14:40, 10 November 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Being able to report results is
vital for any nonprofit organization, NGO, or other mission-based organization (schools, government agencies, etc.). You must be able to show -- to the general public, to program partners, to supporters, to potential supporters, to the media -- that your organization or program is making a real difference.
Need resources on performance measurement and reporting results?
This excellent online database of evaluation resources is written in plain English and includes slide presentations with audio, written text and worksheets. It was developed for
AmeriCorps members (part of the
USA's national service program). If you need to report about your program's progress -- and it doesn't have to have anything to with AmeriCorps -- you will find these resources helpful.
Also see
Questions to Ask for a Major Report from the Developing World, which, while created for use in-the-field in the developing world, might also be helpful for any nonprofit or mission-based organization needing to report on program results.
10:29, 2 November 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
I've been advocating for nonprofits to use the Internet to network
since 1994. It's been nice to see people and the media now talking about the Internet the way I and others were
talking about it back then: as a place to connect with people and ideas, and to interact whenever you want with almost anyone you want without being limited by geography and hierarchies.
But many of the people promoting the current "hot" online networking tools like
LinkedIn,
FaceBook and
MySpace seem to think that
everyone, or at least
most people, are reachable via those tools. They forget that
these networking sites exclude entire populations -- millions and millions of people. These online communities represent a highlyly selected, limited group, relatively speaking. For instance, according to the latest data from
Quantcast, only 5 percent of LinkedIn users are black and only 2 percent are Hispanic. In addition, the limited number of people reached by FaceBook and MySpace are divided into different demographics; choosing just one of these platforms could be seen as
leaving out certain groups.
And then there's the identifiers that have appeared again with social networking sites, identifiers that disappeared when the only online tools we used was email, USENET and web sites: identifiers like appearance, religion, pregnancy, age, sexual orientation and political views --
things that can easily be used by someone, consciously or unconsciously, to discriminate against potential staff, volunteers, clients and supporters.
I'm going to keep advocating that nonprofits use the Internet to network with current and potential donors, volunteers, clients, staff and the general public, and that includes using online social networks. But I'm also going to keep advocating that
nonprofits should think about diversity, and plan strategically to reach a varied audience. If a nonprofit limits itself to only the current "hot" online networking tools to recruit new volunteers, staff and others, it's going to end up with a very homogenous workforce and community of supporters.
More information at this article:
Discriminatory Twist in Networking Sites Puts Recruiters in Peril.
11:25, 16 September 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
To Seth Godin, in response to his
blog about nonprofits using networking tools
Before you chastise nonprofits for their supposed lack of use of new technologies, you might want to do your homework first. If you had, you would have been overwhelmed with examples of nonprofit groups, large and small, using social-media tools. As the
Chronicle of Philanthropy pointed out in its
rebuttal of your blog, "shows nonprofit groups are actually well ahead of businesses in their use of social-media tools such as Twitter, Facebook, and blogs."
So what if there are no charities in the top 100 twitter users in terms of followers? T
he number of followers is NO determination of success that a message is really creating change, any more than number of cars passing a billboard or number of visitors to a web site. Big numbers of viewers does NOT equal big numbers of donors, big numbers of changed behavior, big numbers of event attendees, etc. If there are nonprofits out there who are turning Twitter followers, FaceBook followers, web site visitors, or email newsletter subscribers into volunteers, donors, clients or other supporters, good for them and who cares whether or not they are in the "top 100" group?
But what really infuriates me is your comment "The opportunities online are basically free, and if you don't have a ton of volunteers happy to help you, then you're not working on something important enough." Here's something you should know: volunteers are NEVER free. Never. Volunteers have to be screened, interviewed, trained and supervised, just like a consultant you hire to do something like manage online activities. That *time* costs *money*. So, yes, resources ARE an issue, particularly when you have corporate donors that balk at the idea of funding a volunteer manager.
Sorry if I sound upset, but I am. Another corporate guy mocking nonprofits, throwing around a lot of ignorant comments. Same old same old. Some paradigms never change. Meanwhile, nonprofits will plug along and keep doing really exciting, worthwhile things, online and off, and they will all be here, doing amazing things, when you're long gone.
Reminds me of the 1990s, when all sorts of corporate folks did the same chastising regarding nonprofits' perceived lack of use of the Web and email. Funny: so many of those hot new start ups those people represented are gone, but the nonprofits are still here.
