Karma Knowledge Exchange Event 19Th September 2013

SUMMARY OF KARMA KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE EVENT 19TH SEPTEMBER 2013

Introductions

Introductory presentation on background to KARMA project, aims/objectives and progress on work done
Subsequent presentations from KARMA team providing feedback regarding findings from NGO interviews and audience focus groups, respectively

Summary of Key Points/Findings

There are important differences between “apparent” and “explicit” emotional manipulation
Audiences read and engage with each communication/campaign in relation to all other communications/campaigns and other media discourses. Perhaps there are rewards to be achieved from those that “break the mould”?
Audiences are very knowledgeable about and aware of strategies used to “push buttons”, and are critical of communications that they feel to be “faking” sincerity. Sincerity is key to successful audience engagement

NGOs want to achieve the same status as the police, the NHS or other similar institutions, and want to be “loved” by the public

Focus group findings indicate that there are four models of NGOs as perceived by audiences: Charity, Professional, Glamour, Pure Business
It is interesting how the four models change in terms of perception across the different focus group age demographics
The focus groups indicate that people do not trust NGOs – the main concerns are about exactly what percentage of donated money actually reaches the beneficiaries

Questions/Comments

Questions about precisely which materials were used in the focus groups. It was explained that we chose not to distribute these during today’s event, because the context in which the focus group participants had engaged with themwas a key element of their responses
Clarification requestedabout our definition of “emotionally manipulative”: it was suggested that this is precisely “the point of what [NGOs] do”
Observations made regarding the tensions that exist between the fundraising and policy/campaign departments of NGOs, because of their disparate objectives and perspectives
We commented that fundraisers are tired of being told that what they do is manipulative, and that NGOs are concerned about the cumulative effect of such criticisms on their work
NGO Professional commented that aggressive DRTV (Direct Response TV) campaigns are effective. Whilst they may be counterproductive in the longer term, they do work in the short term
We agreed that fundraisers say that securing long term donors is the main challenge for them, i.e. converting one-off givers into sustained donors
NGO Professional commented that there is known to be a high dropout rate from street campaigns

NGO Professional notes that the public have a very skewed perception of this, and that almost £0.92 per pound goes to beneficiaries - also noted that it’s important for NGOs to try and get this point across in their communications
We noted that there’s a perceptible shift away from notions of charity amongst NGOs (because of its potentially negative connotations) and towards notions of justice instead. It is however important to remember that there can be positive aspects of the idea of the “Good Samaritan” that might be valuable, and shouldn’t be abandoned completely
We agreed that there may still be some mileage in this notion, despite its “old-fashioned” nature
NGO Professional noted that it’s difficult for NGOs to know how much attention they should pay to negative feedback from the public (especially since the majority is positive!), because by responding too fervently, they risk giving it credence and losing focus on their own objectives in the process
NGO Professional noted that NGOs themselves are responsible for how they’re perceived. Observed that perceptions of NGOs have been “bundled together” with discourses surrounding the banking crisis, and that this has had a detrimental effect
NGO Professional noted that successful campaigns are those in which the “ask” is tangible, which is why social networks have become useful for these purposes. Commented that Oxfam is actively seeking to counteract its corporate image, and that new technologies could help to create greater transparency in NGO communications, ensuring that feedback loops between NGOs and the public are clear and that these are addressed and maintained properly
We responded that although the issue of “transparency” is important, this doesn’t solve the problem of trust, because it doesn’t address or acknowledge the non-rational elements of human emotions
NGO Professional queried whether there was a sense from the focus groups that people are loyal to specific NGOs, or to specific issues. Whilst regular donors tend to be signed up to more than one NGO, they are loyal to particular issues – this was linked to observations from Concern’s online donors
NGO Professional asked why the British Red Cross weren’t included in the study (answer: they were at the beginning, but later withdrew for a variety of political reasons). NGO Professional wondered about the extent to which their non-participation might skew the results/findings from the project because the BRC are such a trusted organisation amongst the public

Key Problems

Reconciling market pressures with cherished charity values
Re-building trust in UK public
Counteracting the “self-serving” image of NGOs

Suggestions

There are few problems in terms of the public’s perceptions of beneficiaries – the issues are mainly with the NGOs (the intermediaries)
Whilst the NGO sector is preoccupied with their portrayal of beneficiaries, that isn’t the crucial issue at all – it is images of NGOs themselves that concern people most
Existing feedback from NGOs about the work they do isn’t enough
Audiences need a release from the emotions that are aroused by NGO communications/campaigns, so that they don’t feel “dumped on”. From a psychological perspective, people can hold on to their knowledge and feelings for a much longer time if they are manageable

ACTION RESEARCH MEETING

Summary provided of findings from audience focus groups, as per morning KE workshop

