nonprofits – Page 2 – Elaine Gantz Wright

The ROI that would be king

October 5, 2009October 5, 2009 elaine gantz wright11 Comments

ElaineGantzWright’s blog is for people interested in using the Web and online marketing to drive social change. Elaine covers social media for nonprofits, philanthropy trends, online giving, cause marketing, random life musings, and more.

The pursuit of social media ROI (return on investment) continues to vex me. Last week, my blog post featured some comments about its confounding elusiveness and sparked lively discussion—on and offline. It’s still a very hot topic—at conferences, webinars, cocktail parties, bunko nights, and marketing strategy meetings going on as I type.

Once again, I turn to one of my master media mentors—Clay Shirky. He says:

“A revolution does not happen when a society adopts new tools. It happens when a society adopts new behaviors.”

And I think that quote sums up the core conundrum. At the end of the day, social media is really not “a program” at all. It is a fundamental shift in the way customers, donors, constituents, and employees consume and produce information. It’s behavior—a change in the way we are in the world.

Therefore, the future of marketing is not about telling people things—but about doing things with and for people. Think about it. How do you calculate ROI on messaging coming from your target audience? How do you calculate ROI (an old media metric) in a new media environment? It’s a brave new world, indeed—where we are “creating an environment for coordination and collaboration.”

Even if you consider the question in old media terms, isn’t it like trying to figure ROI on your phone, your conference room, or your fax? Few of us really think about these things in relationship to ROI. But since it’s the Internet, there is still a certain geek mystique. We are a little squeamish and feel the need to “ROI everything”—even if it means constructing elaborate parallel expense models based on paid Google adwords or other media buys. But the truth is, social media will soon be the rule—not the exception. Cost of doing business. David Spark addresses some of these issues from a refreshing perspective on socialmedia.biz. The requirement that everything fit in a discrete ROI queue is simply unrealistic and soon, anachronistic.

Perhaps, a 21st century take on this question would be Return on Engagement—taking the focus away from the justification of hard costs and considering opportunity costs. What do we sacrifice if we are not involved? What are the benefits—tangible and intangible—of spending your time monitoring and creating conversation? What business or donor involvement have you created?

Rules of Engagement

Still, even in the ROE context, just having a blog, Facebook account, or Twitter profile does not a social media strategy make. The fabric of social media success is woven from many threads and yarns, including compelling content, irresistible contests/quizzes, provocative video/photos, and authentic voices. You wouldn’t use just one traditional channel to market your product or organization, so it is probably not useful to think that one Twitter account or a blog post by itself can somehow produce ROI—or even ROE—overnight. Attributing a direct revenue equation to an isolated social media marketing activity simply isn’t relevant or accurate. Though weak individually, coordinated social media activities can certainly move the needle.

Engagement fosters affinity, trust, commitment—and ultimately, investment. Marketing has become equal parts science and art. Remember, creating a blog on WordPress of Blogger is free. Right now, Facebook and Twitter are free. So, social media’s costs are mostly labor, time, and creative energy. Therefore, social media success really comes down to commitment, clarity about your objectives, and getting over your fear of exposure—a horse that has already left the barn, I might add. Also, it helps if you have something to say that will interest your audience. Whether you call it—ROI, ROE, or RBI (wait, that’s baseball), here are some thoughts on how to plan, launch, and execute an effective social media plan:

• Focus on conversation, content, and benefits—not tools and technology
• Highlight intangibles
• Justify qualitative, as well as quantitative objectives.
• Compare costs of alternatives, benefits, and of not doing anything.
• Use pilot projects to test and evaluate
• Streamline data collection
• Get buy-in by using a cross-functional team or committee
• Release your fear

The pre-social media business universe was built on linear measurement. I think it’s time to consider using a different kind of yardstick—something with multiple dimensions and constant movement, something we have yet to invent. If small is the new big and free is the new economic engine, what are the new metrics? Is it time to get comfortable with a whole new level of ambiguity. What do you think?

Change of Heart?