16:22, 11 September 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Back in the olden days of the 1990s, I would try to introduce co-workers at the non-profit where I was worked to the new-fangled things called "email" and "USENET", which at that time were my favorite tools on something called the "Internet." A year later, at a different organization, I was trying to sell co-workers on an additional tool, called the "World Wide Web."
It took me dozens of times saying,
You know, you could have emailed that to everyone instead of faxing it to finally get one of my co-workers to abandon many hours standing at the fax machine to send out meeting minutes and agendas. At a professional association I was a part of, it took generating a standing-room-only audience of newcomers for a monthly meeting to convince the board that you could sell an event successfully with email and postings to online discussion groups -- no postal mailings and no faxes (I'll never forget, in 1997, asking the room to raise their hands if they found out about the event via email or the web, and most of the room raising their hands).
Selling
online volunteering also proved difficult, and 15 years after the first workshop I did on the subject, I would say the majority of traditional volunteer managers/coordinators remain unsold on the idea (while people who work with volunteers, but don't identify as volunteer managers/coordinators, seem to need no convincing to use online tools with volunteers). Workshops, online materials, books and endless success stories just can't seem to get the majority of traditional volunteer managers/coordinators on board.
Convincing people to use new and even not-so-new online tools remains tough.
What strategies have you used, or what circumstances do you believe need to be in place, to convince someone to join or post to an online discussion group, to use
RSS to subscribe to updates on a web site or blog, to fill out a profile on
LinkedIn, to share documents via an Intranet, or to be even REALLY daring and edit
Wikipedia?
Please,
no generalities ("Be sure to talk in non-tech language" or "Remember to stay customer-focused", etc.).
I'm looking for concrete examples of carrots and sticks ("We had five mandatory trainings and then people had their tech use evaluated in their annual performance reviews").
In return, I'll give you four virtual tons of cyber karma.
08:40, 1 September 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
I'm notorious for
using old technology. I still use my
lime iBook running
OS 9 for things
my current Apple laptop can't do without my spending a whole bunch of money, such as converting raw video to different formats (and
the page about my lime iBook is one of the most popular pages on my web site).
I also have an "ancient" cell phone: a
Nokia 1100. People have laughed when I've taken it out to use. Never mind that it's the world's best selling phone handset, as well as the best selling consumer electronics device in the world, beating Sony's Playstation and Apple's iPod by far.
It was specifically designed for use in developing countries: its keypad and front face have been designed to be as dust-proof as possible, and its sides are non-slip for humid weather -- perfect for all
the traveling I do. That's probably why I'm still able to use this old work horse year after year while friends and families are often taking their year-old phones into a shop because this or that part is broken.
I use the phone not only to make and receive calls, or to send and receive text messages, from clients and friends. I also have
updates from my Google calendar sent to my cell phone. No, I don't receive any
Twitter updates or any
RSS feeds -- I have yet to come across a feed I'd love to interrupt me regularly anywhere I am via my cell phone. Like many millions of other people, I still prefer email.
I even sometimes use the built-in flashlight.
Mission-based organizations (nonprofits, NGOs, government agencies, public schools, etc.), particularly small ones, often don't have the option to buy or to upgrade their technology tools to the latest and greatest toys on the market every few years. Luckily, you CAN get a lot out of older communications tools. Yes, there's always a point where you must upgrade. But remember that
many people get as much out of their older tech tools than many people do with the latest and greatest toys.
When you are ready to upgrade, please
recycle your tech tools. For phones, just go to
Google and type in
Or call nearby domestic violence shelters in your area -- many accept cell phone donations.
15:50, 22 August 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
How rumors and myth can derail government initiatives, interfere with community development initiatives and even become a danger to some people, particularly in developing countries and post-conflict situations, is
something I've been interested in for many years. I maintain a web site of
examples of such, as well as
suggestions on how to counter rumors and myths that threaten public initiatives.
So you can imagine my horrified fascination to see
the most outlandish myths imaginable being promoted as fact by various individuals and factions regarding the efforts to reform health care coverage in the USA. These myths have taken hold in the USA among people that I truly thought would never fall for such. And, yet, knowing what I know about how much Americans love conspiracy theories, no matter how outlandish, I guess I shouldn't really be surprised.
It's worth noting that, alongside traditional communications and organizing efforts, both traditional and so-called Web 2.0 Internet tools have played a huge role in disseminating myths about health care reform in the USA -- something that bloggers who continually crow about the benefits of social media have mostly avoided discussing. Rapid-fire communications can, indeed, be used for good, but this is yet another example of something I've been trying to say for a while now: they can also be used for not-so-good:
Roger Ebert (yes, the film critic) does an admirable job of
debunking many health care myths being perpetuated. His language is simple and fact-based, and he speaks from the heart. A good style for others to follow.
