Archive for the 'otherblogs' Category

Guest Post on Tactical Philanthropy: Causes, MySpace and ideablob

Sean Stannard-Stockton has just posted my guest post on the Tactical Philanthropy blog.  You can read it and the comments on the blog here, it’s copied below.

“In recent days, Causes has left MySpace and IdeaBlob has shutdown. To some, these events were unimportant. In reaction to the Causes announcement, Economist bureau chief Matthew Bishop tweeted “Who knew it was on MySpace?” to which New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom tweeted back “No kidding.”

But to many people active in online social action communities, these events had deeper meaning. This is a guest post from Amy Sample Ward, NetSquared’s Global Community Development Manager.”

—–

There’s something in the wind, other than in-coming winter, that has my attention.  It’s something I can only wrap my mind around by talking to others and hope that this is a chance to further a very important conversation.

First, let’s start at the beginning:

Causes Leaves MySpace

Two weeks ago, Causes, the application that lets individuals and organizations campaign and fundraise, removed itself and all Causes-related content/data from MySpace.  (Read more about Causes leaving MySpace here.)

This separation came with no public announcement, either before the move or when it happened, except for a very short email sent a couple days beforehand to account administrators as a warning.  The message explained that Causes would be focusing on only providing service to the Facebook platform, encouraging any MySpace users that wanted to continue using the application to migrate, too.

and then…

ideablob Shuts Down

By now, you may have heard about the very abrupt closedown of ideablob, a competition and promotion platform for entrepreneurs.    Late last week, registered users, interested supporters and social changemakers participating in a funding competition were all greeted with the message below when visiting the ideablob website:

ideablobclose

Users (whether they were people with a project in the competition, those that had voted to support an idea, or were general registered users of the site) received no notice that the closure was coming, or even when it happened. The only bread crumbs to find were some business reports about Advanta declaring bankruptcy, like this one, that don’t even mention ideablob.

Here’s a bit of John Brennan’s story (an ideablob member who was competition in the competition) from his comment on my original blog post:

“It’s upsetting that companies like this aren’t actually thinking or caring about the real people and ideas they are effecting. This week our idea was up for the sprint and in the top 3. Why did they even start the competition when they already were going through bankruptcy talks?”

and so…

The Conversation

What’s this mean to you as an activist, supporter, volunteer, changemaker, entrepreneur, innovator or *insert preferred title* online? Well, it means a lot.  We can see (and learn a valuable lesson about) the way current ecosystem of social media works in regards to transparency, data, and community.  To unpack this, let’s narrow in on each:

Transparency
The lack of communication about the actual decision, but more so in the lack of communication about the development, direction and intention of Causes and ideablob indicates that transparency isn’t a part of the package.  There are many who approach the online landscape with very different views than their offline business decisions.  For example, if ideablob or Causes were a product offline, and you were a funder, an investor, or a consumer/user of ideablob or Causes as offline products providing no integral communication, you would probably not have ever considered participating/consuming.   Just because you aren’t meeting offline, in real-time, in the same room with your supporters and the competitors in the ideablob competition, does not mean likewise that you do not need to know if the platform will even be around for your competition to finish.

The transparency issue is a steep mountain to climb with social media.  Unless you knew that ideablob was part of Advanta, and you were reading the business sections of the papers last week, you wouldn’t have had any idea ideablob was even considering discontinuing.  But, transparency is even more than this, and really is a part of the Data and Community, too.

Data
We can count our Twitter followers or how many people have commented on our blog post, or could have counted the number of supporters on Causes or voters on ideablob, but that doesn’t mean we connect with them.  Now that Causes removed itself, it’s content, and any related data from MySpace, organizations cannot connect with their supporters who were using Causes.  ideablob particpants are locked out from seeing any comments or feedback on their ideas.  The fact that access to data, whether it’s supporters’ email addresses, tracking actions taken, or anything else, is instantly gone should be a big alert bell to those working in a “networked” way via social media to grow their community. To connect with supporters, organizations and individuals working on projects will need to be sure that data gets back to them.

