Effective fundraising can deliver real value to donors. For example, it can enhance public reputation. This external identity has tangible economic value.250

But fundraising can do more. It can also deliver transcendent value. This comes from a private, internal identity. It comes from a moral identity. Moral identity reflects how well one’s life matches one’s ideal values.251

Primal origins: Morality as a gift

An internal moral identity may seem intangible. It may feel far removed from the rational world of natural selection and game theory. But it does connect. How? It connects in this way. Morality is a code of conduct. More precisely, it’s a pro-social code.252 Pro-social actions benefit the group. Thus, acting morally is like a gift to the group.

This gift may be simply an individual helpful act.

But it can help the group in another way. It can support a shared pro-social code.253 The code dictates that group members help each other. This mutual concern makes the group stronger. Thus, supporting a pro-social code makes the group stronger. It acts like a gift to the group.

This support can even include punishing code violators. The punisher incurs cost in order to enforce a code. But the code benefits the group. Thus, costly punishment can be a form of pro-social action.254 (In the primal-giving game, this is called indirect reciprocity.255 A world of indirect reciprocity strongly encourages sharing.)

The reinforcement may be positive or negative. But the effect is similar: Supporting a pro-social code acts like a gift to the group.

Primal origins of moral identity: Similarity

When are such gifts to the group a good idea? It might depend on one’s similarity with the shared group. In Hamilton’s simple math,256 a gift is genetically helpful when

My Cost < (Their Benefit X Our Similarity).

The trade-off weighs the cost of support against the benefit to the group. The value of this group benefit depends on genetic similarity with the group members. However, the natural origins of code support go beyond this simple math.

Primal origins of moral identity: Alliances

If people aren’t related, Hamilton’s math doesn’t work. Yet, sustainable giving is still possible. It is possible through reciprocal altruism. Biologists model this using the primal-giving game.257 In the game, each player can give to the other. A gift helps the other player more than it costs. But both players must decide to give or not before knowing what the other will do.

When behavior is hidden, reciprocity is not possible. (We can’t respond to an action that we can’t see.) Without reciprocity, not sharing is the only logical move. That’s why visibility is so important. If sharing is invisible, no one shares.

This choice is individually rational. But everyone ends up worse off because no one shares. Is there a way around this problem? Is there a way that leads to reciprocal sharing even when it is invisible?

There is. Suppose a group of players adopted an internal moral code:

When playing with fellow group members, they would act as if they were being watched.

Each player would give up rational opportunities to cheat fellow group members. They would share with each other, even when their actions were hidden.

The result? This “moral code” group would succeed. It would outperform other groups.258 Being part of this group would be more valuable than being part of a purely rational self-interested group. In natural selection, being part of a strong, mutually cooperative group is an ideal scenario.

Thus, playing the game as if one is being watched – even when actions are hidden – can be a superior strategy for the group. This gameplay matches the desire for internal moral identity. It means one’s private actions match one’s ideal public values. It means acting the same whether the actions are hidden or not.

Primal origins of moral identity: Alliance problems

This “moral code” group would outperform others. It works. But there’s a problem. It works only if other group members actually follow the code. To be stable, these groups must exclude cheaters. They must exclude those who claim they will follow the pro-social values, but then don’t. But how is this possible if cheating is hidden?

One solution is to use a visible substitute for the hidden action. Group members can express their commitment to following the pro-social code using costly signals. In religious groups, a costly signal might be a special diet or dress. It can also be a gift or sacrifice such as burning valuable goods.259

Increasing group member monitoring also helps. Over time, an accumulation of costly signals – including unknowingly observed behavior – means something. It predicts the person will consistently follow the moral code in the future. A group of such similarly committed people is strong. It excludes those who aren’t internally committed to the group’s moral code. It excludes cheaters.

These game-theory concepts lead to practical suggestions. For example, maintaining a long history of commitment to a code is a particularly valuable signal. Thus, reminders of one’s historical commitment to such values encourage continued support for the values.

Following the moral code is also strategic if other group members support these values. Rejecting such values risks being subjected to costly punishment. It risks exclusion from the cooperative group. Thus, reminders that other group members support these values can also increase support for the values.

Even when hidden, supporting the moral code can still make sense. It makes sense because it helps other group members. Moral values are pro-social.

But helping the group can also help the individual. Being part of a strong, mutually cooperative group is valuable. (In natural selection, such alliances can be key to survival.) Thus, reminders of how such moral values benefit one’s group can encourage support for the values.

Story origins of moral identity

Primal game theory explains the power of supporting a pro-social moral code. But what about practical reality? What about fundraising?

Fundraising can match the game. Giving can support a pro-social moral code. It can enhance the donor’s internal moral identity. How? The steps are already familiar.

