Archive for the ‘Movement Building’ Category

Feb

2012

01

Category:

Movement Building

Tags:

20 Comments

Komen Kan Kiss My Mammagram, PinActivism, and Newsjacking for a Cause

Source: thefastertimes.com via Noland on Pinterest

 

On Tuesday, the Susan G. Komen Foundation, a leading breast cancer charity,  pulled hundreds of thousands of dollars in breast cancer screening funds from Planned Parenthood.  Each year millions of women are screened for breast cancer at Planned Parenthood, and Susan G. Komen’s funding pays for about 170,000 of those screenings.  These services are particularly important for women from under-served communities.

The AP reported that Komen for the Cure has decided to halt grants to Planned Parenthood and the decision was politically motivated.   Within hours, Planned Parenthood sent a fundraising email out to its network, asking supporters to replace the money that Komen had pulled for breast cancer screenings for low-income women.   As the news traveled from email boxes to social networks to mainstream media, activists, men, and women expressed their outrage.

My Networked Nonprofit co-author, Allison Fine, started a fundraising campaign on Causes this morning called “Komen Can Kiss My Mammagram”  quickly raising several thousand dollars.    I observed conversations happening in threads on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networks – people urging their friends to donate or take action.        I started receiving emails from organizations like Momsrising urging us to email the Komen organization and ask them to restore this much needed support of women’s health.

My colleague, Kivi Leroux-Miller, wrote an astute case study documenting the social media response and provided an analysis about why it happened.    As Kivi says, “This is what happens when a leading nonprofit jumps into a highly controversial area of public debate without a communications strategy, stays silent, and therefore lets others take over the public dialogue, perhaps permanently redefining the organization and its brand. Watch and learn, so you don’t make the same mistake on whatever hot button issues your organization might be wading into.”  Read her analysis.

Let me go a little meta here.  Last week Kivi wrote about “newsjacking” the technique of piggy backing on a crisis to get more media attention.   And it worked!  Kivi got a call from a newspaper in Dallas writing about the nonprofit marketing angle.  She also got quoted on an influential blog.

I asked Kivi to share her process:

I was on the Washington Post site reading something else when I saw the AP story. Literally five minutes later (around 4 pm ET), I got the fundraising appeal email from Planned Parenthood (nicely customized with my name and state, I might add). I immediately forwarded it to Nancy Schwartz, because she had blogged about Komen’s Kentucky Fried Chicken partnership and I knew she’d want to follow up. Again, literally minutes later, I started to see mentions on Facebook and Twitter.

Nancy and I tossed around the idea of doing some kind of joint post about the story, her on the branding, me probably on how Planned Parenthood grabbed the moment, to publish on Thursday since Nancy was busy all day Wednesday. But then the story just exploded on Twitter and Facebook in the early evening, and I kept waiting to see what Komen would say. And I waited, and waited, and waited.

Absolutely nothing.

The fact that they had this totally inane tweet about prostate cancer in a mummy as their most recent tweet when they were getting eaten alive on Twitter just made me crazy. Same thing on Facebook — their most recent post was about a partnership with Energizer and people were just going wild on Energizer, because they just happened to be the most recent update on Komen’s page.  I probably checked Komen’s Twitter and Facebook pages 20 times Tuesday night, pleading with them in my head to say something to their supporters. All the while, I was taking screen captures, which I’ve made a habit, because it’s so much easier to just grab it as you see it, rather than trying to find it later.

Whenever I get obsessed on a nonprofit story like this, where I find myself spending an hour, or two, or more focused on it, I know I have to blog it right away. If I’m that taken by a story, I know my readers will be too, and if I’m going to put that much time into something, I have to turn it into content I can use — I’m trying to blog five days a week after all, and it’s not always easy!  Before I went to bed, I’d decided to post on Wednesday and to focus on Komen’s non-reaction and how I really believed they had completely changed their positioning within field, I assumed without really meaning to do so. I’d posted on both my personal and Nonprofit Marketing Guide Facebook pages that I was probably going to write about it the next day.

Got up Wednesday morning, saw that Komen still hadn’t said anything, and started writing. Building out a blow-by-blow post like that, then adding your own commentary, takes some time, especially when dealing with a controversial topic like abortion. My own personal feelings aside, I really wanted to focus on the nonprofit marketing angle, because that’s why people read my blog.  I probably spent a solid two hours on the post this morning, not counting all the research the night before.

