The Absurdity of the "Pre-Ask"

January 27, 2009

The Absurdity of the "Pre-Ask"

Some nonprofit organizations send letters and e-mail messages to potential donors with the goal of raising awareness.

Weeks or months later — presumably after recipients understand the cause — the nonprofit group follows up with a more formal appeal for money or support.

Is such a tactic successful?

Katya Andresen, vice president of marketing at Network for Good, answers that question with an emphatic “no” on Katya’s Non-Profit Marketing Blog.

Ms. Andresen says the initial effort to raise awareness amounts to nothing more than “wasted breath.”

“Most people treat the pre-ask as a non-ask,” she writes. “Any response to a pre-ask is not to be trusted. The real answer will only come when you do ask.”

Her advice: ask for something — whether it be a donation or some other call to action. The key is to make sure that you are trying to inspire the recipient to engage with your organization in some meaningful way.

“In this economy, with dwindling marketing budgets, don’t waste money on the pre-ask,” Ms. Andresen writes. “Make a great case for your cause, then make a very clear call to action.”

Do you agree? Is the “pre-ask” useful, or a waste of time and money? Click on the comments link below to share your thoughts.

— Peter Panepento

Comments

While there may be some cases where the “pre-ask” is not warranted, for lapsed major donors it is extremely important to bring them back in the fold by demonstrating that your mission is still critically important and your accomplishments are significant. There is both an art and a science to fundraising and the formula is often different depending upon the source of the potential gift .

— Sharon Jaycox Daitz Jan 27, 02:19 PM #
Any time you can “really” connect to a donor or potential donor is not a waste of effort. You don’t always need to ask for money.

— Debbie Honeycutt Jan 27, 02:23 PM #
The only way a pre-ask is useful at all is if it is face to face and the prospect knows they will be asked for money – preferably by someone who can exert influence.

Ms. Andersen is absolutely correct. Sending what amounts to junk mail or junk e-mail is not only a waste, it can be detrimental later on if the prospect decides the organization is afraid to ask for money.

Fund raising is a contact sport. Unless people accept that, their efforts are little more than window dressing for leadership that wants to see effort without progress.

It should be noted that once someone is a donor, periodic non solicitation contact should be designed to broaden and deepen the relationship between the donor and the organization. Cultivation should focus on people who have already demonstrated some interest by making a gift – however small.

— Sam Prince Jan 27, 02:23 PM #
Katya Anderson’s party analogy in her blog is flawed. There was much more to the relationship before the blurted out “pre-ask.” As Ms. Andersen notes in her blog, they were at the party together for some time, and had chatted. The woman got more of an impression and understanding of the man well before his “pre-ask” blurting. And so it is with developing a relationship with a prospective donor. It’s not just the one letter or email or call. There should be an ongoing dialogue over whatever period is necessary until the prospect is at the point where he/she is ready to say “yes” to the ask. Simplifying the “pre-ask” to one event or activity is as flawed as the pre-date analogy in the blog.

— Mark Gorman Jan 27, 02:28 PM #
I totally disagree with Ms. Andresen on this issue. First, her argument is not logically valid. She argues against a “pre-ask” for money through her questionable date analogy, then jumps to a global argument against marketing a nonprofit to inform potential donors without immediately asking for money. By this logic, all the presidential candidates wasted years of effort and millions of dollars trying to create awareness of themselves and to inform the public about their qualifications and stances on issues. They should have waited until a week or so before the election, effected a good summary of why they were the best candidate and then immediately asked for our vote. Absurd. Donors rightfully resent being valued only for their immediate dollars. They deserve our care and education before and after the ask.

— Boyd Jan 27, 02:51 PM #
Looking at the “pre-ask” from strictly an insular fundraising stand-point, it is silly and a waste of time… if goal is just to ask for money. But, when you step back and look at the overall constituent engagement plan of your entire organization, not strictly the fundraising office, it may be quite beneficial in building a greater and more deeply connected community of like-minded people (who have the propensity to support your cause). You need to actively engage your constituents in interactions with your organization, creating/building communities around your cause and/or organization.

