MuZemike, Bad feelings? We're learning more about our donors to maximize the fundraising potential of our messages during the two month campaign. We have a lofty goal - and a short time period to accomplish it in.
-Deniz On 10/6/10 1:03 PM, MuZemike wrote: > Is it me, or when I saw the word "focus group", I started to develop > some bad feelings about this? > > -MuZemike > > On 10/5/2010 8:49 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I wanted to take a moment to bring you up to date on the planning of >> the 2010-2011 fundraiser, and ask once again for your participation in >> the process. Our updated meta pages >> (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2010 >> ) will give you an overview as well. There's a lot of information >> here, because we've made huge progress: I hope you'll take the time to >> read it and join in the planning for the fundraiser. >> >> There's no doubt about it: the appeal from Jimmy Wales is a strong >> message. We've tested it head-to-head against other banners, and the >> results [1] are unequivocal - especially when you also compare its >> performance last year and the year before. >> >> But nobody wants to just put Jimmy up on the sites and leave him up >> for two months! >> >> So we're issuing a challenge: Find the banner that will beat Jimmy. >> >> Data informed conclusions >> Here's the trick: >> We have to make our decisions based on the facts, not our instinct. >> Please read the summaries below for really important details from our >> focus group and survey of past donors. >> >> Focus Group >> Wikimedia conducted a focus group of past donors in the New York City >> area in September 2010. It's important to note that this was a single >> focus group, and in a single city. We'll need to do more to make sure >> that results correlate universally. But we came out of it with a few >> important take-away points. It's important to realize that these >> points reflect ONLY donors - they should not be read as a wider >> feeling about mission or strategic direction - they're messaging >> points to help us refine and deliver the best messages possible. >> >> ** The most powerful image is of Wikipedia as a global community of >> people who freely share their knowledge and self-police the product. >> For everyone who participated, the idea of a global community of >> people sharing knowledge that is accessible to anyone who wants it >> free of charge is incredibly powerful. Respondents in this group were >> highly unlikely to be editors themselves; most consider themselves >> users. They love the idea of the community and want to support it, but >> they are reluctant to put themselves out there by being more than a >> user and a donor. >> >> ** Keeping the projects ad-free is a powerful motivator. >> Respondents were unanimous that keeping Wiki[m\p]edia ad free should >> be a priority, even if it meant that Wiki[m\p]edia would be >> approaching them for money more often. Accepting paid ads could >> corrupt the values and discourage the free flow of information. >> >> ** Independence is critically important. >> These respondents consume a lot of media, and they place a high >> premium on the free flow of information. They have little patience >> for “sponsored” news or information that excludes other perspectives. >> The Wikimedia model of openness and community engagement facilitates >> that. >> >> ** It’s a cause because it’s a tool. >> This may sound a bit like a chicken/egg argument, but it’s actually an >> important nuance. These folks use Wikimedia every day for things from >> simple curiosities to serious research. So it’s a tool that lets them >> get what they need. But it has grown to 17 million articles in 270 >> languages. Because it has that kind of depth and it reaches so many >> people around the world, it’s worth protecting what the community so >> successfully built. And that makes it a cause too. >> >> ** Growing isn’t always a good thing, when positioning for donors. >> Like many tech savvy folks, our respondents are a suspicious lot. The >> idea of Wikimedia growing brings up concerns about what Wikimedia >> would become, and fears about the path of companies like Facebook. >> It’s not just a privacy concern; it’s a concern about what would >> happen to the democratic model of Wikimedia inside a growth strategy. >> Supporting the organic growth of the community doesn’t raise the same >> concerns. >> >> ** Supporters strongly reject any agenda being attached to Wikimedia, >> even when that agenda would extend the current offerings. >> An agenda implies ownership, and respondents feel pretty strongly that >> the community owns Wikipedia. They think of Wikipedia as an organic >> thing, not like a typical nonprofit, and any attempt to steer it would >> disrupt that. Community support is one of the key values, and not >> everyone in the community would support new initiatives. >> >> ** There is room to fundraise more aggressively. >> Across the board, respondents were surprised that they didn’t have the >> opportunity to give to Wikimedia more often. Obviously, there is a >> balance and a PBS-style solicitation schedule wouldn’t make sense both >> for Wikimedia’s personality and for this audience, but there is much >> more space available than we are taking. >> >> ** Wikimedia