Hi Amy,
Thanks for your reply.  Yes in an ideal world organizations would be able to maintain an effective balance between being nimble and being disciplined.  As a consultant who works with grassroots social change organizations, I see organizations really struggling with this balance.  And… the power and potential of social media is creating tension in the balance even more.

Often, it seems that the culture of on-line advocacy reflects the platform – vast possibilities that require self-determination to leverage effectively.  For example, providing access to tools to find organizations to support as an alternative to SGK, (a very empowering approach of course).  I wonder though if a less democratic, or in other terms, a more directed, approach would work – for example for the online activist to name a focused set of organizations to funnel people toward.  and … this approach requires the kind of decision making your describe.  But I think responding to a trusted partner is different than responding to a request from some random online activists – thus the need for ongoing partnerships.

This is not meant as criticism, your campaign definitely did this with PP.  I am asking a more long-term question.  

I think we often ask, how can organizations leverage the power of social media, asked less often is the question:  how can social media best leverage the potential of organizations. However I may not be engaged in the right conversations.

Hi Susan-

Thanks so much for joining in here! And great question.

Many organizations have criteria that support decision making when it comes to partnerships, sponsorships, and other opportunities; and even for the process of making decisions at all. For example, your organization may say that if a partnership does not require additional staff, is in line or directly supporting a current program, and strengthens the organization either through additional funding or list building, etc. that it gets a green light to move forward. I think organizations should also create some criteria that let them make more nimble decisions and take advantage of the fast-moving social web. Maybe it’s a matrix of qualifications or just a simple list of criteria. I think there should be some guide organizations use internally that helps evaluate right on the spot so that staff can verify the opportunity and dive in.

Would love to hear what you think though!

Thanks again 🙂

I am especially interested in the challenge you faced with organizations not being nimble enough to participate in what was an incredible opportunity to re-frame how to fight breast cancer, as you were doing with Reclaim the Pink.I don’t know the answer, but I think that recognizing that on-line and on the ground organizing share the challenge of how to transform passive engagement into active engagement on issues.  By that I mean, when something flashes before my face that I can take easy action on, I do, petitions, making small donations, spreading the word on an issue etc.  On most issues my own engagement is pretty passive.  There are very few issues where I am actively engaged – dedicated more resources, more time, being a vocal advocate, working with an organization on it etc.To me this is a critical question for movement building and organizing for social change in these times – we will have to wait to see if SGK will at last change, or if this will be just another controversy that they weather before settling back into stasis – or if SGK does not change – will support increase for a broader set of organizations so that movement gets built across a diverse set of strategies for fighting breast cancer.Thank your for taking such powerful action, and for being willing to learn in public.

Great points, Allison! When it comes to the action side of things, for me, I look at it as either an organization or a community driven plan. By and large, if your plan is organization driven, even if it has your community at heart or in mind, your chances of adoption are much lower. If, like this campaign or others that come from or with the community, organizations can support the community in driving forward, the adoption component isn’t really a question – it is already being adopted, the community is already involved.

When it comes to impact, I think, especially in issues this like one, many people are interested in and recognize the reality that this is not a one day fight. And, similarly, it isn’t a one organization cause. For it to truly be a movement, it is going to take many organizations and many days of action to get to the world we want.

Reflection reflection – five blog posts, five very different takes on the same shared efforts. Amy Sample Ward looks at it all from community organizing perspective. Beth as an opportunity to constantly measure and learn. Allison captures the essence of the “people power” that makes something like this happen. Lisa looks at the many types of free agents. And I wonked out on accountability and governance questions. Stephanie keeps going with the graphics and the facebook presence.

https://amysampleward.org/2012/02/14/observations-and-reflections-on-takebackthepink/
http://www.bethkanter.org/aar/
http://www.allisonfine.com/2012/02/13/take-back-the-pink-lessons-learned/
http://jewpoint0.org/2012/02/free-agents-insights-from-takebackthepink/
http://philanthropy.blogspot.com/2012/02/new-calls-for-transparency.html
https://www.facebook.com/takebackthepink

The action front is a bit easier, I think, either people want to play or not. I caution groups not to be disappointed or discouraged if people don’t want to play in your sandbox – often it’s just a matter of timing, people are distracted or too busy to play. In this case, we certainly knew that we had a web-full of people engaged in the issue, and our job was to throw a few ideas out and see who wanted to play with us.

The results front is a bit more complicated – and I think we mushed it up a bit when we changed our focus from funding PP to support breast health in general. Without a tangible, bite-size goal it is difficult to see on the back end what difference we made.  We weren’t trying to raise $X or have signatures on a petition. Did we raise awareness for people beyond those who were already engaged and interested – I don’t think there is any way to know. We certainly gave people a constructive outlet, and that’s a good thing. This is a huge struggle for advocacy groups working in an area over a long time, like children’s health, to break down their efforts into bite-size pieces and people to do something small and come and go. But that’s where your bread crumbs come in! (And thanks for showing me how to do that so well!)

All that to say, it’s complicated and we’re just scratching the surface of understanding online action for social change – and thanks for playing in the sandbox and scratching with me!