Nonprofit Bridge

More from Craigslist Foundation’s recent NYC Nonprofit Boot Camp;  Big Duck’s Farra Trompeter offered an engaging session on social networking – is this a tool that nonprofits should be taking full advantage of now?

If your organization does take the plunge, expect that it will require a 2-3 hour investment daily.  A recent feature at Philanthropy Journal confirms this, also describing who is best suited to fit this role:

• Knows and enjoys social media
• Is tech savvy (but doesn’t have to be a geek)
• Knows your organization and is committed to its mission
• Has a personable, outgoing writing style

Is your main goal is to raise funds or to attract and interest current / prospective constituents?  So far, few nonprofits have successfully been able to prove that the potential return is definitely worth the dedication of resources to social networking activities.

Farra recommended these first steps in Facebook:

1. find out whether other organizations with compatible missions are already there, and what they are doing
2. create fan page
3. create cause

Some nonprofits have been also to receive donations through text messaging, although this also is a relatively new initiative.  Twitter is already used by nonprofits such as Red Cross and ASPCA to distribute information.

Starting and maintaining a presence on social networking sites confirms the trend that your constituents may never find your organization’s web site, so why not go to where they already are?

Other good resources on this topic:

• Beth’s Blog – How Nonprofits Can Use Social Media
• Media Rules - book & blog
• Nten’s We Are Media Project - social media starter kit for nonprofits

Thanks to the CraigsList Foundation for hosting the NYC Nonprofit Boot Camp on Aug. 16.  Miriam Kriegel of BBMGled a particularly interesting session on ‘brand driven communications

Miriam stressed the importance of nonprofits identifying what they stand for, what their unique difference from other organizations with compatible missions and realizing that branding is not simply your logo.  She also suggested that narrowing your focus makes your brand stronger.  In addition, if you don’t already have a well known brand, “create a new category in which you can claim leadership.”

In contrast to building multiple web sites to address different audiences, Miriam suggested using a single web site which is associated with a strong branding message. This presents an interesting challenge – can we serve all of our constituents differently yet have them all view our organization with a consistent identity?

As I’ve advocated elsewhere, Miriam also stressed the importance that all touch points have similar messaging, e.g. web site, direct mail, telephone, events, board interactions with the public as well as that a brand be presented consistently over time.

These principles are often used in for profit organizations, but they clearly can be used effectively within our sector.  What is it about your organization that makes it unique?  Having a clear mission which staff and board can clearly articulate helps, but creating a strong brand is a critical component of any nonprofit’s communications strategy.

Probably the best book I’ve read on how the Internet has changed our world is Groundswell, Similar to my posting last week on how donors are bypassing traditional nonprofits to make direct contributions, authors Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff define groundswell as a social trend in which people use technologies to get the things they need from each other, rather than from traditional institutions like corporations.

The main idea is how organizations can use tools such as blogs, social networks, wikis,  forums and other web 2.0 technologies to listen and to communicate with customers.  Many examples are offered such as Salesforce’s IdeaExchange and Dell’s IdeaStorm where customers participate in an online community to help develop products.  This is a very different approach to how communication and branding have traditionally been handled since no longer is the organization controlling the messaging vehicle and the content.

How can we apply these ideas to nonprofits?  By engaging with our constituents all year, not only when we are seeking a donation.  By having a presence on social networking sites.  By communicating through blogs and paying attention to what others are blogging about our cause.  By rewarding constituents who not only support our organizations, but also spread the word to others.

It’s not so important that we figure out which tools we should use, but instead utilize whatever technologies are available to connect with our audience.  As the authors point out, Even though you may have a clear vision of what the company needs to do, getting the company to embrace the groundswell will take a lot of small steps and a lot of time.  The first step is to find others in your organization who already understand the value of these strategies and can help win management support, which is essential for successful implementation.

See the Groundswell blog for more ideas on how to get started.

While reviewing an online donation form recently, I came across this default question: “keep me informed about how my gift is being used.”  This seemed like an opportunity to find out exactly how a donation would be used by our organization. e.g. to support research, to sponsor an event, to provide constituent service.  However it turned out that this question was actually intended as an opt-in for email communication.  Needless to say, I advised that we revise the language so the constituent isn’t promised something that we aren’t prepared to deliver.

Yet in a recent Chronicle of Philanthropy article, Give and Take (subscription required), many new nonprofits were profiled that can tell donors exactly how their funds are used by allowing constituents to contribute directly to a project of their choice.  This trend is referred to as ‘direct giving’ or ‘peer-to-peer philanthropy’ and is utilized by organizations such as GlobalGiving, Kiva, DonorsChoose and ModestNeeds.

These nonprofits are maintained through mostly optional fees added to the donation, although GiveMeaning is trying the advertising route. Since none of these organizations are self-supporting yet, it’s unsure whether this concept will survive and, if so, which of these charities will remain.  However, the ability to donate directly to a cause is an area where many traditional nonprofits cannot compete, especially when donations for specific causes are discouraged so funds received are not ‘restricted’ in their use.

Without the Internet, this type of philanthropy would not exist.  Make a donation to one of these organizations and see how your constituent experience compares to what you’ve received from most traditional nonprofits.  For a profile of these types of sites, visit Peter Dietz’s Social Actions