I really didn’t think about the newsjacking potential of the post until I got into writing the commentary, and decided to really call out Komen for the lack of responsiveness to their supporters. I knew it would be a good lesson for my blog readers, but then mid-morning, Komen posted on Facebook (but still not on Twitter), and I found the response to be really lacking given the outrage.

I published around 11:30 a.m. ET, and at that point, I figured my post would probably get covered by the nonprofit trade press, like the Chronicle of Philanthropy (which it did). I really didn’t appreciate that the story had gone beyond the nonprofit news world until my phone rang around 1:30 pm and it was Kate Nocera from Politico.com. That’s when I thought, “Damn, I just newsjacked this story!” She had been searching for reaction to the Komen story and came upon my post. I was so irritated with Komen at that point that I was pretty critical in the interview.

I usually publish my weekly e-newsletter on Tuesday or Wednesday and hadn’t gotten to it Tuesday, so it only made sense to include the Komen story in the e-newsletter too. I had planned for that edition to be a longer article on using photography, but I cut that back and led with Komen. Traffic to my site was so heavy this afternoon that the site started crashing every 15 minutes, so I had to call my hosting company and upgrade (I was already on a decent virtual private server, but had to double the capacity.)

 

This isn’t the first time that Komen has endured a social media backlash. It’s ill fated “Buckets for the Cure” backfired.

 

Source: Uploaded by user via Beth on Pinterest

As I reading the comments on Allison’s campaign wall over at Causes, my friend Stephanie Rudat has posted some of the visuals.    This made think of Pinterest.  Given that Pinterest’s demographics are mostly women, I wondered whether it might be worth experimenting with some “Pinactivism.” I set up a board named after Allison’s Campaign, “Komen Kan Kiss My Mammagram” and invited other women who work in social media and activism to add to the board.   All the visuals are linked to Allison’s campaign. The board got over 500 followers in less than half hour.   Whether they donate or not is another story.

The point is that social networking platforms provide a canvas for people to find each other, self organize actions in something they believe, and do it.   A lot more nimbly than the most likely fortress like communications machine at Komen.   In the book I just finished with KD Paine,  we talk about the importance and a method of measuring relationships.    This public relations disaster also shines a light on the importance of measurement of relationships and the ability to respond in real time.

 

 

Jan

2012

17

Category:

Movement Building

Tags:

1 Comment

SOPA Strike: 12 Hour Internet Blackout on Jan. 18th To Call Attention to US Bill That Threatens Open Internet

Source: globalvoicesonline.org via Beth on Pinterest

 

 

 

United States lawmakers are considering two bills, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), that post a  threat to the openness of the web around the Globe.  In response, many web sites are going on strike.   Sites includes  Wikipedia, Reddit,  BoingBoing, and Global Voices are “going dark” and will black out the Global Voices Advocacy site for 12 hours on January 18 beginning at 8 am.  Other sites will provides more information about the proposed bills and a link to a send an email to lawmakers.

Global Voices has issued a statement explaining why they are supporting this Internet strike.

We are an international volunteer community dedicated to amplifying citizen media from around the world. In the last six years, we’ve produced more than 75,000 posts that link to blogs and other citizen content for readers in over 20 languages. Our content is free to use, and free to share. We rely on the open Internet to carry out our mission, and on social media and citizen media websites that allow for simple publication and sharing of content. Platforms like WordPress, Wikipedia, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, Reddit, Tumblr, and many other online media production communities host content on which we base much of our work.

The passage of SOPA and PIPA by the United States Congress and Senate would force social media platforms and other web sites that host user-generated content to pro-actively monitor and censor users to prevent them from posting words or images that may violate copyrights. It would raise the cost of participation on these sites for all users worldwide, and could force many social media projects to shut down, especially smaller websites and businesses.

We are concerned this law would will inflict broad damage on the work of digital activists living under repressive regimes, as well as restrict basic speech freedoms around the world. Current copyright laws are occasionally misused in the U.S, and can result in de facto speech restrictions. In countries with less independent judicial systems, abuse of copyright law to repress activism is both simple and frequent.