How are you encouraging your supporters all over the web to connect with you directly?  For example, when you post a message (whether it’s on Twitter, Facebook, or even Change.org) telling your supporters that you’re ramping up for some big news, a new project or something else, include a link where they can sign up with you to be on the email/announcement list.  When supporters sign a petition or take action on your organization’s behalf in social media platforms, include “thank you” and “learn more” links wherever possible that link to ways to connect directly with your organization, ensuring the contact information is in your database, not just Facebook’s.

Community
In the Causes move, the issues around community are very clearly focused on the different demographic groups represented on MySpace and Facebook.  With ideablob, it isn’t so much that groups are being separated/segregated, but entirely shut off.  These events raise many questions and flags about diversity, opportunity, and even corporate decision-making.  Communities on both platforms were clearly not part of the development and communications process, yet they were actively using the platform (for example, a grant from ideablob helped Epic Change implement a technology lab in a school in Tanzania).

What is the difference between a community actively using a platform and one actively involved in the evolution of the platform?  If a platform were to disappear, would the community be able to continue on?  Perhaps so if it had been active in the development and direction (or, perhaps that would indicate that the platform would be more unlikely to disappear or at least not without notice)?

What’s Next

I don’t necessarily want to call for the communities on MySpace or on ideablob to call for the return of the tools. We can see by the issues raised above that the platforms weren’t necessarily operating in the best ethos anyway.  But, I do want an arena for the communities to describe what they do want and be an integral part of the process to building and sustaining whatever that is.

How can this work? I can’t speak for others working in the “innovation sector,” but at NetSquared we can’t emphasize enough that our Community is what drives us – whether’s it’s online or offline.  Community feedback shapes everything from our goals to our website and everything in between.  We are able to work as a small team on the organization side because of the passionate, collaborative, dedicated Community.

For example, you can follow the website redesign process via the blog where the feedback and directives for the redesign, the people who stepped up to implement, and the step-by-step process have all been open and Community centered.  This isn’t about creating a new splash page, this is involving the users in the design of the Gallery where their Projects are housed, showcased and voted on; involving bloggers in the design of the collaborative sharing space they contribute to already; involving Community members in telling us both the bad stuff and the good stuff, so we can work to make it everything they want.  As another example, the Net Tuesday network is now up 56+ groups meeting every month around the world—a global network of events, bringing the NetSquared Community together offline—and growing in an entirely organic way.

That doesn’t mean NetSquared’s perfect, by any measure, but it does mean that a quick abandonment isn’t in store.  That also doesn’t mean that NetSquared is the *only* or the *best* place for absolutely everyone to find what they are looking for.  It is, though, one example of trying to make it work.

Your invitation:  Join this conversation.  Tell me what the recent Causes/ideablob announcements means for our sector and for you.  And share your ideas with your friends and colleagues to further the breadth of the conversation.  The more voices the better!  Here are some places to start:

  • Evaluate your use of social media tools: do you encourage your supporters on other platforms to register on your website, ensuring you have their contact details?
  • Evaluate your community: are you reaching a diverse community or operating in a silo?
  • Evaluate your relationship with developers: are you using tools that allow you to surface suggestions, ideas, and useful functionality for development? Do you know what the plans are for the tools you are using?

Case Study in Local: Oakland Local

oakland_local_logo250x125Oakland Local is launching today! Oakland Local is a news & community site for Oakland, CA, USA, focusing on social justice issues including climate change, air quality, food access, arts as activists, and identity, race & ethnicity.

About Oakland Local

Oakland Local is launching in partnership with 35 local nonprofit, neighborhood & community organizations: it combines postings of partner organizations’ news and information with blogging and with reported stories from a top quality news team.  The news team includes: Susan Mernit, Amy Gahran, Kamika Dunlap, Kwan Booth, Ryan Van Lenning and others.Oakland Local is also media partners and collaborators with Spot.us, Newsdesk.org, The Center for Investigative Reporting, New America Media, Endless Canvas, Youth Rising, Youth Radio and Youth Outlook as well. The site offers forums, a directory of 320 local nonprofits and a blog directory of 180 active local bloggers!

