Optimize Your Fundraising with Tim Kachuriak

Welcome to Brainfluence, where author and international keynote speaker Roger Dooley has weekly conversations with thought leaders and world class experts. Every episode shows you how to improve your business with advice based on science or data.

Roger’s new book, Friction, is published by McGraw Hill and is now available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and bookstores everywhere. Dr Robert Cialdini described the book as, “Blinding insight,” and Nobel winner Dr. Richard Claimer said, “Reading Friction will arm any manager with a mental can of WD40.”

To learn more, go to RogerDooley.com/Friction, or just visit the book seller of your choice.

Now, here’s Roger.

Roger Dooley:     Welcome to Brainfluence. I’m Roger Dooley. One of my favorite kinds of marketing is nonprofit marketing, and that’s because you can’t just sell features and benefits the way most product and service marketers do. Instead, you are encouraging your donors or volunteers to engage in what is essentially an irrational behavior. There’s no tangible benefit from making a donation or volunteering for an organization, but still, just about everybody does that at times. So joining us today is Tim Kachuriak, who’s going to explain a little bit both about why people donate and then also what he’s learned from actually researching how various organizations solicit donations. Tim, welcome to the show.

Tim Kachuriak:    Roger, great to be here. Thanks for having me.

Roger Dooley:     Great. Well, Tim, first explain what it is that you do.

Tim Kachuriak:    Sure. So NextAfter is really three things. We’re a fundraising research lab, we’re a consultancy, and we’re a training institute. And I’ll explain a little bit about how each of those three different pieces work. In our fundraising research lab, we do two kinds of research, both forensic research, where we’re looking and analyzing large amounts of data across the nonprofit sector, and what we’re looking for in the data is patterns that lead to opportunities to really unlock greater digital fundraising performance.

And the way that we do that is by doing these mystery donor studies. So very simply, we’ll go out and we’ll subscribe to hundreds of different organizations at the same time. We’ll monitor everything they send us, every email, every voicemail, every text mail. I’ve got boxes of direct mail stacked up to the ceiling in our storage room here. And then we analyze those pieces of correspondence, and we wait for the organizations to ask us to make a financial gift. And when we do, we respond by giving a gift as small as $20, as large as $5,000. And then we continue to monitor how these charities communicate with us once we’ve crossed from being a casual visitor, to subscriber, to donor.

And Roger, it is absolutely fascinating. What’s really interesting is just how varied the communication is from organization to organization. And when we do these mystery donor studies, what I’m always interested in is I can have two organizations that are very similar in terms of their size, their scope, their area of focus, and they’ve got two radically different communication practices. So when we see that, we say, okay, if organization A is doing one thing and organization B is doing something completely different, how do know what works best? What’s going to actually generate the best results?

So we take some of the most interesting insights we glean from the mystery donor studies and we use it to power the other kind of research we do, which is more applied research, where we’re testing, we’re running experiments online, because the web is the greatest behavioral laboratory that’s ever existed. We can launch two different versions of the same different appeal and see what actually truly works. So we have documented about 2,500 different experiments across a whole range of different online communication vehicles, and we’re starting to just scratch the surface about what works at inspiring people to give.

Roger Dooley:     Yeah, well, Tim, it sounds a little bit like my friend Peter Ramsey, who has done something like that in the banking industry, where as a study that was, I found particularly brutal, but yours sounds pretty brutal, too, he signed up for a new account at 12 different banks and financial institutions, and then engaged in a variety of transactions, like transferring money, making deposits and such, and documented every aspect of the experience and then compared them. And like you, he found startling differences between organizations. Even though they’re all providing the same basic service, there were huge differences in their processes, how long it took to get an account operational. I mean, the best banks were doing it in two days. The worst was in something like 35 business days. That’s a month and a half of real time. And then organizations wonder, well, why aren’t we doing that well?

But I want to get into some of the details of what you’ve learned from these various studies, Tim, but explain your reasoning as to why people donate. Why do people engage in this behavior at all?

Tim Kachuriak:    Well, as you mentioned in the introduction, it’s a very irrational behavior. On paper, it doesn’t make sense. I’m going to give my money, and the benefit’s really going to be experienced by somebody else that I may never meet or interact with. So it doesn’t make sense, which means that there’s some sort of deeper motivation inside of all of us. And there’s a lot of really interesting research that’s being conducted on compassion.

