00:00:00
Jonah Berger: Vote by donating for
this cause or that cause, or
00:00:03
even for one specific cause.
Vote with your preferences. Do
00:00:06
you like this thing better, or
that? It increases people's
00:00:09
likelihood of donation,
00:00:10
and increases the amount
donated overall.
00:00:12
Dan Loney: How does this
potentially impact how an
00:00:14
organization has to think about
the process of trying to draw
00:00:18
out those donations from the
public? Is it any different for
00:00:21
a group, rather than an
individual?
00:00:23
- Welcome to <i>The Ripple Effect</i>,
00:00:25
the podcast that
takes you on a journey through
00:00:27
the minds of Wharton faculty.
00:00:29
I'm your host, Dan Loney, and in
00:00:31
each episode, we'll be diving
deep into the inspiration behind
00:00:34
the groundbreaking research that
Wharton professors have
00:00:37
conducted and exploring how
their findings resonate with the
00:00:40
world today.
00:00:41
- Well, charitable
giving can have a variety of
00:00:44
reasons behind it, but research
by author and Wharton School
00:00:47
Marketing Professor Joanna
Berger says that when there are
00:00:50
dueling preferences at play,
there's a potential for a higher
00:00:54
level of pro social giving. And
Jonah joins us right now to
00:00:58
discuss his work. Hi, Jonah,
great to have you back.
00:01:01
Thanks for having me.
00:01:02
- Talk about this component
of dueling preferences
00:01:05
and how important it is
to this process of pro social giving.
00:01:11
You know, we often—
nonprofits and even individuals
00:01:15
often ask others for help. They
say, "Hey, will you donate money?
00:01:18
Will you donate time? Please,
help us." Obviously, helping
00:01:22
these organizations, helping
these causes, is really
00:01:25
important, but people don't
always do it. And so one
00:01:28
question we had is, could there
be a way to encourage
00:01:31
individuals to give more?
Whether it's donating their time
00:01:34
or their money. And we were
inspired a little bit by
00:01:37
something that you may have seen
in your own life a lot more
00:01:40
recently, at least in the past
five years or so. Which is, walk
00:01:43
into a coffee shop, and rather
than simply asking you for tips—
00:01:46
you know, tip the barista if
they did a good job— the coffee
00:01:49
shop might say, "Hey, vote
with your tips. Do you like <i>Star</i>
00:01:53
<i>Wars</i> or <i>Star Trek</i>? Do you like
dogs or cats? Do you like— which
00:01:57
ice cream do you like better,
vanilla or chocolate?" And while
00:02:00
in that situation, it can seem a
little trivial, a little bit
00:02:02
silly, we wondered if similar
approaches might be helpful to
00:02:06
getting people to donate. What
these approaches do is they
00:02:09
don't only ask people for money,
they give people opportunity to
00:02:12
express their preferences. Hey,
you're not just asking me to pay
00:02:16
you for doing a good job, but
you're asking me which thing I
00:02:18
like better. And so we were
wondering, would people be more
00:02:21
likely to donate, to give, to do
things, if doing those things
00:02:25
was an opportunity to express
00:02:26
their preferences to others
and the world?
00:02:29
And so seemingly, by
having that component of self
00:02:32
expression, it probably builds a
connection between the two—
00:02:36
between the two elements that
are in the transaction.
00:02:41
Certainly. And I think the
bigger idea is, you know, people
00:02:44
love expressing themself, right?
Think about how much money
00:02:46
people spend on cars, clothes
and houses and other things that
00:02:50
will allow them to express their
identity. Similarly, people love
00:02:53
talking about their preferences,
right? People love talking about
00:02:56
where they went on vacation, or what
they bought or things that they
00:02:59
like. And so people have an
ingrained value of self
00:03:03
expression. And what our
research shows is that people
00:03:05
actually would be willing to pay to
get this opportunity to self
00:03:08
express. When asking people for
donations, for example, rather
00:03:12
just asking them to give money,
asking them to give money in a
00:03:15
way that gives them a chance to
express their preferences, vote
00:03:18
by donating for this cause or
that cause, or even for one
00:03:22
specific cause, vote with your
preferences. Do you like this
00:03:24
thing better, or that? It
increases people's likelihood of
00:03:27
donation and increases the
amount donated overall.
00:03:30
How does this potentially impact
00:03:32
how an organization
has to think about
00:03:34
the process of trying to draw
out those donations from the
00:03:37
public? Is it any different
for a group
00:03:39
rather than an individual?
00:03:42
You know, I think as
an organization, we are often
00:03:44
trying to get people to give
more. To give more time, to give
00:03:47
more effort, to give more
resources. But it's challenging
00:03:50
to get people to do that. And so
the simple takeaway from this
00:03:53
research is, look, if you're a
nonprofit trying to increase
00:03:56
donations, asking people to
donate and express their
00:03:59
preferences, giving them this
preference duel as a way of
00:04:02
doing it is a way to increase
donations. And sure, you can ask
00:04:06
about things that are related to
your cause. So if I'm the World
00:04:08
Wildlife Fund Foundation, for
example, World Wildlife Foundation,
00:04:12
"Which animal do you like better?" is
certainly relevant to my cause.
00:04:15
But you can also ask things that
aren't necessarily relevant to
00:04:18
your cause. You can ask people
which baseball team they prefer
00:04:21
or which sport they like
better, or which season they prefer.
00:04:24
People like expressing
themselves and so giving them
00:04:27
opportunities to do so can can
increase and create benefits for
00:04:31
companies and organizations.
