Why Understanding IKEA Will Increase Your Community and Donor Engagement

by Dr. Kevin Dean, President & CEO, Tennessee Nonprofit Network

One might imagine that the path to robust community and donor engagement is paved with grand pronouncements and lavish galas. One would, however, be missing a crucial, albeit rather assembly-required, piece of the puzzle: the IKEA effect. For those who consider the finer points of human psychology a mere trifle—an unnecessary flourish in the serious business of social impact—this treatise on flat-pack furniture’s enduring legacy in the realm of philanthropic endeavor might prove… enlightening.

If we genuinely wish to understand why some individuals champion a cause with the zeal of a freshly caffeinated zealot, while others merely nod politely before scrolling past, we must delve into the subtly manipulative brilliance of Swedish furniture design. Yes, indeed. The very same principles that compel a grown adult to pay good money for a collection of particleboard, dowels, and indecipherable pictograms, only to spend a Saturday afternoon muttering imprecations at an Allen key, are astonishingly pertinent to the art of fostering profound commitment in the nonprofit sphere. To master community engagement and cultivate truly dedicated donors, one must first master the art of convincing people to build something with you. And by “build,” we mean something far more intangible than a BILLY bookcase.

What, Precisely, Is the IKEA Effect?

At its core, the IKEA effect is a cognitive bias wherein individuals place a disproportionately higher value on products that they have partially or wholly created, assembled, or customized themselves. The term, coined by researchers Michael I. Norton, Daniel Mochon, and Dan Ariely in a 2011 study, takes its prosaic name from the ubiquitous Scandinavian retailer that has, for decades, offloaded the final, exasperating stages of furniture production onto its eager (or, more accurately, economically coerced) customers.

Consider, if you will, the humble KALLAX shelving unit (which we have all over the Tennessee Nonprofit Network offices). Acquired in a flat box, it is, in its nascent state, little more than compressed sawdust and laminate. Yet, after hours of deciphering cryptic instructions, aligning stubborn pegs, and perhaps a minor marital dispute over the orientation of piece ‘B’, that very same shelving unit undergoes a remarkable metamorphosis in the owner’s perception. It is no longer just a shelving unit; it is my shelving unit. A testament to personal grit. A monument to DIY fortitude. Suddenly, its perceived value far exceeds that of an identical, pre-assembled unit, even if the latter was constructed with superior craftsmanship and significantly less existential angst.

This peculiar phenomenon is not merely an homage to Nordic pragmatism; it is deeply rooted in several fundamental psychological drivers:

1. Effort Justification: Humans are remarkably adept at rationalizing their investments. If one expends considerable time, energy, or even frustration on a task, there’s a strong psychological impetus to believe that the effort was worthwhile. To admit that one’s self-assembled, slightly wobbly BRIMNES bed is no better than its factory-built counterpart would be to admit to wasted effort, a most unpalatable truth. Therefore, the brain obligingly inflates the perceived value of the creation to justify the labor expended. “I worked hard on this; therefore, it must be good (and valuable).”
2. Sense of Competence and Effectance: There is an inherent human need to feel capable, effective, and in control of one’s environment. Successfully completing a task, even one as mundane as assembling a desk, triggers a sense of accomplishment. This feeling of “effectance”—the ability to successfully produce desired outcomes—is intrinsically rewarding. The act of creation, however amateurish, reinforces a positive self-concept. “I built this! I am capable!” This positive feeling then imbues the created object with a halo of personal pride.
3. Ownership and the Endowment Effect: Closely related but distinct, the IKEA effect is amplified by the endowment effect, which posits that people value items more highly simply because they own them. When you participate in the creation of something, your sense of ownership begins long before the final nail is hammered. It becomes an extension of yourself, a tangible representation of your engagement. This personal connection naturally leads to a higher subjective valuation.

In essence, the IKEA effect posits that labor, even if unpaid or tedious, can lead to “love.” It suggests that we are not entirely rational beings; our emotional investment and the sense of having contributed to an outcome profoundly skew our perceptions of its worth. And this, dear nonprofit leaders, is where the rubber meets the proverbial (and perhaps slightly sticky) road of engagement.