One of the most interesting studies I’ve seen is Dr. Karen Wynn at Yale. She does this thing called the baby lab, and she does experimentation and research with infant children. So they have zero capacity for language. They’re under 18 months old. And what she’s finding is that compassion seems to be something that’s hardwired inside of us, right? This whole idea of connectedness and trust and relationship and really caring for other people is something that’s almost innate inside of us. So what are the reasons why people give? We’re not quite sure yet, but it seems to be something that’s deeply rooted in what makes us human.

Roger Dooley:     So now one study that you published is about the state of nonprofit donation pages. And I loved that one of your key takeaways, in fact, number three, was that there’s too much friction, because that’s what I’ve been focused on for the last few years, with my book Friction. And it’s interesting to see that, not surprising perhaps, that not only does that occur in the commercial world, but that exists in the nonprofit world, as well. So tell me, backing up, not just to jump straight to that conclusion, tell me a little bit about that study.

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah, I mean, it was a very simple idea. So let’s just go and actually give gifts to organizations online. So go to their website, click the donate button, and go through the process and document every single step of that journey. And it’s probably not too surprising, but friction is an epidemic in the nonprofit space.  One of the great things I love about people like you that are researching this stuff and decoding ways to make things easier for people as they go through the process of completing a transaction, all of that stuff has direct relevance for our work in the nonprofit space.

But the problem is, is there’s not a lot of people speaking into that space that are bringing some of those ideas. So that’s a big thing that we try to do at NextAfter, is we try to go and find what’s happening on the bleeding edge of neuromarketing or decision science, and how do we actually kind of contextualize that in a way that would make sense for nonprofit giving?

Roger Dooley:     Well, I think the non-profits often, obviously there are some very big well-funded nonprofits, but many of them are not huge and not very well-funded. They can always use more money. And even in commercial organizations, I see friction problems and it’s not that there isn’t, you know, they may have user experience people, customer experience people who know what to do, but there’s organizational barriers to getting that done. It’s like, wow, we’d have to change the website for that, and that’s too costly. We’ll do it next fiscal. Or that’s a compliance thing that has to be there. And nobody pushes back, and it’s hard enough in commercial organizations that often can really see a bottom line impact when they improve that experience. But in nonprofits it’s got to be doubly difficult, simply because often they can’t afford the expertise that companies can, and they’re relying often on perhaps even donated services in some cases. So it’s got to be a real challenge.

Tim Kachuriak:    It’s a huge challenge. And the biggest challenge is the same challenge it is for marketers, right? The challenge is, is that I’m the marketer, I’m not a customer, which means I have a completely different perspective of what it is that my customers, my donors are going through as they’re going through this process. And one of the things you talk about is that there’s sometimes good friction that can be added into a process. Actually, one of the things that we find is that if you go to most donation pages for most nonprofit organizations, they have very little words on the page.

But we know that less than 30% of the people that click the donate button and go to the donation page actually complete the transaction. Why is that? Well, it’s because they’re not adequately sold on the reasons why they should be giving a gift right now in this instance to this specific organization. So one of the ways that we actually add friction back into the process is by putting more copy on that page, more words that actually express the value proposition for giving a gift today to support this work.

It’s rather unintuitive when we show one of our clients, like here’s the new page we’ve created and there’s all of this text that is showing up before they even get to the donation form. They’re like, “Oh, I don’t know. I mean, people don’t read when they come to the website, do they?” And I’m like, “Well, of course they do. People read what’s interesting to them. And sometimes that’s your donation page, and they have a different perspective than you have, and you have to help them understand what you see from the other side of the table.”

Roger Dooley:     That’s really interesting, because that is a difference than what you would see on a, say an eCommerce website, where normally once you click that buy button, you want nothing in the way of that transaction completing. So that’s why Amazon has one-click ordering. You make that decision and boom, it’s done. You don’t get a second chance, unless you go to cancel the order. There’s no thinking, nothing involved in the process, and of course they’re wildly successful. But you’re finding that when people click that donate button, they’re still in many cases not a hundred percent sure they want to donate. So I wonder if there’s different wording or something for the donate button, or just adding that text seems to work.