The “one big thing” in fundraising is to advance the donor’s hero story. The hero story (monomyth) cycle is,260

A box and arrow diagram where "Original identity" links to "Challenge" links to "Victory" links to "Enhanced Identity"

Or, as a loop,

A circular diagram where "Identity" (bottom left) links with an arrow pointing to "Challenge" (top middle) which links with an arrow pointing to "Victory" (bottom right) which links with a backwards arrow pointing back to "Identity"

Previous chapters show how this cycle can enhance external, public identity.261 These same steps can also enhance an internal, private, moral identity. They can move the donor from his original moral identity to an enhanced moral identity. In both cases, the process starts with the donor’s original identity.

Original identity: Reminders

Most giving supports some moral value. It might be faith or compassion. It might be freedom or education. The options are endless. But when does such giving enhance the donor’s internal moral identity? It depends.

The first question is this: How much are these values part of the donor’s ideal moral identity? If the values don’t matter, the gift won’t help. If the values do matter, then the gift can help. It can help the donor’s life match his ideal values. Thus, the value of the gift depends on the importance of the supported values.

But this importance can be fluid. Reminders can influence it. This shows up in experiments using religious reminders. In one, showing people the words

more than doubled gifts to others.262 In another, organ donations increased if the solicitor wore a Christian cross.263 Another found a “Sunday effect”: Religious people were more likely to support charity, but only if they had visited their place of worship on that day.264 In another, mindfulness meditation more than doubled gifts to the United Way.265 Thus, spiritual reminders encourage donations.

But this is not just about religious values. The right setting or reminder can strengthen a connection with any values. In experiments, reminders make moral values more mentally accessible.266 They bring the values to the top of the mind. This, in turn, increases actions that match those values.267

Reminders strengthen the importance of the moral value. A gift that supports that moral value then becomes more attractive.268 The reminder helps link the gift with the donor’s ideal moral identity. This connection makes the rest of the story more compelling. It makes the gift more attractive.

Original identity: Socratic inquiry

Reminding people about desired values underlying a gift works. But even more powerful is getting them to talk about it.

In experiments, people who first describe their connection with a value act differently. They become more likely to act according to that value.269

Expressing such an opinion once works. Expressing it multiple times in different ways works even better. This repetition increases commitment to the belief.270 It increases actions that match the belief.271

This also works in fundraising. Getting people to express their opinion about the importance of the underlying cause or values works.272 In experiments, this increases

It works in experiments for charities in

Answering questions about the importance of underlying values or causes works. It works by highlighting the internal importance of those values. And the more times people do it, the more impact it has.273

Original identity: Donor’s story

The right setting can provide values reminders. Socratic inquiry can do the same. Either way, focusing on values can increase giving. If.

Such reminders work only if the moral value is part of the donor’s ideal moral identity. If it isn’t, then this won’t work. The gift might advance some moral value. But it doesn’t advance the donor’s moral value. Thus, the gift won’t be compelling.

To be compelling, the challenge must be rooted in the donor’s desired moral identity. Otherwise, neither meeting the challenge nor winning the victory will enhance the donor’s identity. A compelling gift requires each part of the story cycle. It requires identity, challenge, and victory.

For example, suppose religious faith is not part of a donor’s identity. Then a gift that supports that value won’t help. It won’t enhance the donor’s internal, moral identity. It won’t be compelling.

Different values work for different people. One experiment tested a gender difference.274 It pointed to findings that women “consider relationships to be more central to their sense of self.”275 It tested reminders of five relationship-centered moral traits: compassionate, kind, caring, friendly, and helpful. These reminders increased giving for women, but not for men.276 The researchers suggested that a different set of moral traits might work better for men.277

The “one big thing” in fundraising remains the same: Advance the donor’s hero story. This means advancing the donor’s story. A story about values that aren’t part of the donor’s identity isn’t the donor’s story. A gift that advances those values won’t help. It won’t advance this donor’s story.

Challenge: External threat

A story about values central to the donor’s identity is the donor’s story. But it’s not yet a hero story. The hero story cycle starts with original identity. It can start by connecting to values that are part of this identity. It can start by highlighting the importance of these identity connections. But to advance the story, this identity must then connect to a challenge.

A compelling challenge responds to a threat or opportunity. A threat to one’s moral values can be external or internal. An external threat arises when an outside force attacks the moral value.

An external threat is common in political cause fundraising. One experiment added an external threat to a political appeal letter. Doing so nearly doubled the share of people making gifts.278 The added phrases included,

Other experiments show similar results for threats related to issues in

Showing that an opposing political candidate is ahead in fundraising also provides a threat. And it also increases donations.281 In another example, online donations to the ACLU were typically about $5 million per year. Then President Trump took office. These donations shot up to over $120 million per year.282

Most hero stories involve responding to an external threat. In fundraising, external threats can make a huge impact. They can help create a more heroic giving opportunity.