 

 

Source: flickr.com via Beth on Pinterest

 

According to Global Voices, even though the current version of SOPA was put indefinitely on hold this week, PIPA, the Senate version of the bill, is still alive. And the issues and forces that are driving the passage of a law are still at play.   Global Voices, co-founder, Ethan Zuckerman co-authored this post with Joi Ito to explain why it is important to call attention to this bill on January 18th with the planned Internet strike.

Last month, Jim Fruchterman, of Benetech, shared this guest post, “Why I’m Scared of the SOPA Bill,” that explains  how the bill could major problems for nonprofits as well.

Source: Uploaded by user via Beth on Pinterest

I put together this pinterest board that includes additional information about the bills and the various protests and actions that are taking place tomorrow and this  infographic explains the issues with the bill.

Source: eef-etc.com via Beth on Pinterest

 

 

How the Strike Works

Sites are striking in all different ways, but they are united by sending site visitors to this site to send a message about the bill.     Some web sites are going dark for the 12 hours my inserting this  HTML.   You can find lots of other tools to help do a strike:   Zachary Johnson’s blackout page,  ProtestSOPA.org,  CloudFlare’s Stop Censorship app, and SOPA Strike WordPress Plugin.    Like other Internet protests, they are asking people who want to participate by tweeting about the strike using the hashtag #sopastrike.    They are asking supporters to go to Blackout SOPA to add ‘STOP SOPA’ to your Twitter image and post this SOPA Strike page to your Facebook account by clicking here.    They also want you to them to tell everyone about the strike and direct them to this site to send an email.

 

Jan

2012

09

Category:

Leadership, Measurement, Movement Building, Networks

Tags:

7 Comments

Metrics for Building, Scaling, and Funding Social Movements

Investing in movements or networks for social change is a strategy that some funders are using.  But, how do you measure the results?

Marino Morino, who wrote “Leap of Reason: Managing to Outcomes in an Era of Scarcity” pointed me to this recent report, “Transactions, Transformations, Translations:  Metrics That Matter for Building, Scaling and Funding Social Movements” by Manual Paster, Jennifer Ito, and Rachel Rosner with the USC Program for Environmental and Regional Equity and funded by the Ford Foundation.   The report addresses metrics for success for investing in broad field social movements or networked approaches to social change.  The report is written for funders and those on the ground doing the work in the context of networks, although it doesn’t go deep into practice.

The report captures a conundrum in measuring social change movements or networked approaches.    Outcomes for “wicked problems” can be easily counted – policies passed, housing the homeless, educating children.  But there are less tangible results such as “we changed the frame” or “we shifted members’ consciousness” which for grassroots organizers on the ground view as the vibrancy of the network .   The report lays out some new metrics for movement building – that are paths to the more easily counted tangible results and where the unit of analysis is the movement or network, not an organization.

As the report points out,  movement organizers are grappling with big questions.  It is less about how to raise funds for their organizations (although that’s important) but focused on the big picture:   What is the long-term change that we want to see?  What is needed to achieve it?  What roles do different organizations play?    The report identifies metrics to measure progress around this these questions – it asks and answers – “What exactly are the right metrics for today?

“Amazing large numbers of members, staging marches, and winning campaigns – all these remain important measures of a successfully growing movement.  There are, however, other equally important aspects that are often missed in the numbers alone, including the fundamental changes that a leader, organization, or community experiences through their involvement in organizing and advocacy.”

The report suggests that one needs metrics that represent two sides:

Transactions: These are markers, both internal (number of members) and external  (voter turnout).    While the data is not always to collect, such measures tend to be easier to track because they are more tangible.    But they only tell part of the story and skip over the richness of experience and momentum that can be a prelude to social change.

Transformations: These are important, but often “invisible” work.   They should how people, organizations, and movements have been altered through the collective efforts.   They can also show how societal or political views have been shifted.   These metrics are more qualitative in nature which makes them more difficult to define, capture, and track.

The report argues for using a combination of metrics to tell the fuller story of a movement’s success.  It goes on to define both transaction and transformation metrics in different categories for movement or network building which serves as the meat of the report.