Tim Kachuriak:    I liken it to fishing. So if you go fishing and you hook a fish, right? You don’t put the pole down and expect the fish to swim in of its own accord. I mean, that would be crazy. You keep the tip up, and you keep cranking all the way through until you’ve actually landed the fish inside the boat. And so when somebody clicks on the donation page, they haven’t made all the different decisions they have to make.

So for example, one of the things that nonprofits struggle with is that we don’t have a fixed price. Our customers determine our price. They determine how much they’re going to give. Do I want to give $10, $20, or $1,000 to support this organization? So that’s one decision they have to make. Do I want to make this a one-time gift or a recurring gift? That’s another decision. How do I want to pay? Do I want to designate my gift in some way? There’s all these decisions that people are faced with when they get to the donation page. So that’s the place where friction is exasperated. If we don’t have balancing value that’s being communicated all the way through that process, we lose people along the way.

Roger Dooley:     Yeah, that’s interesting. So I guess one of the things that I’ve written about in the past is anchoring, where people are influenced by the first number they see. So it’s pretty common for nonprofits to have levels of donation, and the very first one is 5,000, even though their average donor is somewhere in the $50 range or something, because that ends up increasing the average donation. Or does it? If you tested different anchors and different ordering, you start with the, I’ve always advocated starting with a big number for that anchoring effect, as opposed to starting with $50 or starting with $10, $50 and working your way up to the big numbers. So I’m curious what insights you have on that from your tests.

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah, we’ve done a lot of experimentation around what’s called the gift array, which is like the number of different values that you put on the form, and the ordering of those specific values. And what we find is actually going from a lower number to a larger number and then having a blank field at the bottom tends to generate more conversions. It tends to reduce the average gift size. But if the organization is really focused on trying to get as many donors as possible into the organization, that’s usually a more preferred strategy when it comes to that.

Another test that we’ve done is simply around kind of trying to make the decision easier. They’re presented with like $10, $25, $50, $100, picking what is the most popular value and highlighting it in some way, much like you would kind of saying this is like the preferred model that most people choose. It seems to actually increase the conversion rates, as well as increase the average gift size if you didn’t have that in place there. So there’s things around that that we found to be pretty interesting.

Roger Dooley:     Right. I think that most popular strategy works a lot. I see it in people selling software as a service online. They typically always have like an enterprise version that almost nobody buys, or maybe nobody at all buys that, that’s really expensive. They start with the free or incredibly cheap version. But the one that they want to sell is always highlighted, and it implies that this is what other people are doing. Sort of a social proof thing. This is most popular, because that makes people comfortable knowing that, okay, well, I’m not really sure, you know, if it’s donation, am I going to seem cheap? Or am I really kind of giving too much? Maybe I should give money to somebody else, give some of it to somebody else. That gives them that reassurance that okay, this is the norm. This is what other people do.

Tim Kachuriak:    That’s exactly right. What you just verbally say right now is what is happening inside the mind of the donor when they’re presented with this page and all these different decisions to make. And so if we just don’t give them any sort of guidance to go through that decision process, we leave them to their own kind of devices, and oftentimes they say like, “I don’t really know how to choose. I need to go talk to my spouse.” There’s all these different things that could cause them to say, “I’ll come back later.” And we know, Roger, that once they’re gone, they’re gone, baby. They’re not coming back.

Roger Dooley:     Right. So from that donation page study, we talked about friction, and what are a couple of the other key things that you found that seem to be an issue across a large number of sites or organizations?

Tim Kachuriak:    Here’s a real simple one. So even though every single donation page is secure, it’s got the https and it’s got the encryption and the little lock up in the browser address bar, that’s not enough assurance. So when people go and they’re giving money, they have this kind of defensive posture, as much as they have this offensive posture. The offensive one is like, “I want to go do good. I want to go support this work. I’m going to be part of this organization and what they’re trying to accomplish the world.” But then they’re also like, “Man, I don’t know, is this organization going to use my money appropriately? Is this a secure transaction? Can I really trust that the money is going to go to where I hope it’s going to go?”