donors are highly suspicious of marketing gimmicks. >> Simple, direct messages are likely to work best. Jimmy’s message >> worked not so much because he was the founder, but because it was a >> simple plea for support delivered authentically. >> >> As we know, that’s something that also needs quantitative testing to >> prove. Sometimes donor response in a focus group and donor activity >> don’t line up exactly. But, some things already line up with early >> tests. The more gimmicky the banner, the less likely it is to drive >> donations even if it increases clicks. >> >> Reaction to banners like “572 have donated in New York today” also >> raised concerns about privacy – not a good reaction in an already >> suspicious audience. Appeals to “keep us growing” or that highlight a >> contributor’s work raise earlier concerns about an agenda. >> >> Donor Survey Highlights >> Wikimedia produced a random sample of 20,000 individuals from the much >> larger number of individuals, from many countries, contributing less >> than $1000 between November 1 2009 and June 30 2010. These individuals >> were invited to participate in a 29 item (but around 70 question) >> survey. 3760 agreed to participate, and the survey was conducted in >> August 2010. The participants probably differ from those who declined >> in ways that are associated with survey answers. Hence the respondents >> do not represent an entirely representative sample of the< $1000 >> donors. >> >> The survey participants are committed to Wiki[p/m]edia, visiting it >> frequently. They say that they are very likely to donate again, and >> they support all the survey-mentioned reasons for donation. They were >> not aware of Wikipedia chapters. A majority of respondents did not >> appear greatly concerned about possible threats to Wikipedia’s identity. >> About 1/3 of these individuals have edited, though not frequently. >> Those who express more support for Wikimedia as a cause appear more >> prone to edit. Those who have not contributed in this way say mostly >> that they haven’t thought about it--suggesting that they haven’t >> really considered the possibility—or that they don’t have time. >> Europeans and the highly educated especially stress lack of time. >> >> Some subgroup differences were found within the sample. The likelihood >> of writing or editing does vary a bit by subgroup, for example. >> Overall, however, responses did not vary greatly by subgroup, whether >> “demographic” (nationality, education, sex) or behavioral (e.g., >> degree of on-line activity). >> >> * The full details of the survey can be found at >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FR_Donor_survey_report.pdf >> * A short overview can be found at >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Donor_survey_report_excerpts.pdf >> . >> >> Chapters >> Chapters will receive the specifics of how we will work with them >> through their fundraising contacts which were designated on the >> fundraising survey, in order to keep the information communicated here >> to the essentials. >> >> Testing >> We have been testing for ten weeks now, and are really pleased with >> the progress that the tech team has made with new tools to support the >> fundraiser. Geotargetting appears to work now, and we are currently >> testing a 1 step versus 2 step donation process. We will have solid >> test results this week, we believe. In all, we believe that we are - >> technically and message-wise - in a really good position. We're >> working out kinks, definitely, but we're working them out before the >> fundraiser starts, so that we can maximize the dollar-earning >> potential of every day that we have banners up. >> >> We need you >> From the very beginning, Zack charged me with presenting the most >> collaborative fundraiser yet. I'm thrilled at the level of >> involvement from the community, in everything from banner creation to >> testing structure, to design, to actually sitting on our test >> fundraisers with us in virtual conferences and being a full >> participating member of the team. We're reporting out frequently, and >> trying very hard to engage with members of the community. We have >> dedicated staff who are outreaching to our various language wikis in >> an attempt to get ever more broad participation. I strongly encourage >> you to join in the discussions at the meta pages about the >> fundraiser: /http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FR2010. Your involvement >> is not just appreciated - it's crucial. >> >> Thanks for sticking through this email - join us in discussion and >> help us beat the Jimmy appeal! >> >> Thanks, >> Philippe >> >> >> [1] - >> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2010/Banner_testing#Test_six_ >> :_September_23rd.2C_2010 >> ____________________ >> Philippe Beaudette >> Head of Reader Relations >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> phili...@wikimedia.org >> >> Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share in >> the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! >> >> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Deniz Gültekin Community Associate Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge http://donate.wikimedia.org/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