You can also connect with Oakland Local on twitter and facebook.

Getting Local

There’s a lot of very cool activity happening lately around local websites.  The social web has opened a lot of doors for communities and collaborations and changed the way many people view the definition of community—on the web, communities can form easily and quickly around ideas, interests, and anything else—as physical geography isn’t important.  Now that social media tools have reached a certain level of ubiquity for those online (we can’t forget that many people are still not even online at all), we see people and groups turning the tools back around to help connect those who ARE geographically close.

The latest work we’ve been doing with the Social by Social concept (using social tech for social good) is to help apply the ideas and lessons we originally wrote about for nonprofit organizations to also be applicable to the work of local governments and communities (moving from connecting communities of interest to communities of locality).  It is fun and interesting work and I’ll probably be blogging more and more about it soon.

I’ll be watching Oakland Local to see how it evolves and grows and how the community reacts and uses it.

What do you think?

Have you used a local website before or started a local community network online?  What would you want to see included on a community website for your area?


Back to School, Back Online

This post originally written September 8, 2009.  Posted on Stanford Social Innovation Review’s Opinion blog.  Visit the original post here.

It’s back-to-school time for many countries and that means a switch from summer programs, outdoor community events, and many youth campaigns.  New research out today from nfpSynergy shows that organizations who serve youth may want to be going online to reach them.

The Research

nfpSynergy, a leading nonprofit sector think-tank and research consultancy in the UK, “tracks a representative sample of over 1000 11-25 year olds throughout mainland Britain twice-yearly, gaining insights into their views and habits, both social and charity-related” in its Youth Engagement Monitor.  The newest report, out today, focused on the use of social networking platforms by young people who are/aren’t also involved with charities.  (Read the full press release here or download the Social Media data slides here.) Some of the results include:

  • Facebook is by far the most popular social networking site amongst young people – used by over 7 in 10 (72%) of all 11-25 year olds; rising to 80% of 17-25 year olds, those of college/university age – and to 83% of those who are currently at, or who have already been to, university.
  • Amongst 11-25 year olds, Facebook is trailed by Bebo (28%), MySpace (25%), Twitter (12%), MSN (9%), YouTube (2%) and “other” (4%)
  • Those involved regularly with charities are far more likely to use such social media than those who are not, with four fifths (79%) of those claiming regular charitable involvement using Facebook, compared with just 69% of those claiming no involvement
  • Bebo is the only major networking site to be more popular amongst 11-16 year olds (35%) than amongst 17-25 year olds (24%)
  • Female respondents reported a significantly higher usage across all the top 4 networking sites

Despite this, less than half (48%) of the 187 charities that were surveyed as part of nfpSynergy’s Virtual Promise (2008) report said that their organization used social networking websites.

What It Means

First, what the research does not mean: Don’t jump into Facebook immediately!  It’s easy for organizations, especially ones with small staff sizes and lots, and lots on the growing “to do” lists to see stats or research like this and automatically say, “Okay, then we should be on Facebook and it’ll solve all of our youth engagement problems.” Or, maybe not that statement exactly, but close to it.  This data does confirm many thing we already knew: that most young people are using social networking platforms of one kind or another, that females are more likely to use networking tools than males, etc.  It also shows that those young people who are engaged or involved with charities are also those using social networking tools. But, it does not say that they want to engage with charities in social networking platforms or, if they do, how they want that connection to start and continue.

So, if your organization serves or engages with youth and you want to think about moving into social networking spaces, here are a few pointers to help you get started!

No running in the halls!

There’s no point rushing into things, so give yourself the time to think strategically about how you want to use social networking platforms in your organization’s work and how it best fits with what you are doing now and the goals you want to achieve.  If you are thinking of using Facebook, for example, you will want to consider whether you want to create an individual account, or Fan page, or a group; each platform has it’s own options for how organizations could be represented and each option has different ways that other users would be able to interact.  You also want to consider which young people you want to connect with: as noted above, different ages may use different platforms; there’s lots of research also discussing the different regions or nationalities using each platform, as well as socioeconomic groups (check out Danah Boyd’s recent dissertation on the way teenagers use social networks!).