So some simple things that we’ve tested to try to reduce some of that mental anxiety that people are processing, right at the point where the donation form is, we’ll put a little box, we’ll shade that area of the actual form, we’ll simply put like a little padlock in the corner. And just by doing that can actually increase conversion rate by 15% or more. So when we’ve run experiments, we’ve seen that that one little outcome is increasing in conversion, just by reminding them visually that this is in fact a secure transaction. To overcome the I guess the anxiety of is this organization going to use the money in the right way, we’ll use all of like the seals and the banners and the badges from these third-party watchdog organizations, like CharityWatch or GuideStar or Charity Navigator. And we’ll put the little seal of approval, which is, again, just reassuring the donor that their funds are going to be used in an appropriate way. So simple little visual cues like that can sometimes make the difference between getting a gift and not.

Roger Dooley:     Well, that’s another similarity to conventional eCommerce, where particularly, I think it may be a little bit less so now, like if you’re buying from Amazon, you don’t really look at that, because you’ve already placed a hundred orders with them, but if you’re dealing with somebody new, people do look for those trust symbols, as they call them. And often I don’t think the visitor is even processing exactly what that trust symbol means. It might mean that this domain is secure, that there is some kind of encryption for the transaction or who knows what, but it gives them that assurance. That’s pretty interesting that merely the lock symbol can increase donations. That’s brilliant. That’s a great takeaway. And I’m thinking that might even work for eCommerce companies, as well, just some little visual indicator like that, if they’re not a well-known brand like an Amazon or Walmart or something of that nature.

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah, absolutely.

Roger Dooley:     How has the pandemic affected fundraising, Tim?

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah. Interesting that you ask that question. So right when everything started to shut down in the middle of March, because we do all these mystery donor studies, we have this thing called the aggregate donor inbox, where we have hundreds of different charities constantly send us messages on a daily basis. And so I went to our CTO, and I said, “How can we use all this data that we’re actively collecting to try to answer some of the questions that we’re getting every day from our clients, which is what are other organizations doing? Are they still communicating with their donors? Are they still asking? Are they mentioning COVID or coronavirus or pandemic in their communications?”

And so we constructed this coronavirus research center, which is a series of different data visualizations that answer all of those questions. And even more, we opened up the aggregate donor inbox, where people can come in and they can go through and actually click on any of the messages and be able to view them, just to get a sense for what other organizations are doing. And that’s been super, super helpful.

The second part of the data that we actually exposed to folks is that we have about 90 charities that have shared their Google analytics data. So we’re able to see what’s happening. Are people still visiting the website? Is traffic up? Is it down? What’s the engagement levels like? And then for about 43% of those organizations, they actually have really good eCommerce tracking data embedded inside of Google analytics. So we were able to open all that stuff up, and what we found is that actually online giving is up 30% year over year. The number of transactions has been going up significantly each month since March. And a lot of that is being really driven from email. So if you look at the sources of traffic and the sources of transactions, email seems to be the lifeline for many charities in this time.

So how has it affected nonprofit giving? Well, a lot of it is being substituted into the digital space. So we’re getting that, I guess that shove into the digital transformation that we really need.

Roger Dooley:     Well, I guess these days you don’t have too many in-person fundraisers. For a long time, people could not even go to a place of worship, or many are still avoiding places of worship. Even if they’re open, they don’t want to go, if they happen to be vulnerable or perhaps have somebody vulnerable at home. So I guess it’s natural that some of that might shift online, although you’ve got sort of conflicting factors. They are probably some people who are doing okay, who perhaps feel a greater need to help others. But then there are those folks who have been negatively impacted by the pandemic, who have lost their job, have had their hours cut, or are in some other kind of financial stress. So have you been able to differentiate any of that, or is it just more of a general trend that their online giving is up?

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah. I mean, what’s interesting is that a lot of folks that, I mean, there are certainly folks that are hurting financially, that have lost jobs or are out of work or have been furloughed in some way. But for those that are still working, a lot of the data suggests that people actually have increased I guess disposable income during this time. So they’re not going to Disney World vacations. They’re not going out to eat every single night. People are staying home, and what we’re seeing because of this increased solidarity, that everybody’s kind of in the same boat here together, and they’re hearing these stories of people suffering, we feel that it’s actually increasing people’s desire to help. The people that still have jobs, that still have sources of income, are feeling this, I guess this compassion and this desire to really want to help those that are not experiencing that. So that’s been some of the things we’ve been seeing from the data we’ve been tracking.

