September 15, 2009
Followers and Friends Not the Only Measure of Nonprofit Success Online
Is a celebrity-marketing expert right when he chides the nonprofit world for being “paralyzed by fear” when it comes to the use of social-media tools such as Twitter and Facebook?
Or did he fail to do his homework?
In his blog, Seth Godin, the marketing expert and author, takes the nonprofit world to task for failing “to show up in a big way” in these online networks.
As evidence, Mr. Godin points to the list of the top 100 Twitter users in terms of number of followers.
The list is largely dominated by celebrities, big entertainment and news-media companies, and a smattering of businesses.
“Where are the big charities, the urgent charities, the famous charities that face such timely needs and are in a hurry to make change?” Mr. Godin asks. “Very few of them have bothered to show up in a big way.”
He continues: “Please don’t tell me it’s about a lack of resources. The opportunities online are basically free, and if you don’t have a ton of volunteers happy to help you, then you’re not working on something important enough. The only reason not to turn this over to hordes of crowds eager to help you is that it means giving up total control and bureaucracy. Which is scary because it leads to change.”
But the nonprofit world is full of examples of nonprofit groups large and small that are creatively using social-media tools to promote change.
In fact, a recent study by the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Center for Marketing Research shows nonprofit groups are actually well ahead of businesses in their use of social-media tools such as Twitter, Facebook, and blogs.
What’s more, a growing number of groups are raising awareness, planning major events, and raising significant money through the use of social-media tools, The Chronicle has reported.
For example, the World Wildlife Fund, through a program called Earth Hour, inspired people in more than 4,000 cities to turn off their lights for one hour in March to raise awareness about climate change.
The event, which was organized almost exclusively through online social networks, started in one city — Sydney, Australia — in 2007. Andy Ridley, executive director of Earth Hour, says the effort has grown quickly because the organization has given control of its message to supporters, many of whom have created their own Twitter and Facebook pages to appeal to audiences in their home cities.
In addition, groups such as the Nature Conservancy and Emory University have been successful in raising hundreds of thousands of dollars online by giving through small donations collected through giving programs that were organized through Facebook. (You can see examples of six innovative online fund-raising campaigns in this video.)
What’s more, many large organizations have hired experts who work full time on developing a presence on Facebook, Twitter, and other networks. Wendy Harman, social-media manager at the American Red Cross, and Danielle Brigida, the social-media-outreach coordinator at the National Wildlife Federation, discussed how they approach these tools in a recent Chronicle live discussion.
What do you think? Is Mr. Godin on target in his assessment — or are nonprofit groups effectively embracing these tools? Post a comment below to share your thoughts — and to point to other examples of nonprofit groups that are leading the online charge.
Click on the audio player below to hear leaders from Earth Hour and the Lance Armstrong Foundation discuss how they are using social-media tools to advance their causes.
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Anticipation of High Court's Electioneering Decision, Plus More: Tuesday's Roundup
Next: Why Nonprofit Boards Fail, Plus More: Wednesday's Roundup
I am fresh in my position with The Pittsburgh Foundation, but I think there are many great examples of nonprofit use of social media. LiveStrong and the Gates Foundation come to mind as great examples. Is it really about the numbers. If The Pittsburgh Foundation had 1 million followers would we have accomplished something? I have always believed it is about creating interactions and egagement. That is what we measure our efforts by and we do not wish to keep up with the Ashton Kutcher’s.
— Christopher Whitlatch Sep 15, 01:33 PM #
I would say, “No,” Seth did not do his homework. Some nonprofits are having amazing success in this arena. Others do suffer from a lack of resources and need to be encouraged to reprioritize. It’s the new digital divide – those who aren’t embracing social media need to get on board. Thankfully, the barriers to entry are fairly low. The key resource needed is time.
— Laura Norvig Sep 15, 02:27 PM #
We at Meatless Monday have been having wonderful success on Twitter and Facebook. Social networking helps us to get the word out but, more importantly, it gives us instant feedback with our readers and helps to shape our content. We strive for one on one interaction with our supporters, rather than the standard RSS feed.