September 22, 2009September 22, 2009 elaine gantz wright7 Comments

“It is not enough to stay busy. So, too, are the ants. The question is what you are busy about.” Henry David Thoreau

Seth Godin has ignited an Internet firestorm with his recent blog post condemning nonprofits for their aversion to change and their resistance to embracing social media in a passionate way. I think he has hit a nerve, but I suspect the emotional reaction is indicative of a much deeper, lurking tension at the very heart of the public sector.

As I wrote on this blog last week, social media is more a functional change in the way we live – as opposed to just the newest bright, shiny gadget. Clay Shirky calls it “the largest increase in expressive capability in human history.” Seth, this is a vast, ubiquitous, socio-cultural revolution. Perhaps, that explains why nonprofit and for-profit enterprises, alike, are a little reticent about just “showing up” haphazardly on Twitter, Facebook, etc. If you may recall, Seth laments, “Where are the big charities, the urgent charities, the famous charities that face such timely needs and are in a hurry to make change? Very few of them have bothered to show up in a big way.” I think it’s more than “showing up.” Although, one of my favorite quotes is Woody Allen’s, “Eighty percent of success is showing up.” I guess it’s complicated, as they say on Facebook. Perhaps we all need to just start swimming and learn to stay afloat as we go. Regardless, I think communicators have a daunting task ahead—no matter where they play—figuring out how to harness the enormous power within some sort of workable plan.

Still, I have to admit that on some level, Seth’s righteous indignation about an entire sector defining itself by “what it is not” (i.e. nonprofit) resonated strongly with me. As a wordsmith and amateur psychologist, I think this negative identity creates an inherent tension or incongruity of purpose. Perhaps even a self-esteem problem?

I was reminded of a brilliant closing session speaker I saw at last year’s Governor’s Conference for nonprofits presented by Austin’s One Star Foundation last year. The dynamic and innovative Valerie Keller, CEO of the Outreach Center in Lafayette, LA, spoke to this group of passionate Texas nonprofit leaders about this very issue. Her fervor took on the urgency of a battle cry—as she chided the well-meaning, often overly self-effacing social sector for settling for this dismissive “non” moniker. This concept also aligns with what I discussed last week when I mused about the emerging imperative for the nonprofit sector to rethink the ways it does business and functions at a core level.

In Valerie’s case, she definitely walks her talk. She has successfully reenergized a social service agency in a struggling region of Louisiana through creative public/private entrepreneurial partnerships and a social enterprise model. Social enterprise—now, that’s a term that jazzes me.

Another thought-leader in this area is Dan Pallotta, author of Uncharitable. Dan harshly critiques the underlying value system that confines our charities and other nonprofit organizations. Pallotta sheds light on the frugal, almost prudish constraints the public expects from nonprofits—everything from banning paid advertising, to perpetuating substandard wages for nonprofit employees. He examines the public’s unconscious expectation that nonprofits behave differently from for-profits and points the finger at Americans’ Puritan heritage of self-denial and frugality. That’s an interesting notion that may not tell the whole story—but may contribute to the perception.

We say, “Grow, grow, and do more . . . but, uh, don’t spend money!” On some level, we seem to want the nonprofit sector to shun the very strategies and tactics that drive the business sector. There’s the rub—a fundamental disconnect. Further, Pallotta argues that the public tends to fixate too tenaciously on fundraising ratios and low overhead costs as the only relevant success measures. These arbitrary efficiency calculations do not always translate into results—or impact, for that matter. Instead, he calls for donors to focus on this:

“What has the organization achieved, and what can it achieve with my donation?”

Pallotta challenges us to speak up on behalf of nonprofits and actively educate donors on the necessity of cost-effective administrative expenses and business techniques that can build the best launching pads for nonprofits and—the change they seek to create.

What do you think?