Media Matters does a good job as well of
debunking the myths. But just these two voices are not enough to counter the onslaught of misinformation.
Without an education campaign that permeates not only the airwaves but also various communications avenues, from the Internet to civic organization and community-of-faith meetings, backed up by an energized grassroots movement,
health care reform -- and common sense -- in the USA is doomed once again.
Also see:
How to Handle Online Criticism. How a nonprofit or government organization handles online criticism is going to speak volumes about that agency, for weeks, months, and maybe even years to come. There's no way to avoid criticism, but there
are ways to address criticism that can actually help an organization to be perceived as even more trustworthy and worth supporting -- and the Internet can help.
14:03, 13 August 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Long-term readers of my blog know that I am passionate about
debunking urban legends, and that I'm very
concerned at how easy online and phone-based tools, from email to Twitter, are making it to promote rumors and myths.
I worked in Afghanistan for six months in 2007, and I maintain a lot of contacts there. One of them forwards emails to several people, including me, regarding warnings or calls for protests, and all of them have been urban legends -- not one has been true. The latest was this:
In the business area of MID TOWN MAN HATTAN in New York a new BAR is opened in the name of APPLE MECCA which is familiar to KAABA MAKKAH. This bar will be used for supply of Wine and Drinks. The Muslims of New York are pressurizing Government of USA not open this BAR.
Accompanying this myth is a purported photo of the "bar" --
here's an example.
Ofcourse
this is all a lie.
The picture is not real. It is a doctored image of the Apple Computer store on Fifth Avenue in New York City (which, indeed, has a bar -- a
genius bar -- where knowledge, rather than wine and beer, is served).
It is a clear block, not a black box, and is not at all a rendering of the holy Ka'ba.
But many people forward the message via their phones or computers to all their friends and relatives, and they not only keep the lie alive, they also generate hatred and misunderstanding by Muslims against the West.
In the USA, we have a variety of online resources that debunk myths and rumors, such as the
Straight Dope column by Cecil Adams,
truthorfiction.com, President Obama's
Reality Check, and the popular but politically-framed
snopes.com.
Are there any efforts in Arab-speaking countries and countries with large numbers of Muslims that are actively, engaging in myth-busting? If you know of such, please
contact me. If not -- please, someone, get busy!
Also see:
17:21, 11 August 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Having a good heart and passion for a cause are nice, but the reality is that
a nonprofit organization must be effectively-run, adhering to both legal requirements and suggested practices for good governance, in order to be successful and sustainable.
The
US Internal Revenue Service has a continuing professional education program for its "Exempt Organizations examination agents, determinations specialists," and others who work with tax-exempt organizations. These materials are VERY detailed and, at times, "thick", but there is a lot of great information here that can help nonprofit organizations with specific questions about governance and compliance issues.
Here are links to the materials used in the IRS training programs:
And hurrah for the IRS -- when it comes to nonprofits, they offer
a LOT of great, very detailed information online.
11:45, 21 July 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
T.X. Hammes' blog
Dumb-dumb bullets: As a decision-making aid, PowerPoint is a poor tool has really struck a chord, at least with me. 'Cause I hate slide shows, whether they are done in PowerPoint or any other presentation software.
Hammes uses "PowerPoint" to mean any "slide show", and has this to say about it in
his blog:
Make no mistake, PowerPoint is not a neutral tool — it is actively hostile to thoughtful decision-making. It has fundamentally changed our culture by altering the expectations of who makes decisions, what decisions they make and how they make them.
He continues
Before PowerPoint, staffs prepared succinct two- or three-page summaries of key issues. The decision-maker would read a paper, have time to think it over and then convene a meeting with either the full staff or just the experts involved to discuss the key points of the paper. Of course, the staff involved in the discussion would also have read the paper and had time to prepare to discuss the issues. In contrast, today, a decision-maker sits through a 20-minute PowerPoint presentation followed by five minutes of discussion and then is expected to make a decision. Compounding the problem, often his staff will have received only a five-minute briefing from the action officer on the way to the presentation and thus will not be well-prepared to discuss the issues. This entire process clearly has a toxic effect on staff work and decision-making.
If I didn't know that T.X. Hammes retired from the Marine Corps after 30 years, I would swear, based on the above, that he, too,
worked at the United Nations. Please
read the entire blog. He's so right on.
