4 Ps

Product: There are multiple products to correlate with varying levels of need to help:
• Annual giving
• Chairs
• Rooms
• Major Gifts: Highly customized product. Tailored to each donors “needs.” High contact. Recognition … board knows its limits on these. E.g., would not give naming rights to the Gold Room for less than a million dollars
Price: Product Line Pricing strategy. Tie to dynamic variable "I need to help women" the amount that i need to help translates to willingness to pay translates to "price" for fundtraising? What about the fact that personal income and other economic factors impact size of a gift?

Promotion: Marketing Communication Objective = Image or Behavior. Thinking image b/c “distribution” could pick up the call to action – response device included with promotion is an implicit call to action; discussion with a governor or gifts officer is the call to action. Perception objective b/c the target already considers helping women to be important

Place / Channel: Considering the channel strategy variables, the Martha Cook fundraising channel should be:
Depth: Relatively shallow – in fundraising its important to be close to your donors. Also given that most of MCB’s donors are heart loyal its important to keep close control over the message that they hear. The “product” is also high on credence attributes which also supports tighter control
Breadth: The number of “outlets” should also be relatively limited – keeping the message consistent in human interactions will require a well-trained group that is on message. The “outlets” would include: direct mail pieces approved by the board and fundraising committee, interactions between fundraising targets and fundraisers – the building’s development officers, board of directors, and a small fundraising team.

Depth: The channel needs to be highly integrated

The channel I envision looks like:

Relationship Building interaction with fundraiser (x 4-5) -> The “ask” -> Potential donor makes decision to give -> gift is given to a fundraiser or building representative -> gift is turned over to University development for processing -> building rep/fundraiser thanks donor -> as appropriate organization recognizes donor beyond the thank you.

This channel is relatively short and the building is in control of the steps where there is interaction with the consumer. Gift processing should be outsourced to the University to take advantage of its economies of scale in transaction processing and to avoid building a duplicate asset – especially a non-strategic one where the building lacks a core competence.