Is this the tipping point for UK charities’ adoption of social media?

I had planned to attend, and to tweet from, this year’s Institute of Fundraising National Convention.  How brilliant it would have been to be the first to do it...

However, as things turned out, I was needed at my desk more and I was pipped to the post by Jon Waddingham from Just Giving.  The considerable upside of this was that I was able to keep track of some of the buzz from this year’s Convention by following Jon's tweets, even though I wasn’t able to be there.  It was the next best thing – thanks again, Jon.

What I was really interested in – if you hadn’t guessed – was whether the speakers this year would be tuned into social media, whether the charities and agencies would be presenting any useful insights into how they are using them, what they have learned and what’s been working for them.

I gathered from Jon’s tweets that quite a few people were waxing lyrical about social media over the three-day event – and rightly so – including:

• Joe Saxton, presenting a session entitled, 'Will online fundraising ever be better than paper-based DM?'

• Sue Fidler, of Sue Fidler Ltd, and Richard Brooks, Director of Marketing from Compassion in World Farming, presenting 'Online fundraising - How to make it work'
• Tom Mansel-Pleydell, head of client services at Just Giving, whose session was entitled, 'Social Media: Join in or miss out'.

Here’s a couple of Jon Waddingham’s tweets sent during that session:

You can visit Jon's profile for more. And you can compare and contrast with this piece published shortly afterwards on the Guardian website.  Both provide some very useful insights.

I’m only hoping that enough charities will have attended at least one seminar where social media was on the agenda during the Convention, and that this will have opened the UK sector’s eyes up to the potential of these platforms and removed some of the barriers in people’s minds about giving them a try.  In the words of Tom Mansel-Pleydell, tweeted by Jon Waddingham (!):

1.       Assign resource

2.       Get out there

3.       Observe

4.       Take part

5.       Review and measure.

And I hope it’s not lost on those who are still reluctant, that this post would not exist without social media, and people using them to connect around a common interest.

Comments

[Howard Lake]

I'd hope it is a tipping point for charities, but personal experience of banging even the Web 1.0 drum at fundraising conferences since 1995 suggest that it'll be a slow process. Not that there won't be shining exceptions to this of course, and thanks for sharing some of them here.

Have just read a BBC News report:

Firms 'miss' social site success
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7501073.stm

about Gartner research that claims that commercial companies too are missing out on the potential of using social networking sites.

Maggie Shiels, Technology reporter, quotes Gartner researcher Jeffrey Mann: "Businesses which harness how employees use these sites stand to increase savings, productivity and profits."

[Rachel Beer]

Thanks Howard.

I think that the sheer accessibility of Web 2.0 technologies (low cost, easy to use, flexible, open source) makes the decision for charities who want to extend their reach online so much easier now though.

The real difference is that charities won't really have to make any great commitment, in terms of budget or resource, to start experimenting and learning. They can set up profiles on a variety of ready-made platforms without paying a thing, most will have plenty of existing content that they can share, and it takes so little time to micro-blog - for instance - all of which are easy ways to dip a toe in.

Some big barriers at the moment, as I see them (for commercial organisations too), are:

That these media are still so new and young, which means there is a relative lack of successful case studies at the moment. That doesn't mean that there aren't a huge number of individuals and organisations utilising these channels, and starting to get results - just that what they are testing isn't mature enough to yield really significant learnings yet. I also think that a lot of the early adopters that are beginning to blaze a trail would rather keep a competitive advantage and keep what they are learning to themselves! (As the charity market becomes more competitive, and charities become more commercial in their approach, I think we're going to see more of this.)

Fear and/ or lack of understanding about this new landscape - the cultural changes it has brought with it, and how significant these are ('It's just a fad that will pass. We don't need to change how we do things'), the platforms themselves (what they even are and what they do), who uses them and how (e.g. Facebook is just for kids who want to throw sheep at each other), how much resource is required ('I only have a small team and they're already busy'), and so on...

And, for charities, the 'silo culture' that still seems to be so prevalent - and the politics that cause it and are caused by it – that can hinder collaboration and progress. For example, many are struggling with who should 'own' social media within their organisations and not really doing anything in the meantime, while fundraising, comms, marketing and digital (some visionaries do have these!) teams battle it out.

Problem is, these all stand in the way of being able to answer the $64,000 question - quite literally - that most direct response budget holders will ask: "What return will I get?"

[Jonathan Waddingham]

Very interesting points raised there. It's late on a Friday, so I don't have much to add, save for a link to a great blog post on "Ten Questions Not To Ask A Social Media Panel" that deals with that $64,000 question...
http://www.marketersstudio.com/2008/06/ten-questions-n.html
hat tip to Hugh Macleod - http://twitter.com/gapingvoid/statuses/846896716