The Charity Place

It's a beautiful world

You might have noticed that it's gone a little bit quiet at this blog lately (quieter than usual even).

The reason?

I've recently launched an agency called Beautiful World.  We do fundraising, marketing and communications for charities and other organisations that want to do the world some good (no surprises there, I'm sure).

I've started Beautiful World with two beautiful business partners, Simon Frank and Adam Waller, both of whom I've done great work with with before at other charity specialist agencies.

Social media is one of our specialisms (naturally).  We've already helped a number of charities get started with Twitter, get better at Facebook, get buy-in across their organisation, develop integrated social media strategies, build communities of support, and begin to leverage them to fundraise, and engage with volunteers, campaigners and other stakeholders.

We're also helping charities integrate their online and offline activities - because giving stakeholders and supporters a genuine, joined-up experience of your brand, across all media channels, is more important than ever now everything (and almost everyone) is joined up online.

We also know a thing or two about how to measure and evaluate your fundraising, marketing and communications activities, and how to use data (the information charities hold on their databases, including how donors were recruited, how many times they've donated, how much they've given, when and how often, what other types of support they have engaged in) and web metrics to improve results and return on investment.

We've just helped one charity more than double their projected income AND halve their mailing costs - which has tripled their return on investment.  I can't tell you how happy and proud we are about that.

Anyway - and returning to my original point, finally - I'll be posting content over at the Beautiful World blog from time to time now, as well as from time to time here, although you'll still mostly find me on Twitter!

Twitter - why use directories?

I found a new Twitter service the other day called We Follow - which calls itself a 'user powered Twitter directory'.

In a previous post on finding people to follow, I shared a link for Twellow, which is a similar thing.

I like the look of WeFollow, just because it's so simple and uncluttered, but you can only add yourself to three categories, which is a bit frustrating.  A lot of individuals, and a lot of charities, are a lot more multifaceted than that.

I've signed up to We Follow anyway though - because directories are a good place for other people to find you, so can help you attract new followers.  And because people find you via a category search, like 'nonprofit', it's likely you'll share a genuine interest with them, so it's a win win.

If you're a charity and followers find you using a directory, the chances are that they are pretty interested in what you do - exactly the sort of people you want to engage with.

At the moment, Twellow is more searchable, because you can add far more categories to your profile, which creates more ways for people to find you.  Twellow also allows you to link to more of your social profiles, which makes it easy for people to engage with you on the platform of their choice.

 
There are plenty of other ways for your supporters to track down your Twitter profile, including promoting and linking it to your Facebook page, your YouTube channel, your website - all of which will help bump the page rank up in searches.

There's also Twitter Search (which has recently added an advanced search, which helps you drill down further into niches and interests).

I would still say it's worth registering with directories though, just so you are covering as many bases as possible and making it really easy for people to find you and engage with you.

Like Twitter search, they'll help people find you based around their interests, rather than by your brand - and that's very powerful.

Come to think of it, Twellow automatically creates a listing/ profile for you when you start using Twitter, which you have the option to claim and amend or add to.  Have you claimed yours yet?

Serious fun from SXSW - the Social Media Nonprofit Poetry Slam

I've just been catching up with this session - run yesterday at SXSW Interactive in Austin, Texas - via the Twitterstream and the links to various blogs that people have shared in their tweets.

Conducted entirely in rhyme (yes, really), the session was moderated by Beth Kanter, with contributions from:

• Danielle Brigida - National Wildlife Federation
• Wendy Harman - American Red Cross - National Headquarters
• Carie Lewis - The Humane Society of the United States
• David Neff - American Cancer Society [Judge]
• Katie Paine - KDPaine & Partners [Judge]
• Holly Ross - NTEN [Judge]

Unsurprisingly, Twitter is mentioned heavily - along with a range of other social media - in the examples shared by the panel.

Beth has kindly shared a comprehensive range of content from it here, on her blog - including the slides, transcripts of the poems recited by each of the panelists, along with a variety of links to help you get a fuller picture of the nonprofit case studies, experiences and insights that the session pulled together and shared.

And here's a video (via the NTEN blog) of the panelists in action:

Looks like a lot of fun, whilst making a serious point about how charities - and brands in general - are re-evaluating their traditional views on metrics, measurement and ROI to account for a different style of engagement with supporters through social media. 

It's really quite clever to deliver a session on measurement and metrics in such a unusual and engaging way - reflecting how social media enable nonprofits to engage supporters in helping them meet their challenges in new and innovative ways.

Beth also shares some reflections from the session on her blog here.

Twitter - Are you a 'natural born twitterer'?

Yesterday I shared an article from The Chronicle of Philanthropy featuring advice and examples of Twitter for nonprofits, which featured a quote from Jeff Manning of the The Lance Armstrong Foundation. If you missed that post, here's a link to it.

Following on from that, I thought I would share this interview with Lance Armstrong that I came across this afternoon on TechCrunch - declaring him a 'natural born Twitterer' - as it contains a couple of insights that might be useful.

