Goodo
Goodo is a concept for a digital subscription platform which shows people the tangible, real world outcomes their donations have for the organisations they support.
How might we help charitable organisations take advantage of digital platforms so they can provide a more engaging experience to donors?
Summary
I was inspired to look into what some of the challenges were for charities in New Zealand after seeing the effect Covid-19 had on their ability to fundraise and the increased need for support.
Findings from my research and interviews highlighted the importance of tangible outcomes being communicated to show donors their money was going to have a real impact. They also wanted to help people in their own backyard and support organisations who were transparent and reputable.
With this in mind, I created concepts which met these needs in different ways before settling on a digital, subscription based platform. This concept allowed users to see the difference they were making over time and choose how much they wanted to donate to a variety of causes based on what each amount would mean; such as restoring someone’s sight or providing a safe night for vulnerable families. This format also encourages more regular spending which has a number of benefits to charities.
I framed these ideas into a solution where users could browse and compare the impact each amount would have for different organisation, selecting contributions around these outcomes.
Conducting usability and validation testing, I explored and refined the way this would work within the wider eco system as well as the language and flow through the platform.
Problem Definition
Initial research into this space identified that the one of key challenges all charities face is irregular and insufficient funding. They rely on the generosity of others to survive and the inability to accurately forecast revenue is a pain point for most organisations.
In times of economic downturn and financial hardship, this issue is compounded for some organisations where they are disproportionately affected by an increased need for their services.
New Zealand also has one of the highest density charity to population ratios in the world, so the level of competition is high compared to other countries. This makes fundraising all the more difficult, with people wanting to support a charity being inundated with choices.
Research
I conducted secondary research and interviews to understand what drives different behaviours and influences someone’s decision to support an organisation. I was interested in understanding this from a local perspective as well as insights from larger studies.
Secondary Research Findings
2. Demographics
“Studies show that the more money people have, and the higher in social class that people feel, the more money they donate to charity.
… Looking at the relationship between wealth and generosity, research suggests that lower-income households donate a greater proportion of their income to charity as compared with higher-income households – once again suggesting a complex relationship between wealth and giving.” (Whillans, 2016)
1. Regular giving statistics
Ongoing direct debit donors in New Zealand tend to be:
More likely to be female than male
Less likely than average to be aged under 25 years or 75+
Significantly more likely to have household income of $100,000 per annum +
More likely to have a tertiary education or at least 7th Form. (Statistics NZ)
3. Motivations
“Considerable evidence exists indicating that givers are neither pure altruists nor pure egoists. Rather, the evidence suggests that givers are impure altruists, motivated by both altruism and warm glow.” (Crumpler, Grossman, 2008)
“Don't reward your donors with pens or calendars - Reward them with the opportunity to see the specific impact that their generosity is having and to connect with the individuals and communities they're helping.”
— Elizabeth Dunn
Interviews
I conducted 8 interviews with people who regularly made donations as well as those who had been involved in fundraising themselves in a professional capacity. I mapped each participants comments to identify commonalities in thoughts and actions to create the basis for a design brief.
Interview Insights
1.
Participants donated a certain value based on its tangible benefit because they want to feel like their donation was going to result in something meaningful. For example, restoring someone’s sight or providing a safe night for a vulnerable family.
4.
Participants chose a charity based on their personal values and decided to contribute regularly because they felt they could afford to help those less fortunate.
2.
Participants supported local charities because they want to help someone in their own backyard and support causes they feel a personal connection to.
5.
Participants supported charities who were reputable and had great transparency over their operational costs because they want their donation to go straight to those who need it.
3.
Participants often chose to make donations online because they preferred the convenience and could get a receipt for tax returns.
Design Brief
Show people the impact their donation has
One of the key insights I wanted to explore further was that people felt more inclined to donate in larger, more regular amounts when there was a material outcome these contributions had for the organisation they were supporting. People feel more motivated to make a contribution because the end result is tangible and real.
Highlight reputable, local charities
People wanted to support local charities and help people “in their own backyard” and would only support reputable organisations where they knew their money would be put to good use.
