[WMNL Documenten] Evaluatie fondsenwerving 2010/2011
Documenten van Wikimedia Nederland
documents op lists.wmnederland.nl
Wo Feb 23 13:57:47 CET 2011
Ook beschikbaar op
Wikimedia Nederland (WMNL) in 2010/2011 was one of 11 so-called ≥category-1
chapters≤. This means that in its own geography, it could take control over
the sitenotice on all Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) projects during the
fundraiser and route potential donors to a landing page that allowed
donations exclusively to WMNL. It has been given this status by the WMF in
the understanding that WMNL would be seen as a charity per late 2010.
Current developments are that WMNL has been granted the desired ANBI status
retroactively per January 1, 2010. This allows WMNL for example to make
gifts to the WMF without taxation.
1&action=edit§ion=2> ] Results (tentative)
In 1.000 Euro Nett result Gross result Bank costs Thank you Fundraiser Other
2009-07 / 2010/06 192 200 7 0,5 0 0
2010-07 / 2011-06 311 346 12 1 18 6
* Increase of result of 80% in Euro and 70% in USD compared to previous year
(2009/2010), after a huge increase compared to the year before that
* Both in absolute terms as relative to internet users as relative to GNP
and relative to last year very good results.
* Much better than expected, but further improvement is possible considering
the inadequate communication and tools available regarding measurements and
analysis of donations and click-through rates. Improved manuals and
accessibility would leads to more productive newcomers (i.e. chapter
fundraisers without extensive wiki experience). Especially the access to
comparative data for the banners and landing pages was not as expected, and
communication regarding the access to adapting the sitenotices ourselves was
1&action=edit§ion=3> ] Time path
* High increase in donations with the new landing page. This is roughly an
increase of 30-40%.
* There was an error in the landing pages, where the banners for non-nl
projects were accidentally deactivated for a week. This cost ~50% of our
donations, considering the 100% increase after this was fixed. Better tools
would be required to make further analysis of this language-effect.
1&action=edit§ion=4> ] Task list
* SM: omleiden www.wmnederland.nl/nieuwsbrief & aanmaken nieuwsbrief lijst
* Uitsplitsen contactgegevens
* Versturen bedankjes brief
* Versturen bedankjes e-mail
* Checken & uitzetten evaluatie
* Opstellen voorlopig rapport voor WMF
* Contacting, contracting and setting up Ogone
1&action=edit§ion=5> ] Banners, landing pages and payment system
* The current system works, but has an inferior connection to the
administrations, and therefore should be replaced. A new system has been
selected, but has to be installed and activated. This new system integrates
iDEAL and PayPal environments and click-through analysis.
* Considering the dependency of the WMF for click through data and other
statistical information, we should consider hosting the landing page
ourselves next time. The processing time of requests should also be reduced
significantly that way (i.e. from 1,5 month to 1 day).
* Improvement is possible on the layout and (mono/multi)linguistic character
of the landing and processing pages.
* More variety in the sitenotice, with the help of better analysis systems,
should be possible, reducing the donation fatigue.
* Now we have the ANBI status (Dutch charity status), a lower transaction
rate at PayPal should be possible, lowering transfer costs for donations.
1&action=edit§ion=6> ] Internal communication
* Communication within WMNL: Communication was largely unstructured and on a
need-to basis. The freelancer reported on a weekly basis to the responsible
board member. More structure in internal communication could be helpful to
identify bumps in the road at an earlier stage.
* Communication with the WMF: During the weeks before the fundraiser, our
contact person at the WMF changed a few times. This lead to a few
* Communication through several layers of employees is not the most
effective way of reaching results. At the chapter side, there was a feeling
that bureaucracy was prohibiting effective communication and fundraising.
* Communication through Moushira was not always as smooth as would be hoped.
Questions and requests were often answered with large delay times. We had to
wait for a simple A/B test to give results for over a month - every time
facing a promise for results the next day or so.
* Because of the inferior (communication) infrastructure both internally and
especially with the WMF regarding the test data, the freelancer was not able
to perform at full potential.
1&action=edit§ion=7> ] Press
* There was some press attention in the Netherlands for the fundraiser, but
in general there was not much interest until after the fundraiser was
finalized and it could be a side-topic for 10 year Wikipedia. It is unclear
how realistic it is to expect increase in press attention in The Netherlands
about fundraising next year. With a more professional organization it should
at least be possible to reach full potential.
1&action=edit§ion=8> ] Time path
* Everything started, like every year, too late. Especially because of the
unclearity surrounding the fundraising agreement for 2010/2011 until
October, there was hesitance on how and how much time and money should be
invested in the success of the fundraiser.
* Talks about the fundraiser agreement should start in May, agreement should
be signed in the Summer.
* Personnel for the fundraiser should be hired in a much earlier stage, and
should be therefore more effective.
1&action=edit§ion=9> ] Opportunities for improvement
* Tooling regarding statistics
* Payment system
* Communication (quantity, speed and quality) with the Wikimedia Foundation
* More accessible and usable banner system
* Planning by WMNL
* Improved reporting (automated and more detailed)
------------- volgend deel ------------
Een HTML-bijlage is gescrubt...
Meer informatie over de Documents