Wired Causes

You are browsing the archives of 2010 May.

<a href=”http://www.box.net/shared/0n18eeycl4″ title=””>

My long-time blogging mentor, Marketing Diva Toby Bloomberg, has a new free eBook I highly recommend. It’s called Social Media Marketing GPS, and it was written one Tweet at time.  Really.

Here’s the concept, as explained by Toby (who helped me create this blog!)

“Social Media Marketing GPS began as an experiment. I wondered if marketers would be receptive to, and find value in, a new book genre built on a succession of tweet interviews about one business topic: social media marketing.  The goal was to create a comprehensive body of knowledge that could serve as a roadmap (GPS) for developing a strategic social media plan. My thoughts were if this could be accomplished in a series of 140 character tweets it might help ease the apprehension for people new to social media, while at the same time, providing a review and offering some interesting ideas for those more experienced.”

Here are my favorite quotes from it from a variety of leading thinkers she interviewed via Twitter - but read the whole thing!  You can download the ebook here.  It covers social media strategy, ethics, metrics and Twitter, blogging, etc.

1. Why Social Media? People are talking and as marketers, we’d better be listening and engaging in conversation. Markets are conversations.

2. What comes first - the tool or the content? The problem will define the tool and at the beginning and end of the day-it’s all about the interaction.

3. Ethics are everything: Social media (SM) is about trust, and trust must be earned. Once lost, trust is hard to recover. In SM, there may be no second chance to recover it.

4. You need a strategy (and the Guide helps you build one, by the way). “When beginning without a strategy, you are following, not leading; you are not prepared for the next step, you are not anticipating.”

5. Social media brings back the “corner grocery store relationship” where business was built on trust. The grocer was part of the community.  The grocer knew and cared about the people that purchased her products/services. SM helps create and nurture closer relationships in this same way.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy had a fascinating chat this week with Molly Stranahan, a psychologist and heiress to the Champion Spark Plug fortune who speaks on the importance of giving to personal fulfillment.

The headline: GIVING IS ABOUT THE PEOPLE, NOT THE MONEY.

Here are the four most interesting lessons in my view, with quotes from Stranahan.

1. People aren’t philanthropists.  Here is what Stranahan said about the term: “Ah, that term, “philanthropist.”! I think we have so many associations with it that aren’t appealing. I always envisioned rich, white men who give money to build wings on art museums or hospitals, and that it means that you aren’t doing anything useful yourself, wtih your time - you are only valued for your monetary gifts. In my experience, joy in giving comes from a feeling that I am making a difference. It is either because I can see the difference it is making related to an issue I care about, or because it is helping someone I care about do work that makes a difference to them.”

2. People don’t like being treated as philanthropists.  “As a donor, sometimes I feel like fundraisers see me as only the funds I might give. I find I am attracted when I am seen as a whole person. Ask me questions about my interests, engage in a conversation about the overlaps between what your organization does and my interests. Let’s learn together. And let me see the impact of the work.”

3. People who give think of themselves as part of you - not your audience.  “I like to think of the whole group of people involved in a charitable organization as a team - each providing a different type of energy to solve the problem at hand. Some provide their time (as staff or volunteers), some provide wisdom (often the the people affected by the problem), and some provide money. People like feeling connected to others, and if you help your donors feel like part of the team, you may be enhancing their happiness.”

4. Data has its limits! “I am also aware that we are getting hung up on ‘measurable outcomes’ that can miss the deepest impact of the work of a charity. With Needmor’s (organization Stranahan supports) funding of community organizing, the part that most affected me was seeing how the community members who became leaders had changed. They could no longer be oppressed in the same ways as before. That isn’t really that measurable, but it is the impact that most excites me… When you care about the people in the organization, you get more committed.”

Dear Nonprofiteer, I’m the ED of a growing nonprofit doing bridge-building work on a highly divisive social issue. Our work is getting rave reviews. Our Board, however, is really struggling with its role in fundraising. All of the nonprofit literature I’ve read says that the Board of Directors is largely responsible for raising funds for [...]

Source:  Extreme Foods
For the third and final Conversational Case Study on America’s Giving Challenge from Allison Fine and I, we  pose a question rather than answer one: Is there a “special sauce” for successful participation in online fundraising contests?   The post summarizes the strategies used by contest winners.
I wonder if the secret sauce is to [...]

From today’s AdAge, a screen shot of the satirical rogue Twitter feed, BP GlobalPR.

The front page headline in yesterday’s Washington Post was not what you wanted to see if you work for the Nature Conservancy: “Oil spill threatens to stain alliances: Environmental nonprofits face potential backlash as supporters learn of ties to BP.”  It was worse online: “Nature Conservancy faces potential backlash from ties with BP.”