Implications of the IKEA Effect: A Nonprofit Leader’s Field Guide

For nonprofit leaders, the implications of the IKEA effect are less about particleboard and more about passion. In a sector perpetually vying for finite resources—time, talent, and treasure—understanding this bias moves beyond mere academic curiosity to become a strategic imperative.

Too often, nonprofit engagement strategies are unidirectional: the organization informs, requests, and receives. They present a fully “assembled” vision, a perfectly polished program, and then ask for support. While this approach is certainly necessary for clear communication, it frequently overlooks the profound psychological benefit of involving stakeholders in the construction of that vision.

Consider the typical donor. They write a check (or, more likely, click a button). They receive a thank-you note and perhaps an annual report. Their involvement is transactional. While their financial contribution is invaluable, their psychological investment, their sense of having “built” something, might remain low. Contrast this with the volunteer who spends hours sorting donations, or the board member who toils through strategic planning meetings. Their tangible efforts, the sweat equity invested, imbue their connection to the organization with a far deeper sense of ownership and value.

Nonprofit leaders, in their earnest pursuit of efficiency and impact, sometimes inadvertently strip away opportunities for “IKEA moments.” They might opt for a pre-packaged solution, hire consultants to devise strategies, or present polished programs without soliciting substantive input from the very people they aim to serve or engage. The unintended consequence? A perfectly functional program, perhaps, but one that evokes less “love” from its constituents because they had no hand in its assembly.

The irony inherent in the IKEA effect’s application to nonprofits lies in its counter-intuitive nature: sometimes, making things harder (by requiring effort and involvement) makes them more appealing. This runs contrary to the prevailing wisdom of making things as easy and frictionless as possible. While convenience has its place, it should not supersede the profound psychological benefits of co-creation when the goal is deep, sustained engagement.

The Imperative of Better Understanding: Community, Board, and Donor Engagement

The need to better understand the IKEA effect, especially as it relates to community engagement, board engagement, and donor engagement, is paramount for any nonprofit striving for long-term sustainability and genuine impact. It moves beyond transactional relationships to transformative ones.

For community engagement, the IKEA effect dictates that merely offering services to a community is insufficient for truly embedding an organization within it. When community members are invited to identify problems, co-design solutions, or actively participate in the delivery of programs, their investment deepens. They shift from being passive recipients to active architects. This isn’t just about good governance; it’s about fostering a profound sense of collective ownership and efficacy. A program designed for a community, no matter how well-intentioned, will rarely garner the same fierce loyalty as a program designed with and by its members. The slight imperfections born of community input become badges of honor, rather than flaws.

Board engagement is another critical area. A board that simply rubber-stamps decisions or attends perfunctory meetings is a board ripe for apathy and eventual attrition. When board members are challenged to grapple with complex strategic issues, to roll up their sleeves for fundraising initiatives beyond just “giving,” or to lead difficult conversations, they invest their intellectual and emotional capital. This effort translates into a heightened sense of responsibility and pride in the organization’s success. Their “governance” shifts from oversight to genuine co-creation of the organization’s future. The bylaws become their blueprints, not merely a dusty tome.

Finally, donor engagement stands to be radically transformed by embracing the IKEA effect. The traditional model often treats donors as ATMs. While financial contributions are always urgent, limiting engagement to monetary transactions misses a colossal opportunity for deeper connection. Donors who are given opportunities to contribute more than just cash—their insights, their networks, their time, even if symbolic—will feel a far stronger sense of ownership over the impact they are enabling. This is not about reducing fundraising asks but enriching the donor experience, shifting it from a simple exchange of funds to a shared endeavor in social change.

The true genius of the IKEA effect, when applied to the nonprofit sector, is its ability to transform passive support into active partnership. It’s about recognizing that the “sweat equity” of engagement—whether it’s strategic thinking, hands-on volunteering, or thoughtful input—is just as valuable, if not more so, than the purely monetary contribution, in building lasting commitment.

Specific Examples: Leveraging the IKEA Effect for Deeper Engagement

Let’s move from theoretical musings to practical applications, examining how nonprofit leaders can deliberately cultivate “IKEA moments” across their engagement spectrum.

Leveraging the IKEA Effect in Community Engagement

True community engagement isn’t a suggestion box; it’s a shared workshop.

