective to light for me! You did a wonderful job on your charity pitch!