It boils down to people wanting to belong. People will give time/money/energy (whatever their “resource they have to give) if they feel like they are a part of something greater than them.

If your organization has effective programs, marketing/public relations department and all facets are working in tandem to engage your constituents, at whatever point there are in their cycle with you (cold prospect, warm prospect, donor, volunteer, board member, etc.), then sure, a “pre-ask” is silly from the development/fundraising department.

If your organization is not operating in that model, then perhaps a “pre-ask” letter is still a little silly, but the concept of engaging your constituents and interacting with them on a regular basis to bring them closer to the fold doesn’t seem like such a waste of time.

And, lastly, again, it depends on what you’re goal is in regards to the pre-ask. If he goal of the “pre-ask” to increase the amount of cash donations during the “ask,” it’s pointless. A larger goal may be to increase donations of resources (time, money, connections, access to networks and people with resources), you may find more value to the “pre-ask”. But, if the “pre-ask” is just another step in your overall, organization-wide constituent engagement plan, then it’s not just a “pre-ask” for the sake of laying the groundwork for the “ask,” rather another touch and reach out to our valued constituents. It’s not about the money, but about the work you do to better your community (however small or large that community is).

— Sherwood Smith-Soley Jan 27, 02:53 PM #
I’d say that you really can’t evaluate Ms. Andresen’s comments without knowing that context. In face-to-face, major gift fundraising, the opportunity cost rushing the ask is huge, particularly if you are dealing with a new supporter.

In direct mail — particularly cold prospecting — the case could be made for her viewpoint.

But, quite frankly, her failure to even specify context suggests that maybe she doesn’t have enough fundraising — as opposed to marketing — experience to be making such suggestions.

That said, I would agree with her premise if she had instead suggested that one always ask for some kind of action when contacting a prospective donor.

— Michael Evers Jan 27, 03:38 PM #
Ms. Andresen seems to seek headlines with her provocative statement without substance to back it up. Is she discounting the concept of someone needing to be exposed to an organization several (the #7 is often used)times before responding? How naive of her to ignore the value of cultivation and stewardship!

— Ed Davis Jan 28, 10:21 AM #
I read the original post and got a very different sense than many of the commenters here. In the analogy, it seemed as if the man was too nervous to ask outright, so made a flimsy attempt instead to no results. When he asked a few days later with, as Katya said, “clarity and conviction,” he got a response.

What I got from this example was to be clear in what you’re asking for – none of the generic “will you support us” talk. And to be confident – if you aren’t sure in your ask that the donor should be investing, why should they?

— Sonia Singh Jan 28, 11:59 AM #
It is critically important to segment our stategies according to media, and Katya fails to do that in her blanket pronouncement. Online, the quickest way to get your prospects to click “unsubscribe” — and lose them forever as online prospects — is to “just ask for the money.” Disastrous adice for online fundraising!

— Harry Lynch Jan 29, 10:10 AM #
Wow, great comments. But I fear the original post here missed the mark. So let me try to make my point about the story: ASK FOR SOMETHING. This is different from asking for money right away. You might ask for an email address. You might ask for someone to sign a petition. That’s fine. But ask for something. Don’t just talk about yourself and think that’s a good cultivation strategy. What I’m talking about is the difference between “our environment is in bad shape and we’re a great environmental organization” and “please replace your light bulbs” or “sign this petition.” It’s also the difference between “if I called you, would you go out” and “can I call you” or “would you go out.” I believe in building relationships, so I agree with the dissenters here, but not at the expense of appealing for action whenever we can.

— Katya Jan 30, 11:44 AM #
Katya:

Thank you for clarifying your original post. I’ve since amended this one to incorporate more of what you were trying to express in your original post.

Thanks.

— Peter Panepento Jan 31, 12:02 PM #

Commenting is closed for this article.

Previous: New Poll Identifies Top National Priorities of Americans
Next: Treat Donors Like Investors, a Top Philanthropist Urges

Related Articles

Blogroll

The Absurdity of the "Pre-Ask"

Comments