Harness the benefits of online payment methods
People preferred to make donations online because it was more convenient and meant they could easily keep track of their receipts to file as part of their tax return.
Territories & Concepts
With these findings and principles in mind, I created a range of solutions that would fulfil these criteria.
Territory 1. Online Subscription Service
Concept : A platform where users subscribe to support different charities and can track their donations over time to see the impact their small contributions add up to. Offers convenience and visibility.
Territory 3. Recycling x Corporate Social Responsibility
Concept: Deposit on recyclables paid by retailers. Consumers can bring items to a recycling station where the deposit is refunded and they select a charity for the proceeds to go to.
Territory 2. Social Media Fundraising Campaign
Concept: Social media campaign where people participate in challenges based on fundraising goals that correlate to a tangible outcome for the charity they’re supporting. Provides extra motivation to meet the goal amount and everyone shares in the feel good factor.
Territory 4. Physical Interaction / Service
Concept: A digital, socially distanced version of street collection campaigns where users can tap their card on the way out of the supermarket or petrol station to donate different amounts on different points.
Chosen Concept
I combined different aspects of the different approaches that best fit the brief to create the concept for an online platform where donation amounts were displayed as a tangible impact the user could track over time and adjust/ manage through a dashboard.
While conducting research, I had identified that digital channels were a powerful tool in helping prevent loss of revenue during lockdown due to the inability to host large events and street collection days. This impacted my decision to choose a concept that would harness the advantage of an online option.
Paper Prototypes
From my selected concept, I identified the key features and screens I wanted to develop, then mapped out the user flow with paper prototypes of the screens to be prototyped.
Overall User Flow
Dasboard Iterations
Impact Calculator Layouts
Charity / Impact Picker Flows
Usability Testing
I thought about the key things I wanted to find out through testing and consolidated them into 3 key questions. From these questions, I devised the following tasks I would test with users
1. Meet the product / Unboxing
What is important for the user to know when signing up for this service?
How will they know this platform is right for them?
Task - ‘Think out loud” Comprehension, describe what Goodo does and key benefits, expectations etc.
3. Sign Up
What order would the user expect to give certain details and how do I keep them engaged in the process?
Are they able to find the information they need to decide/choose from the causes and impacts listed?
Task - Complete sign up process, find more info on certain charities, refine and filter options
2. Dashboard
What will the user be checking on the dashboard?
How will they monitor their impact and use it to make supporting the causes they care about meaningful and simple?
Tasks - Describe outcomes from their donations, Support another cause, Change payment information and frequency, Generate receipts and locate financial reports.
Testing Insights
Insight 1.
Users wanted to get a clear picture of how this system works within the overall ecosystem. They also wanted to be clear on the benefit it provides to those charities in order for them to feel comfortable supporting them this way.
Insight 2.
Users wanted to be able to explore a variety of options within one screen so they could easily compare the different impacts
Insight 3.
Setting up payments needed to be clearer in terms of how often they would be charged. Users also wanted to be sure they could make changes and adjust payment amount / frequency easily
Visual Identity & Design System
Final Prototype
User Dashboard
Home Page
Sign Up Page
Select Causes & Impacts
Payment Registration
Further Development
Throughout this process, I identified a range of different additional functions that could be added in the future.
Goodo Debit Card
Social Challenges
Financial Reporting
Reflection
As a first attempt at running an end to end design process for a digital platform, overall I am reasonably happy with the end result. There are a few things I would have done differently with the benefit of what I know now. I learned about the importance of prioritising the most important features to ensure the platform can function as needed without putting so much effort into the ‘nice to haves’ at the expense of getting the basics right.
Feedback from my testing participants also highlighted just how much everyone thinks and acts differently. I started off implementing changes each participant would suggest or when they didn’t understand what something meant I would suggest different wordings that made sense to them. But as soon as I would change it for one participant it would often then be challenged by another. The way each user makes sense of what they see on the screen varies so much that sometimes it felt like it was impossible to ‘get it right’. I learned here that it was important to stick to the proven principles and as the saying goes, you have to learn the rules before you can break them.