I hate slide shows for the same reasons Mr. Hammes does. But I have even more reasons for hating them, namely, that
- people stare at the presentation rather than listening to what's being said
- people stare at the slide show the entire time rather than looking at the presenter
- people think reading the slide show later, having missed the actual meeting, will provide them with all the information needed
- the presenter often stares at the presentation instead of the audience
I do slide shows for my presentations because they are expected, but honestly, I don't really need them. I like for my presentations to have a healthy dose of discussions, with the audience chiming in throughout the presentation with their own thoughts, even answering each others' questions instead of all answers coming from me. Slide shows kill interaction. They kill listening. Instead, audience see glowing colored lights, audience stares at glowing colored lights, audience no listen, audience no think.
Next time you are asked to do a slide show, think about what it is you are really trying to accomplish. Is a slide show really the right mechanism?
10:59, 15 July 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
"We're a nonprofit because we don't profit, right?"
It's happened again:
a group of people with good heart thought that, because they were focused on helping charities and because they weren't making a profit, that made them a nonprofit organization -- and
that claim is now getting them into trouble and could derail all of their work.
I read this scenario again and again online: a group of people come together with the best of intentions and want to raise money to help someone or something that needs help. They think their desire and the nature of their work automatically grants them the designation of "nonprofit" or "charity." They start using those designations to describe themselves, they ask for donations, sell products and services, and put all the money into one of the organizer's bank account. But, sooner or later, they get into trouble. For instance, since they aren't really a nonprofit or charity, the government wants to tax all individuals who have accepted donations for the group's efforts, regardless of where those donations have ultimately ended up.
How can it be better communicated that, at least in most countries,
you cannot claim to be a nonprofit, nor a charity, and you cannot accept non-taxable donations, unless you have official government paperwork saying such -- particularly if you accept donations or sell products or services?
A surprising number of these groups are online. So maybe the Internet could be better used to educate these nonprofit and charity wannabes?
Let's be clear: in most countries,
a nonprofit organization or charity is a type of business. Yes, that's right: a
business. The nonprofit organization or charity is allowed to make a profit. It is allowed event make lots and lots of profit. It is allowed to pay competitive salaries to its staff members, pay for really nice offices, pay for an interior decorator, etc. What makes such a properly registered business a nonprofit or charity is that profits may not be distributed to the owners (the board of directors). The profits must go back into the organization -- to pay rent, staff annual salaries (but no profit sharing checks), program costs, whatever. There are also specialized tax rules and accounting practices that apply to nonprofit organizations.
There's terrific, free, detailed information all over the Internet and maybe even in your city to support nonprofit organizations:
- Start with the Free Management Library. Most of the information is USA-centric, but much of it is applicable to other countries.
- In the USA, most offices of the State Attorney General have web sites specifically for nonprofits registered in that state, such as Kentucky and Oregon.
- Many developing countries have associations for nonprofits that can help fledgling nonprofits or charities, such as in South Africa or Black Sea NGO Network.
- See if there are any local (city or county) agencies that support nonprofits.
- In the USA, contact your local United Way or public library to find out if your community is served by a nonprofit support center, such as the Center for Nonprofit Excellence in Louisville, Kentucky.
- Contact faculty at the nearest university or college with nonprofit management-related classes for assistance in forming a nonprofit organization.
13:55, 14 July 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
There are hundreds -- maybe thousands -- of places asking for you to fill out an online profile. These online professional networking and social networking sites want your name, your job title, your professional history, your interests, your connections, etc. Without your information, the networks aren't as valuable.
It would be impossible for one person to utilize every platform available, but nonprofit staff have to be even more choosy: their time is already stretched thin, as are all of their organization's resources, and their time is not best spent filling out and maintaining endless numbers of online profiles.
Nonprofit staff must be strategic regarding the use of online networking sites -- just as they must be about their time offline.
Which online profiles should nonprofit staff members invest their time in to fill out and maintain, at minimum? As of July 2009, here are my recommendations, but remember that online profile sites wax and wane in terms of popularity -- what's true now will not be true in two years:
Regarding a staff member's professional life, I recommend each staff member being asked to fill out LinkedIn, at minimum, and perhaps Plaxo as well. Both sites are very reputable professional networking sites with millions of members, and probably the most used professional online networks in the USA. Staff should ensure that their profiles on these sites have up-to-date information about all of professional activities/past employment (or those jobs that they want to share with everyone; they are not obligated to do so) and staff might want to include volunteer positions as well, if they want to share such with professional colleagues and potential employers (again, they are not obligated to do so). Many people use
LinkedIn and/or
Plaxo as their electronic address book for professional contacts (I do!), since contact information is maintained by members themselves, and this helps to always have up-to-date contact info for professional contacts. It's also a great way to show off the credentials of your staff and volunteers. Remember, however, that
these profiles belong to the individuals who create them, not the nonprofit they are working for.