In the interview, Lance says of Twitter,

'140 characters fits my personality well. I’m not much for small talk ... I see long drawn out emails and I delete them. It also brings a certain transparency to my life that others may have never seen or realized. Lastly, it works great for talking about the thing I care about the most (behind my family) and that’s fighting cancer. Twitter builds grassroots movements quicker than anything I’ve ever seen.'

These are useful principles to bear in mind whether you're tweeting as an individual or on behalf of the brand of the charity or nonprofit you work for. Being as transparent as possible and focusing on what's important to you/ your organisation gives your followers a clear idea about who you are and what you stand for - and something honest and real to engage with.  As Lance puts it:

'It has to be 100% authentic... people are smart. They know when they see something real.'

Lance goes on to say he tries to:

'Keep it positive. There are plenty of times I felt like crushing someone for what they say or did but I avoid it.'

Clearly, many charities and nonprofits deal with challenges and issues that are not, in themselves, necessarily positive, and need to be transparent about the realities of this in order to attract support.

However, what he means here is that it's important to respond positively to criticism or negative attention.  And it's just as important, if you're about to start tweeting on behalf of your charity or nonprofit, to set expectations with your director or board about the likelihood that this will happen, because you're bound to encounter it sooner or later.

If you haven't yet started tweeting at your organisation, I think it's worth thinking this through, and discussing it with colleagues in your communications team.  They will be adept at handling negative media coverage, and dealing with common misconceptions, and able to advise on the kinds of issues that generally arise and what your organisation's position is.  You might consider working together to develop some guidelines or general principles, so that you (or other staff tweeting on behalf of your organisation) can feel confident that your tweets are aligned with brand values and key messages.

Remember though, whilst it's good to plan and anticipate scenarios, you should try to avoid over-thinking your approach to Twitter and be led by the character of the medium - which is, by its very nature, fast and informal.

If you are going to tweet on behalf of your nonprofit's brand, it will be totally unworkable if every message you post has to be signed-off internally beforehand, if you adopt too corporate a tone, or if your tweets don't show any personality.  Even if your profile name and picture is your organisation's brand, you'll still only get real engagement with the Twitter community if you let something of the personality of the individual using the account show through (Dogs Trust do this really well).  In fact, it's unrealistic to think that won't happen anyway, unless you only post generic updates - and, believe me, if you do that you won't be getting the most out of using Twitter for all your efforts.

So, if you can, try to be a natural born twitterer - and do what feels right, rather than getting bogged down with policies and rules.

You might want to follow Lance Armstrong on Twitter for a while, and decide what you think about his style of tweeting.  You might find it interesting to compare his tweets to those from The Lance Armstrong Foundation. Do they have the same voice; how does the content and style differ?

I've been following Lance on Twitter for a while now, and I've never really noticed that he tweets as frequently as the article says.  Mind you, as he says, 'Most tweets I send people don't even notice'. That's a useful insight too.  Although your tweets can be read at any time, people have busy lives and aren't going to hang on your every word, or read every tweet.  Another reason not to be too cautious or precious, and just experiment a bit.  And if you post a tweet and have second thoughts about it later, you can always delete it or - better still - be transparent, and correct yourself or invite some positive debate about it.

Twitter - Advice from The Chronicle of Philanthropy

I wanted to share this article entitled, 'When Characters Count: Advice for Charities on Making the Most of Twitter', by Caroline Preston from The Chronicle of Philanthropy.

It contains a variety of examples of nonprofits using Twitter in various ways - which might be useful for those considering starting to use Twitter or wanting to understand more about how to get the most from it - and some useful advice from 'nonprofit social-media experts', including the following list:

Find out where your supporters are. Do some casual research to learn if people who care about your cause are talking about it on the site.

Listen to others. If you sign up for Twitter, don't just start blasting information about yourself and your organization. Find out what people are saying about your charity, and what information they're looking for.

Don't be a bore. Readers don't sign up to follow a group's Twitter account because they want a litany of links to press releases. That's what RSS feeds are for. So inject some personality into your messages.

Be professional. While for an animal-rights group blogging about vegan recipes may make sense, posting about how disappointed you were in last night's episode of Lost probably doesn't.

Engage with users. Twitter is a two-way dialogue: You send out messages, and readers and supporters will probably respond with questions and suggestions. Nonprofit officials who use Twitter say they try to respond to some, if not all, of the comments they get. Even Lance Armstrong, who has more than 130,000 followers on the site, sends out general responses to all of his followers if he has been asked the same question again and again, says Jeff Manning, online marketing manager at the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

Monitor your account. In a recent tweet, Ken Berger, president of Charity Navigator, compared Twitter to owning a dog: "Among other things, you must walk it a few times a day or you are in trouble." Claire Sale, social-media specialist with the American Red Cross, agrees. She says that charities can risk losing readers and respect, at least among Twitterati, if they let their accounts idle for too long.

Tiptoe into fund raising. Twitter followers cannot replace loyal donors, and charity officials should not neglect the latter while experimenting with one-time campaigns on the networking site.