Roger Dooley:     Let’s talk a little bit about gifts. The other day, I got an envelope from some nonprofit, I forget which, that had address labels, personalized address labels in it. Now, this is a strategy that’s been used for I guess 50 years, at least, maybe even significantly longer than that, and apparently for some organizations, still works. But then you’ve also got gifts that come when you make a donation. So if you support your local NPR affiliate, maybe you’ll get a coffee mug or a hoodie or something from them. I’m curious, what is your take on gifts? The first kind establishes reciprocity, reciprocation, where they give you something. You didn’t expect those address labels.

And now, I think at least some people, I mean the science shows that people feel more obligated if someone has done something for them in an unsolicited way, where they’re not saying, “I’m going to give you X if you do Y for me,” the way the NPR gifts work. So I’m curious, what’s your take on the two kinds of donations. And do you have any interesting findings from your research?

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah, absolutely. You know, reciprocity is a very, very powerful opportunity, especially as it relates to digital fundraising and digital marketing. So one of the things that we like to encourage the groups that we work with to do is to say, what content do you have that you could repackage, repurpose, turn into something that represents a significant value to the people that would be your likely online donors? So what could that be? That could be in the form of an ebook. It could be in the form of an online course. It could be in the form of a personal self-assessment. But the idea is, is the content that they provide gets to enable the potential donor to experience the value proposition of the organization first, and then they’re able to have an opportunity to give after the fact.

So I’ve got a great example of how this works, and since we’re both in Texas, I’ll use a Texas example. Years ago, I was working with the Texas State Historical Association. I’ve seen in some of your talks you mention how people in Texas love Texas. And so one of the resources that the Texas State Historical Association publishes is this Texas Almanac. So every two years, it’s this big phone book size book with everything about Texas. And they would offer that as a followup premium for somebody that became a member of the association. So if you become a member at a certain level, you’ll get this big phone book thing sent in the mail.

And I was in their offices one day, and I was looking around and I saw this CD case, and it was the Texas Almanac on CD-ROM. I said, “What’s a CD-ROM, man?” And they’re like, “Oh yeah, you put that in your computer. Ha ha ha.” But I was like, “Well, what do you do with these things?” They’re like, “Well, we sell them.” I said, “Okay, cool. How much does it cost?” It’s 19.99. Okay, great. How many have you sold in the past, say 12 months. 15 units. Okay, so that’s about $300 in revenue, and I said, “Okay, I’ve got a crazy idea. I want to take the contents that’s on this CD-ROM. I want to put it on your website and make it available to people for free, but they have to give us their name and email address first.”

They said, “Well, why would we give it away? It costs 19.99.” I said, “But what we’ll do is after somebody actually requests this free ebook, we’ll send it to them. And then we’ll present them with an opportunity to join the Texas State Historical Association.” They said, “Okay.” So we posted on their website. In the first month, they had 17,000 people that signed up to get that free ebook. About two percent of those people actually became a donor to the organization, and it ended up generating like $13,000 in revenue in 30 days, compared to $300 trying to sell the resource in 12 months.

So it’s a perfect example of really just reimagining, repackaging, repurposing your content, delivering it to people in advance, really taking advantage of the concept of reciprocity and allowing people to experience the value proposition, so that then they’re in a better position to really want to join into whatever it is that your cause does with their financial give bank. So that’s how we’ve seen the best way to leverage that.

Roger Dooley:     What about the other kind of gift, where you get a $5 mug if you give $50 or $100? Are you a fan of that practice?

Tim Kachuriak:    I mean, it works in some cases. The best use case that we find for the premium after the gift is when you’re trying to get somebody to upgrade to a higher giving level. So you may have this free offer, somebody comes in to the donation page, and they can give a gift of any amount, but for gift of $100 or more, we’re going to send you this book in the mail, or we’re going to send you this resource, or we’re going to give you something else. We find that that’s one way to kind of basically migrate people to a higher commitment level of giving, is one way to use that.

Roger Dooley:     Yeah. And I think, too, the more it’s unique and relates to the purpose of the organization. So I recall thinking of NPR, at one point you could, for some level of donation, you could get a recording, your answering machine, back when people had answering machines, a recording done by one of their announcers who was well known and had a recognizable voice. Now, that’s something that doesn’t have a lot of cost or particular value, but it’s really unique, and it ties into a person’s love of the organization.