FaceBook and
MySpace are
social networking sites; they were set up originally to allow people to connect socially, from joining clubs to finding people to date. Some nonprofit organizations use social networking sites to connect with current and potential clients, volunteers and other supporters. However,
some nonprofit staff members, including volunteers, are uncomfortable with mixing in work with their online social activities. Therefore, it's inappropriate for you to require staff to use their personal profiles on these and other social networking sites for their professional or volunteer work; rather, ask them voluntarily, or, encourage them to create a separate profile specifically for their work or volunteering with your nonprofit organization, if you think staff investing their time in using social networking sites is important for your nonprofit's efforts.
My recommendations for nonprofit organizations regarding which social networking sites are worth investing their staff time, at minimum:
- If your nonprofit reaches out to young people, have a profile for your organization on MySpace, maintained by whomever at your organization is in charge of communications. Invite your clients, volunteers and supporters to link to this profile, but know that you cannot control the content of those who link to your MySpace profile; if that makes you uncomfortable, then either write and enforce a linking policy for forget MySpace altogether.
- FaceBook doesn't permit organizations to be an individual user, so have a member of your communications team create a profile for him or herself (separate from the one he or she uses outside of work), and then create a group for your organization on FaceBook and invite your clients, volunteers and supporters to join such, become a fan of such, etc. Again, remember that you cannot control the content of those who link to your FaceBook group; if that makes you uncomfortable, then either write and enforce a membership policy for forget FaceBook altogether.
But there's more! Staff members who have
Yahoo and/or
Google accounts and use such for work or volunteer-related activities should be encouraged to complete their online profiles on these mega sites as well. This means that other members of
YahooGroups or
Googlegroups to which they belong can read more about them when they post a message, and opens the door to a range of other networking opportunities via the many tools these two sites offer.
I consider utilizing online profiles on Yahoo and Google as important as any recommendation on this blog. That said, again, remember that staff members may be using their Yahoo or Google account primarily for social activities and, if that's the case, they may not want to use such sites for professional or volunteer activities in any way. And THAT said, if staff members are using either of these accounts primarily for work or volunteering (meaning that, for instance, your organization's email address is a
Yahoo or
Google address, or your online discussion group for volunteers is hosted on
YahooGroups or
Googlegroups, then you have every right to require that staff accounts on these platforms be used for work, not social activities.
Do NOT require staff, volunteers or others to link to your organization, or to each other, on any online
social networking site. Outside of the online systems your organization sets up, such as its own web site, its own online forum, etc., an online profile is not yours -- online profiles belong to the individual staff member, volunteer or client do with as he or she wills.
There are even more online networking sites popping up every day. Ask your staff, volunteers and other supporters which online social networking sites they use frequently, why they use them, and if they think your organization should also use such sites. When you ask this question, make sure staff, volunteers and others know that this information is not required and they are under no obligation to provide this information to you. Use this information to plan strategically regarding which other online networking sites your organization should use (if any).
Have a goal for the use of each online networking site and evaluate these activities regularly.
More advice on
how nonprofits can utilize online networking sites here.
Also see
12:32, 10 July 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
New York Times columnist
Nicholas Kristof muses in a somewhat meandering
July 8, 2009 column about how we're all much more likely to be moved by the plight of one person than we are by large-scale humanitarian crises. There is a mountain of evidence to support that musing, some of which Mr. Kristof notes in his column. He also criticizes the marketing efforts of aid and development organizations:
"...humanitarians are abjectly ineffective at selling their causes. Any brand of toothpaste is peddled with far more sophistication than the life-saving work of aid groups. Do-gooders also have a penchant for exaggeration, so that the public often has more trust in the effectiveness of toothpaste than of humanitarian aid... There’s growing evidence that jumping up and down about millions of lives at stake can even be counterproductive."
He's right! Too many aid groups rely on statistics and old-school "look at all these many, many suffering people" images to get their message across. And I've seen some toothpaste ads that give the impression that the product is doing a lot of good in the world, moreso than some aid organizations' ads I've seen.
