Tag: social media

What’s the Next Layer on the Stack?

elaine gantz wright5 Comments

pancakesI was privileged to speak to a class at Southern Methodist University last week on social media for nonprofits. Nina Flournoy, the charming, accomplished corporate communications professor, was taking a very practical, professionally focused approach to the material. Clearly, the bright, enthusiastic students were hungry to comprehend the marketing power of social media.

They asked great questions – What makes something go viral for a business or nonprofit? How do I know what to post? When to post? How do I find my audience? Looking back on the day, my insights were many, but I was surprised to notice that though we may be asking similar questions, our points of view were remarkably different. Facebook, Twitter, and social media are as much a part of their daily lives as the telephone or the iPod. In fact, they live perpetually connected lives. Therefore, looking at these social media sites as marketing channels to be managed or positioned can feel incongruent. Social media is simply how they live, how they interact with the world and each other. It’s second nature—breathing, eating, sleeping—and tweeting! The reality is here:

As part of a slightly older generation of professionals, I am still experimenting with ways to integrate, coordinate, and differentiate somehow. But whether you are Generation X, Y or Z, I think these are questions we as marketers must address right now, in the moment. We are all trying to figure out how to weave social media tactics into the overall marketing mix—and manage them effectively. As we know, setting up a Facebook account or a Twitter profile is just the beginning—definitely not the whole story.

Content is king—but even more important is the conversation it triggers. Social media is less about information and more about participation. And geez, that is very hard to schedule! It is an activity, behavior, and process. Therefore, the question is—does the user experience have value? I think that’s where businesses and nonprofits are stymied. They look at social media and ask, “how is this relevant?”

And yet, that’s probably the flawed interpretation. Twitter, Facebook, and Linked In are really relevance-neutral. They are only as effective as their context. Sage North America recently released survey data that “88 percent of U.S. and Canadian nonprofits are using some form of social media, although less than half of this number have been using it for more than a year.” The surprising news is, “Of those who have not adopted a social media campaign, 45 percent indicated that it was because they were unsure of its relevance or advantages. Others said that they were unable to devote the time or resources.” The other hesitancy seems to be an uncertainty about integrating existing online transactions with social media environments. “91 percent of nonprofits said that they raise funds online, yet only 58 percent of these respondents said they use social media for fundraising.”

The challenge is to embrace the social media landscape in a valuable, productive way. That is, from a business perspective, we need to find a way to aggregate the vast, messy world of social media into a usable set of metrics, messages, behaviors, and/or outcomes. As I have written in earlier posts, it’s the new success measure—ROE, return on engagement.

At the end of the class, the SMU students asked me the question, “What’s next? What’s the next big thing?” What a fabulous and provocative question. There is some buzz about this among thought leaders. They suggest it is the question is really “What’s next on the stack?” We need to think about the media communication world as a stack or a progression. Many point to aggregation, dashboards for marketers, and consolidation tools. Chris Vary of Weber Shandwick and the Dallas Social Media Club says he suspects Twitter has probably peaked in terms of growth, so we should keep our eyes on the social media horizon. I have read there are 11,000 registered third party apps built on top of Twitter and probably more for Facebook; therefore, I’m thinking the cycle dictates some sort of consolidation or filtering.

Thinking back on my visit to SMU, where I earned an MBA and an MA, I am dizzied and overwhelmed by the acceleration of change. When I was sitting in those same chairs in the Hughes Trigg Building (well, maybe replaced since then) twenty-ahem years ago, I was thinking about taking my box of punch cards to the guy who worked on the other side of the little window in the mainframe building. No PCs. No Internet. No email, even. Still had the old Smith-Carona and Liquid Paper, for heaven’s sake! So hard to fathom.

gartner-social-software-hype-cycle-2009
Gartner Social Media Hype Cycle

And now, I can’t imagine a day without my iPhone and HootSuite. I guess I’m sort of a hybrid. As I wrapped up my remarks, I waxed a little nostalgic and encouraged the students to stay open, curious, and highly, highly adaptive.

The human condition is evolving at hyper-speed—intertwined with high-velocity technological innovation focused solely on expressive capability. As NYU professor Clay Shirky observes, “The moment we are living right now, this generation, represents the largest increase in expressive capability in human history.”

So consider this—social media as we know it right now will not be recognizable in 3-5 years. What do you think is next? Are you ready?