Secrets, secrets are no fun!

Regardless of which platform/s you decide to use, remember to be authentic and transparent. No one likes secrets!  Young people you are trying to connect with online (anyone, really) will judge you by your profile information: does it say who you are, which individuals at the organization may be speaking on behalf of the organization via the account? does it give your contact information outside of the social network (website, email, blog, or address)?  how about information – if you provide mental health services, for example, post information about how to get help if you need it, or how to help a friend, and so on. All this will help to make your profile more reliable and trustworthy, as well as put information out into a social space where youth could come across it without necessarily looking for your organization specifically.

Going to Johnny’s party?

The parties, the dances, the school events, they all helped shape many of the memories from being school-aged.  There’s no reason to leave them out of your plan for connecting with young people in social networks!  Create opportunities and events that bring people together online and offline – these activities can help move people up the ladder of engagement, get them volunteering or advocating for your organization, using your services or helping promote them.  Plus, social networking is all about connecting with friends, new and old; if your organization is a catalyst for community by connecting those who are affected or interested in the causes you work on, it will be easier to round up participation for your campaigns (on or offline) and find more supporters to help push your mission and work forward.  So, throw a party or two, and have fun!

What do you think? Are you an organization that works with young people, and are you using social networking sites to connect with them? What lessons or examples do you want to share?

Comment here, or visit the original post at SSIR here.

New on SSIR: First and Foremost Know Your Community

My newest post is now up on the Stanford Social Innovation Review.  You can read the post and participation in the conversation on the SSIR blog here!

The piece is reposted below:

Have we replicated our offline social dynamics and barriers online? I believe we have, and so does Danah Boyd.  As profiled in the New York Observer, Danah talked to the data uncovered in her four years of research on new media use in a presentation at the Personal Democracy Forum.  If we truly are reproducing our offline social divides online, then it’s further proof that the central part of your social media strategy needs to be focused on your audience.

“MySpace has become the ghetto of the digital landscape,” Ms. Boyd explained to the crowd. And many of us in these social environments, she said, “have gotten into the habit of crossing the street like we always do to avoid the riff-raff.” – NYO

You’ve probably heard of Facebook; you may even have set up a group or a fan page there for your organization.  But did you do that because you heard of Facebook in the news, or from a friend? Did you choose Facebook because you evaluated your existing community as well as the audience you wanted to bring into your community, and they were already using Facebook?  Did you consider MySpace? or Orkut? or Bebo? Maybe you’ve never heard of those platforms, but for some large demographics they are the hot spots online, not Facebook.

Let’s step back a minute and consider why a nonprofit or social benefit group wants to include social networking as part of a social media strategy.  Why would your organization want to have a presence on a social network?

  • Go where the community already is!  Don’t expect the community to come to you, or even find you, online. Instead, go where they have already set up shop.
  • Make your calls to action part of the routine!  Creating calls to action that match the community and can be accomplished, or promoted, in the same space will increase the overall participation you can garner.
  • Join the community!  Don’t just come to the party and start asking questions or push calls to action; instead, actually join the community, answer questions, share links or information (even ones that aren’t related to your work but you may just know!), and be a genuine part of the ecosystem.