Global, Social, Ubiquitous, and Cheap

September 14, 2009September 15, 2009 elaine gantz wright8 Comments

I have just discovered Clay Shirky, New York University Interactive Technology Professor and my new favorite media provocateur. He talks about social media in the context of the broadly transformed media landscape with massive cultural implications. He spoke at the NTEN conference in April, and Blackbaud Blogger Chad Norman documented several quotes that he claimed “blew his mind.” And, indeed they do mine, too! Shirky has remarkable vision and shrewd insight. His fundamental premise is that cell phones, the Web, Facebook and Twitter have radically changed all the rules of the media game, allowing ordinary citizens to access extraordinary new powers to engage in and impact real-world events. It’s a fascinating concept that certainly informs the way we think about social action as a whole. Further, in considering Shirky’s observations, I’m wondering if we could be on the verge of a systemic reinvention of how we address society’s most pressing needs across the board? Could the “nonprofit organization” as we know it be ripe for transformation? In a presentation on TED, Shirky makes a sweeping claim:

“The moment we are living right now, this generation, represents the largest increase in expressive capability in human history.”

He goes on to say that only four other periods in history have manifested such revolutionary change:
• In the mid 1440s, the invention of the printing press, movable type, and oil-based inks.
• About 200 years ago—the invention of the telegraph, followed by the telephone—
enabling 2-way communication, slow text-based conversations, then real-time voice
conversations.
• About 150 years ago—recorded media, other than print—introduction of photographs, then recorded sound, then motion pictures—all encoded into physical objects.
• About 100 years ago—harnessing the electromagnetic spectrum to send images through the air—radio and television.

Reviewing the 20th century, Shirky suggests, “The media that’s good at creating conversations is no good at creating groups. The media that’s good at creating groups is no good at creating conversations.” The Internet has shattered this model—in several salient ways.

First, it natively supports groups and conversations simultaneously. Now “many can talk to many,” as opposed to “one talking to one” or “one talking to many.” The other big change is the Internet is carriage for all other media. Everything exists side by side and intertwined. And the marriage of the Internet and mobile technology has taken this a step further—making media global, social, ubiquitous, and cheap. And this reality has enabled the third big shift—the consumers are now the producers. Shirky suspects there are now more amateurs producing media than professionals, leading to another one of those provocative quotes—”Media is increasingly less just a source of information and increasingly more a site of coordination.”

So, I have to ask— where does this leave the “marketing communications professional”? What exactly is our role now? It’s a question I’ve been asking myself recently. We are no longer about “carefully crafting and conveying messages” – but about ““creating an environment for convening and supporting.” As marketing professionals, are we becoming party hosts, rather than communicators? Hmmm. How does this new media model integrate with the current structural framework of business? There is the rub. This is a shift to be reckoned with. But consider the other conundrum . . .As drivers of organizations, how do we make use of this new landscape? And how does the traditional nonprofit organization adroitly adjust to this new media environment?

I can’t help but think about social entrepreneur Manny Hernandez’s success with a non-traditional approach to social action—transitioning his initiative from independent social media communities to official nonprofit status, as opposed to the reverse. His success in creating support networks for diabetes through free Ning tools is an example of the phenomenon Shirky describes as the value of “social capital,” rather than “technical capital.” He aptly observes that “tools don’t get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.” Wow. Another revelation. He adds that the real innovation happens when the tools become second-nature for the user. Manny’s post titled “How To Create Social Change Without Forming a 501-c3” details how he drove the development of his communities independently — TuDiabetes (almost 10,800 members) and EsTuDiabetes (almost 5,400 members) before deciding to establish a nonprofit organization, Diabetes Hands Foundation. You can read more about his transition from the social media cloud to nonprofit organization on Beth Kanter’s blog.

Personally, I have been on both sides of this question, but the rapid-fire change from just a year ago makes it difficult to discern a definite path or any firm conclusions. Having worked for nonprofits and with a for-profit, cause-focused, social-media start-up, I have experienced the challenge of engagement from many vantage points. I believe the key is to optimize the global-social-ubiquitous-cheap equation in ways that leverage “social capital” and capture the imaginations of the wide web of user-consumer-producers. Definitely a brave new world! And an energizing, astonishing, and sometimes befuddling time of recreation.

How do you think nonprofits should adapt?

What are you?