  • Community organizing
  • Civic engagement
  • Leadership development
  • Alliance building
  • Campaigns
  • Research and policy analysis
  • Communications and framing
  • Media
  • Organizational Development
  • Movement Building

One of the most useful parts of the report is a two-page spread that illustrates sample metrics for transformations and transactions for each of these categories or a “metrics tool kit.”   The metrics are not intended to be prescriptive, but the reports recommends that movements need to co-create their metrics so the metrics transcend the organization.   For this to happen, organizations need to the space to begin to work together to build the common language and frameworks for these metrics to hold up against different approaches and models.

There is a category for traditional and social media and a couple of paragraphs in the report.    That’s exactly what the book, “Measuring the Networked Nonprofit,” that I wrote with KD Paine and will publish later this year is about it.

The report included a section on recommendations, including building the metrics tool box and building movement capacity to use metrics.   One of the resources that is mentioned in the book is a Progressive Technology Project’s database technology set up to track this work.   Here’s what the report said about capacity building:

Of course, metrics tools only work if you have skilled craftspeople who can use them effectively.   The presence of such metrics mavens varies across the landscape of movement organizations.    Metrics and measurements need to exist at every level of organization, but it makes a different when someone is in charge and helps organizations stay on track.   While community organizers often find themselves pressed to take the time to assess in light of daily crises and immediate problems, movement builders have learned the power of reflection and refreshing.  Metrics can help, and building them into organizational culture can be facilitated by having someone with responsibilities to make it happen – and to steep others in the new practices.

We spent a chapter or two talking about exactly how to put this into practice because is this a very important point.

The point that the report makes and I agree is that measurement needs to value both transformations and transactions – and that requires new attitudes and approaches.

Anyone out there using metrics to measure movements?

Update:  Special thanks to Victoria Vrana who shared the report with Mario who shared it with me … a networked approach to sharing of networked metrics!

Sep

2011

26

Category:

Engagement, Measurement, Movement Building, Networked Nonprofit

Tags:

11 Comments

Facebook Changes for Organization Pages: Focus On Results

Flickr Photo by Lululemon

The discussion about the recent changes on Facebook has focused mostly around what it means for individuals, particularly the tension between openness and  privacy.    Many people are wondering what it means for nonprofit brands  using Facebook as one of their marketing channels.   So are people like me who do coaching and training on how to use Facebook effectively.     It makes no sense to freak out.

When I create training, I always take a  ”principles” approach.   While the specific tactics and techniques for a tool may change, the concepts generally hold constant.    Over the years, as I have watched Facebook roll out features and changes,  it seems takes a predictable pattern:   the big announcement, hype,  backlash, more tweaks to the platform, experiments by users/organizations, and learning what works.

One of the principles is to listen,  learn, and adapt and stay informed.  That is what a lot of us are doing.  We’re trying to understand  what continues work and what doesn’t and evolve practice.     You need to be nimble and not blindly follow a template because it worked in the past.      Measurement and learning are now more important than ever for success.

Focus on Engagement That Leads To Action

The Facebook “Like” button will morph and include  more actions.    According to this post from All Facebook,  these actions might include:  Want, Buy, Own, Listen, Read, Eat, Watch, Work Out – whatever developers create.   Each of these verbs would describe a type of relationship between things that exist in what Facebook has up until today called the Social Graph (our connections) or now what is being called the “Open Graph.”

For nonprofits,  some app developers, like Causes, are already envisioning types of nonprofit supporter actions on Facebook, such as Give and Pledge, which will allow them to prominently feature higher-value actions amidst the sea activity posted to Facebook everyday.

It is important to have a good understanding your target audiences’ decision-journey or ladder of engagement.   Don’t just stop at reach or awareness and don’t just focus on the number of likes which will become meaningless.   Organizations need to think about what motivates supporters to do something that moves the needle on their outcomes.

Gloria Huang from Red Cross said in a comment, “These changes are an opportunity to use our org’s Facebook presence to inspire actual action, rather than just “liking” posts.  This puts even more pressure on us to figure out how to bridge the gap between digital and real life. For example, if someone cares enough to add an app from the Red Cross that publishes an update whenever they give blood, it’s that much more important for us to thank and reward that donor once they actually show up at the blood center.” The Red Cross uses a ladder of engagement to move people beyond the likes on Facebook from awareness all the way to volunteering.