But not all humanitarian organizations take the old-school outreach approach anymore, and I wish Mr. Kristof had noted this. Three aid organizations that, IMO, have been brilliant in their outreach approaches to current and potential supporters are
CARE International,
KIVA and
BPEACE. What makes these three organizations different in their outreach efforts from the aid organizations Mr. Kristof is talking about?:
- Lots of stories focused on individuals who have benefited from their efforts. These stories about individuals represent the work of these three organizations regarding many other people, sometimes entire regions, but they give supporters that one face, that real name, that many of us need in order to humanize a situation and feel inspired to continue to support the overall cause.
- Stories of results and hope. These organizations don't issue endless pleas of desperation (though crisis communications for immediate aid are, indeed, still necessary); they also talk about how their efforts have had real, tangible impact on local people, on a day-to-day level. That relieves the feeling of fatigue many donors get with constant appeals-for-crisis. It leaves a supporter feeling hopeful, and ready to give again.
- In the case of CARE and MADRE, stories delivered a variety of ways. I get CARE and MADRE updates via an old-fashioned paper newsletters (yes, I still read those -- they don't crash and I can read them even when my Internet is down) and email (leading to stories on their web site). I like having those different ways of communicating.
- In the case of CARE and KIVA, opportunities to connect online with other supporters, through their online message boards. I really love that sense of community and interaction. Again, I feel inspired to continue to support the overall cause.
I support all three of these organizations as a donor, and I feel a personal connection with all three specifically because of how they communicate with me. Also, these three organizations have a very clear picture of how to reach their desired audience -- and they are ready to alter that approach as times change. Other aid agencies could learn from them. Ofcourse, there is no cookie-cutter approach to communications, but, IMO, there is something for any international organization, large or small, to learn from these three organizations.
14:57, 26 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
It's a wonderful thing to put information and services online, whether you are a nonprofit organization, a school, a government agency, a business, whatever. You will not only reach new audiences, but you will better serve and build your credibility with your current customers, clients, supporters -- whomever.
HOWEVER, the information or product has to be easy to find, and the web site or online tool has to be easy to use, for your organization to realize these benefits. In short,
your web site has to be usable. Your primary audience isn't the web designer -- it's your current and potential customers, clients, partners, supporters and others external to your organization.
In November 2008, the
International Seminar on Usability and Accessibility for the Web /
Inicia el Seminario Internacional de Usabilidad y Accesibilidad para la web 2008 was held in Cintermex. Monterrey, Mexico, and a result of this gathering was the
Manifesto on Usability and Accessibility for Mexican Government Websites /
Manifiesto Nuevo León sobre Usabilidad y Accesibilidad para los Portales Gubernamentales Mexicanos. From the Manifesto:
The web can be the most democratic tool a government has because it allows for direct communication, overcoming geographic, cultural, economic and hierarchical barriers, as well as those faced by people with disabilities.
But technologies do not do this on their own. They can either reduce or widen the gap between those with more and those with fewer opportunities, and they can enrich or hurt the relationship between citizens and government. It is the duty of the creators and administrators of these technologies to guide them and improve people’s quality of life.
Good stuff!
Every e-government initiative should adopt this manifesto, not just Mexico! And your nonprofit needs to always have usability in mind when it delivers information or services online. Otherwise, what kind of message are you sending with your online activities?
Thanks to Sharron Rush at
Knowbility for bringing this to my attention... over beer in Austin, Texas...
14:46, 25 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Attention nonprofit organizations:
your employees, volunteers and clients/supporters are using social media/online social networks to talk about what they are doing at your organization.
Let the panic begin! Wring your hands, pull your hair and gnash your teeth over the possibility that they are saying something inappropriate or confidential, that they are saying something negative about your organization, and on and on!
Oh, wait -- they could do all those things with boring old email. In fact, they could do that face-to-face at parties and family gatherings without any Internet whatsoever. Hmmm.
Paid staff and volunteers at nonprofits -- and, depending on your organization's work, clients as well -- need to have guidance regarding confidentiality and appropriateness in
all communications activities, not just those that happen online. And that includes senior management at your organization, including the Executive Director!
If you are going to develop a policy for online communications, it should reflect your existing policies and your organizational culture. And setting such a policy should involve staff and volunteers themselves (and, again, clients, depending on the nature of your work), so that they can feel a sense of ownership of it (they will be much more likely to adhere to it if they helped design it themselves).
Fistful of Talent offers a
terrific set of suggestions for setting a policy for employees regarding online activities, and its good advice for nonprofits as well to apply to paid staff and volunteers.
Also see
my own web pages regarding nonprofits using online tools for outreach.