Which got me thinking: If you were head of PR for the Nature Conservancy or Conservation International or another organization happily accepting grants from BP these past years, what would you do now?

That being a tough question, I decided to let someone else answer it.  I posed it to branding guru Nancy Schwartz of GettingAttention.org, who recently took Susan G. Komen to task for their questionable fried chicken alliance with KFC.  (Buckets of fried chicken will defeat cancer?)  As expected, she immediately responded with some very good answers.

Me: Nancy, imagine you’re head of PR for one of these charities.  What do you do?  What do you say?

Nancy: As I see it, the fact of the Nature Conservancy’s (NC) taking funding from BP for years, no matter how small a percentage it is of the overall organizational budget, is a very bad sign of organizational values gone missing or soft. And once those values are endangered, resultant policy decisions are too.

This is brand gone bust big-time; far bigger even than the Komen-KFC cause marketing deal, chronicled here, since it’s all-organization and long-term rather than a single campaign.  There’s simply no way an environmental organization should be funded by a natural resources mining company – their key principles are radically opposed.

Here’s what the Nature Conservancy PR pro should do to try to rebuild the organization (and secondly, its brand)—not a bad idea for the PR teams at EDF, Conservation Intl etc.).  Better yet, NC should have followed these guidelines for guarding its brand and developing the right partnerships.

1. Get out there broadly and openly, and communicate—honestly.

• NC is doing a pretty good job of the broadly part. For example, they’ve been tweeting to build awareness of and questions for 2pm today chat on the topic with its CEO.
• But not so honestly.  The chat isn’t really a chat, despite NC’s claim to transparency.
    o Submitted questions aren’t visible on the chat page, nor will all be answered or even listed online.
    o The PR team will select “the best ones” for the CEO to respond to.

2. Train and prep key spokespeople, program staff (not the CEO or board members or the PR folks). The fact that an early NC response (via its blog, here) came from chief scientist Peter Kareiva does make it more credible – or at least makes it more compelling to read. • Ensure these spokespeople have personalities and that they say what they do.
• Two recent BP respondents to comments on Karieva’s post simply provide their names and describe themselves as BP employees. A title and a brief description of what they do will be more effective in building bridges. Otherwise, they remain faceless entities (the institution of NC, rather than individuals like those asking the questions).

3. Show and state appreciation of its supporters focus and passion for the cause they’re dedicated to, and the one that drives the Nature conservancy.
• To emphasize shared values—what brings the organization and its base together, rather than focusing on what divides them.

4. Acknowledge that – based on supporter input, and the fact that the NC lives by its network’s passion and support—NC has made a mistake in taking BP funding and in not acknowledging that funding up front in its initial responses to the gulf oil spill debacle.
• State that the partnership has been a productive one (what else can they say) in terms of their influencing BP to make the right decisions when asked, on renewables mainly.
• That NC has not let the funding influence its path but they realize the perception that taking the funding establishes.
    o And that perception is (almost) everything.

5. State that going forward, NC will no longer take funding from BP and any other natural resource mining companies (if it does so).
• But will continue to work with these companies to improve the environmental safety of their operations.

6. Invite participation in a supporter advisory group, to be launched this week. The advisory group (no more than 50 representatives at a time) will be reached out to for input as NC tries to climb out of this hole.

7. Reiterate the organization’s appreciation of its supporters and its commitment to working with them to protect the environment, including the gulf coast.
Me: Paging the Nature Conservancy:  I hope you’re reading this!  Thanks Nancy for some stellar advice.

For this month’s Net2 Think Tank we hoped to help expand online giving to a broader focus than simply online fundraising. Through the wonders of new technology, the process of donating money has become dead simple. So, we asked you, what can organizations do to make online contributions of time, talent, and skills just as simple? Who’s doing it right and what should others be doing?

Below is the round-up of responses we received. Feel free to add your ideas in the comments section at the bottom of this page.

read more

The Minnesota Open Idea is an example of an online social good contest that works.  It combines expert judging with popular vote, online strategy with good old fashion off line organizing, links objectives to a theory of change, and incorporates a fun and engaging way for people to learn about and take action on a [...]

Dear Nonprofiteer, The quick and dirty is this: a local AIDS charity has an ED who facilitates a hostile environment. She fires people and then back-fills their employee record with negative things. She makes her assistant accompany her on personal errands, such as to the fertility specialist. The entire executive team has turned over in [...]

The first in our series of six NetSquared Camps is next Saturday! This event, hosted in Douala, Cameroon, is free to attend and there is still time for you to register! Take a look at the info below and get involved!

read more