Challenge: Internal threat

A challenge to moral values can be external. But it can also be internal. An internal threat suggests a gap between,

This gap motivates action to fix the problem. It motivates action to improve internal moral identity. A gift can help do this. Thus, highlighting this gap can motivate a related gift.

Some experiments create this kind of internal threat. The threat highlights a gap between desired and actual moral identity. This increases guilt. But it also increases donations. In experiments, this happens after

These situations create a gap between desired and actual internal moral identity. A gift helps close that gap. Thus, creating the gap motivates the gift.

In another example, combining a charitable gift with a product can sometimes increases sales. But not always. It works if the product creates guilt.287 For example, it works for a hot fudge sundae. It works for chocolate truffles. But it doesn’t work for laundry detergent. It doesn’t work for a spiral notebook.

Again, the concept is the same. If consuming the product creates a gap between desired and actual identity, the gap can motivate a gift. If the product doesn’t create a gap, it doesn’t motivate a gift.

Challenging one’s loyalty to an important value can also create a threat. It implies that there is a gap between desired and actual moral identity. For example, mentioning a resented stereotype that a group is un-generous does this. In experiments, doing this causes group members to give more.288 Highlighting the alleged gap motivates the giving.

Promising victory

The effective challenge responds to a threat. But it must also promise a victory. This victory can address the threat to the donor’s values. For example, the previous appeal letter threat that nearly doubled giving also included the phrase,

“But we can stop them if we work together.”289

That threat to the moral value was external. It was from an outside force. Thus, victory comes from defeating that outside force.

A victory over an internal threat is also possible. The gift can reduce the gap between actual and desired internal moral identity.290 Giving can fix the problem. It can prove commitment to the supported values.

Promising the donor’s victory

Not all victories are compelling. The compelling victory must be tied to the donor’s identity. It must also be the donor’s victory.

This is where charities often go wrong. Their natural tendency is to claim the victory as theirs. The victory enhances their own identity. (This matches the administrator-hero story.)

But this is not as compelling for the donor. This victory is not tied to the donor’s actions. It doesn’t enhance the donor’s identity.

In an experiment, one e-mail focused on the charity as the actor. For example, it stated,

“The fashion industry has let these women down, but [the charity] won’t.” 291

Another version added the donor as an actor. It instead stated,

“The fashion industry has let these women down, but you and [the charity] won’t.”

The odds of people clicking on the link to learn more were 27% higher for the second message. When the donor delivers the victory, it enhances the donor’s identity. This makes giving more attractive.

The second message increased the odds of responding even more, by 40%, among women. Why? In that case, the challenge connected to both

Connecting to more of the story cycle makes the request more compelling.

Delivering victory: External threat

A challenge is more effective when it promises victory leading to an enhanced identity. But how does the charity actually deliver on this promise?

If the moral challenge is external, the goal is to resist the external foe. Victory comes from the impact of the gift. The charity can confirm this impact. It can confirm this victory. How?

Confirming the victory makes the next challenge more compelling. The hope of “Yes, you can!” is compelling. But it fades unless followed by, “Yes, you did!”

Delivering victory: Internal threat

If the moral challenge is internal, the goal is different. The goal is to reduce the identity gap. Victory moves actual internal moral identity towards desired moral identity.292

Confirming the gift’s impact can help here, too. It can show that the donor is an effective, successful, victorious, and valuable member of the community.

But internal victory can come even without impact. The victory comes simply from the making of the gift. It can verify that the donor is generous, faithful, committed, and sacrificial.

The gift itself may even be destroyed. Such offerings are described in the Iliad,293 the Odyssey,294 and the Pentateuch.295 The act of giving shows allegiance to the desired values regardless of impact.

This type of victory is internal. But it can still be validated by others. The charity can confirm that the act of giving supports the desired values. Gift reporting, gratitude, and compatible publicity for the gift as an expression of the moral value provides this confirmation.

Conclusion

Enhancing the donor’s internal moral identity is powerful. It can tap into the deepest sources for sacrificial motivation. But delivering this transcendent value need not be mysterious.

Enhancing either private or public identity uses the same process. Both internal moral identity and external public reputation grow through the same steps:

A box and arrow diagram where "Original identity" links to "Challenge" links to "Victory" links to "Enhanced Identity"

The process is familiar. The answer, once again, is simply this: Advance the donor’s hero story.

Next up:

The Fundraising Myth & Science Series Book IV

The Socratic Fundraiser:

Using Questions to Advance the Donor’s Story