Employees, volunteers and clients/supporters are, IMO, the best promoters of a nonprofit organization's work. Don't muzzle them! Emphasizing regularly what's appropriate and what's not will keep all conversations -- online or onsite -- within bounds, keep current supporters engaged, and promote your organization to new audiences.
14:45, 19 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Right now, today, on the
IBM.com site (at least the one in English in the USA), is a podcast called:
Working in a cloud is a very down-to-earth strategy: Learn how the smart business of cloud computing makes for a smarter planet.
Go to the
IBM.com site, click on those words, and read a little about
cloud computing. then scroll down the page to "Cloud Computing Podcast," and hear two IBM experts interviewed by my good friend
Betsy Thaggard about IBM's "cloud."
There is nothing new about
cloud computing for most people, including you, the person reading this blog. It's "
a metaphor for the Internet, based on how the Internet is depicted in computer network diagrams and is an abstraction for the complex infrastructure it conceals." As Betsy noted on
a previous article for IBM, "If you use Web mail, share snapshots through Flickr or collaborate online with
LotusLive or Google apps, you're already in the
cloud. "
Why visit the page and listen to the podcast?
- To see how a company takes one of its existing practices/services and presents it in an interesting, easy-to-read/easy-to-access way to appeal to a broad audience
- To listen to an effective podcast
- To think about how your nonprofit could do exactly the same thing with one of its own existing practices
- To learn about "cloud computing" and to be able to say, "Hey, I do that! I know what that is"
- To hear Betsy!
Ignore the techie language and jargon (unless that's your thing); as you read and listen, think about how this information about an IBM service is delivered in such a simple manner, and how your nonprofit could do the same for one of its services.
10:00, 15 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
My good friend Brian Cugelman has recently published his latest
journal paper on website credibility, trust and behavioural change. The paper is called "The Dimensions of Web Site Credibility and Their Relation to Active Trust and Behavioural Impact", and it's co-written with Mike Thelwall and Phil Dawes. The abstract says:
This paper discusses two trends that threaten to undermine the effectiveness of online social marketing interventions: growing mistrust and competition. As a solution, this paper examines the relationships between Web site credibility, target audiences’ active trust and behaviour. Using structural equation modelling to evaluate two credibility models, this study concludes that Web site credibility is best considered a three-dimensional construct composed of expertise, trustworthiness and visual appeal, and that trust plays a partial mediating role between Web site credibility and behavioural impacts. The paper examines theoretical implications of conceptualizing Web sites according to a human credibility model, and factoring trust into Internet-based behavioural change interventions. Practical guidelines suggest ways to address these findings when planning online social marketing interventions.
The keywords used to describe the paper are: Web site credibility, trust, behaviour, social marketing, advocacy, social exchange, Internet, online, Web, persuasion, and
captology (
interactive technologies that motivate and influence users).
Credibility in online activities is something every nonprofit organization/mission-based organization needs to be acutely aware of. In my opinion, NO online activity by a nonprofit organization, whether its sending out an email newsletter or hosting an online discussion group or presenting live online video presentations or
blogging or whatever, will be sustainable and successful over the long-term without building credibility and trust among its audiences and intended participants. It's another example of a human element that's absolutely fundamental to tech use success.
And a reminder: if you ever have been a volunteer, OR if you have worked with volunteers in *any* capacity -- side-by-side or as a manager/primary staff contact --
I invite you to complete this survey regarding the use of online tools to support volunteers, to help me in my efforts to revise the
Virtual Volunteering Guidebook.
10:07, 3 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
I get made fun of for my
use and advocacy of old technology. I like buying something new, truly, but I also like getting my money's worth out of it, and I don't see any reason to throw something away only because a new model is out. Not only can the environment not handle it, but neither can my budget.
I have a
MacBook that I bought in January 2008, but I also still use
my lime iBook clamshell running
OS 9 because there's a lot it can do, for free, that I would have to buy software for on the MacBook (like saving video into various formats), and I think the OS 9 interface is way better than OS 10. Online, I have had some people mock me over it. However, guess which machine gets the "Wow, that's beautiful!" comments when I take it out in public?
