When stripped right back, there are two clear camps; Do we persuade people to give to charity by using negative emotions (guilt, responsibility, or threat)…

…Or do we persuade by using all the amazing positive outcomes that happen as a result of donations?

And what about compliance? Is being too negative even allowed or is that manipulation?

To do these questions justice, we take a look at proven theories and research, with a fascinating discoveries about how the psychology of donors can help fundraisers understand better how to raise more.

The carrot and stick theory

The carrot and stick is an approach that aims to motivate certain behaviours or outcomes by either using a reward (the carrot) or a punishment (the stick).

Typically we see the carrot and the stick method used in any situation that aims to manipulate behaviour, such as parenting, employers or sports coaching. It can be a really great way to simply feed back positive or negative messages without over analysing.

The whole consensus of carrot and stick is goal orientated. So for it to work well, the targets must be set and understood beforehand.

With the carrot, all sorts of promises are made about what good things will happen should the recipient adhere to the rules or expectations.

The reward can be anything that aims to drive action from the employees and ultimately lift the spirits of the worker and show special treatment.

In child rearing this might look like a nice pudding for eating all their dinner, or perhaps a treat of some sort that the child has earned through good behaviour or working hard.

At work this might include things like letting employees have extended lunch hours, or adding a bonus to their pay, or publicly thanking employees with a small gift.

Often with sales based jobs, the carrot works well. If a company wants to increase revenue and have their team sign up extra contracts, they might put an incentive in place which places additional rewards on those working exceptional or unusual hours.

On the other hand we have the stick

This is the direct opposite of the carrot, where a threat of unpleasant consequence is issued should the recipient not behave or perform in the desired way.

In the parenting example, we might threaten that the child will get nothing for pudding if they don’t eat their whole dinner up.

In the work example of ‘the stick’ treatment, those performing the worst might lose certain perks such as working from home or the option to get a bonus.

In its simplest form, the carrot stick theory is all about tapping into pleasure vs displeasure, or positive vs negative outcomes.

So how can we apply that to fundraising and charity donors?

We can see clearly how the carrot stick method can work for positions of authority. But face to face fundraisers aren’t that.

Can the theory be adapted?

Kind of!

If we adapt the carrot and stick theory to fundraising and strip it back to the positive versus negative messaging, we can apply it to the psychology of donors.

As discussed in our previous blog ‘Why do people give?’ there are quite a few reasons that motivate people to give to charity.

‘Positive’ could mean the emotions associated with giving – ego (feeling good), pride (feeling proud of themselves), altruism (feeling morally correct), goal setting (satisfaction of achieving) joy (pleasure from making a difference) and so on.

Likewise, ‘negative’ could include guilt, shame, mean (feeling like they should / could give but won’t/can’t), social exclusion (feeling like they could be judged for not giving) or just sad (from hearing about victims the charities are helping and feeling bad about it)?

The bottom line is - are donors motivated by positives in feeling good when they give, or the negatives because they don’t want to feel bad by not giving?

The answer depends.

One of the theories discussed in donor management software experts Bloomerang’s article discusses using psychological appeal persuasion triggers.

A reader asks

How does the “warm glow” effect work alongside more negative emotions like those related to “scarcity” and “loss aversion?”

Here, ‘loss aversion’ refers to the notion that something will be lost if they don’t follow a particular decision.

According to a report by Austrian Economist Simon Gächter in 2009,

The pain of losing holds double the psychological power of the pleasure of gain.

Just let that sink in for a moment. People will literally respond more strongly if they think they’ll miss out.

Since then, scientists prioritise loss aversion in studying human behaviour, using it to help them understand motivation and how penalties can be more effective than reward.

Loss aversion is an important one as it plays on the human instinct to make decisions based on a loss / gain calculation – we do this automatically and constantly in our day to day lives. It also applies to motivators for charity donations.

A good example might be to think about environmental issues. Loss aversion relates to the fact that if we don’t act, deforestation will continue to cause mass extinction, the oceans will keep filling with plastic and ultimately our planet is going to die and us along with it.

Without action we will lose much, which serves as an excellent motivator for many to donate to environmental charities.

However, although loss aversion has definite power it should be applied carefully. Too much potential loss threat can result in hopelessness.

When negative threats and doomsday predictions become overwhelming, our counter-psychological response is to be the ostrich and simply bury our heads. Small changes are seen as pointless and you may as well do nothing.

Inaction is the anthesis of hope and we see countless examples of how humans can respond in this way, from war to genocide to the climate emergency.