September 7, 2009September 8, 2009 elaine gantz wright3 Comments

I am the first to admit it. I am an anomaly—a distinctive amalgam of eclectic experiences and pronounced passions. I am a seasoned, accomplished professional, schooled in the most traditional marketing media techniques; but I have also journeyed to the cutting edge of the vast social media abyss. It’s largely uncharted territory for my brethren “of a certain age,” so carving out my professional niche while straddling disparate worlds, approaches, and generations can be a challenge.

In fact, I am still processing a recent conversation with a respected nonprofit headhunter in Dallas. The silver-maned, super-savvy staffing pro peered over his polished tortoiseshell reading glasses, took a breath, and asked, “So, Elaine, what are you?” The silence was palpable. I’m thinking in my rattled brain things like—single mom, daughter, job-seeker, brunette, social media consultant, and . . . derailed.

He continued, “So really, are you a fundraiser, or are you a marketer? Which one? I think you need to decide.” My first reaction to that was, “Well, of course, I’m both, and that is the value that I bring to my clients and my employers.” I’m not sure he bought that, because he added, “Well, you have to understand that my client needs to churn out hundreds of funding proposals.” I think he was just a product of his context—his pre-Web 2.0 consciousness.

All weekend, I have pondered that three-hour conversation and its many nuances. Lots of food for thought as he expertly excised ever decision I have ever made since age four. Invasive yet thought-provoking. Later, I mused that I really do hate labels, but I understand they are a necessary evil in the recruiting biz—especially with this economy with such a buyer’s market. But, I suspect I do have to address the question—what (or who) am I, anyway? And what is it I am on this earth to accomplish?

I know I have I entered the social media space for a reason—even though I am not your typical demographic for the job. And I believe more strongly than ever that social media is becoming the new norm and the essential vehicle for product and service communication—whether it’s for nonprofits or for-profits. It’s merging the accepted definitions of marketing, sales, public relations, market research, customer service—and even fundraising for nonprofits.

The recent Socap 09 Conference is a salient example of this invention and innovation. It exemplifies our morphing toolbox for addressing social needs. The whole realm of social enterprise fascinates me. Though the concept of the “social entrepreneur” may even seem like an oxymoron to some, it’s the emerging reinvention of society’s approach to achieving results in the social sector—a new way to think about ROI and change the world.

Socap09 in San Francisco brought together a unique mix of the world’s leading social innovators—traditional investors, impact investors, social entrepreneurs, philanthropists, new media evangelists, NGOs and nonprofits, wealth managers, development agencies, venture capitalists, MBA students, and other groups interested in the growing opportunities related to social capital. These folks account for a new breed of philanthropist—the social catalysts. Last year’s conference gathered more than 650 leading global investors and entrepreneurs from 26 countries. This year’s sold out again and featured speakers from the Skoll Foundation, Food Inc, LINKtv, Invisible Children, Global Giving, the World Economic Forum, Virgance, Kiva, Change.org, Ushahidi, McKinsey, The Economist, and many others. The opening keynote will be given by Sonal Shah, director of the White House Office for Social Innovation.

Founder Kevin Jones said, “In these turbulent times, social innovators in the public and private sectors, from foundations to social venture funds to development agencies to grassroots Web 2.0 activists, are working together to build a new economic foundation for the world.”

I heard about one panel that particularly intrigued me. Having worked with a fledgling cause website, I know this space can be tricky and challenging. “The Future of Social Innovation on the Web” panel was facilitated by Dennis Whittle of Global Giving and featured Premal Shah of Kiva.org, Jonathan Greenblatt of Our Good Works, Steve Newcomb of Virgance, and Ben Rattray of Change.org.

Beth Kanter attended and interviewed several of these guys after their presentation. She reported that Premal talked about the need for creating “magic for users” and building in workflow software that actively facilitates relationship-building through a clear process of engagement. In talking about the next Web transition, he said, “If Web 1.0 is about one-way communication, and Web 2.0 is about two-way communication, then Web 3.0 is about building a bridge between two-way online communication and offline actions and impact.”