Brands have the opportunity to use apps to tell their story.  According to David Armano, Executive Vice President, Global Innovation & Integration:

“Facebook’s latest moves add up to three things: personalization, mobilization and amplification. For users, Facebook will allow users to further personalize how they want to share their lives to friends and connections. It also means doubling down on a better mobile experience. To brands and businesses, the revisions mean their interactions can be more effectively amplified IF they work really hard at high quality content and/or leverage paid options such as sponsored stories. From a business perspective Facebook is seeking to become the social layer that is woven throughout the Web.

The changes stress the increasing importance a “brand’s voice” in that it will need to be even more meaningful and add value to Facebook users. Companies who broadcast irrelevant information will be easier to tune out vs. those who genuinely connect with customers etc. who in turn reward them with engagement and amplification. In Facebook’s latest iteration, it becomes more about quality over quantity.”

Integrated Marketing and Communications Campaigns

Last month,  I shared a case study called “Facebook Likes Are Not A Victory” that told the story of how Momsrising uses an integrated communications strategy and measures success.    Momsrising goes beyond the “like” and uses deep engagement to inspire results – actions that take place offline as well as online.  And, that is how they measure success. This advice still holds true.   Momsrising does not look at the number of fans as an end point – and neither should your nonprofit.

Another example comes from a presentation that Carie Lewis from HSUS did in June,   “Beyond the Facebook Like.   They do not focus getting as many fans a possible, they’re focused on engaging with their network and inspiring them to take some form of action.

Relationship Building Is Even More Important

The news ticker, that streams all updates by all your friends will be important for brands, but not in the way you think.  It won’t be able getting your brand’s Facebook page wall updates into the ticker, but the actions your fans take on your page that end up on the ticker. (The ticker is a box on the side of the interface that provides a scrolling list of everything that is happening inside your social network. Coupled with this is some smart technology that figures out which stories are “top” and puts those (and only those) inside the main news feed.)   ClickZ has called this feature a way that Facebook will be friendlier for brands, and it’s easy to see why.    According to a post from ClickZ:

A lot of the content from brands that consumers like will end up in here as well. Most likely, a consumer does not want to see daily information from a brand on Facebook. What would end up happening, then, is that content would be hidden from view, unless you clicked over to the “most recent” tab on the screen. Which is to say that a lot of the posts that brands were putting up were never getting seen.

Also, given that the new openness of Facebook and serendipity of being able to see everything our friends are doing (and their friends), using multiple channels for engagement of our networks is even more critical.   But not to just share your message, but to truly engagement people by sharing stories – your networks stories, shining a light on those who are making a difference, saying thank you in person and creative ways — all the good principles nonprofits have been using to build relationships with stakeholders.

The new skills are learning how to be a good community manager – and focus on relationships with people, not tactics on specific platforms.

As this all evolves, I suspect that the number of fans will be truly meaningless.   It will be harder to cut through the clutter if you are simply contributing to the clutter.    A Facebook strategy isn’t just about  recruiting fans, but  deeply engaging people, building relationships, and leading them to action – but doing this through different channels.

Another change, is that people will be able to interact with your Facebook wall content without having to like your page.     This means that engaging content will win.

I posted this link on my Facebook Page and it prompted some great discussion about how some nonprofits are going to start rethinking what they’re doing.      Instead, keep calm and take a listen, learn, and adapt approach.

Some things to consider:

  • Ask your team, what are the results that you want to achieve?  How can Facebook support your organizational communications, marketing or program objectives?
  • Facebooking for, and engaging with, a nonprofit organization is now about meaning and resolving issues. How can your nonprofit improve the quality of posts, tone and managing the creativity of the your organization’s image and its engagement style?
  • Read what analysts and pundits are saying about the changes and how brands are responding.   I like to follow what Mari Smith has to say – for example – here is her post about the privacy implications.
  • Watch what other nonprofits are doing and emulate – but be sure to test new ideas in a way that you can learn and improve.

What is your organization doing to learn and adapt its strategy to the new changes?