1. Co-Design Programs: Instead of developing programs in isolation and then “rolling them out” to the community, invite community members to the drawing board.
   • Example: A youth organization wants to create an after-school program. Instead of designing the curriculum, facility layout, and activity schedule internally, they convene a “Youth Design Council” composed of target beneficiaries, parents, and local educators. This council meets regularly to brainstorm, debate, and make decisions on key elements of the program. They choose the themes, select the activities, and even help name the program. The result: a program that not only meets community needs more accurately but is also fiercely defended and promoted by those who helped create it. The youths who helped pick the art supplies will be far more invested in showing up than those merely told “art class is available.”
2. Volunteer-Led Initiatives: Empower volunteers to take ownership beyond simply executing tasks.
   • Example: An environmental conservation group needs help with a new tree-planting initiative. Instead of just assigning planting dates, they form “Green Teams” where volunteers are responsible for researching native species, identifying planting locations, organizing logistics for their specific area, and recruiting fellow planters. Each team effectively “owns” a section of the project. This elevated responsibility transforms a simple volunteering gig into a meaningful, self-directed contribution, fostering a stronger sense of accomplishment and pride in “their” planted forest.
3. Community Storytelling and Content Creation: Give community members the tools and platform to tell their own stories.
   • Example: A local history society wants to document the oral histories of a rapidly changing neighborhood. Instead of professional historians conducting all interviews, they train community residents (especially seniors and youth) in basic interviewing, recording, and transcription techniques. These community members then conduct interviews with their neighbors and family, becoming the curators of their own shared narrative. The resulting archive is not just about the community; it is by the community, imbued with their collective effort and perspective. They will safeguard and promote “their” history.
4. Participatory Budgeting: Involve the community directly in allocating resources.
   • Example: A neighborhood association receives a grant for community improvement projects. Instead of the board deciding how to spend it, they initiate a participatory budgeting process. Residents propose projects, develop mini-proposals, and then vote on which projects receive funding. This hands-on involvement in resource allocation generates significant buy-in and a deep sense of ownership over the resulting improvements, as residents literally “built” the budget.

Leveraging the IKEA Effect in Board Engagement

For board members, the IKEA effect transforms passive governance into active stewardship.

1. Strategic Planning as a Co-Creation Exercise: Move beyond consultants delivering a final strategy document.
   • Example: When developing a new five-year strategic plan, the board isn’t just presented with options. Instead, they are actively involved in data analysis, facilitated brainstorming sessions, and iterative drafting of strategic pillars. Subcommittees are formed to research specific areas (e.g., funding diversification, program expansion, technology upgrades), presenting their findings and recommendations to the full board for rigorous debate and refinement. Each board member’s fingerprints are on the final document, making it “their” strategy, not just “the organization’s.” This makes it far more likely they will champion it vigorously.
2. Board-Led Fundraising Initiatives (Beyond “Give/Get”): Encourage board members to actively participate in fundraising, not just make a personal donation or leverage their networks.
   • Example: Rather than simply asking board members to “get” donations, the organization challenges them to design and execute a small, targeted fundraising campaign. Perhaps a “Friends & Family” online campaign where each board member creates their own personalized appeal page and tracks their progress. Or they might organize a small, intimate cultivation event from scratch, handling everything from invitation lists to venue selection. The effort involved in orchestrating these mini-campaigns increases their emotional investment in the fundraising success, moving beyond a simple financial obligation.
3. Task Forces and Special Projects: Assign board members to challenging, hands-on tasks that require their expertise and time.
   • Example: If the organization is facing a legal challenge, forming a board task force (perhaps including board members with legal backgrounds) to research, strategize, and liaise with counsel fosters deep engagement. Similarly, a board member tasked with revamping the organization’s technology infrastructure, conducting vendor interviews, and presenting a detailed implementation plan will feel far more invested than one who simply reviews an IT budget. The labor of these projects directly correlates with their increased valuation of the outcome.
4. Board Member Recruitment and Onboarding as Collaborative Process: Involve existing board members heavily in identifying, interviewing, and mentoring new recruits.
   • Example: Instead of staff managing the entire board recruitment process, form a “Board Development Committee” comprising current board members. They are responsible for defining skill gaps, actively sourcing candidates, conducting initial interviews, and designing an engaging onboarding process. They effectively “build” their future board. This involvement not only ensures a better fit but also strengthens the commitment of the existing board members to the new additions and the board’s collective success.