Ben Rattray commented on the effectiveness of social media platforms—now and down the road:

“The vast majority of social good platforms have failed because they have modeled social-good platforms on commercial applications. We assumed that if we created a generic platform that people would start their own actions. They don’t. It isn’t as easy to throw up an action on the web as it is to throw up a video. The vision is to provide a platform for collective social action, so it is easy for people who care about an issue to connect. There must be catalytic organizations. If you build the platform, will spontaneous organizing happen? No! Synthesis of grassroots organizations is needed to channel social change.”

And from Premal Shah:

“Kiva is at the intersection of money and meaning. There is going to be a socially responsible investment. There is a third access – it is not about ROI or social impact. It’s the user experience that drives adoption. Never underestimate something that is fun and has short feedback loops. If we want people to engage, it has to be easy, fun, and addictive. Return on experience versus investment.”

Clearly, the line between for-profit and nonprofit is blurring. It’s less about “what you are,” and more about what you can achieve.

Stay tuned, hold on tight, and think about it . . .
“What are you?” or better yet, “What do you want to be?”

The Tweet Life: Ambient Intimacy and other Epiphanies

July 23, 2009November 20, 2022 elaine gantz wright7 Comments

To say Twitter is hot is quite an understatement. In a world thirsty for leadership, everyone seems to be following these days. In the past week, I have attended some interesting presentations on the Internet and making sense of social media for business. It’s a reality and a resource—no doubt, but there is still rampant confusion about how to optimize it. I am very interested to know how you view social media and use it.

I met a true social media master this week—Ben Smithee. He is an astute Gen Y entrepreneur steeped in the savvy of social media—particularly for market research. He says no one has ever called him a guru, but I certainly would. Ben has an impressive grasp of all the latest and greatest tools. Regarding Twitter, he recommends we not Tweet as a business, but as a human voice. Make your messages personal and conversational—not institutional or programmatic. Interact with customers, donors, or clients as individuals, not a solid mass. It’s Communication 101. Make it intimate. Vulnerability is where real connection happens. In fact, I absolutely loved Ben’s term for social media—“ambient intimacy.”

And then, it hit me! That’s the magic of social media. It permeates our everyday lives. Call it habit or even addiction, as some have. For many, social media can become part of their everyday unconscious impulses. That’s why we need to pay attention to this stuff. We can actually use Twitter and other social media tools to enhance intimacy with patrons, donors, customers, or clients by humanizing your missions and our value propositions. Focus on the anecdotal—on stories with authentic fiber, as opposed to carefully crafted messages. It takes so much more than an understanding of the tools and technology that power social networks to inspire change and build long-term, meaningful relationships. You must immerse yourself in the conversation.

You are the personality and the soul of the brand you represent. Think of social media as the page where we compose digital poetry to inspire. These tools are born from technological advances, but they are rooted in the most basic elements of human communication—conversation, curiosity, caring, and connection. I guess you could call them the four “Cs” of social media—a girl’s (or boy’s) “second” best friend, I suspect. Here are a few more tips and concepts for your Tweet Sheet:

• Tweet. Message to your followers.
• Retweet. Share status messages on Twitter. It’s a great way of building relationships.
• @Replies. Direct a message that is available to all. Great way to lift others up.
• #Hashtags. Create ways to search and group information/initiatives/activities.#MoRanch
• Promote your blog or podcast. But try to do it conversationally. Ask people what they think or pose a rhetorical question. Don’t just SPAM the URL. Also, be careful about headlines or questions that are TOO provocative. I have learned this the hard way. Sometimes it’s best to leave your clever copywriter hat in the closet and just be REAL.
• Follow a specific cause of entity. Consider finding the right people tweeting about that cause or entity, and build a blended dashboard tool such as Hootsuite.
• Understand how people are really using Twitter. Monitor the @ replies, and see how they interact with others. Some folks use Twitter like a megaphone, and others use it like a walkie-talkie.
• Make business connections. As always, listen first. Learn more about the person, follow their links, read their blogs, and get to know them. As I have said in the past on my blog, it’s a courtship. You date before you marry. In this space, you listen, respond, and participate—before you pitch or solicit!
• Create a tweet strategy. Instead of tweeting “what are you doing?” try “What are you passionate about?” The answer to that could be very interesting and revealing.

