Latest / Marketing Automation with Fexingo: HubSpot, Marketo, and Automated Customer Journeys / Why Marketing Automation Forgets Your Favorite Charity
Transcript
- Lucas: So Luna, let me start with a number that's been bugging me: a study from a few years back found that the average nonprofit keeps only about nineteen percent of its first-time donors. Nineteen percent. Which means more than four out of five people who give once, never give again. Luna: That's brutal. And I'm guessing marketing automation is supposed to fix that, not make it worse. Lucas: Right, and in theory it should. But here's the specific case that got me thinking. I was helping a small charity that works with food banks, and they had a perfectly good marketing automation tool—let's call it a leading platform, you'd recognize it. They'd set up a beautiful welcome email for new donors, a thank-you with a photo of a family, a link to a survey. And then… nothing. The workflow just ended. No follow-up, no second ask, no update on the impact. Just silence for twelve months, until the next year-end appeal. Luna: So the automation literally did its job and then stopped. It's like the system was designed for a one-night stand, not a relationship. Lucas: Exactly. And the kicker is, the team thought they were done. They checked the box in the platform, said 'automation is set up,' and moved on. But a single-touch workflow isn't a journey, it's a transaction. The donor gets one nice moment, and then the brand—or the cause—disappears. And in that void, another nonprofit with a more persistent automation will swoop in. Luna: So what's the fix? Is it just 'send more emails'? Lucas: No, and that's the trap. More emails without a strategy just gets you unsubscribes. The fix is building a real nurture track—a series of touchpoints that progressively deepen the relationship. Think of it as a lifecycle that starts with the first gift and extends over the next twelve months, with triggers based on behavior, not just time. Luna: Can you give me a concrete example? Like, what does that actually look like in the automation tool? Lucas: Sure. So let's say someone donates one hundred dollars on March third. That triggers a workflow. Day zero, they get the thank-you email, personalized, with the founder's signature. Day three, if they've opened that email, they get a short video from a food bank manager talking about what a hundred dollars buys. Day seven, an email asking them to share the campaign on social—not to give again, just to spread the word. Luna: And if they don't open the first one? Lucas: That's the trigger-based part. If they haven't opened by day five, the workflow branches: they get a different email, with a different subject line, maybe 'Did you see this?' And if they click, they go back to the main track. If they still don't engage, they drop into a lower-touch sequence—maybe a monthly impact digest, not a hard ask. The key is the system is always watching, always reacting. Luna: So the automation is actually… automating. Not just firing off a preset blast. Lucas: Exactly. And it's not about being pushy. It's about being present. The donor gave once, and the organization should act like that gift was the beginning of a conversation, not the end. The math is simple: a repeat donor is worth way more over their lifetime than a first-time giver. Some studies show the second gift is the hardest to get, and once you get it, the retention rate jumps to over sixty percent. Luna: That's a huge jump. So why does it seem like so many organizations—not just nonprofits—still get this wrong? Lucas: Because it's easier to build automation for acquisition. New leads, welcome emails, that's the shiny part. Retention is unglamorous. It's ongoing, it's less measurable in the short term, and it doesn't show up in a campaign report as a spike. But it's where the compound returns are. Luna: I mean, it's like dating, isn't it? Anyone can get a first date. The real skill is getting the second one. Lucas: That's exactly it. And the tools are there. In the platforms we talk about on this show—the big ones, HubSpot, Marketo—you can build these workflows with visual builders, set up conditions, branch logic. It's not a technical challenge. It's a strategic one. And this isn't just for charities. Think about any subscription service, any gym, any retailer. The 'second date' is the repeat purchase, and automation should be designed for that. Luna: I know we're in the weeds here, but this actually connects to something bigger. There's a real human cost when automation goes wrong. Lucas: Say more. Luna: Well, a friend of mine gave to a disaster relief fund after a big earthquake a few years ago. She got the thank-you, and then nothing. She felt like the donation just vanished. She didn't give again. And she told me she'd rather donate to organizations that keep her in the loop, even if it's just a quarterly update. Lucas: That's the thing—people want to feel their contribution mattered. And automation is the tool to do that at scale. But it has to be done right. It reminds me of something we've been talking about on the show: if these marketing conversations have sparked something you've actually used in your work or your side project, the best way to keep this going is to support the show directly. You can do that at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It's a small gesture, but it helps us keep the episodes ad-free and independent. Luna: Yeah, I think a lot of listeners have told us they've built actual workflows after hearing episodes like this. It's good to know the show is making a difference. Anyway, back to the donor journey—you mentioned that the second gift is the hardest. How do you actually get them to that second gift? Lucas: Good question. The second gift often comes from a specific ask that's tied to impact, not just a generic 'donate again.' So instead of, 'We need your support,' it's 'We have a matching grant this week, and every dollar doubles.' Or 'We have the chance to fund a new van for the food bank, but we need to raise ten thousand dollars by Friday.' Luna: So it's about giving them a reason that feels urgent and tangible. Lucas: Exactly. And the automation should recognize when someone is most likely to give again. For example, if a donor clicks on a link in an email about a specific program, that's a signal. You can set a trigger: if they visit the 'food bank' page twice in a week, then send them an email specifically about the food bank's needs. That's behavioral targeting, and it works. Luna: And what about the donors who never open anything? Is there a point where you just stop? Lucas: You can, but you should also think about re-engagement campaigns. A year after the gift, if they've gone silent, you can send a 'we miss you' email with a survey: 'Why did you stop giving?' The responses can teach you a lot. And sometimes people come back—maybe they changed their financial situation, or they just forgot. Automation can keep the door open without being annoying. Luna: I like that. It's not about hounding people, it's about being thoughtful with data. Lucas: Right. And there's a bigger point here, beyond nonprofits. If you're a marketer at any company, look at your own automation. How many of your workflows are built for the first sale? How many for the second? The ones that are missing are the ones that build lifetime value. And that's where the ROI is hiding. Luna: So, give me a takeaway that someone could implement this week. Not in a year, this week. Lucas: Audit your automation. Pull up your workflows and count how many have a 'yes' branch and a 'no' branch. If most of them are linear—everyone gets the same emails—then you're missing the behavioral layer. Start with your highest-value segment, the one-time buyers, and build a simple follow-up track that lasts ninety days. You'll see the impact within a quarter. Luna: That's manageable. And it doesn't require a huge budget, just some thought. Lucas: Exactly. The tools are already in your stack. It's about using them to their full potential. And the donors—or customers—will notice. They'll feel seen, and that's worth more than any discount. Luna: That's a great note to end on. Next episode, maybe we can talk about how to avoid the automation fatigue that comes from over-triggering. Lucas: Oh, that's a good one. There's a fine line between relevant and creepy. Let's save that for next time.