00:04:32
You mention in the research about
00:04:34
identity playing an important
role in developing these pro-
00:04:37
social behaviors as well. How
does that occur?
00:04:41
Well, this is exactly what we're
talking about, right?
00:04:43
People like having particular
00:04:45
identities, but they also like
expressing those. They like both
00:04:48
expressing them to others,
signaling those identities. "I
00:04:51
want to show you that I'm a
sports fan or that I'm knowledgeable
00:04:54
about a particular topic." But
also even for themselves. Even
00:04:56
if no one else is going to see
it, I like expressing myself.
00:05:00
Because it helps me understand
and express who I am. And so
00:05:04
identity plays a big role here.
If we're not giving people an
00:05:07
opportunity to express something
that connects to their identity,
00:05:10
it's probably not going to work.
If we give people a
00:05:12
preference, a dueling
preference, between two things
00:05:15
they don't care about— I don't
know. You know, which— which type
00:05:19
of mulch do you like better?
Most people don't care about
00:05:22
mulch. I'm sure some people do,
but most people don't. They're
00:05:24
probably not going to vote.
They're probably not going to be
00:05:26
more likely to donate, because
it doesn't really have anything
00:05:29
to do with them. It doesn't
touch on their identity. But if
00:05:32
we ask them a question that
touches on their identity or
00:05:34
something they care about— which
political candidate do you like?
00:05:37
Which sports team do you prefer?
Are you a cat person or a dog
00:05:40
person? All those things are—
people— things that people care
00:05:43
more, that connect to their
identities. And so they're more
00:05:46
likely to pay to express those
preferences.
00:05:48
And so then, when
00:05:49
you're doing the field test on
something like— like tipping, I
00:05:53
guess it really is trying to
find out the best approach to
00:05:57
draw a response from the
consumer.
00:05:59
Certainly, you know,
00:06:01
if we're in Philadelphia, for
example, which is your favorite
00:06:03
team? You know, the Eagles or
the 76ers? But if we're down
00:06:06
in North Carolina, it's like, do
you like Duke, or UNC?
00:06:10
When we're out in California,
maybe it's, are you a Cal
00:06:12
fan or a Berkeley fan, are you
a Stanford fan? It's
00:06:15
understanding your audience and
the things they care about and
00:06:18
that are important to them, and
creating these opportunities to
00:06:22
make choices that allow them to
express them.
00:06:24
And so for those
00:06:25
organizations involved in this,
this is almost a little bit of—
00:06:29
you talk about always wanting
organizations to give. Well,
00:06:32
that's a little bit of the— kind
of the upping the ante
00:06:35
philosophy in terms of the level
of donations that may be—
00:06:39
may come your way.
00:06:41
Yeah. And I think, you know, when
we think about donations
00:06:42
there are two questions.
Are people going to
00:06:44
donate at all? And how much are they
gonna donate?
00:06:47
And— you know,
00:06:48
it's important to encourage both
of those things to occur. You
00:06:51
know, am I suggesting that for
huge gifts, for— you know,
00:06:54
million dollar gifts— giving
people the opportunity to
00:06:57
express their preference is
gonna play a big role? Probably
00:06:59
not, right? Somebody who's
giving a million dollars to a
00:07:02
cause is going to care a lot
about the cause. They're gonna
00:07:04
need a lot of time to think
about it. But for smaller
00:07:07
donations, whether it's tips to
the barista, or whether it's
00:07:11
supporting a social cause that
we care about, if I'm on the
00:07:14
fence about whether to donate or
not, or I'm trying to understand
00:07:16
how much to donate, connecting
it to my identity and giving me
00:07:20
opportunity to express that
identity
00:07:22
is going to make me
more likely to donate.
00:07:23
What do you think
this type of research means,
00:07:25
then, for charitable giving in
general, longer term?
00:07:29
You know, I think with any strategy, you
have to be a little careful in
00:07:32
that if it's overused, if people—
it's too familiar, where it
00:07:37
feels like it's not authentic,
it's— it's not going to work. And
00:07:40
so if every single nonprofit
starts using this particular
00:07:44
type approach, it's probably gonna
eventually— its effectiveness may
00:07:47
die out. That's— at least in the
short term, given that not
00:07:50
everybody's using this, it can
be a great way to boost things,
00:07:54
at least into the near and
immediate future.
00:07:55
- But would you expect
00:07:57
that because different people
would be involved in different
00:07:59
organizations, that there would
be some nuanced difference in
00:08:03
how individuals in different
organizations or different
00:08:06
groups would approach this?
00:08:07
Oh, certainly.
I mean, as we talked
00:08:09
about, it's got to be something
that relates to my identity. It's
00:08:11
got to be something that I care
about. And so when applying this
00:08:14
strategy, I need to think about,
well, who is my audience? What
00:08:17
do they care about? And how can
I pick a preference or a choice
00:08:21
that is relevant to that?
00:08:23
Jonah, always great to talk
00:08:24
with you and get your insight.
Thanks very much.
00:08:26
Thanks for having me.
00:08:27
You got it. Jonah
Berger, Wharton School
00:08:29
Marketing Professor.
00:08:31
- Thank you for listening
to <i>The Ripple Effect</i>.
00:08:33
We hope you found this
episode informative and
00:08:35
engaging. Don't forget to
subscribe and leave us a review
00:08:38
so that we can continue to bring
you the best insight
00:08:41
from the Wharton School.
