Separating

Fact from

Fiction The true benefits of testing

Mark Stewart

Greenpeace Australia Pacific

Discussion of test results

“Community Building” results

Current “best practice”

Fundraising ask

1. Campaign Pushes

2. Acquisition of donors

through TM conversion

Percentage of NEW sign ons,

leaving email and phone

Community building triggers

Paid promotion – not so good

You tube – link to social media

distribution

Facebook – sharable

A particular moment in time

Supported by mainstream media

Public support/outrage

Follows the news cycle

Fair-weather friends

Online Conversion the Obama effect

500 tests over the campaign

Overall 49% increase in

conversion on donation page

161% increase in email sign

up

Biggest factor to conversion

Faster page loadings!

14% increase in conversion

Get specific – make it clear

Putting the donor in the picture

Donation page

5% increase

How are

Greenpeace

testing these

things?

Tax Appeal results

Tested landing pages

Return form

Ask letter

Language – more direct

Suggested amounts – per

segment

Control donation landing page

Test A landing page

Test B Landing page

Results – conversion to

donation

% change to

control

Control Test A Test B

% Conversion - -3.2% +5.0%

Avg Gift - -18.3% +21.9%

After 1 week……

Direct Mail test on gift amount

Test DM cash gift ask x 2

latest gift

SegmentRR %

change

Income %

Change

Avg Gift %

Change

TEST: Cash - <12mths - $5-$499 – 50+ or unknown -7.3 16.8 25.4

TEST: Cash – 13-24mths - $5-$499 – 50+ or unknown -1.8 40.8 43.3

TEST: Active RG – Signup more than 9mths ago - $5-$499

– 50+ or unknown-20.9 5.9 14.8

Higher ask (x2) or last gift

When looking at existing RG – impact was less and opt out spiked

Donation Form

DONATE FORM - TIGER APPEAL Old template - 21.4% conversion https://www.greenpeace.org.au/secure/appeal/end-of-year-2013/

New template - 21.7% conversion https://www.greenpeace.org.au/appeal/end-of-year-2013/

This test is still running and more data is needed to find a clear winner. At the moment it seems like the new style design doesn't convert significantly better than our current template. We intend to run more tests on these designs this year to increase conversion.

Old template -

21.4% conversion

New template -

21.7% conversion

But not everything new is better

SHARKFINNING PETITION

Old template - 77.4% conversion https://www.greenpeace.org.au/action/?cid=56

New template - 72.8% conversion https://www.greenpeace.org.au/action/?cid=49

1. Our old template is the clear winner.

It converts 4.6% better. In real terms, the old template

would have given us around 1,000 extra signatures on the

petition had we used it from the start.

2. The mandatory opt in did not suppress conversion

significantly.

We still have around the same number of conversions

regardless of the opt in style. This means the mandatory

proposition should increase new leads generated from

our cyber-actions without compromising overall petition

numbers.

In conclusion, the old style template converts better.

However, the design itself looks ugly and feels dated. We

intend to rebuild this design to make it look more modern and

up to date and then re-test.

Old template - 77.4%

conversion

New template –

72.8% conversion

Next Steps

Load times

More testing – more adventurous

Text

Pictures

Timing

Save payment info – for easier repeat

User Testing – not volunteers, or GP

family

System factors

Email system – manage fast

turn around and workflow

management

Continue to use Optimisely

Database interaction

Improved reporting

Thank you

Question?