Key issues: how to keep audiences connected to humanitarian issues
Reconciling market pressures and charity values
NGO Professional noted that the idea of the “charity shop” is something that’s embedded in our everyday lives, so is to some extent inescapable
We suggested that the ”Professional” (neo-liberal) model of NGOs might have the potential to be seen positively, especially from a psychological perspective, perhaps by engendering a more “open door” relationship with younger audiences
NGO Professional noted that whilst clicktivism can trigger avoidance amongst audiences, CONCERN’s newly launched online campaign involves taking donors on a “supported journey”, aimed at fostering longer term commitment and involvement. NGO Professional noted that this is also the cheapest method for NGOs to boost donations
NGO Professional suggested that there is a gap between NGOs and audiences in communicating the impact of their work, and that this needs to be addressed
NGO Professional commented that NGOs need to remember that they themselves are partly responsible for any negative public perceptions, and that in a sense they are “in the way” between donors and beneficiaries
NGO Professional commented on PLAN having received a number of complaints about CEO salaries, but that even in these cases, people feel they have personal relationships with the beneficiaries that transcend this – even where donors were offended by salary issues, they intended to continue sponsoring “their” child until he or she reached 18
We noted that personal relationships are key – we need to focus on this and rebuild trust as a means of achieving it
NGO Professional noted that people don’t want to think of NGOs as being corporate businesses, and often don’t recognise that the work they do requires a corporate skill set, and therefore justifies corporate CEO salaries
NGO Professional – many charity CEOs actually took significant pay cuts to do their current jobs, and did so willingly – the public don’t recognise this
NGO Professional – public perceptions of NGOs as faceless entities are wholly incorrect: people don’t recognise that in many organisations, all the employees work together in one room. Drawing attention to the fact that they’re not all big bureaucratic can be effective
NGO Professional – fundraisers’ main concern is that “the medium is the message” –this results in a cumulative view of NGOs as simply trying to get money from the public
NGO Professional agreed with findings that the “white hero” notion of NGOs is far less important to the public than their availability and accessibility
NGO Professional – more investment is needed in supporter relations
NGO Professional – annoyances amongst audiences that the only contact they receive from NGOs is via market research agencies asking for more money/to increase their donations. Those doing the “reaching out” to the public aren’t even part of the agencies themselves!
NGO Professional – it might help to close this gap if the people actually doing the “hands-on” work (e.g. the doctors/nurses “on the ground”) gave presentations about agency work instead of NGO professionals. The problem is that many marketing departments are resistant to suggestions about what really works
NGO Professional – who are the “audiences” that NGOs have in mind when they design their campaigns/appeals? There are lots of different notions of “the human”, and each has a significant impact on the design and structure of these documents
We commented that NGO practitioners are anxious about making people feel uncomfortable or even inducing strong emotions – they are reluctant to do this
NGO Professional – there’s a real tensions between provoking important feelings/emotions, and doing this in a way that isn’t too much for people to manage. Provocative campaigns are polarising and can divide people very powerfully
NGO Professional – there is an important distinction to be made between evoking responses and evoking monetary donations from people
NGO Professional – is there any point in even trying to “convert” certain types of reader or audience?
NGO Professional – audiences are different depending on the current socio-cultural climate, and in relation to the context of what’s happening in the world at the time
NGO Professional – social media is really important, because communications delivered via this medium “feel different” to other more conventional methods, and can engender very powerful responses from the public. Strategies such as using an “Inspirational Quote of the Day” can be very popular and effective
We questioned why it is that NGOs want to distance themselves from the provocation of negative emotions
NGO Professional – precisely because the kind of work that we’re doing on this project shows that it doesn’t work!
NGO Professional – NGOs are concerned about oversimplifying and reinforcing stereotypes about “the victim”. They’re keen the emphasise the agency of beneficiaries (showing how people can help themselves), as a means of creating lasting change
NGO Professional – “brand values” are important to NGOs
NGO Professional – NGOs feel it’s important to “protect your brand”: there’s a real tension between campaign people, policy people and marketing people, because charities are increasingly required to come up with a “brand” in three key sentences. MSF have tried and failed several times to find a “strapline” that works
NGO Professional – there’s a competing interest within organisations, and it is very difficult to find something that everyone agrees on. The emphasis on “big message/big ambitions” means that everything becomes less effective in terms of engaging the public
NGO Professional – the focus on “branding” means that all NGO communications risk becoming generic. Being successful isn’t about brand loyalty, but about focusing on the issue in hand
NGO Professional – the public are sick of hearing about “brands”
*** N.B: the whole group acknowledged the irony that the afternoon’s discussion had also been dominated by this issue***
We asked – how can we continue the dialogue with NGOs and how can our findings be useful to them?
NGO Professional – it would be helpful for us to organise a series of “roadshow” presentations, where we visit the NGOs and give talks there, instead of expecting them to come to us
NGO Professional –we need to emphasis the practical value of attending meetings as a means of persuading people to come
NGO Professional – academics and practitioners use completely different discursive and linguistic strategies in their communications, and this can create a barrier to effective liaison. We need to “market” our work to NGOs in a “less academic” way, and try to “sell” the event in a way that is appealing to them
NGO Professional – willing to liaise with us to re-design future invitations
NGO Professional – we could consider putting NGO CEOs on a discussion panel for future events. Suggested names: Justin Forsyth (Save the Children); Jon Snow; John Burke; Vicky Browning (Charity Comms);
Could also approach the Institute of Fundraising
NGO Professional – will circulate information about future events to his full contact list