Chugging – street fundraising – turns members of the public into prey, releasing adrenalin that triggers fight or flight instincts. It'll take a little more imagination to create behaviour change
It's a beautiful day and as I walk down a busy street, I'm feeling good. I'm in control. But then I get the feeling that I'm being watched, that I've been caught in a predator's gaze. Looking around, I see her – a chugger. I begin to weigh up my options (walk faster; pretend to be on the phone; find another way across) when the worst thing possible happens. We make eye contact. Now confrontation is inevitable, as are the lies I must invariably tell to get out of this situation:
"Sorry, do you have two minutes?"
"No", I answer.
Her senses are sharp and she can tell I am uncertain, so presses on: "Have you heard of Unicef?," she asks.
"Yes".
She flips open her folder and an African child's eyes stare up at me: "Have you considered supporting us?"
"Ehh, yes, I'm a member," I say without thinking.
"We don't have members," she shoots back.
Defeated, I mutter: "Ahh. Ok ... I gave some money once …"
I'm sinking now, my internal peace eroding as I begin to feel morally inferior. The chugger represents the good in the world, and has a UN logo to prove it. I represent the moral decline of my society. We have become such selfish bastards that we don't even want to stop and listen, let alone care about anyone else's troubles.
City dwellers across the global north can identify with that experience. Our days are littered with these interactions in which we have just three options: the first, say you support other NGOs and feel bad it's a weak lie. Second, show interest in the subject matter but not in giving funds, and hope the chugger loses interest. Or third, surrender your bank details. You'll feel good about none of the above because you've simply done what was expected of you. However you slice it, you lose.
So what can we learn from this? For me chugging – or street fundraising – represents three things that are wrong with much of development communications. 1. It presents a negative and pessimistic world view, and mostly uses negative and stereotypical imagery. 2. It triggers action out of guilt, and does not motivate or educate. 3. It lacks creativity.
Indeed, a lot of development communications is about pursuing target audiences with negative pictures, and with messages that tell people what to do or think. An exaggerated version of many fundraising messages says: "The world is falling apart, you should care, we (with the help of some celebrities) are on the case, but we need your money."
Of course fundraising is necessary, but there is a flipside to this type of messaging: the repeated negative portrayal of communities does not make us care more, but less. It makes us feel bad and we stick our heads in the sand. The reason? Being confronted by a chugger releases adrenaline, and adrenaline is not what you want to stimulate if you want to motivate people to give, think or change behaviour.
What is needed instead is the release of endorphins. When we laugh and when our curiosity is sparked, endorphins makes us relax, and help lower our personal defences. Humour and creative curiosity also invites people to think for themselves. I don't like it when people tell me what to think, so why should I ask others to?
Last year my organisation, SAIH, made a music video 'Africa for Norway', a spoof that questioned development messaging. The success of that video helped me realise that although an issue is really important, it doesn't have to be wrapped up in a serious way to make its point. Breaking free from conventional communication techniques isn't always easy but the benefits can be great.
Development communicators can learn a thing or two from the fun theory, an initiative started by Volkswagen and based on the idea that making something fun is the easiest way to change people's behaviour for the better. For example, instead of saying: "Work out more," a 'piano staircase' was installed at a metro station in Sweden. Doing so increased the use of the stairs by 66% .
There is reason to be optimistic that NGOs are starting to get and use this approach. In Spain a concept called 'Bet for food', developed to support the growing use of food banks in Catalonia, capitalised on the competitive passion of football fans and led to 210,000 kilos of food collected in just one month.
US NGO, Mama Hope, has also developed 'Stop the Pity' campaign, a fundraising strategy based on dignity and fun. They have had massive outreach while turning negative stereotypes of Africans on their head. New and different approaches create curiosity, which is important in order to entice people to learn more about the issues.
And the 'fun theory' concept can be extending from fundraising to campaigning. It's a simple logic: if we're smart, there will be no need to hunt people down in the streets. They will come to us.
Sindre Edland-Gryt is communication advisor at, Norwegian Students' and Academics' International Assistance Fund (SAIH). He tweets as @sindreolav
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, sign up free to become a member of the Global Development Professionals Network