Develop guidelines. Not every staff member at your charity should be using Twitter in the organization's behalf. Choose one or two people to be in charge of the group's Twitter account.

Avoid taking offense. Because anyone can jot off a quick comment via Twitter, a charity is almost certain to receive a few negative, and even nasty, messages.

Read the full article here.

Twitter - have you got it?

If you've been reading this series of Twitter 'how to' posts, and you have started using Twitter in the process, I'm guessing you will quickly have picked it up and worked out what's so good about it by now.

I know there were a few people in my Twitter Surgery at the Social Media Exchange in January that created Twitter accounts either during or after the session, and they seemed to have the hang of it within a day or two.

So, if it's so simple, why did I start this series on Twitter?

Because so many people were telling me they didn't 'get it', and so many people are still telling me that. In the same breath, though, they are keen to find out why I use it, what I use it for, and why I encourage charities to adopt it - along with other social media. A lot of them are people that run, or work at, PR, fundraising and marketing agencies, too, which I find surprising.

Almost everywhere I go someone is talking about Twitter. At a concert I went to the other night, there was a couple in the seats behind me talking about it during the interval and, on the tube on Friday night, another couple in my carriage were talking about how they'd thought Twitter was a waste of time until recently, when it started to get a lot of press.  Both sets of couples were agency types, talking about how they wanted to understand Twitter more, so they could 'leverage' it for their clients and incorporate it into their digital strategies.

However, it's not surprising that so many people still think using Twitter is pointless.  There is a lot of misinformation around about it and many people prepared to express an opinion about it, profess to use or understand it - not wanting to appear behind the times - that either haven't even set up a profile at all, have posted once or twice and got little from the experience, or have a profile because they think they should be seen to have one, but only post once in a blue moon for appearance's sake.

You might find these articles in the Evening Standard and The Times interesting on that score. I recommend reading the comments for a more informative and representative read than the original pieces.  (It's also worth noting that many people resorted to blogs and Twitter to continue commenting on the article in the Times, since their site would only allow around 20 comments and they didn't publish the ones they really didn't like the look of.  Proof, if any were needed, that you cannot vet and control what people say about your brand anymore; if you don't choose to have dialogue with them, they'll just go somewhere else to continue talking about you, not to you, or with you.)

So, sometimes the best learnings are from watching what not to do

With this in mind, I wanted to share a very entertaining and insightful blog post from Steve Jackson on VSO's first foray into using Twitter.  Steve is the fundraiser and communications officer for COAAP, in Barmenda, Cameroon, and you can follow him on Twitter @ourman.  (By the way, I know his stint at COAAP is up in about six months, so if you're an overseas development charity looking for a full-time blogger and community builder you should get in touch.)

So, what's the big deal about Twitter?

You might have noticed that I quite like Twitter and, if you've been reading some of the posts on this blog or following me on Twitter, you'll probably know that I think it can be a powerful addition to a nonprofit's toolbox - with all manner of uses.

Because of this I'd meant to blog specifically just on Twitter for charities and nonprofits - including an easy 'how to get started' guide - since the spring, but I always ended up feeling like there was already so much information out there that there wasn't any need for more.  Conversely, I'd come across at least one interesting Twitter-related story or service, or gain a new insight, every day and find I almost had too many reasons to blog about Twitter that I got to the point where I didn't know where to start, or what level of detail would be relevant to most people. The result: I didn't write the posts.

So, why write about Twitter now?

I realised over the last few months, partly through organising NFPtweetup in November, that although I may be connected to a number of people in the nonprofit sector that use Twitter and who are pretty Twitter literate (twitterate?), there are still many more who have never heard of it, are not sure what it is, don't know how to use it, or understand how it might be relevant to them, to their professional role or their organisation.

At around the same time (the latter part of 2008), I also became aware that Twitter was about to become more important; that its reach was about to extend beyond the somewhat niche audience of techies, bloggers, entrepreneurs and media types that had been the early adopters of Twitter, and into the mainstream.

How is Twitter entering the mainstream?

Celebrities and politicians started to use Twitter, which sparked interest from outside the Twitter community and from the traditional media (not just tech journalists); from gossip columns, tabloid press and broadsheets - and, most recently, even international television news.

The US election really started to put Twitter on the map - both John McCain and Barack Obama had Twitter profiles hard at work as part of their campaigns, and Obama's use of social media, in particular, was dissected across the web, by bloggers, marketers, fundraisers and clued up journalists.  Not long after that, our national treasure, Stephen Fry, started tweeting, followed by various celebrities, including Britney Spears (you can't get much more mainstream than Britney Spears), John Cleese and, most recently, Jonathan Ross.

Ross (who tweets as 'wossy') has been getting a fair bit of media attention recently, too, in the wake of the 'Sachsgate' controversy, so the press have been very keen to report on how he has been filling his time during his enforced sabbatical, by following his Twitter stream. In fact, over the last month or so, barely a day has gone by without Metro running a Twitter-based story in their new column, 'The Ridiculant', Jonathan Ross or otherwise.