“The fact that digital migration is revealing the same social patterns as urban white flight should send warning signals to all of us,” she said. “It should scare the hell out of us.” – NYO

Choosing the platform or platforms to concentrate your efforts online is crucial.  You may hear about Facebook, but if your audience is on MySpace, it doesn’t matter how much time and energy you put in.  They won’t be there to find you.  When evaluating your community, some of the most influential items to consider regarding social networks include:

  • Age: Facebook users can skew older than MySpace; many organizations in the UK have had great success joining the ecosystem on Bebo to extend the opportunity for teens to reach out for social services in a private way.
  • Actions: What kinds of “actions” do you want your community members to be able to do? Each platform offer unique functionality and it may not match what your community members want to do with/for you.
  • Data: Is your work reliant on certain data (whether for eligibility, age, etc.) that you will need validate, or at least advertise? Each platform displays profile information in different ways and you will need to check your settings and profile customization to ensure you are disclosing what you need, and offering opportunities to connect outside of the public messages.
  • Goals: What are your goals for the inclusion of social networking in your social media strategy?  Be sure you don’t get caught up only on functionality that’s new and cool; remember why you’re there.

Danah’s research shines a bright light on an issue many activists and organizations have been concerned about ever since the media hype around Facebook VS MySpace rose as a loud voice in the conversation about social media use.  The issues our social service agencies and social benefit organizations are dealing with offline, in local communities, are showing up online.  It’s imperative that we recognize the social divides permeating online social networks and carefully consider how we craft our online strategies to truly reach and serve our communities.

What do you think? Has your organization had experience reaching your core constituents in an online social network? How did you identify the best place to concentrate your efforts?  What lessons have you learned?

You can download Danah’s dissertation here.

Comeback Lines to Social Media Objectors

Debra Askanase has turned a recent experience dealing with many social media obvjections into a list to help you nail your comeback lines for any objectors in your organization or office.  She even crowdsourced some of the responses via Twitter – a fun way to get a bit more brain power out of the process of blogging!  She deals with these five questions:

  1. It’s not safe! What about the BU Craigslist killer?
  2. What if our biggest rival pretends to be us online?
  3. Social media means a lot of work and we don’t have the staff time to do that.
  4. There is no place in our organization for social media.
  5. People will attack us online with negative critique.

Read the answers to those questions and more of the story on Debra’s blog here.

And remember… the best comeback line is the truth, and the truth is that if you aren’t online, joining the conversation with your community members, supporters, and doubters, and engaging with the larger sector, then it doesn’t matter how great you think your branding is or how much you know your audience, because there is a quickly moving and building conversation about your work and your sector happening without you.  The only form of control you have over your message and your organization is to join the conversation that’s already happening.  Really.

New on SSIR: The Power of Vision, Review of “The Pollyanna Principles”

I have a new post up on the Stanford Social Innovation Review and this is a special post because it’s actually a book review.  Hildy Gottlieb, a colleague (but really growing into a friend) sent me a copy of her new book, The Pollyanna Principles.  I read it on the plane to and from N2Y4 (11 hours from London to San Francisco!) and have filled the edges of the pages with notes and ideas and questions.  You can find the review below, or on the SSIR Opinion Blog.

—–

Hildy Gottlieb’s new book The Pollyanna Principles is a handbook for starting a revolution in social benefit organization design and practice, but it isn’t the revolution. What’s the catch? Well, it is going to take everyone, whether you are part of an organization or receive services from one, whether you are a philanthropist or a volunteer, whether you work for a for-profit business or are a community member. For social benefit organizations to truly “work” we all need to be part of the design, the process, the success.

“When we assume we are separate, we build systems that reinforce that separateness.  When we assume we are interconnected and interdependent, we build systems that reinforce those connections.

The Six Pollyanna Principles

There are six core statements that represent The Pollyanna Principles and they include:

  1. We accomplish what we hold ourselves accountable for.
  2. Each and everyone of us is creating the future, every day, whether we do so consciously or not.
  3. Everyone and everything is interconnected and interdependent, whether we acknowledge that or not.
  4. “Being the change we want to see” means walking the talk of our values.
  5. Strength build upon our stengths, not our weaknesses.
  6. Individuals will go where systems lead them.

The Pollyanna Principles boil down to a similar premise I have blogged about before: we are creating organizations that

  1. are vested in the social issues they work towards ending in such a way that they require those issue to persist
  2. are built in a bubble
  3. are consistently missing opportunities to succeed by operating like a business (with competition) instead of as a living part of the community.

You can find previous blog posts (with great conversations in the comments) here, here and here.