 

Aug

2011

01

Category:

Content, Movement Building

Tags:

12 Comments

Content Curation Is Listening and Engaging

Content curation is  the organizing, filtering and “making sense of” information on the web and sharing the very best pieces of content that you’ve cherry picked with your network.    But finding and organizing the information is only half of the task.    As Mari Smith points out in this video about why curation is important and some tools  for doing it.   By sharing the information and giving credit to the source where you found the link, you build relationships and a network.     I used to describe this process as “Listening and Engaging” but really like focusing it the process around a content strategy – makes listening and engaging much more actionable.

Last week, I helped launch a peer exchange for  Packard Foundation for Children’s Health Insurance grantees with Spitfire Communications (creators of the SMART chart).  The focus is how to use effectively integrate social media, measure, and learn from it.   (It’s the topic of my next book that I’m co-writing with KD Paine).    As my focus is on peer-driven learning,  we included two peer organizations working on this issue at the national level who have vast experience using social media as part of an integrated campaign:   Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner co-founder of Momsrising and Bruce Lesley, President,  of First Focus.    (I learned so much that I enough material for whole chapter in the book and ten blog posts … so I’m starting with this one.)

Bruce Lesley is one of a growing number of  nonprofit executive directors and senior leaders that use Twitter.  And, he isn’t tweeting about what he ate for breakfast or one of his personal passions, basketball.   He uses Twitter to curate information related to his organization’s mission and work as a bipartisan advocacy organization dedicated to making children and families a priority in federal policy and budget decisions.   He also uses content curation for sources for his guest blogging.     His use of Twitter (and his organization’s use of Twitter and all communications channels for that matter) serve this intent:

First Focus is working to change the dialogue around children’s issues by taking a cross-cutting and broad based approach to federal policy making. In all of our work, we seek to raise awareness regarding public policies impacting children and ensure that related programs have the resources necessary to help them grow up in a healthy and nurturing environment.

If you take a look at Bruce Lesley’s Twitter stream, you will see that he is curating information on public policies impacting children.   Bruce does his own curating, using Google Reader and FlipBoard.   Any individual or nonprofit organization can curate information using these tools.  They can make it strategic by linking the information to their mission.   But what is the secret sauce to doing it well?

 

What do the experts say?      I found this  video interview of Robert Scoble with Howard Rheingold about Scoble’s curation techniques and tools.   Scoble is known for his ability to follow and make sense of hundreds and thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people through social media channels.    And while most people who work in nonprofits don’t have a compelling reason to do curating at the same level that Scoble does, there were a couple of gems in what he said.   It comes down to organizing your sources, knowing them as trust worthy, and seeing patterns.

If you take a peek at Bruce Lesley’s Twitter lists, you’ll see how he has identified and organized different sources by topic.    This makes it easy to fine-tune the Twitter stream and find patterns.   By acknowledging sources and engaging in brief dialogue, he is also building a network around this topics on Twitter.

Bruce notes, “There  is an initial investment but I was surfing on the web for information anyway and found Twitter to be an efficient way to find people and thus do less web surfing.”    Bruce says he made a few mistakes, like anyone learning a new tool or technique.  ” I followed some of the wrong people. I am interested in child health policy, obviously, but searched for “children’s health” and thus followed children’s hospitals across the country. They are not engaged in public policy so then I unfollowed them because it didn’t meet my goals.”

I mentioned the above video on Google + deep in a thread of a resource that Scoble originally shared.    The ever helpful Mari Smith shared this  post analyzing the video and pointing to the best Scoble quote:

“If you want more followers, you have to follow better people. Because your inbound will inform your outbound. If your inbound is crappy and jumbled, and you don’t understand what you’re reading and who’s writing it.. then you’re not going to be a very good person on pushing stuff outbound… and therefore you wont gather an audience that’s interesting to you, because you won’t be informing them very well. I look at it as a funnel: who do I put in my funnel? People I trust.”

Mari Smith goes on to talk about her approach to building networks through curation and building relationships across networks. Also, that anyone can curate information and share – either through multiple channels or a single channel.   Her advice is to focus on quality, not quantity – and that being consistent is the most important quality.

If this isn’t too meta, here’s my curated content on content curation for nonprofits.

Is your nonprofit using curation as a content strategy?   How?  What tools do you use?  What are your best tips and practices?

 

12