This document analyzes the effectiveness of standard matching versus team matching for increasing donations and participation. Standard matching provides a match only if a certain percentage of a donor's team also donates, while team matching matches all donations. An anonymous online survey was conducted. Results showed team matching increased donations and participation more for new donors, while standard matching was more effective for regular donors who donate less than 5.2% of their monthly allowance. The conclusion is that neither matching type is ultimately more effective - the decisive factor appears to be how much donors initially donate to charity.

1. An analysis of
Team Matching
UCL Arts and Sciences Project
Amy Kirk-Smith | Lena Fuldauer
Lara Gregorians | Oliver Rutherford | Virginia Alonso

2. “As soon as people start thinking about
what they are thinking about,
the experiment becomes flawed.”
- Vincent Walsh (2013)

3. THE QUESTION
“IS TEAM MATCHING MORE EFFECTIVE THAN STANDARD
MATCHING IN TERMS OF INCREASING DONATIONS AND
PARTICIPATION?”

4. WHAT IS MATCHING?
– IF YOU DONATE ONE POUND, YOUR
COMPANY MATCHES YOU BY DONATING ONE POUND,
THEREFORE YOUR CAUSE RECEIVES A TOTAL OF 2 POUNDS
STANDARD MATCHING
– YOUR CAUSE IS MATCHED ONLY IF A
CERTAIN % OF YOUR TEAM ALSO DONATES.
TEAM MATCHING

5. Procedure:
OUR EXPERIMENT
• Anonymous online survey
• What’s good about a survey?
– Eliminates time and budget constraints
– Larger sample size
– Anonymity increases reliability
• The HIV/AIDS context created is
“implicit content” to ensure that
awareness of the survey´s purpose did
not confound responses

6. The Aim
“IS TEAM MATCHING MORE EFFECTIVE THAN STANDARD
MATCHING IN TERMS OF INCREASING DONATIONS AND
PARTICIPATION?”

7. DATA ANALYSIS
We split the gathered data sets into four foci:
Effect of standard matching
on regular donors
Effect of standard matching
on new donors
Effect of team matching on
regular donors
Effect of team matching on
new donors
Significance of
value of the token | new & regular donors

8. RESULTS
On average...
new donors donated 10 tokens more with
standard matching, & 13 tokens more
with team matching
regular donors donated 6.90 tokens more
with standard matching, & 8.93 tokens
more with team matching

9. EVALUATING
PARTICIPATION
42.8% of donors who had not initially
donated did so with a standard matching
incentive.
66.7% of donors who had not initially
donated did so with a team matching
incentive.

10. CONCLUSION
From the data gathered for new donors:
a team matching incentive was relatively
more effective than standard matching in
terms of increasing both participation and
amount donated as a new donor

11. What about for regular donors…

12. Graph showing response of regular donors to different matching
incentives (modified)
140
y (blue) = 1.06x + 7.56
Tokens donated after matching incentive
120
y (green) = 1.11x + 4.83
100
Lineal(Standard
matching)
y=x
80
Lineal(y=x)
60
40
Lineal(Team
maching)
20
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Tokens donated before any matching incentive
The y=x line shows the behaviour if neither starndard or team matching had any effect on the donor’s charitable behaviour.

13. EVALUATION OF
REGULAR DONORS
Among the people surveyed:
those who donated less than 5.2% of their monthly
allowance to charity responded more effectively
to a standard matching incentive.
while those who donated more than 5.2% of their
monthly allowance to charity responded more
effectively to a team matching incentive.
meaning that…

14. CONCLUSION
From the data gathered for regular donors:
a standard matching incentive was more effective on people
who donated relatively fewer tokens to charity
while a team matching incentive was more effective on people
who donated more tokens to charity.
Meaning that there was not one type of matching that was
ultimately more effective than the other. In our experiment,
the decisive factor appears to be the amount of tokens that
they are initially donating to charity.