Elaine Gantz Wright writes about social media and other communications phenomena. Please post your comment below and join the conversation. elgantz@ yahoo.com

The New Peer-to-Peer Potential

elaine gantz wright2 Comments

hand
The Giving USA Foundation/Giving Institute released its Annual Report on Philanthropy for the year ending December 31, 2008 in June of this year. Notably, despite the impact of the recession and arguably the most challenging economy since the Great Depression, total giving to charitable causes in the United States reached an estimated $307.65 billion.

The key finding here is that individual giving continues to account for the largest percentage of overall giving at 75 percent of the total. Individual giving is an estimated $229.28 billion, (down by 2.7 percent over 2007 with a -6.3 percent adjustment for inflation). Education organizations received an estimated $40.94 billion, or 13 percent of the total. Gifts to this type of organization decreased 5.5 percent with a -9 percent adjusted for inflation.

As fundraisers, the path is clear. Individuals represent our greatest opportunity for recovery and growth. That said, our methods of securing individual donations definitely deserve some scrutiny and consideration—especially in light of rapid-fire technological changes impacting the landscape.

Just how can we maximize individual giving? And what are the fundamental trends and challenges influencing the proven solicitation process?

Throughout my career, I have heard mentors chant, “People don’t give to institutions; they give to people.” It is a time-tested fundraising adage, and it defines the essential nature of one-on-one solicitation at the very heart of fundraising. The process of one person asking another to give is what fundraising is all about. One-on-one meetings and conversations are the moments where the school’s case for support is made most effectively with a blend of passion and hard facts. It is the personal relationships between volunteer solicitors and donors that generate funding and continuing support for institutions across the street and across the globe. Research, cultivation and stewardship are all part of the solicitation process, but nothing happens until—we ask.

As we learned from the game-changing success of Internet fundraising in the last presidential campaign, closed–door handshakes and smoke-filled rooms are anachronisms. One of the most remarkable aspects of the Obama groundswell was the return of grassroots participation—the return to people. That is, people reaching out—one to another—to ask for support. Whether online or on the front porch, people asked— peers and strangers.

The automation of the contact process was nothing short of amazing—phone scripts downloaded seamlessly to kitchen and dining-room computers all over the nation and people giving up their Sunday afternoons to attend calling parties with cell phones in hand. Real-time tracking reports updated party calling returns as it the volunteers were dialing—thus enlivening the competitive spirit along with the political passion for change.

This was the fruitful marriage of personal peer-to-peer power and technology.

Today, the world of online fundraising tools and platforms is evolving rapidly. Social media is a radical new milieu impacting the time-honored one-on-one tradition. Think about Facebook CAUSES with more than 33 million monthly active users and social action sites such as www.change.org. or www.care2.com.

Everyone is trying to figure out how the infuse electronic appeal with the authenticity of human emotion. Photos, audio, video—innovations are expanding exponentially. Charity:Water has used video as the medium for its organization’s message very effectively.

So, what are some other opportunities tools and methods? I am interested in learning how schools, universities, and institutions are absorbing these tactics. What’s working? What’s not? What’s changing? What needs to change? How can we best automate and streamline the peer-to-peer solicitation process?

In a world with so many demands on time and attention, we as fundraisers will be more successful if we can appeal to the behaviors and preferences of those making the asks—our volunteers, ambassadors, and emerging Gen X leaders of today and tomorrow.

Contact me at elgantz @ yahoo.com.

The ROI that would be king

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.

crown2The 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

talking 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?

Listening Lessons

elaine gantz wright9 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. Find out more at SocialFuse.

“To listen well is as powerful a means of influence as to talk well, and is as essential to all true conversation.”
-Chinese Proverb
ear
I attended a meeting of social media aficionados last week—the Dallas Social Media Club. It was a vibrant group of new-media-savvy folks with cutting-edge interests and razor-sharp wits. I loved the energy in the room and the combination of slightly smug awareness and wide-eyed curiosity about what might replace Twitter as the next techno-networking phenomenon. Officially, “the Social Media Club Dallas focuses on social media practitioners in corporate, agency, and PR roles—primarily interested in how the medium to large enterprises are leveraging social media to reach, engage, and most important, drive revenue.”

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, Thursday evening’s confab consisted primarily of “vendor” types—as the speaker, Chris Vary, VP of Weber Shandwick’s Digital Division, noted when he conducted a quick poll of the room. I think this strongly indicates that the social media charge is still led by the practitioner-evangelists, and that most businesses, small to large to small (including nonprofits), have still not seen the proverbial light. On a practical level, they have not figured out how to integrate it into everyday operations.

