Value experienced from donation Vaue perceived by donation to a particular charity

It seems as though there is a parallel asymmetry on the supplier-side:

Value available from donation Value proposed by donation

Not surprisingly, this follows the canonical model of communication:

What Party A thinks What Party A says or writes
What Party B understands What Party A hears or reads

In both models, potential for mismatch occurs in 3 places:

o Within the supplier (intent vs. expression)
o Within the consumer (understanding vs. reception)
o Along the communication link (fidelity of transmission)

So this seems to provide the supplier with several opportunities to better connect with potential donors:

o On the supplier-side, more effectively communicate the actual intent as part of the value proposition (e.g. what real benefits have we delivered)

o On the consumer-side, more effectively recognize context-dependencies and plug into them. For example, a potential donor who has a close friend or relative with cancer (or who has just passed away from the disease) is likely to be more receptive to a message, even one that lacks specificity. OTOH, potential donors who have lost someone to heart disease or stroke might be in a context that is less receptive.

o In the communications channel itself, there may be ways to communicate the same content that are more or less effective.

I guess that if value propositions also tell us which parts of the communication channel a business thinks contribute the most. Some businesses pay more attention to what the consumer will perceive. Others pay more attention to what they feel about what they need to say. And others stress about how the message is delivered, and less about its content or how it will be received.

Charlie