‘Scarcity’ is another power tactic, used by millions of businesses every day. Scarcity works on the basis that something will run out, so you’d better be quick to get your order in.

As consumers, we’re used to constantly hearing about our ‘last chance to order this’ or ‘limited edition that’. You only need to look at the toilet roll chaos in lockdown to realise how quick people are to react when they think they’ll go without something.

Scarcity is directly related to want. When people want something they’ll act upon that urge.

In terms of charity, fundraisers can use want and scarcity as the winning combination for action. But first it’s about establishing what donors want.

Donors want children to be safe and can imagine saving lives with a vital vaccination.
Donors want animals not to suffer and so will help animal charities to help them.
Donors want refugees to be able to rebuild their lives and so will donate clothes, food and money to help them.

In the belief that they can help make change and that help is scarce, every donor can get that feeling of super power - the contentment and assurance that they’ve done the right thing. THEY become the scarcity.

Again humans are designed to want to pursue things that make them feel good, motivating them to take action, so fundraisers can remind them of what an incredible thing they’re doing and how most people don’t make the wonderful decision that they are today.

Learn more about how behavioural science influences charity donors

What can face to face fundraisers learn from negative persuasion?

General consensus shows that face to face fundraisers should always try to avoid categorising emotions as either positive or negative.

Research proves time and again that pressing forwards with positivity is what makes people want to donate - and keep donating.

Tempting though it is to make people feel guilty about their easier lives and situations, these type of one and done donors don’t usually return.

For long-term giving, donors must feel good about it. They must know their cash has impact. They must know their gift is important to the charity and the beneficiary.

The magic fundraising formula – and the best solution

Approach a passing stranger or knocking on a door to strike up a conversation about a charity should neither be all good, nor all bad news.

If all fundraisers do is tell donors how well things are going, it sends a clear message that donors aren’t actually needed.
If fundraisers report that it’s all terrible and awful, it lacks sustainability - or worse - triggers hopelessness.

Rather, fundraisers should aim to share how their charity is battling this very real and serious problem.

But it’s a problem that has solutions and those solutions are happening.

And to continue that great work and progress, they need incredible people with bold hearts and generosity to help.

Can the donor be that person?

Of course they can!

Once the regular giving has been agreed, it’s the charities job to keep donors well informed and happy to hear all the wonderful impacts of their giving.

A great example of this type of follow through is Client Earth – a legal charity that sues planet polluters.

Members are updated monthly with details of which corporations they’re taking to court and why. The donors can see direct results of their spend giving reconfirmation that things are happening and goals are being met.

Another example is FGM charity ‘Global Media Campaign to End FGM’ who write monthly to not only thank donors, but describe the latest campaigns and the ‘feminist warriors’ that are working directly with affected communities e.g. Team Tonkolili travel to hard-to-reach communities to cover FGM stories.

Members hear about African countries where they’ve made direct change, either by speaking and changing the minds of clerical leaders, educating about the impacts of FGM on maternal health and childbirth and wider topics such as child marriage and keeping girls in schools.

From positive statistics to stories to intentions and plans, charities can both inspire and motivate anyone that wants to see real change for young girls.

The four steps to fundraising success using positivity

For those on the front line of fundraising who work face to face with the general public, these four simple steps work wonders:

Share the problem

Firstly fundraisers must remember they’re informing about a problem that donors can help to solve. Make the problem easy to understand, real and relatable.

Aim to agitate

Using the word agitate suggests aggression but this type of agitate is simply to provoke the desire to act.

The idea here is to emphasise the seriousness of the problem, but not the size of it necessarily. Bring it down to foundational level of a someone that is directly affected by the problem you’ve already introduced.

We already know how powerful stories can be so tell the story of one of the beneficiaries of your cause.

Learn about the power of story telling in face to face fundraising

Sell the solution

This is where the donor gets to feel like the hero they can be!

Show how their decision to give makes all the difference and what impact that has on those in need. Without the solution it’s all problem and that’s not good.

Offer the outcome

This is the business end of the transaction – here the fundraiser should provide a crystal clear vision of what will happen if they give. E.g. This many girls can be saved from the cut, or this many homeless people can be given shelter on a cold night.

It’s imperative that donors believe they hold the key to change. Evidence of that is crucial for donors to continue wanting to give.

The bottom line is that fundraisers must continue to work towards joy and purpose – this is where the magic happens.

If you’re interested in a career as a professional fundraiser, hop over to our work with us page and see if it’s something that resonates with you - We’re always looking for the right people to represent our incredible charities.

Learn more