Naive and broad question: what should EA and EA orgs do differently to interest non-EA donors? (are there things you feel are frequently under-appreciated by EA actors?)
I have mentioned a few of these in my comments after @Adam’s post. What’s been your experience?
Inside EA, we are great at making a case through research, data, and impact, and traditional non-EA fundraising is known for its emotion-driven asks and responses.
I believe there is a sweet spot somewhere in the middle, but we haven’t it yet.
Your comments here and there make sense to me. I feel like it’s quite straightforward in theory, and harder to do in practice.
I do observe that some orgs are leagues above others in communicating, and I feel like the two important reasons for this are - the org’s willingness to allocate resources to professional communication work - the extent to which the org’s activity lends itself to communication (eg most orgs working with cute animals have an advantage here).
Naive and broad question: what should EA and EA orgs do differently to interest non-EA donors?
(are there things you feel are frequently under-appreciated by EA actors?)
Hi @GV
I have mentioned a few of these in my comments after @Adam’s post. What’s been your experience?
Inside EA, we are great at making a case through research, data, and impact, and traditional non-EA fundraising is known for its emotion-driven asks and responses.
I believe there is a sweet spot somewhere in the middle, but we haven’t it yet.
Your comments here and there make sense to me. I feel like it’s quite straightforward in theory, and harder to do in practice.
I do observe that some orgs are leagues above others in communicating, and I feel like the two important reasons for this are
- the org’s willingness to allocate resources to professional communication work
- the extent to which the org’s activity lends itself to communication (eg most orgs working with cute animals have an advantage here).