And for nonprofit causes, hashtags have become an effective tool in building awareness and motivating action. They make it easy to search and identify a particular trend. Blame Drew’s Cancer http://blamedrewscancer.com/# (hashtag: #blamedrewscancer) is a great example. Drew Olanoff recently contracted Hodgkins Lymphoma, and launched his campaign. The tweets are pulled into http://www.blamedrewscancer.com with the goal that their sheer volume will trigger a large donation from a nonprofit organization. The site recently announced that Livestrong will be a partner.

So, get creative! And let us know—what’s working for you? Follow me.

How are you holding on — in the meantime?

July 17, 2009December 4, 2017 elaine gantz wright1 Comment

The Rollins Philanthropy & Leadership Center recently released the findings of its 2009 Nonprofit Compensation and Benefits Report. The report compiled data on more than 8,300 individual salaries and categorized into 121 job titles for 145 nonprofit organizations in Central Florida and found that male CEOs/executive directors of nonprofit organizations earn significantly higher pay than their female counterparts on average. According to the report, the average annual compensation for male CEOs/executive directors was $110,962 versus $80,987 per year for females. “While more of the surveyed CEOs/executive directors are women, there are more males in the CEO/executive director positions at the largest organizations,” said Margaret Linanne, executive director of the Philanthropy Center. Margaret added that these numbers lined up with recent nationwide data released by a similar study conducted by The Nonprofit Times.

I hung up the phone after speaking with Margaret and thought, “How grim.” I consider myself a glass-half-full, optimistic person most days, but I’ve been having trouble mustering the good cheer. This story makes me think of my own situation—in transition once again—personally and professionally. I am a seasoned career professional and a woman with many blessings. I have invented programs, raised millions, and changes lives, but my path has encountered many challenges lately. The social media start-up business I felt was my calling recently faced difficult choices—a layoff of the core team due to budget cuts. The pain of a vision, derailed.

Ordinarily, such circumstances would not thwart my resolve, but the uncertain economic environment is disturbing in new, pervasive ways. I can think of more than a dozen bright, intelligent, accomplished women in their forties and fifties who have been relieved of their significant responsibilities in the past six months—in for-profit and nonprofit environments. Margaret surmised that the male bias still lingers in private sector and nonprofit board rooms across the country that—”women don’t have to work,” because their husbands are the making big salaries or because they are raising the children. But I am here to tell you that the women are typically doing both jobs these days. Where do we find the energy?

And many reports say that males are feeling the brunt of the economic downturn. A July 16, 2009 Wall Street Journal article reports, “The 2.3 percentage-point gap between men’s June unemployment rate of 10.6% and women’s 8.3% rate is near the highest it’s ever been since records started being kept in 1948. The gap first hit two percentage points in March this year, and the 2.5 percentage-point gap in May was the highest ever. The overall unemployment rate rose to 9.5% in June, from 9.4% in May. The economy lost a higher-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June.”

As the single mother of two teenage boys, the reality of waning male productivity is as disconcerting as the abhorrent gender compensation gap. About two out of three men I encounter seem to be chronically unemployed, underemployed, or nursing a sense of entitled malaise. Not sure what in the heck is going on in our culture, but I suspect we are on the verge a course correction of unprecedented magnitude and disruption.

Seeking solace, I revisited one of my favorite books recently—In the Meantime, by Iyanla Vanzant. It is an intimate, touching book about transition of the heart—the process of moving from one period in your life to the next—managing monumental changes in love, life . . . everything.

Iyanla writes: “The presence of love is a healing power. The effects of this healing are what we are all born to discover and experience in every aspect of our lives. It is sometimes difficult to realize this, because in the meantime, we are not getting the love we want in the way we want it. The meantime is often a time of vagueness. You are experiencing a vague anxiety that you cannot quite pinpoint. It’s in your head. No, your chest. No, your heart. Sometimes that something is sadness. You are walking on a tightrope, about to fall. You are trying to hold on, to stay grounded, but slowly, bit by bit, you realize that you or your job or your relationship is falling apart. In the meantime, just when things look like they are falling apart, they are actually falling into place—the divine place for everyone involved. When you are in the meantime, you are in a time of healing preparation. You are being prepared for the grandest experience of your life—unconditional love and light. In the meantime, you must be willing to endure the process of felling vague confusion and helplessness. Remember, however, the meantime is not permanent. It is a healing process.”