As I have posited in past posts, I believe this is because it is more than a change of media. It is a change of mentality. That’s a tougher paradigm to shift. Clay Shirky is one our most articulate voices around the gestalt of this communication transformation, yet it’s still a bit slippery.

As I interact with nonprofits and small businesses, I struggle to identify ways to provide high-value impact. So many complain that they have set up their various social platform accounts on Facebook, Twitter, and Linked In, but they sit dormant—like throwing a party and no one attends. Still, nonprofits and for-profits are tentative about investing—staff time, budgets, mindshare to the care and feeding of these communities without tangible proof of ROI. I was amazed when the PR big wheels at Weber Shandwick had to cajole their Fortune 10 client— General Motors, to commit to social media. It took three years. They had to construct some sort of elaborate expense metaphor quantifying projected Google pay-per-click costs.

So, more and more, I’m thinking it is really all about listening. I’m not too keen on the concept of “active listening,” because I think that is redundant and a little cheesy, as my teenage sons say. “Passive listening” is simply not paying attention in my book. (That reminds me of some relationships I’ve had.) That said, I think businesses should first approach social media as a listening tool, as opposed to a communications tool—an ear as opposed to a mouth. I think that helps marketers diminish some of the execution-related tension. All of the social media gurus—from Beth Kanter to Seth Godin, recommend starting with listening. However, I’m now thinking this should be the fundamental objective—allowing other opportunities to blossom.

Really, social media is a gift to market research professionals—a way to gather real-time and real customer feedback inexpensively. Then, the way we respond can dramatically enhance, strength, and embellish our brands in this new context of conversation. Crafting the response becomes the artistry. We can provide customer service, build relationships, or even soothe the ruffled feathers of cranky influencers/bloggers. This must be authentic, customer-validating, spin-free conversation.

Chris Vary talked about the new PR being the “virtual newsroom.” He is definitely on to something. We as public relations and communications professionals must me become more like monitors than marketers. Great places to start include: (Begin with the free ones.)

• Technorati
• Google Alerts
• Social Mention
• Delicious
• Twitter
• Radian 6

RSS feed rules:

Your feed dashboard becomes your roadmap. Set up Google Reader, iGoogle, or Bloglines to track—organization names, names of key leaders/board members, other players in your space, industry terms, your URLs, possible controversial subjects, etc. Get creative with keywords. And as Beth Kanter advises, involve the entire operation in the process. Here’s Beth’s great presentation:

Move social media out of the silo of the communications department. Empower all of your employees as listeners. Then, your social media strategy looks more like a training initiative for your various constituents and stakeholders. Brainstorm keywords, learn how to respond effectively, and handle red-flag issues. This is where social media gets organic, integrated, and exponential in impact.

Are you listening?

Global, Social, Ubiquitous, and Cheap

elaine gantz wright8 Comments
Professor Clay Shirky
Professor Clay Shirky

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. Find out more at SocialFuse.

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.

Bill Cheswick's map of the Internet
Bill Cheswick's map of the Internet

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?

How are you holding on — in the meantime?

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

elaine gantz wright6 Comments

tweet_twoThe 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?

elaine gantz wright6 Comments

iphone_200
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?

From the Bazaar to the Cathedral

elaine gantz wright2 Comments
Social media = the bazaar
Social media = the bazaar

I had an energizing partnering conversation with a dynamic nonprofit consultant this week. It’s one of the things I love most about my work—networking and brainstorming with passionate, bright professionals about maximizing support of nonprofit organizations. Carlo Cuesta is part of a firm based in Minneapolis called Creation in Common. Love the notion. And, I love the Twin Cities, because I spent my salad days (in addition to most of my snow days) there working for the glorious Guthrie Theater—one of the foundational forces of our nation’s regional theater movement. In its vision statement, CIC states, “Engaged collaboration is the ultimate method in which to create vibrant communities working in harmony toward a shared vision. Knowledge is in constant motion and is formed through playful interaction, the active exchange of ideas and concepts, and the testing of solutions that lead to enlightening truths and courageous failure.”

This is a perfect description of social media.

There is much lively banter and conversation across the various Web 2.0 groups I frequent about nonprofit engagement in social media. Do nonprofits get it? How should they do it? Are they really ahead of the private sector curve? Does anyone know how to measure ROI? Why should they spend the time? How do they integrate into my communication plan?

All of these are valid questions—and worth answering as soon as possible. But one post I read definitely sums up my feelings. Richard Lewis, a new media pro, says, “The most important consideration for the use of social networking is that if you choose not to participate, you are still part of the discussion, but you just do not have a voice.” It’s all about finding your own, distinctive, effective voice in the sometimes overwhelming cacophony.