Why I’m excited about The Pollyanna Principles

We have a huge opportunity before us to remodel our social benefit organization structure. There is so much talk both online and offline, from inside organizations and from outside, that “nonprofits are broken.” We’ve done step 1: admitted that we have a problem. Now, what?  Well, as Hildy explains, we need to start driving our work with our vision of how we want the world to be, instead of what the problems are before us. What does that mean? Well, imagine that your organization said you wanted to have a public education system in your state that provided opportunities for all students to learn, fair pay for both teachers and staff, opportunities for growth for students, teachers and staff, and an entry point for all students to enter the “real world” prepared. You can imagine that by operating under that vision (instead of focusing on drop-out rates, teacher pay scales, or job skill training) that partnerships with the community, new opportunities for learning exchanges and career paths, and much more start to take shape organically, naturally.

Collaboration is a huge focus of mine: Finding ways for organizations working in the same sector to share calls to action to amplify the impact, helping organizaitons understand where their work aligns to cross pollinate across their networks, and so forth. Reading the Pollyanna Principles was like finding a twin I had been separated from at birth!  But, that isn’t to say it’s the complete conversation. This is truly a great starting place from which we can all move the conversation forward.

There are still many questions I have and that I imagine all organizations, boards, volunteers, community members will have when they read the book. But I want to, am ready to, ask those questions and answer them as a community. Questions like:

  • How do we truly create community planning opportunities as funders that include all members of the community when the “community” of interested people is often limited to the grantee pool?
  • How do we begin to change the cultural view of nonprofits in society/by the community so that the public, those who use the services or are otherwise affected by nonprofits’ work can have a stake in the responsibility to create organizations making real change and all of the community is shaping its future?
  • How do we help organizations redefine their “community” to understand the entire ecosystem in which they operate?
  • And many more…

What’s Next
The Pollyanna Principles is about social benefit organizations, but it’s really about community. Community is the most important thing to me, and I truly believe that we can’t create any amount of change, any amount of real world impact, or any lasting effects without participation, ownership, and shared responsibility by community members in the work these organizations do. This means we have to have community members represented in building and implementing an organization’s work, as well as building grant programs from funders. We need to have those receiving the services and those delivering them in constant collaboration.  We need people in the community to expect organizations to succeed and take a stake in making sure they do.

So, what’s stopping us from doing this? Hildy says it’s the Culture of Can’t that we are all accustomed to operating within that holds us back.  Can we move to the Culture of Can? Are we ready? What are the Can’ts holding you or your organization back?

I’m ready to start: to start asking questions and coming up with answer, to think and share collaboratively, and to really focus on the vision we share for a better world and work towards that goal instead of focusing only on the problems – are you?  I’d love to hear your ideas!

You can learn more about The Pollyanna Principles at: http://pollyannaprinciples.org

Visit the Stanford Social Innovation Review opinion blog to join the conversation there, too!

SSIR Post: Swine Flu or Why Local Organizations Matter

I have a new blog post up on the Stanford Social Innovation Review opinion blog.  Check it out here!

The “Swine Flu” scare was fun, wasn’t it?  No, it really wasn’t; but it did give most of the world a chance to react in real-time to what could have been much worse. In a recent Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, David Brooks compared the global response vs localized response to the outbreak. I think this comparison, and context, is a great example of why local (read: non-global) organizations are still key in social change work, and why we need to be building stronger networks for data and information sharing.

Power to the People
Brooks shows that if the world had a global approach to outbreaks like Swine Flu, then the decision-making and directive power would be in a really bumped up World Health Organization-like group. This umbrella organization would require time for consideration and input from its members and wouldn’t necessarily be in-tune with the communities or cultures actually touched by the issues.

Let’s consider this example in comparison to a generic sector, focusing on a global issue, like the environmental & climate sector working on climate change. Creating a huge umbrella organization is just not going to happen realistically for any sector, at least one with the governing and implementing power suggested above. Instead, we want to keep the power to address issues in the hands of organizations spread around the world. It is impossible for one organization to know the stories, issues, culture and decision-making information of all locations. It’s hard enough to master one geography!