And when Britney Spears started tweeting, it was covered by all the usual celebrity columns and magazines, which meant that readers of 'Now' magazine heard about Britney's house move via Twitter.

According to a recent report from The Telegraph, even the Church of England's Bishop of Buckingham, The Rt Rev Alan Wilson has become a fan of Twitter and has been enjoying following @wossy's tweets.

I'm betting that Jonathan Ross and Stephen Fry will mention Twitter on @wossy's show, when he returns to our screens this Friday (perhaps they'll even tweet live?).  If they do, it's bound to mean that Twitter becomes even more widely adopted.

Regardless of whether they do or do not, Twitter hit the International headlines, including a spot on BBC News, last week when the pilot of US Air, Flight 1549 had to make an emergency landing on the Hudson River. You would have had to have been living in a cave to have missed the story of how 'citizen journalist' Janis Krums, took the first picture of the remarkable scene with his iPhone, posting it to Twitter, from where it spread across the world before the traditional news networks had even picked the story up (not the first time Twitter has been credited with this power).

Why is all of this important and relevant to charities and nonprofit organisations?

Twitter has 'come of age'.  It has enough users now that it's become an established part of the landscape, it adds so much value to so many people and organisations, it is permeating the offline world more and more now and it has already outlived one of it's competitors.  It feels to me that it has either reached, or is fast approaching, a tipping point - and a point at which those that have dismissed it up until now as a fad or a 'niche network for geeks' should consider being more open-minded about its potential.

So, my advice is, if your organisation hasn't genned up about Twitter yet, or you have just tinkered around the edges with it, 2009 is the year to reconsider it seriously as part of your strategy. At the very least, you should be starting to explore and learn about how it might be able to help you achieve your objectives, so you are closer to being able to leverage what it has to offer you in the future.

According to data from Nielson Online, Twitter was the fastest growing social networking site in the US between September 2007 and September 2008, achieving a 343% growth rate (Facebook came in at the number six spot, growing 116% over the same time period).  Although, Twitter has only a tiny percentage of the users that Facebook has globally, the Nielsen data shows the potential for that to change, which means it's conceiveable that Twitter might prove to be a much more important and valuable channel through which to engage with supporters and stakeholders in the not too distant future.

Don't get left behind!

Whether you are already using Twitter, or thinking about trying it, there is a whole range of things you could be doing in this first quarter of 2009 to move your organisation forward.

To help you do that, I'm going to write a series of Twitter posts, specifically for nonprofits, that cover everything from getting started with setting up a Twitter profile, to building a community, and leveraging your networks to produce value for your organisation.

Much of this will be informed by real questions that charities and nonprofits have asked me, or posted on Twitter or at The Charity Place, over the last few months, including the feedback received from the first NFPtweetup.

I won't be reinventing the wheel, as there are already plenty of great resources about how to use Twitter all over the place online and it would be daft to duplicate them where they already exist. Rather, I will pull as many of them as possible together in one place for easy reference, and attempt to do so in as logical a progression as possible - adding insights and stories from my experiences, and the experiences of other nonprofit professionals, along the way to keep it as fresh, accessible and useful as possible.

How you can help

As I post, it would be great if you could add your thoughts, experiences and anything you think I've missed, in the comments on each post.  That should mean we end up with a really thorough set of crowd-sourced resources for the sector.

Look out for the first post, tomorrow, on getting started with Twitter...  If there are any burning questions you have on this, do post them now so I can build them in.

NFPtweetup - during and after

I'm delighted to report that the first NFPtweetup, held last night (4.30-8.30pm, GMT), seemed to be enjoyed by those that took part, and provided a useful forum to bring people together and start exploring all things Twitter for nonprofits.

To think that it started out as a casual, off-the-cuff, remark in a conversation between two not-for-profit tweeters...

... but evolved to be so much more - just like so many things do, wherever social media enables like-minded people to come together.  You can see most of this by looking through tweets mentioning NFPtweetup here and checking out the wiki here.

In all, 35-40 tweeters participated - either in person and/ or online - to share ideas, insights and thoughts, and discuss some of the issues and opportunities for charities and nonprofits using, or thinking of using, Twitter.

(I should say that, although Twitter was the focus of the event, one of the main objectives that emerged as the idea for the event evolved was to engage around the topic of social media in general, using Twitter as an entry point for the conversation - since many of the challenges, considerations and opportunities are the same across the many social platforms.)

To get as much value from this gathering of minds, and allow it to be shared as widely as possible, I put a shout out to everyone before the event to submit one slide capturing an idea, a thought, an observation, a question or an example related to nonprofits' use of Twitter.  This was the result:

NFPtweetup Collaborative Slideshow

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: collaboration socialmedia)

Brilliantly, this collaborative effort was even featured as Top Presentation of the Day on Slideshare which took it to an even wider audience than that for the event itself.

As you might expect of a gathering of nonprofit geeks, there was also plenty of content generated during the event that we've shared across the web.  Here are some links for those interested:

You can access much of the content via this search of hashtags.org.

Tweets including NFPtweetup can all be seen here, too (this would usually be the case at hashtags.org, but the service was down for development when the tweets for NFPtweetup started, and the team at hashtags.org say they are not intending to backdate to aggregate what they missed during this time, because it would take them too long!).

Blog posts (known at time of writing):

• Post by Damien Austin-Walker, from Timebank

• Post by Amy Sample Ward, from NetSquared

• Post by Howard Lake, at UK Fundraising
  (Howard says this was the UK's first NFPtweetup. I think that's true...)

• Post by Ed Walker, from UCLAN

Photos:

• Photos on Twitter tagged NFPtweetup.

Videos and more are being listed here on the wiki as they are created and shared.

With content still being posted, and conversations - having been started on Twitter - moving to other social sites, including The Charity Place, I hope that this event has acted as a catalyst to open up the area of social media a bit more, make it more accessible and unleash its potential for charities and nonprofits.

Thanks again to Just Giving for supporting this event, and to everyone that attended, contributed and participated.

So, should we have another one in a couple of months? Perhaps to explore the burning issues that came up this time that we only had chance to scratch the surface of? Any feedback greatly appreciated...

NFPtweetup - sponsored by The Charity Place and Just Giving

This is primarily a heads up for anyone reading this blog who may not have heard about NFPtweetup yet.

This event is taking place between 4.30-8.30pm (GMT) on Monday, 24 November and is open to anyone working in the not-for-profit space who either uses Twitter or has an interest in the applications of Twitter, and other social media, for charities and nonprofit organisations.

There are more details here on the wiki, and you can participate in the event either by attending it physically at the Coach & Horses, Greek Street, Soho, London, or by participating online (if you attend in person, you'll be able to enjoy a drink or two with the compliments of those nice people at Just Giving, who are kindly supporting this event).

All details and information are on the wiki so, if you are interested, please have a look.

You don't need to register for the event, although it would be nice if we knew to expect you - either in person or online - so we can do our best to include everyone in the conversation; and signing up to the wiki is probably the best way to make sure that happens.

If you're reading this, don't be a lurker - join the flock!

A disclaimer

I've been trying to turn more charities onto the possibilities of social media for a while, because of the enormous power they have to enable organisations to meet their objectives - if used strategically.

I'm saying that again, because it's key and it concerns me that it's a point that many people keep missing.

I'm not advocating using Twitter, or any other social media, for the sake of it (or because it is cutting edge, 'cool', new or exciting).  I am keen to develop a deeper understanding that social media are a powerful set of tools that can help charities and nonprofits achieve important objectives that contribute towards their corporate/ organisational plans, and their missions.  This means activities like building awareness of their work, raising funds, delivering support, scoping and understanding need, communicating important messages to supporters and stakeholders, recruiting donors, campaigners, volunteers, staff, advocates, growing a greater voice to influence policy and provision of local and national services, developing better solutions and so on.

I'm also very aware that there are some very practical barriers for a lot of organisations - whether they are rooted in resources (time, money, people power, structure), knowledge, understanding, experience or a combination of these - factors can make it very difficult to put together a business case, or create a culture, for testing these tools.

So, where was I? Oh yes, that's right:

NFPtweetup is all about coming together with others to explore these (and any other) burning issues, share thoughts and ideas, meet new people and maybe even collaborate.  I hope that it turns out to be a great forum for people not using Twitter or any other social media yet in their organisations to consider what might work for them.

Twitter: Where did Obama go?

Over a week ago now, I noticed a post on, Valleywag pointing out that, after having tweeted throughout his campaign for the Presidency, Barack Obama's Twitter account had since gone surprisingly quiet.

The article suggested that his 'followers have been pumped and dumped — Twittered into contributing money and time, and then passed over for more presidential means of communication'.

I can understand why they might feel that, too.

A few days earlier, this was one of the things I was careful to draw attention to in the article I wrote (annoyingly, the link always shows 'Page not found' on first click through and needs to be reloaded before you can see the article) for the CharityComms website, which ended:

'If you actively engage people anywhere through a social platform, you will have become an important part of their online world and your absence will be noticed and commented on if you suddenly disappear from the landscape.'

The 'radio silence' of the Obama Twitter account has provided the perfect case in point to prove this and, because it has such a high profile, we can see how people have responded and learn from the insights this provides.

There are important lessons to consider carefully here if you already using social media or considering dipping your toe in.

Social media offers huge opportunities to genuinely connect with your supporters in a way that most other media is not able to replicate. As a user of Twitter, I know that it really feels like being part of a community: If you ask for help or advice, it's unusually forthcoming, people are very supportive of each other, and — once you've built relationships with like-minded others — you are missed if you don't tweet for a while, and even asked if you're okay when you haven't been around for a day or two. 

Most other social platforms have similar cultures.

For charities, it is important to understand that the connections you are making with your supporters using social media are with real people — not just user names or avatars — and real people have feelings.

One of the reasons social media is so powerful for charities is its ability to bring supporters closer to your organisation and your work, but with this comes a degree of accountability.  This is particularly true if you have asked something of them — money, time, attention, engagement — and they have given it.

Another thing to bear in mind is that social media create a culture of meritocracy, where you connect and engage with others based on how much you give, mutually respect and share.  Those that only use their Twitter profiles to promote themselves, don't engage and don't give anything back, don't get too much of a positive response, quickly find that they are 'unfollowed' and and can even be considered 'spammers'.  It's important that you keep adding value to the environment.

There will be many that will continue to follow Barack Obama regardless of whether he tweets regularly again or not, simply because he's the President elect and because they're interested to see what he'll do next — many, because they'll be looking for an opportunity to criticise.

If you're a charity, this is not as likely to be the case.  If you do not stay active in your social communities, you are more likely to lose followers and connections than Obama is.  However, like him, you will also undoubtedly lose some of the goodwill and engagement that you spent time and energy building up; all of which will diminish your opportunities to generate income, awareness and greater support of your work.

Social media is a great leveller, and individuals can make a lot of noise now — positive and negative — using them.  For charities and nonprofits, the challenge is to make sure you give your supporters the information and motivation to create as much of that positive noise as possible.  Don't let fear of negative buzz inhibit you either: If you concentrate your efforts on filling the space with positive buzz, there generally isn't the space or the appetite for anything else.

'TripAdvisor Causes'

I've been neglecting my blog of late, and there are all sorts of things stacking up in my head that I've been wanting to post about.  For now, here's something that caught my eye this morning.

I noticed that TripAdvisor is donating $1 million to charity and has nominated five organisations that it will split the amount between, 'as determined by the percentage of total votes that each charity receives' from visitors to its site.

You can vote for either, Save the Children, Medecins Sans Frontieres, National Geographic Society, The Nature Conservancy or Conservation International.

Incidentally, their rationale is that they are offsetting some of the effects of the global tourism industry that they've become such a popular part of, through their 'More Than Footprints™ Campaign' or, in their words:

'With over 15 million reviews and opinions from real travellers, TripAdvisor believes in the power of the collective voice.  We also believe that by helping us support these great causes, you can make a difference in your community and the places you visit.'

Once you have voted, if you log back in, you can go back and check TripAdvisor Causes to get an update on what percentage of the overall vote each charity has received -- A nice touch.

You also get the opportunity to invite others to add their vote by using a neat little dashboard with links to Delicious, StumbleUpon, Facebook, and a function that allows you to pull up to 50 of your contacts in from whichever web-based email you use.  Easy!

I couldn't help thinking how clever TripAdvisor is to come up with a CSR offering so well aligned with their user-generated model, and was impressed at how straightforward they have made it for people to share the message (which, of course, is in their interests, since it drives traffic to their site).  Still, it's something a lot of non-profit organisations could learn from.

When I last looked, this was how the vote was panning out, which won't surprise those of you who know about the relative popularity of different types of cause (i.e. environment, children etc):

I think it's a bit of a shame that there aren't clear links from TripAdvisor to any of the charities' home pages -- in some cases no links at all! -- which you would have thought Tripadvisor might have been kind enough to promote and those organisations would have pushed for.  It smacks a little of self-interest on TripAdvisor's part; wanting to keep traffic within their site, or perhaps it's just an oversight?

A truly unusual proposition

I just received an email from Oxfam with the most unusual ask I think I can ever remember getting from a charity: To knit a square for a giant, knitted petition.

I read on to find out 'How a giant, knitted petition could make a big difference to mums in poor countries'.

Now, I can't even knit, but I'm so taken with this campaign that I requested a guide without giving it much more thought.  Let's just hope it's simple -- and can succeed to teach me the basics of knitting where my so many members of my family previously failed -- because Oxfam want me to take a photo of it and upload it to the Flickr group they've created for the campaign.

Brilliant.

If that wasn't enough, they have provided a selection of banners for supporters to use on their websites and blogs.

Oxfam have come up with something really different here -- that stands out from so many of the other asks made by charities.  It also lends itself to sharing of content on and offline (the Flickr site shows people getting together to knit), and provides the tools to do this.  All of this gives the campaign real impact, and turns it into an experience, by injecting elements of community and fun alongside a serious message.

Who knows, as well as helping to reduce mortality rates in pregnancy and childbirth safer for women in poor countries, I might finally even learn to knit.  Sounds like a win-win to me.

Experience the problem and be part of the solution

Thanks to this article in the Independent today, I was introduced today to Save the Children's Kroo Bay project, and the fantastically engaging content on their website that puts supporters and potential supporters in touch with their work there -- including these webinars.

I can't remember having seen a better illustration of a charity bringing people closer to it's work at grass roots level, whilst also educating them about the bigger picture, by including everything from individual profiles (where supporters can leave messages for workers and residents in Kroo Bay) to an overview of the Save the Children's 'big plan'.  It makes the work the charity does highly tangible, without artificially simplifying the issues -- and has a refreshing honesty and integrity about it.

You only need to take a look at some of the comments supporters have posted to see what they have achieved here in terms of engagement.  I was really struck by this one, from Sarah in Kent (which is full of insights):

‘I could see myself signing up to a 'save a Kroo Bay child' action plan which lists the key areas where money is needed to give that child his or her maximum chances of reaching adulthood in health and safety. I and others could put money into the pot until collectively we had brought it to completion. It would be like an individual child fund, albeit one of the thousands of other child funds that Kroo Bay needs support for.. but we may move one obstacle at a time. There could and should, of course, be a general pot as well as not eveyone would want to donat in the same way, and you STC would want some unrestricted funds (just remember to tell us why you want them?).

One the one hand, we the community would be able to see the chances of one child's life being safeguarded as within our reach, and we would know clearly what it takes to achieve that within an area such as Kroo Bay, or any other. On the other, we would be acting together, pooling our money but also connecting our thoughts, feelings and perhaps our dialogue in unity and collaboration.

The STC challenge is 'we save the children, will you?' and my answer is oh yes please let me save just one child, and then another, and then another. Please make it seem real to me that my donations have the chance of safeguarding one young human life to the point of adulthood.’

It's interesting to note that, given a social media element in the site, supporters are quick to engage not only with the charity and it's work, but also with each other -- seeing the oppportunity to collaborate and achieve more together as a result.

The Independent article finishes by saying:

'NGOs are throwing themselves with gusto behind the many tools Web 2.0 has brought, but it is difficult to ascertain which ones are having a direct impact on donations ... clever elements of multimedia can do much to draw in potential supporters and educate them about the relevant issues and individual campaigns. How and when that might translate into an actual donation, however, is more difficult to track.'

Of course, tracking itself is not really the issue here, since web analytics are sophisticated enough to enable this.  However, the question of whether and/ or when investment in creating this kind of rich, online experience will result in more financial support, is the one on most charities' minds, and is far more difficult to answer.

Just remember that, once, not so long ago, many people probably asked the same question about direct mail.  In fact, come to think of it, some of them still do...

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.

Another social media and sharing 'how to'

There are some interesting insights into how UNICEF have been using a host of social media and sharing platforms to engage with supporters and prospective supporters here, on Joanne Fritz's blog.

It's a shame there's no measurement of the financial impact of the activity - or information on how they might be considering tracking and analysing this.

Regardless, it will undoubtedly have a positive influence on fundraising, because it's:

• Getting messages out to new audiences, and creating a pool of interested, engaged people - who'll be more likely to become financial supporters as a result
• Offering new ways for existing supporters to engage with UNICEF and providing them with a richer, more meaningful experience.

As time goes on, we'll see more in depth analysis and evidence that this kind of activity is paying off; it is direct, highly personal and trackable, so it's also highly measurable.

For now, just know that your organisation needs to be part of the conversation so you can experiment, find out and learn about how it will work for you - just like UNICEF are doing.

Connecting your supporters directly with your work has never been easier

Yesterday, I posted about how charities need to make the most direct connections possible between their supporters and the work they do.

There just really isn’t any good excuse not to be doing this anymore because there are so many accessible, inexpensive tools at our disposal now.

For a lesson in using social media to do connect people and causes, you couldn’t get a much better example than Mara Triangle, who have integrated content on Facebook, Flickr, and Vimeo, and are microblogging updates reguarly using Twitter.

It’s just about as close as you can get to the Masai Mara, looking at the wildlife yourself, without actually being there in person (although, when you watch some of the video, you sometimes almost forget you’re still just sitting in front of your PC).

Male Lions Fighting from Joseph Kimojino on Vimeo.

News, photos and footage appear in real time, and the team there engage one-to-one on a daily basis with donors and potential donors all over the world in a way I don’t think I’ve ever seen before.

I’m totally hooked.

If you’ve spent five or ten minutes looking at what they do, and the amazing wildlife they’re so bravely protecting – against all the odds – I reckon there’s a good chance you’ll have already signed up to a regular gift.  If you haven’t, take a look at their urgent appeal here and consider giving something.

And, before you go, just think – if Mara Triangle can do this with the scant resources they have, what excuse is there really for your organisation not to be doing something similar?

Social networks take word of mouth to a global level

I’m still totally captivated by the enormous possibilities of social media to share ideas and information, and am inspired to post (yet again) on the subject of how people are using them to come together and do good – because I’ve been motivated to give in the last few days via Twitter.

Just look at what Jeremiah Owyang has started through his blog and his Twitter feed, which Oliver Ding then turned into this presentation on Slideshare...

| View | Upload your own

Through the content that Jeremiah and Oliver have generated, people have been driven to charity sites and give a donation, and/ or to pages like this one.

So far, Oliver Ding’s 24 ways to give presentation has received 1,065 views, and has been nominated ‘slideshow of the day’, which has to make a difference to the amount of money raised.  (I don't need to tell you how to make a donation, because everything you need to know is in the slideshow)...

| View | Upload your own

The Pledgebank campaign has 264 people signed up, and  counting (you can sign up by clicking here).

