Page MenuHomePhabricator

Delay cancelling monthly recurring until month 3
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

[Assigning to @AKanji-WMF -- please add Dylan or FR Tech]

What?
We want to move away from cancelling declined gifts in the first month. We should keep them active, rest them and reattempt the following two months.

Why?
We'd save people that way without having to reactivate them.

How?
We'd need FR Tech to update the cancellation logic for this, and designate any responses and decline reasons that we'd need to exclude.

Note: Currently, the status we give to 1-3 lapsed monthly donors is Delinquent but this is going to be changed in the new framework. FYI @JMando

Event Timeline

Thanks for the add @MSuijkerbuijk_WMF - I think this is a great change.

QQ - how will this impact the recurring failure emails? Will they both deploy in month 1 or will they now shift to month 3? Or do we want to create new emails 3 & 4 and 5 & 6 for months 2 and 3? We don't want the same copy to send each month when we reattempt, so just confirming the cadence. Thanks!

To me (open to discuss) the failure emails can remain as they are for now to let the donor know - this is more of a technical shift on our end.
Later on, we can explore that journey.

So instead of attempting to charge again the following day, we would attempt to charge again the following month?

@Ejegg How is it done now? I am aware that @EMartin mentioned that with Gr4vy and other PSPs optimizations, the rules of 3 retries might have changed.
We want to continue to retry right after the failed payment, in the month it happens, but then also keep them and reattempt during those first 3 months.
We need to understand how this will be shown in reporting too @JMando and @AKanji-WMF as if this changes, it will happen at the time we launch donor portal and might give us wrong views on what's happening with cancellations.

@MSuijkerbuijk_WMF We've discussed this a bit at fr-tech. We're definitely on board with changing how this flow works in the big picture. However, we need to consider how all the different parts fit together and if we make the change you're proposing here, there would be a lot of follow-on issues we'd have to think about.

I think it would make sense to bring everyone together to discuss how we want this flow to work in the long term and consider approaches to get us there. @Ejegg is away for a little bit, so we could aim for the week of the 23rd. We'll include myself, @Ejegg , @Cstone and @AKanji-WMF or @SBurnett-WMF, yourself, and @krobinson. Is there anyone else you'd like to include?

Thanks @Lars makes sense. Please include Joseph and Erica R.

Hi all - adding here a note from a colleague working in a Sustainer program
' For our lapsed process, it tries automatically three times over 3 months. We follow up with 3 contact attempts over 60 days. We get about 60% of the lapsed sustainers back. The extra personal outreach often leads to an increased monthly gift.'