Speak the Local Language
As Brooks points out, people like to look to someone like them, especially in times of crisis. Local organizations provide this local face. We can speak the local language, understand the local culture.

In the climate change example, this means that we can brand, communicate, and distribute information, calls to action, and important opportunities for engagement in a way that encourages response locally. The missing link, though, is that the underlying opportunity (whether it is a petition to sign, an online or offline event, or anything else) needs to be networked across all the organization. The effect of having all organizations gather signatures on the same petition versus hundreds creating and distributing their own petitions for the same issue is huge.

Innovate and Reiterate
Lastly, one enormous organization could only respond to the Swine Flu outbreak or something similar with safe, tested protocols. But those are often not efficient or necessary. With distributed power through local organizations, medical teams, and governments, the response to the Swine Flu outbreak was something involving much more innovation and experimentation.

This, again, holds true for organizations working on social change issues. New messages, campaigns, and strategies can be tested, deployed, and analyzed in separate groups. What makes this more powerful? Leveraging a networked system so that when a new campaign works, or better yet – doesn’t work, that information can be shared in real time with all of the other organizations. This means the “what works” can get implemented faster in other places and the “what doesn’t” can be cut out of the loop without more wasted capacity.

Great, Now What?
So, what do we need to make this happen? There are tools like Zanby that allow organizations to link together to share calls to action across networks. This is a great start. But, we also need to be building out collaboration platforms that allow for organizations to link in with each other, share data and calls to action, but also feedback lessons learned—a way to combine experiential and hard data across the whole network.

What do you think?  What kind of tools would we need to accomplish this? What push backs or culture shocks to working in this way would need to be overcome?  Where would you start?

Visit the SSIR opinion blog here.

SSIR: Nonprofit Advantage for Future of Twitter and Search

My newest post is up on the Stanford Social Innovation Review Opinion blog.  Here’s an excerpt:

The ability to search online has changed our lives. It’s true. To Google something is a verb that you can look up in the dictionary now. What has it done?

  • Because of search, it no longer matters how many pages there are on the Web, because search can find what you are looking for.
  • Because of search, it no longer matters how many blog posts I write, because search can find the relevant ones for me or my readers.
  • Because of search, it no longer matters how many photos we post online or where we post them, because search can filter out our tags and codes.
  • Because of search, it no longer matters whether you are a blogger or a company, because search will sift the most active conversations to the top.

We are so used to searching online now that we can’t get away from it, rather, we don’t want to browse the web without it. Instead of going to Google.com to search the Web, we have search tools (often powered by Google) in our browsers, on our website and on our blogs, and everywhere else really.

Enter Twitter.

Twitter has created the most up-to-the minute archive of conversations around the world.  And guess what many of those conversations include: links.  We can see, through using Twitter Search, the public timeline, or Trending, what topics are popular, what links are being shared, and more.  These are things you can’t necessarily find in a Google search.  So it’s no wonder that there are preliminary talks between the two companies.

So, what’s the advantage for nonprofits?

There’s a reason that SEO (search engine optimization) consultants are so busy with work—lots and lots of companies and organizations of all sizes want to increase their standing in the millions of search results returned when you look up their key words in a search. But with Twitter, it isn’t static.  It’s constantly, right now, with every second, changing. Because it’s all conversation.

Nonprofits are already on Twitter and are joining every day as more and more organizations recognize opportunities to use the tool to connect with their communities online in real-time and leverage the communication tool to expand their campaigns and communications. As search continues to become more dynamic for Twitter users and integrated more and more into the process of finding and contributing to conversations as well as finding information and resources, nonprofits are in a terrific position to greatly influence the community.

For example…  [Read the full post here.]

What do you think? Have you found people, organizations, or resources via Twitter that you couldn’t find otherwise? Would love to hear what you think!

You can add your comments and thoughts here or on the SSIR blog.