Actually, many analogies are emerging around social media— “the cocktail party,” “circus,” etc. But, I really liked Carlo’s concept – “the bazaar.” Marketing has been carried out to date more “cathedral style.” Organizations traditionally deliver messages as if we were speaking to a focused, almost sedentary audience—their congregations, if you will. The social media landscape really is a more like a flea market or a bazaar. It’s a free-for-all of experiences and ideas with the incessant, media-driven competition for attention and interaction. It’s about distraction and short attention spans. Carlo contends that our task as marketers is create that bridge or portico—that provides a path into the organization’s “cathedral.”

What a useful image! Yes, we do need to lead friends into our figurative cathedrals. Perhaps we can do that more effectively by offering opportunities to engage and converse on our very own web sites. Through our own hosted, customized communities?

But, we also need to meet the fish where they swim. Such as:

• Twitter — micro-blogging
• Flickr, Picasa — photo-sharing
• LinkedIn, Facebook — social networking
• YouTube, Vimeo – video-sharing
• WordPress, Blogger, Typepad – blogging
• Slideshare, YELP – Info-sharing

The context has changed—and to succeed, our tactics must be decentralized, as well. We are communicating and responding in real time—on the fly and with a whole new mojo (as my teenage son would say).

So, it seems our goal in the long run is to cultivate and empower these various communities of affinity—whether they emerge in our own cathedrals—or in the hearts of those we serve in the remotest corners of the vast virtual universe.

What are your thoughts?

The Paradigm Has Shifted

elaine gantz wright1 Comment
The Time is Now
The Time is Now

While most of us in the nonprofit world may still be debating the viability of direct mail (snail variety) versus online giving, statistics have been released indicating social media participation has now surpassed — even email. You cannot ignore the buzz about social media any longer — it’s here, and it’s powerful.

Last month, the New York Times reported that time spent engaged in online communities increased 883% between February 2003 and February 2009. Time spent viewing video online increased 1905% between February 2003 and February 2009. Combine this with NTEN’s 2009 eNonprofit Benchmarks Study revealing that online gifts in 2008 increased 43% over 2007, with total dollars raised online increasing 26%–and you have a reason to pay attention.

Still, with this explosive growth in use of social networks, so many organizations are asking “How do you effectively deploy a social media strategy, and what is the return on investment (ROI)?” The trouble with social media to date has been that it’s difficult to measure results.

No doubt, many executive directors have been heard to proclaim, “We need to get on the Twitter!” But the important question to answer first is “Why?” It’s so easy to fall prey to the “Latest Big Thing” Syndrome, whether you are a nonprofit, political organization, or company. Diving headlong into the latest technology or social media tool without asking those basic questions—Who, What, What, Where, When, How, and Why?—can lead to frustration and failure. That old adage comes to mind, “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you.”

Think ROI – Investment divided by return.

And, don’t forget expectation. The return may be only partially monetary. Objectives may include anything from building awareness, getting feedback on project relevance, expanding prospects/followers, or raising money. Here are some useful ways to think about effectiveness:
• Conduct awareness studies—prior to launch and at milestone intervals, such six months, year, etc.
• Track referral sites—identify the “web destinations” of people who respond to your message.
• Track traditional site metrics, such as unique visits, page views, and time spent on your site.
• Monitor your Net Promoter Score (customer loyalty scale of 0-10 that asks how likely you would be to refer an organization to a friend).
• Benchmark the number of friends/fans/followers on a particular social network or community.
• Measure the number of gifts made or dollars raised within a certain time frame or in response to a specific appeal.
• Measure brand visibility.
• And, of course, does it satisfy the boss?

This is not a comprehensive list, but it is a great place to start. The next step is to develop smart ways to integrate your social media combustion into your other marketing initiatives to turbo-charge your impact.

Finally, as you ponder your course, let me remind of the 2008 presidential campaign—not Barack Obama, but Ron Paul. It was a small scrappy campaign. And it all started with the infamous “money bombs,” the initial supporter-driven efforts to raise millions in a single day—Nov. 5th, 2007. Now, that’s a measurable result. This occurred without huge email lists, paid media, or even strategic campaign leadership. The result as $4.3 million raised in a single day. They repeated it later with $6 million raised in a single day. Anything is possible.

Do you have examples or thoughts? Comment below. Or, if you want to begin expanding your social media reach today, contact me — ellagantz(at)sbcglobal.net