And then there are cell phones. To me,
there's nothing intuitive about a cell phone: I take a long, long time compared to most users in trying to do things like, oh, make a phone call. And observation of family and friends tells me I'm not alone in feeling this way. Whereas I feel oh-so-comfortable in cyberspace,
a cell phone -- especially the current models -- leaves me utterly confused. What makes some people really laugh is when I pull out my cell phone, a
blue Nokia 1100. One friend called it a "training phone." But it gets the job done: I use it primarily to receive calls, since I use
Skype or
iVisit, to
make calls, usually. I also use it to send and receive text messages (including reminders from my private Google calendar, as opposed to
my public Google calendar). This phone is as plain as you can get: it doesn't have a color screen, music player, or camera. However, it does have a flashlight, alarm, reminders, and three games I adore. But mostly,
it works and doesn't confuse me.
I just found out today that the Nokia 1100 is not only the most popular cell phone model ever sold, it has, at least as of 2007, outsold both the iPod and Playstation 2 (
see this story in Reuters UK). So I'm not alone in liking this little work horse of a phone. Or maybe it's a donkey? Whatever it is:
hurrah for easy-to-use, minimal-learning curve tech. There is still a market for such!
07:00, 3 June 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
In
an AP story about a man who shot two people in Arkansas, whose motive was his religious beliefs, there is mention of his religion (Islam) and the story uses the words
terrorist and
terrorism.
In
another AP story, this one about a man who shot a doctor attending church in Kansas just a few days before, the motive was also the shooter's religious beliefs, but that religion (Christianity) is
never mentioned, nor are the words
terrorist and
terrorism.
So, Associated Press -- what's up with that? Why such specific language choices for one story but not another? The stories have oh-so--much in common: a male religious extremist, in the name of his deity, publicly executes someone whose practices are, he believes, so grievous that they warrant religiously-sanctioned murder. He believes that this violent act will garner him a place in heaven. He believes his violent act is righteous. I could be (and am) describing either shooter. But the media -- and not just the AP -- has chosen to describe the shooters and their motivations in strikingly different terms.
The words we use to describe situations often says a lot about our beliefs and prejudices. Each media outlet needs to put their reports on these two stories side-by-side and do some in-depth reflection on the very different words they have used to describe the subjects.
11:38, 19 May 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Open University, where I got
my MSc from, has a
free open content initiative called
OpenLearn. The more-than-40 units of study offered are spread across various subject areas: Arts & History, Business & Management, Education, IT & Computing, Mathematics & Statistics, Science & Nature, Society and Study Skills & Language Learning. In short: these are
free university courses online, except you don't pay... and you aren't graded.
Only downside of OpenLearn: it requires that you use a latest web browser. So if you use an older operating system and cannot update your browser, you are locked out of many of the features (but not the reading materials).
A course they are now offering and that I hope to take advantage of myself soon is on
social marketing - the systematic application of marketing techniques to achieve specific behavioral goals for a social good. Some of the most well-known social marketing efforts are those encouraging people not to smoke, to use seat belts, to follow speed limits, to use condoms, to keep household chemicals out of reach of children, to not litter, to spay and neuter their dogs and cats, and on and on.
Read more about OU's OpenLearn Social Marketing class.
06:39, 18 May 2009
Post your comments using your Google, Yahoo, AIM or OpenID account.
Networking/communications technology plays a central role in just about everyone's personal and professional lives, no matter where or how they live. Sadly, many businesses, governments, nonprofits and other organizations configure their online communications in such a way that not everyone can access it, preventing many people with disabilities, people using assistive technologies and people using older technologies from accessing the information. And
that's several MILLION people.
Don't you want to reach
everyone with your message? Don't you want
everyone to be able to access your message, service and/or products?
Remember: many elements of design that make a Web site more accessible to people with disabilities ALSO enhance the functionality and visual elegance of the site for EVERYONE. The same techniques that help disabled users (including those who use assistive technology) also aid handheld and mobile users.
IEEE is hosting the "Accessing the Future Conference: A Global Collaborative Exploration of Accessibility in the Next Decade" to promote ways to make IT smarter -- more flexible, intuitive and adaptive. It's Monday, July 20 to Tuesday, Jul 21 at Northeastern University in Boston, MA, USA. Early bird registration ends May 29.
My favorite organization addressing this issue: Knowbility, based in Austin, Texas. Among their many activities, they host the best corporate volunteering event I've ever seen -- the best by far. It's the Accessibility Internet Rally (AIR). AIR matches volunteer teams of Web designers and developers with non-profit organizations to build Web sites that are accessible for people with disabilities.
The web-building event happens in one day. Before the event, however, the volunteers receive advanced training on building accessible web sites, and they take this training back to their companies and into their daily work. Want to host an AIR event in your community? Visit the Knowbility web site and click on the appropriate link. And when you tell them you are interested in hosting your own AIR event, tell them Jayne sent ya!