Or some other signaling type things, where if you are wearing an NPR sweatshirt, that is saying something about you, your likes, your preferences, and so on, where it sort of goes beyond the fact, “Oh hey, look, I got a sweatshirt.” It’s actually sort of a statement, too. So yeah, I think to me that’s where those things make sense. Otherwise, just a generic something or other is probably not going to have a big impact, I wouldn’t think.

Tim Kachuriak:    Right. I mean, you might as well just go buy it on Amazon. Right?

Roger Dooley:     Right. Well, exactly. And people can these days. There’s no uniqueness to anything anymore. Anything that you see anywhere and say, “Hey, that’s kind of interesting,” with five minutes of research, you can find it in Amazon, and 24 hours later, it’s going to be on your doorstep. So there’s not much unique anymore, unless it’s somehow associated with a brand, an organization, or something of that nature, that you simply can’t get anywhere else.

So what have you seen about the transition to mobile? I mean, mobile has really come on strong over the last five or 10 years, going from probably a pretty small amount of commerce activity to being in many cases more than half. How is that true for nonprofits?

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah. For most nonprofit organizations, the giving, the ideal giving generation is kind of like the boomers and above, right? So these are folks that are a little bit older, and they may not be as…

Roger Dooley:     Be careful there, Tim.

Tim Kachuriak:    I’m trying to choose my—but they typically are not as active on mobile commerce than some of the younger generations. So we still see that that’s lagging behind. Probably about 70% of the transactions still occur on desktop compared to mobile, but that’s up from like 5% six or seven years ago. So it is rapidly increasing, and at a pretty decent rate, but it’s still not taken over yet.

And there’s still a lot of problems. Still, again, most nonprofit organizations have significant challenges with the mobile version or the responsive version of their donation page. Depending on what donation page software they use, it may really kind of jigger the way that that page looks, gives them less control, and some cases you lose some of those value claims or those third-party credibility indicators that would normally be there on a desktop. So we’re working on that. That’s something we’re actively researching, but it’s still an opportunity, I would say.

Roger Dooley:     Well, I can keep on going, because this is such an interesting topic and conversation. Do you have any last … I loved your little tip about the lock near the donate button or where they put in their payment information. Any other little tidbit like that you can give our audience?

Tim Kachuriak:    Here’s a great one. So most of the dollars raised online happens through email appeals. So it’s really still the only true direct response channel is email. And if you look at most nonprofit fundraising emails, they’re very elaborately designed, HTML, graphics, images, a lot of stuff all over that. What we’ve found, and we’ve run experiments like this with dozens of organizations, we’ve done it in different countries, we’ve done it in different languages, and what we continue to find is when we scrape away the marketing veneer, get rid of the images, get rid of the HTML, get rid of the graphics, the buttons, and even rewrite the copy, the plain text copy, so it sounds like coming from one person to another person, I mean, we’ll see like 200, 300% increases in the percentage of people that respond to the plain text version of the email versus the HTML version of the email.

And it goes back to a principle that we found through all of our research as like a central unifying principle, that people give to people, not to email machines, not to websites, not to direct mail letters. People give to people. And the more that we can humanize our communications, the more we can make it seem genuine, like one person to another person, the better responses we will receive.

Roger Dooley:     Great. That is a wonderful tip, Tim. And let me remind our audience that we are speaking with Tim Kachuriak, and Tim, how can people find you and your ideas?

Tim Kachuriak:    Yeah, you can go to nextafter.com and all of our research, every single experiment that we’ve published, it’s all open source. It’s all there, available. Every mystery donor study we’ve published is all there. So go check us out if you’re interested in the topic, and I’m sure you can dive headlong into the treasure trove of research that we’ve published and created.

Roger Dooley:     Great. Well, we will link there and to any other resources we mentioned on the show notes page at rogerdooley.com/podcast, and we will have audio, text, and video versions of this conversation there, as well. Tim, thanks for being on the show.

Tim Kachuriak:    Thank you so much, Roger. It was great.

Thank you for tuning into this episode of Brainfluence. To find more episodes like this one, and to access all of Roger’s online writing and resources, the best starting point is RogerDooley.com.

And remember, Roger’s new book, Friction, is now available at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and book sellers everywhere. Bestselling author Dan Pink calls it, “An important read,” and Wharton Professor Dr. Joana Berger said, “You’ll understand Friction’s power and how to harness it.”

For more information or for links to Amazon and other sellers, go to RogerDooley.com/Friction.