Leveraging the IKEA Effect in Donor Engagement

Transforming financial transactions into meaningful, co-creative partnerships is key for donors.

1. “Choose Your Impact” Campaigns: Give donors a perceived choice in how their funds are used, allowing them to “customize” their contribution.
   • Example: Instead of a general appeal for “program support,” present donors with a campaign where they can direct their donation to specific, tangible projects: “Fund a month of literacy classes,” “Provide school supplies for 10 children,” or “Support a community garden plot.” While the underlying funds are commingled for administrative purposes, the perception of choice and direct impact allows donors to feel like they are actively “building” a specific outcome. They feel more ownership over the chosen project.
2. Donor Advisory Councils/Working Groups: Invite significant donors to contribute their expertise, not just their wealth.
   • Example: For major donors, create a “Strategic Funding Group” that meets periodically to provide feedback on program effectiveness, offer insights on fundraising strategies, or even help evaluate new initiatives. These are not governance roles, but opportunities for donors to lend their professional acumen (e.g., in marketing, finance, or operations) to specific organizational challenges. The effort of contributing their intellect and time will invariably deepen their commitment and pride in the organization’s success, making their financial support a natural extension of their active involvement.
3. “Build Your Own Event” or Micro-Fundraisers: Empower donors to host their own small-scale fundraising events.
   • Example: Provide donors with a “Host a Cause” toolkit that includes templates for invitations, suggested activities (e.g., a bake sale, a book club discussion with a donation ask, a small sports tournament), and branding materials. Donors then take on the labor of organizing and executing their own event, inviting their networks, and raising funds. The effort they expend in planning, promoting, and hosting creates a powerful sense of ownership over the funds raised and the impact generated. It’s “their” event for “our” cause.
4. Impact Reporting Focused on Donor “Co-Authorship”: Frame impact reports not just as what the organization did, but what the organization and the donor achieved together.
   • Example: Instead of a generic annual report, send personalized impact summaries to key donors, specifically highlighting how their chosen area of support or their participation in a specific campaign contributed to tangible outcomes. Use language that emphasizes shared accomplishment: “Because of your vital support, we together achieved X,” or “Your dedication helped us implement Y.” Including photos or stories where the donor’s influence (even if indirect) is visible reinforces their sense of having “built” that success.
5. Small, Symbolic “Assembly” Tasks: Even minor acts of effort can trigger the effect.
   • Example: For a new donor, send a small, symbolic packet of seeds with a note like, “Help us grow our impact: plant these in your garden as a reminder of the change we are cultivating together.” While minimal effort, the act of planting and nurturing something physically connected to the cause can subtly engage the IKEA effect, fostering a deeper, more tangible link than just reading a newsletter. Or, perhaps, include a blank space in a thank you card for them to write a message that will then be shared with a beneficiary.

Conclusion: The Assembly Required Future of Engagement

The IKEA effect, for all its seemingly unrelated origins in flat-pack furniture, offers a profound insight into human motivation: we value what we work for. For nonprofit leaders navigating the complex landscape of community, board, and donor engagement, this isn’t a mere psychological quirk; it’s a strategic blueprint. When community members feel they have built their programs, when board members have crafted their strategy, and when donors have helped construct the very impact they fund, the level of commitment transcends simple obligation. It becomes a matter of personal pride, a testament to shared endeavor, and a powerful, almost unshakeable, sense of ownership.

So, the next time you find yourself wrestling with an inscrutable diagram and a handful of oddly shaped fasteners, consider the broader implications. The frustration, the effort, the eventual triumph—these are the very ingredients that can transform casual interest into ardent advocacy. In the nonprofit sector, the most valuable assets might not always arrive pre-assembled; often, they are waiting to be built, piece by painstaking piece, by the very people whose hearts and hands you seek to engage. It’s an assembly-required future, and frankly, it’s far more rewarding than just buying the finished product.