I find Iyanla’s words comforting right now—at a time we all need to examine the truth in our hearts as we reinvent our expectations and our lives. We all need to find a way to hold on—in the meantime.

Anne Lamott, another one of my favorite writers, says, “Man is born broken. He lives by mending. The grace of God is glue.”

What are your thoughts about keeping your balance?

Tweet Surrender: The Truth about Twitter

July 10, 2009November 20, 2022 elaine gantz wright6 Comments

The decibel level of Twitter buzz only continues to crescendo. Harvard Business School is even studying the complexities of Tweet-ology. A Harvard MBA student examined the activity of a random sample of 300,000 Twitter users in May of this year—to try to understand the phenomenon that is Twitter. We hear it referenced almost daily—and more and more, you can follow just about anyone or anything on Twitter, but what’s really going on? And this begs the question—just how do we make it work for us?

Continuing along my own journey of social media comprehension, I have to admit I was startled by this recent data—especially in comparison to what I know about other popular social media sites, such as Facebook. The researchers discovered that 80% of those sampled were “followed by” or “followed” at least one user. By comparison, only 60 to 65% of other online social media site members have at least one friend (measuring these stats for sites at similar levels of development). This suggests that entrenched, active users really do understand exactly how Twitter works. (Unlike much of the non-Web 2.0 world.) The initiated get it — not really too much of a revelation, methinks.

However, it’s the metrics around gender behavior that particularly intrigue me. Although men and women follow a similar number of Twitter users, men have 15% more followers than women. And, men also have more reciprocated relationships, in which two users follow each other. This “follower split” suggests that women are driven less by followers than men, or perhaps they have more stringent criteria for reciprocating relationships. This seems somehow counter-intuitive, though—especially given that females hold a slight majority on Twitter—45% are men, and 55% are women.

Even more enlightening is— who follows whom:
• A man is two times more likely to follow another man than a woman.
• A woman is 25% more likely to follow a man than a woman.
• A man is 40% more likely to be followed by another man than by a woman.

This cannot be explained by different tweeting activity, either, because both men and women tweet at the same rate. These results are remarkable in light of previous social media research. On other social networks, most of the activity is focused around women. Men seem to follow content produced by women they do and do not know, and women follow content produced by women they know.

Generally, men receive comparatively little attention from other men or from women. The researchers conjectured that perhaps men and women find the content produced by other men on Twitter more compelling than on other social networks. And maybe, men find the content produced by women less compelling because of the lack of photo sharing, detailed biographies, etc. After all, men are visual creatures.

Or could the cryptic nature of the 140-character-post limit and truncated URLs inhibit more meaningful sharing—that women often prefer? It’s a thought-provoking question.

Overall, Twitter’s usage patterns are also very different from a typical online social network. On Twitter, there is a small, very active user group. Specifically, the top 10% of Twitter users accounted for over 90% of tweets. Oh, there’s that old 90/10 rule again! Fundraising 101, indeed. On a typical online social network, the top 10% of users account for only about 30% of all production.

From this perspective, Twitter is actually more of a one-way, asynchronous communication vehicle than a two-way, peer-to-peer network. Perhaps nonprofits can harness the platform for a new way of crowd fundraising? Worth considering. The leaders initiate and the followers acquiesce. Hmmm . . . a whole new way to think about the social web? Perhaps a new social science. I wonder.

What do you think? @ellagantz

Will microvolunteering have a macro impact?

