|
ANALYTICALS: GOOD TO THE LAST OBJECTION
Two questions.
Question #1: When
was the last time you sat down and listed all
the things that people suspect or misunderstand
about your organization?
Question #2: Do you
depend on statistics to make your case? Maybe
you're keen to send out an annual appeal letter
lavishly buttered with service stats? "Our
dedicated staff of eight plus our 27 volunteers
delivered 1,892 evening meals to 1,230 addresses
in six counties, seven days a week, 52 weeks a
year." The McDonald's approach: 22 trillion
served.
If your answer to
the first question is "never," and your answer
to the second question is "certainly," then it's
time you learned more about "the Analytical,"
one of the four personality types you'll
encounter in every audience - in every brain, in
fact, including your own.
[The other three
personalities? The Amiable. The Bottom-Liner.
The Expressive. More about these in upcoming
newsletters. Let me just say this: speaking to
all four personality types is ESSENTIAL to
successful communications. But I digress.]
The Analytical is an
information glutton who feasts on documentation
and statistical evidence. Sounds good? Not
really. Because the other thing you should know
about the Analytical is this: he/she is bad at
making decisions.
My point? I have
two.
First: Don't waste
too much time on Analyticals. Analyticals
represent just 25% of your audience - and
they're the 25% who can't make up their minds.
(There is one important exception to this rule:
answering objections. See below.)
Second: If you hope
statistics will persuade people to give your
organization money, prepare to be disappointed.
Statistics are weak persuaders. They aim for the
head, not the heart, and leave donors cold.
Focus on the other
three personality types. They are 75% of your
audience. They are just fine at making
decisions. But - warning - they will NOT be
moved by a wall of statistics. Statistics are
unemotional (not good for the Amiable), abstract
(not good for the Expressive), and too easily
misinterpreted (not good for the Bottom-Liner).
But let's return to
the Analytical and the issue of answering
objections.
Here's how the
Analytical part of your mind thinks.
A recent survey
asked donors to guess how much charities spend
on administration (salaries, fundraising, etc.).
Donors were extremely pessimistic. They guessed
that 60% of every dollar they gave went to
administration. I was amazed: even though these
donors were willing to give their hard-earned
money, they remained more than a little cynical
about the good intentions (or efficiency,
anyway) of the charities they supported. Guilty
until proven innocent, was the essence. Imagine
what these donors might give, if they knew that
the charity actually only spent 15% on
administration and 85% on changing the world for
the better?
Why were they so
sceptical? Has everyone lost their faith in the
basic honesty of others? Nope. (Well, actually
they have, according to the research in a
bestseller called BOWLING ALONE. But that's
another discussion, best savoured with beer.)
Doubts and
objections are just garden-variety human nature
at work. You don't think our species became so
grotesquely successful by being gullible, do
you? Doubt played - and continues to play - a
vital role in species survival.
Be prepared. Any
communications - your newsletter, Web site,
brochure, and certainly your fundraising appeals
- will awaken the Analytical response in
readers, especially in people who don't know you
well.
And the Analytical
part of your audience comes well-stocked with
suspicions and doubts (read: misconceptions)
about your organization.
How much of every
dollar that is donated to a food bank actually
ends up feeding the hungry? Is that
self-satisfied community foundation really just
a club for rich folks? Do all the fancy theories
behind a charter school truly cause kids to
learn better? Does that in-prison counselling
service end up coddling criminals? Are zoos
really just "animal prisons" by another name?
You get the idea. Your only defence is to answer
objections early and often.
HINT: One of the
best ways I know to get doubting Analyticals on
your side is with testimonial. The Jewish
Rehabilitation Center for Aged of the North
Shore (MA), a nursing home, fills the margins of
its brochure with reassuring soundbites like,
"We never considered anyplace else for our
parents." The National Parks Conservation
Association (DC), which raises some of its
income through guided tours, runs in its
catalogue signed notes from recent customers: "I
probably learned more on this trip than any I've
ever been on. The guides were exceptional,
patient, even-tempered, knowledgeable and FUN."
Got testimonial? Use
it.
[http://www.aherncomm.com/includes/copyright.htm]
|