# Q & A: tenure and the donor loyalty thing

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/03/13/q-amp-tenure-and-donor-loyalty-thing-314/
- Published: 2009-03-13T15:44:39+00:00
- Author: Howard Lake

_Part two of a three-part blog on donor loyalty: measuring and using tenure._

 

**Q: if tenure is years of continuous giving, what is the range of tenure values
we might expect?**

## Advertisement

 [⌊Posthub advert. You create the campaign. We'll handle the postal journey. Get started at post-hub.co.uk.⌉](https://fundraising.co.uk/ads/posthub-20261007-300x250/)

 

A: the minimum tenure, of course, is 1 year, but donors often show great commitment.
Tenure can rise to many years.

 

I’ve looked at databases that were commissioned 18 years ago and found appreciable
numbers of donors with 18-17-16-15 years of continuous giving. What amazing, special
people. Founding fathers and mothers. Veterans. Partners. Advocates. Words are not
enough.

 

**Q: so tenure measures loyalty then?**

 

A: you could say that, and for a charity with both a long organisational history
and a database that has been carefully – make that scrupulously – managed, loyalty-
as-tenure is there for anyone to see. But of course it does not indicate at all **
WHY** the donor is loyal. For that we have to probe the heart, mind, values, experience-
of-the-cause of the donor and that is another discussion entirely. It means **listening**
to long term loyal donors intelligently and finding out about their motives.

 

**Q: does tenure differentiate how donors behave?**

 

A: Yes. There is not a great deal of experimentation or testing around (that I know
of), but one instance I will tell you about gives a powerful illustration of tenure
in action. A membership-based organisation was contacting its supporters by mail,
and cut a second, small slot-like window in the envelope. In it they lasered ‘Member
since <1985>’ or whatever date it was.

 

**Q: that is so simple. What happened?**

 

A: it was the most successful appeal of all time measured in both response rate 
and revenue. It is nothing more than simple recognition of the member’s commitment.
It shows that simple data can be used to great effect. In the example here the use
of tenure was in the envelope, to get the thing opened, but it could have been used
just as easily in the body of the letter.

 

But donors can surprise you. This same mailing had a higher than usual complaint
rate (‘I don’t want my neighbours/family/partner knowing I’ve been a supporter of
yours for many years!’). And some long established non-profits believe that, regardless
of what the database says, they have supporters who have supported them for 30-50
years.

 

**Q: does the for-profit world use tenure too?**

 

A: I can’t say I am an expert, but I remember when I belonged to the AA (Automobile
Association, roadside rescue). I had a membership card and on it was embossed ‘Member
since 1973’. And when I started Rodd Associates in 1989 I used the well known office
supplies firm Viking. After a few years of buying from them, a letter arrived out
of the blue from the finance director thanking me for my loyal custom. They really
won me over on that day.

 

**Q: so what should fundraisers do with tenure when they’ve got it?**

 

A: that is another story for the next blog.

 

 * **[Fundraiser's Phrase Book](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/03/26/amazon-324/)**(
   26 March 2009)
 * **[YMCA launches national integrated homeless appeal](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/04/01/ymca-launches-national-integrated-homeless-appeal/)**(
   1 April 2009)
 * **[Barnardo’s TV advert – Break the Cycle](https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/05/01/barnardo039s-tv-advert-break-cycle/)**(
   1 May 2009)

## Comments

### By: admin

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2009/03/13/q-amp-tenure-and-donor-loyalty-thing-314/#comment-3565
- Published: 2009-03-20T13:16:25+00:00

I’m enjoying this common sense blast from the past, John.

Just come across an August 2003 issue of Professional Fundraising magazine which
includes another example of old ideas still being relevant.

Consultant Simon Bernstein wrote to PF to point out that Habitat for Humanity’s 
claims in the February issue to have done something “never done by a charity anywhere
in the 
 world” were not accurate.

Habitat was saying that it had offered a money-back guarantee to donors in its cold
acquisition pack.

Bernstein pointed out that Friends of the Earth had been offering a money back guarantee
on its cold pack for almost 10 years, unlike the Habitat’s six months campaign.

Bernstein suggested that PF create a ‘New, old campaigns’ section in the magazine“
to encourage the promulgation of other excellent ideas the sector may have forgotten
or neglected”.

I reckon that’s exactly what you’re doing with your blog John, so thank you.