July 2, 2009July 3, 2009 elaine gantz wright6 Comments

I was very intrigued by the latest social media philanthropy trend I saw posted by NPR on my Facebook page—The Extraordinaires, a snazzy, new social media enterprise that delivers microvolunteer opportunities to mobile phones that can be done on-demand and on-the-spot. The article begins – “Got five minutes? Got a cell phone? Want to do good?” What a concept—weaving volunteer activities into the fabric of your busy, over-programmed day. Interesting concept, but does it make practical sense? When you are waiting at the doctor’s office or in line at the grocery store, might you have time or focus to translate an email newsletter into Spanish—or figure sum-of-the-years-digits depreciation on the purchase of a new copier? I wonder. It’s a great concept, indeed—multi-taking at the highest level of win-win efficiency.

Upon download, I realized the opportunities offered were almost universally photo-related—tagging images for the Smithsonian or cataloging images for the Brooklyn Museum. My mind was racing with other options or opportunities. Still, I was a bit bewildered. The app asked that I describe what I saw—one session asking me to tag what appeared to be 19th century French Genre paintings. Now, I’m thinking this is a bit freewheeling for a museum. Luckily, I took art history in college, but I’m not so sure I would trust the random, crowdsourced public to accurately catalog these esoteric works for posterity. Definite fact-checking and review required, indeed.

As I hit submit, I suspected that it was less about the task at hand, so to speak, and more about the experience. It’s kind of like taking one of those Facebook quizzes. It’s fun and enlightening in a pseudo-informational sort of way, but the value is questionable. However, I was surprised that there seemed to be no data capture—no way of engaging me further after my “micro” interaction. There was just a very cordial thank you for “making the world a better place.” So, the ongoing social media question looms—how do we bring those touched through casual encounters such as an iphone tagging exercise into our cultivation universes?

Extraordinaires co-founder Jacob Colker, 26, says, “We hope people might look differently at that ride on the bus and not just play video games.” He continues, “Microvolunteerism is perfectly suited for the Millennial Generation. They are used to text messaging, MySpace, Facebook, get-in, get-out, instant gratification. For them, going out and cleaning up a park—that’s not necessarily attractive to them.” So, is microvoluteerism the new media equivalent of a one-night stand? No commitments . . . no strings? I guess we’ll have to stay tuned!

I cringe to think the entire paradigm for volunteerism is shifting to micro tasks and instant gratification. I prefer to see this as fresh, innovative concept yet another option to attract “followers” and “fans.” I am reminded of the mission trip my 17-year-old son recently took to northern Michigan. The group of 35 students spent a week renovating a deteriorating campground for economically disadvantaged youth. They built Adirondack chairs, sanded fences, and painted cabins. They got their hands dirty and their hearts engaged. No cell phones were allowed. And, the gratification may not have been instant, but it was most certainly—genuine.

What do you think about microvolunteerism?

The meaning of social media for nonprofits and the wisdom of Sidney Poitier.

April 7, 2009April 14, 2009 elaine gantz wrightLeave a comment

Every day at http://www.YourCause.com, I set out to make the world a better place by empowering nonprofit organizations. It’s an exciting, new landscape of trial and error; ups and downs; fits and starts — well, more fits than starts, particularly in the wacky world of a Web 2.0 start-up. Every once in while, I have the opportunity to be truly inspired, even electrified. I live for those moments. I had such an experience at the AFP International conference in New Orleans last week. Amidst the chaos and cacophony of more than 3000 “jazzed” fundraisers in the Big Easy, I witnessed communication at its finest, clearest, and most meaningful. Mr. Sidney Poitier, one our finest actors, commanded a room of thousands — with the clarity of his purpose and the weight of his presence. His gravitas was magnetic–elegant, yet with an ease that comes with years of experience as a master communicator. This is a man comfortable in his own skin — and in his own head. I could have listened to him speak for hours — riveted, in tears many times. The poignant authenticity and intimacy of his delivery were sheer magic — mesmerizing. He focused on those who had most impacted his own life philanthropically — not through sweeping gestures and grand campaigns, but through private, selfless, personal acts of kindness and consideration. And he overflowed with the gratitude that resulted from their sincere acknowledgment. Wow! What a privilege. “Philanthropy is the profound manifestation of the best in all of us.” “Sometimes we need to take an honest look a how steady we are at the wheel of our existence.” – Sidney Poitier

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: