Two thoughts. Pardon my grammar. English is my second language:
1. Small non-profits have to spend more time and assign more resources to defining who they are, what makes them different, how are they relevant to the people who donate time and money to them, what are the physical and mental barriers current patrons have to giving more and prospects have to signing up. How can new technologies and marketing practices reduce the cost of raising awareness and taking people to the commit stage.
The steps above are well-known. The key idea is the rigor, open-mindedness and human capital assigned to these exercizes. By rigor I mean how deeply small non-business introspect in answering the question “who are we”, how informed and honest are they in answering “what makes us different” and “how relevant” they are not only for people they serve but for patrons and prospects. By open-mindedness, I mean how willing are small non-profits to do things differently. To cancel, for example, the annual fund raising dinner in favor of a less costly and more convenient (for patrons) way to connect. To establish strategic partnerships with other non-profits (finding a way to work around political bickering and complexity), to partner with for-profit businesses (who may provide not only grants but access to prospects or perks to patrons); to rethink how the money raised is used (i.e. capitalize on the power of viral campaigns as opposed of doing the spread or the 30-second spot; cut down operational costs to be able to devote more cash to external must haves). Openmindedness and rigor can also be applied in defining “the patron or prospect” user experience. What are the physical (physical location of chats and information events vs. web open house) and mental (trust, too many other charities approaching him/her in the same way, lack of transparency in how the money is going to be spent) barriers preventing them to commit time and money. Finally, what human capital and what level of expertise are assigned to answering these questions. Are the strategic communications decisions taken only by an overworked staff, or is there someone on the team who reads “AdWeek/BrandWeek”, attends communication and marketing conferences; or someone who is used to crafting stories that move (filmmaker, documentarians, even on air promo cutters.)
2. The press release is cheap to produce and king. There was a recent article in the Wall Street Journal about a man who ran a one-stop pr agency in the mid-west who often placed articles (high power, free/low cost advertising) in major newspapers by tailoring the message in a way that it would appeal to newspapers low on news and blogs. I admit he was promoting “curious products”. But before you think “that would never apply to a small non profit” consider what different and powerful personal stories do you have to tell—ah, to do that… you have to dig deeply to know who you are… and why would people care….
After writing the post above, I have been reading other posts on this blog and continuing to think of practical ideas to answer Perla’s questions:
1. Peter Manzo on his December 6 entry “Let’s be Unrealistic” points to an excellent book by Chip Heath & Dan Heath “Made to Stick”. I purchased the book yesterday. It has concrete strategies to help tell stories better and connect with your audience. If you don’t want to purchase the book or borrow it from your library, their free blog and interview on the social innovation blog (see Mr. Manzo’s entry for link) gives you the gist of their methodology.
One thing that worries me with non-profits becoming more effective communicators is clutter; a key challenge to the proliferation of smaller non-profits is that they might alienate prospect patrons and volunteers by too many causes. Fundraising in this manner is inefficient and counterproductive. We need to come together and figure out ways of telling a meta-story that funds various related efforts. Non profits should be keenly aware of transactional barriers.
2. My experience working in the media industry was confirmed in an article in September/October Columbia Journalism Review: media companies are down-sizing talented journalists and media producers in droves. People who know how to tell a good story, get the word out, connect. Nonprofits focusing, because of lack of resources, in on-the ground efforts should tap into these people.
Big media and local hegemony are no longer the only option. People are more empowered than any time before to following who they are and getting together with like-minded individuals to get results.
——-
Question: why is there so little cross-participation on this board? You seem to have answers and resources for each other. Just curious.
COMMENTS
BY Juan Carlos Paredes Trujillo
ON December 26, 2007 02:21 PM
Two thoughts. Pardon my grammar. English is my second language:
1. Small non-profits have to spend more time and assign more resources to defining who they are, what makes them different, how are they relevant to the people who donate time and money to them, what are the physical and mental barriers current patrons have to giving more and prospects have to signing up. How can new technologies and marketing practices reduce the cost of raising awareness and taking people to the commit stage.
The steps above are well-known. The key idea is the rigor, open-mindedness and human capital assigned to these exercizes. By rigor I mean how deeply small non-business introspect in answering the question “who are we”, how informed and honest are they in answering “what makes us different” and “how relevant” they are not only for people they serve but for patrons and prospects. By open-mindedness, I mean how willing are small non-profits to do things differently. To cancel, for example, the annual fund raising dinner in favor of a less costly and more convenient (for patrons) way to connect. To establish strategic partnerships with other non-profits (finding a way to work around political bickering and complexity), to partner with for-profit businesses (who may provide not only grants but access to prospects or perks to patrons); to rethink how the money raised is used (i.e. capitalize on the power of viral campaigns as opposed of doing the spread or the 30-second spot; cut down operational costs to be able to devote more cash to external must haves). Openmindedness and rigor can also be applied in defining “the patron or prospect” user experience. What are the physical (physical location of chats and information events vs. web open house) and mental (trust, too many other charities approaching him/her in the same way, lack of transparency in how the money is going to be spent) barriers preventing them to commit time and money. Finally, what human capital and what level of expertise are assigned to answering these questions. Are the strategic communications decisions taken only by an overworked staff, or is there someone on the team who reads “AdWeek/BrandWeek”, attends communication and marketing conferences; or someone who is used to crafting stories that move (filmmaker, documentarians, even on air promo cutters.)
2. The press release is cheap to produce and king. There was a recent article in the Wall Street Journal about a man who ran a one-stop pr agency in the mid-west who often placed articles (high power, free/low cost advertising) in major newspapers by tailoring the message in a way that it would appeal to newspapers low on news and blogs. I admit he was promoting “curious products”. But before you think “that would never apply to a small non profit” consider what different and powerful personal stories do you have to tell—ah, to do that… you have to dig deeply to know who you are… and why would people care….
BY JuanCarlosParedesTrujillo
ON December 29, 2007 12:56 PM
After writing the post above, I have been reading other posts on this blog and continuing to think of practical ideas to answer Perla’s questions:
1. Peter Manzo on his December 6 entry “Let’s be Unrealistic” points to an excellent book by Chip Heath & Dan Heath “Made to Stick”. I purchased the book yesterday. It has concrete strategies to help tell stories better and connect with your audience. If you don’t want to purchase the book or borrow it from your library, their free blog and interview on the social innovation blog (see Mr. Manzo’s entry for link) gives you the gist of their methodology.
One thing that worries me with non-profits becoming more effective communicators is clutter; a key challenge to the proliferation of smaller non-profits is that they might alienate prospect patrons and volunteers by too many causes. Fundraising in this manner is inefficient and counterproductive. We need to come together and figure out ways of telling a meta-story that funds various related efforts. Non profits should be keenly aware of transactional barriers.
2. My experience working in the media industry was confirmed in an article in September/October Columbia Journalism Review: media companies are down-sizing talented journalists and media producers in droves. People who know how to tell a good story, get the word out, connect. Nonprofits focusing, because of lack of resources, in on-the ground efforts should tap into these people.
Big media and local hegemony are no longer the only option. People are more empowered than any time before to following who they are and getting together with like-minded individuals to get results.
——-
Question: why is there so little cross-participation on this board? You seem to have answers and resources for each other. Just curious.