From TechPresident: Facebook Haggadah: A Case Study in Viral ROI

Micah L. Sifry, the co-founder of Personal Democracy Forum, took a closer look at ROI for Facebook apps in his piece last week Facebook Haggadah: A Case Study in Viral ROI (Is This App Different From All Other Apps?) for TechPresident.  He sent his thoughts around asking for feedback and I was more than happy to share some ideas on the subject.

Here’s an excerpt from his post:

Within a day his Facebook Haggadah was all over the web. It looks like David Bernstein at the Volokh Conspiracy was the first major blogger to post about it, Monday at about 5pm, and AllFacebook’s Nick O’Neill tweeted about it two hours later. Soon it was being retweeted all over Twitter, and for good reason.

If you’re Jewish or you’ve ever been to a seder, Elkin’s retelling of the story is hilarious. It’s also deeply in tune with a longstanding Jewish tradition of modifying and updating the Haggadah to grapple with modern times and norms (see Arthur Waskow’s 1960s “Freedom Seder” for more on this history). I thought it would be interesting to take a look at the viral spread and impact of Elkin’s spoof, especially as it turns out that he had a serious goal in posting his parody, which is to get people involved in fighting global warming and in particular to draw users to a Facebook app he spent months writing called “YesWeConserve.com.” The app is designed to help people find and share popular energy-saving ideas, and reports that its users have collectively so far made “186 pledges to save $6243.27 and 22735 kilograms of CO2 per year.”

Elkin reports that his Facebook app Yes We Conserve has gotten about 5,500 visits as a result, but only 233 people have installed it. He notes that people can use a lot of the app’s functionality without installing it, “which is what most people do.” But he’s disappointed in his conversion rate.

Why is This App Different From All Other Apps?
Should he be? It seems to me that Elkin did pretty well in gross terms, considering that his conservation app isn’t much related to a satirical retelling of the Passover story, and in essence is functioning more like an interstitial ad than anything else. Getting nearly 4% of the people who looked at the Haggadah to click through to YesWeConserve, and then getting about 4% of that group to adopt the app seems like a decent conversion rate for something that cost him nothing to promote.

You can read the full post here.

These were the thoughts I shared with Micah:

I think that social media has created an outlet for individuals to cause-align in a way that replaces the brands of clothes you wear to be judged at school, with the issues you are passionate about to be judged online. I’m not the only one seeing this trend, though, and that’s why there are SO many Facebook apps to get people connecting their individual online space with social actions they care about. What I’m sensing is that many people are overwhelmed with apps—ones their friends keep inviting them to use, ones they accidentally click on, ones they want to use but none of their friends are using, and so on. The way to unmuck the water could be to focus in on apps that let users broadcast an array of issues and opportunities from one little box, instead of installing and managing lots of little boxes.

I think 4% is great for the YesWeConserve application! I’d certainly be proud! But, given what I just said, I’d also think about how that application could create a more user-drive, dynamic space within that 400×400 box to reassure users that adding it to their profile isn’t a wasted five minutes.

What do you think?  What questions about ROI do you or your organization have when considering the build or integration of a Facebook app or similar tool?  Have you seen apps that you really like?  Ones you really don’t like?  You can read Micah’s full blog post here.

Would love to hear your thoughts!

Train for Humanity is looking for new participants!

From Mark Hayward of Train for Humanity:

After redesigning the Train for Humanity website we are now ready to launch into phase two of our humanitarian project. The initial phase of Train for Humanity ran for four months from September to December 2008.

Phase two will run for six months from March to August 2009 and we are asking potential participants to make a commitment to raising at least one thousand dollars.

All funds from phase two will go directly toward supporting the Darfur Peace & Development Organization’s (DPDO) school project. DPDO supports the operation of fifteen elementary schools in North Darfur and they are responsible for teacher salaries and providing classroom supplies (Total Enrollment: 8300 students; Teachers: 160 plus 56 support staff).

Since the genocide started, there have been an estimated 300,000 deaths of innocent men, women, and children and over two million persons displaced.

Want to learn more and get involved?