The Psychology of Giving: What Motivates People to Support Community Causes

Knowing why people dedicate time, treasure, and talent to help others is not just a psychological observation, but a practical foundation for creating sustainable and effective community support programming. Every nonprofit has that moment of momentum when everyone comes out of the gate strong – but why does this level of supporter enthusiasm fizzle out in a few months? Why do some needs get overwhelming support while others that are equally interesting but presented at another time find minimal feedback?

Essentially, people give and volunteer for reasons that are not as apparent and easy as listening to needs and deciding to support. People give for psychological and social reasons that are beyond altruistic behavior. In fact, these reasons are so nuanced that they may not even be evident to supporters themselves. Furthermore, they may be founded upon tenuous situations and presentation. Successful community-based organizations learn how to maneuver around these psychological appeals to provide dynamic outreach and engagement. People do not respond the same way to all initiatives – they have minds of their own.

Connection

We’re social beings, and the effort to help others only becomes more feasible when we feel some level of connection or commonality. Therefore, it’s no wonder that disaster-relief funding for communities with which we are geographically located is more responsive than an ongoing need for a faraway community – especially when the faraway need may appear greater. We give more to what we know or can somewhat relate to as opposed to something we have no context to understand.

Obviously, geographic connections make the most sense, but they can also rely upon experiences, demographics, similar values, etc. For example, a parent who had to scrape by to pay childcare costs may want to support other families who are currently in that position. If an individual receives help from someone in a vulnerable situation, he/she may want to give that assistance back down the road to someone who finds his/herself in similar trouble.

The story becomes personal, transforming an abstract social problem into a relatable human experience. When potential supporters can visualize themselves or their loved ones in similar situations, the psychological barrier that often precludes giving is diminished significantly. That’s why so much of fundraising attempts rely more upon the plight of one individual versus dollar values surrounding many needing help.

Social Norms

People pay attention to what others in their communities are doing – especially those whom they admire and hope to be like. Giving becomes increasingly popularized when it becomes socially visible and valued, championing others to get involved. This explains why so many early donors are heralded in critical fundraising phases. This explanation also parallels why public acknowledgments of contributors are successfully well-received.

In addition, community identity plays a primary role in sustainable giving. When giving support for local needs becomes how people define the character of their community, giving will be more predictable over time. Towns that acquire reputations for being caring, supportive venues become self-fulfilling as new people move into town and adopt existing patterns.

However, this sentiment assumes that giving must always be socially visible; otherwise, people might feel left out or incapable of contributing in other ways. Organizations that work best learn how to champion involvement yet remain flexible with alternate means of contribution relative to individual resource possibilities.

Control

People want to feel like they have a level of control over what happens with their money. If giving feels like it’s going into a black hole or cannot champion sufficient change, people will not want to participate (this is why disaster relief fundraisers are much more popular than long-term poverty-based fundraising – which feels insurmountable) – it’s easier to make positive changes when immediate changes take place versus vague incidents down the road.

Organizations that tell contributors what they do with money tend to grow better relationships with repeat contributors – increasing their scope of giving through time – as they appreciate being kept in the loop. A practical approach champions a good faith effort that supporters have the right to see expenditures at work over time for clear results.

Organizations should work with suppliers like Bags in Bulk who specialize in nonprofit needs as a way to ensure best practices for donations so contributors feel like their money goes further, so more can happen for the beneficiaries.

Emotional Satisfactions

Realistically, unless you’re a true altruist, any giving either publicly or privately champions emotional/societal benefit on behalf of the contributor. Whether it’s feeling good about providing good feelings or gaining social approval from others or championing connections from volunteer work with like-minded individuals or providing expert contributions – understanding this spirit doesn’t go as compromise shows organizations how to make such endeavors all the more meaningful.

Different people appreciate different levels of satisfaction related to charitable efforts. Some want hands-on opportunities while others want behind-the-scenes access. Some want to learn new skills while other advocates want to showcase established ones. Providing multiple means of participation caters to various personality profiles who appreciate charitable involvement differently.

This goes for recognition as well – some people want their names publicized; others prefer their efforts to remain low-key. The last thing any organization wants is for people to get offended if a certain level of recognition is given when it goes directly against contributor preferences.

Circumstantial Nuances

People and charities go in waves based on life’s circumstances relative to finances and personal beneficence. For example, young families may not have a lot of money but have the time and energy to volunteer vigorously. Empty nesters might have ample money but little energy capacity at an older age. Retirees might just look for a challenge through which their previous work-related skills can finally benefit an appreciatively charitable cause.

Seasonality becomes important in giving – it makes the most sense at the year’s end for tax reasons or holiday spirit – but organizations that succeed find optimal timing for their mission/causes throughout the year independent of holiday sentiment. For example, back-to-school looks good for certain educational initiatives; spring looks great for others.

In addition, economics play a significant role; during recessionary periods, people may have less money (and yet maybe this is where they have more time). Understanding this dynamic chart helps organizations manage expectations in case someone anticipated greater results.

Sustainable Appeal

People must recognize that initial feelings of enthusiasm can wane quickly but can be managed if giving appeals become sustainable through consistent connection efforts over time. It’s crucial for any kind of organization to connect benefactors with what they need without treating them like a funding source and instead fostering mutual community betterment.

Supporters appreciate consistent communication about how their efforts transformed over time – from feedback providing avenues for minor details – to major events in which supporters see their dollars at work. When donors can reconnect their cause with making a difference personally applicable, they’ll appreciate investing even further.

Success comes from an awareness approach people give for myriad reasons within which there is no right or wrong answer as long as they effectively champion what’s immediately necessary for the community doing the giving in respectful and efficient manners.