There are at least 30 people who have indicated they’ve given through Jeremiah’s updates on Twitter, and more – no doubt – who have given privately.

I'm sorry to say that I had previously received an approach from two charities - one via Facebook and the other by email - but hadn't yet made a donation.  However, Jeremiah's Twitter message changed that.

Charities, take note...

What, you mean you don’t give to charity???

I found myself suggesting to a friend recently that supporting good causes was undergoing a huge change; that it's becoming almost fashionable to support a charity and more and more people are doing it because they think everyone else is, and it’s the thing to do.

This was prompted, in part, because a couple of days before another friend had said to me: ‘I feel like I should support a charity, but I’m not sure which one to support.’

I thought that was really insightful –- because they were clearly not motivated by a cause or a need, or something they believed passionately in.  Instead, it felt like they were saying, ‘I’ve got a great career, a nice car, I wear good clothes, I can afford nice wine these days. Everyone else seems to give to a charity, so it must be what one does; like going snowboarding or playing golf.  I don’t want to be the odd one out.’

I think social media is the big lever in this, because it gives people a platform to show others what they’re doing, where they’re going, who with, what they did, how much fun they had doing it; it gives us all a way to share more about ourselves with the people we’ve got a connection with.  You could argue that there’s an element of competitiveness about some of what people share, but it’s also hugely positive -- because it gives us a deeper understanding about the people we know, through this series of windows into their lives and their psyches, to an extent we never had in the past.

We find out that a business associate we’ve known for years takes the most beautiful photographs, that a friend we haven’t seen for a while is backpacking solo in Japan, that one of our old clients is an aficionado of facial hair, that an old house mate now has two gorgeous children and two enormous pedigree cats, that someone we went to school with likes Jon Spencer Blues Explosion too.  And we find out which charities they all support -- because they invite us to join the group or campaign they’ve set up for the cause on Facebook.

There’s something highly tribal about this –- which is effectively what fashion is all about –- and I think the power it has to spread ideas and information is going make charity giving ‘mainstream’ in a way it has never quite been previously.

I realise this could be perceived as a slightly tasteless thing to say, when so many charities are raising money for deeply serious causes, but I’d rather people gave money to charity than spend it on Louis Vuitton handbags any day -– so shoot me.

Is it worth building your own online networks?

You probably had a look at MyActionAid when it was launched by ActionAid last February – perhaps you've even used it?

It’s a brilliant platform for events and community fundraising – a bit like an own-branded version of Just Giving – and you can see how it has the potential to be so much more; a social networking platform for ActionAid to engage with its supporters, for them to engage with each other, to take ActionAid’s messages to their social networks and bring their friends into the fold.

Adding different ways for people to engage aside from fundraising – I'm thinking campaigning in particular – and further integration with other platforms would add value to the experience and make this site a really rich way to engage with ActionAid, its work and its community of supporters.

It’s great to get some insights from their experiences and to find out a little about their future plans, including making widgets available to integrate with supporters on Facebook.

I always want to hear about how this kind of initiative is working, and I’m impressed that they're citing ‘double the giving rate compared to presence on other sites’. That's got to make doing something like this well worth the effort, surely?

Campaign for Mohammed Maree

This captured my imagination this morning.   What a fantastic illustration of how social media can be used to spread a message and affect change.

I've got my fingers crossed for Mohammed Maree.  I also searched and James Karl Buck has set-up a petition page and a facebook group campaigning for him to be returned.

I hope it's quickly and that he's unharmed.  Sign up now.

Social networking - an income generator?

I’ve been thinking a lot about this subject recently, and I saw an article today from the States that has inspired me to post.

It’s always interesting to hear how charities are beginning to tap into the potential of online social networks, because it's such early days yet, and there's still not much evidence around of this type of engagement with charities converting into income on any scale.  However, I think organisations need to change their perceptions about this anyway.

Debates seem to be raging all over the place – particularly online – about whether digital media will replace print media (most people are focusing, as usual, on direct mail), and whether charities should ‘switch their budgets’ from one to the other.  I've also heard budget-holders say that they're considering digital because it’s ‘a cheaper medium to reach more people’ than direct mail. This all seems to be in the context of recruiting financial supporters.

(A bit of an aside: I’m supposing direct mail receives all the focus because it’s more expensive than doordrops and inserts, and that digital media would seem to provide the same direct route to the individual that direct mail does, at a fraction of the cost.)

Well, I think that all of this is missing the point a bit, because:

• Not every charity will have, or be able to develop, propositions that will work across all media

• No approach will work unless it matches the right ask to the right audience and uses the most appropriate media to deliver it

• Social media are relationship-building tools that will help organisations engage with individuals who might support their mission in many ways; not necessarily financial.

Time will tell, but my hunch is that social media offer excellent channels to connect with new audiences, increase awareness, recruit campaigners and advocates (remember that a lot of these people have proactively joined up around your cause – they’re online activists), and create a new kind of self-selecting prospect pool, from which a percentage will convert to financial support if you engage them in the right way.

Mind you, they’ve got to fix this first, or I’m off ;p