Please check us out and discover how one meatless day a week helps the planet and your health! www.twitter.com/meatlessmonday
www.facebook.com/meatlessmonday
— TamiMMC Sep 15, 02:41 PM #
I think it is unwise to compare celebrities to charities in terms of success in social media. Celebrities have a much wider reach and audience than nonprofits – when was the last time you saw thousands of screaming fans sitting outside ANY nonprofit’s door? Do our Executive Directors get stalked by the paparazzi like celebrities?
The point here is the unmistakable star power that we as nonprofits simply do not have. Those of us who are on the social media band wagon are putting in the time, seeking people out, connecting, opening the dialogue. We’re all making huge strides with these new tools and while we as nonprofits may never see the “success” of celebrities, the fact that we’re able to connect with a wider audience in a cost effective manner is itself a success worth celebrating.
— Kristiana Kocis Sep 15, 02:48 PM #
While there are many great examples of nonprofits using social media, I see small, traditional nonprofits – every day – still paralyzed by fear. Many are too paralyzed to even dip a toe into social media or, if they do embark on it, they are too afraid to give up control of the message to their followers. So, do I think Mr. Godin is correct in that respect? Yes I do. I see it every day.
On a side note: “in a big way” is a relative term. Let’s compare apples to apples. Nonprofits just aren’t as sexy to the general public as celebrities….yet. :)
— Clover Frederick Sep 15, 03:36 PM #
I was struck too by the use of numbers argument to make sweeping statement about nonprofits not engaging. There’s a number of charities like Red Cross and NWF who had great success. And don’t forget HSUS, LiveStrong, NWF, American Cancer Society, and many others.
Yet, are the successes that we point to – are these across the board for all nonprofits?
Change is an issue ..
— Beth Kanter Sep 15, 03:37 PM #
I think the real issue is that the majority of non profits still have issues doing the basics- website creation,facilitating on-line donations, generating timely acknowledgments, etc.
This nuts and bolts work must be done before a social network fundraising strategy can ever be implemented. Crawl before you walk, walk before you run.
As someone mentioned, what’s the point of having a million followers if you can’t measure or track them at all?
— Jon Biedermann Sep 15, 03:45 PM #
Here is where I agree with Seth: As a whole, I do think nonprofits are too timid with their marketing and communications. The nonprofits I work with and hear from daily constantly fear offending a potential supporter and thus take a very conservative approach to marketing. It’s easier for some groups than others simply because their issues are more palatable to a wider swath of the public. Is anyone seriously going to protest digging wells to give people clean water?
I do disagree with Seth on his point about resources being an excuse. Money isn’t an excuse with social media, but time really can be. Volunteers can work for many organizations,as he points out, but not for all. Nonprofits are very diverse and many work on very, very hard issues, precisely because the private sector and government haven’t figured out how to solve the problems.
— Kivi Leroux Miller Sep 15, 03:53 PM #
The focus on social media is mistaken; that is one example Seth uses to make his larger point: “If your non-profit isn’t acting with as much energy and guts as it takes to get funded in Silicon Valley or featured on Digg, then you’re failing in your duty to make change.”
This is why the concepts of social entrepreneurship and social innovation are eclipsing the non profit sector, in terms of attractiveness to highly creative, risk-taking folk; the former appear to put equal emphasis on both “mission” and “driven”.
— Thaler Pekar Sep 15, 04:13 PM #
I think Seth is mostly wrong on his assessment (as well as his decision to not allow comments on his actual post about this – is he afraid of engaging those who might disagree?)
First, if he honestly thinks that the number of Twitter followers has anything to do with how successful a user is or how engaged the user’s followers are, then he doesn’t understand Twitter (and most other social networking tools), period. Those tools are about engagement – somehow I don’t think Ashton Kutcher, who has over 1 million followers, responds and engages with all of them.
Secondly, his point about resources is totally misguided. The resource nonprofits don’t have is time, as Kivi pointed out already. But money plays into this too, despite Goden’s dismissive attitude toward it. I’ve worked in many nonprofits, has he? Has he ever tried to just turn on a 7 year old computer and then wait 20 minutes for it to boot? Has he ever tried to post a blog entry or update a twitter feed when the internet is so painfully slow that you can’t even get a page to load? These are resource issues obviously.
Finally, I’ll pose the blasphemous question here: can Goden, or others, even prove that social media is going to benefit these nonprofits in any real way? Measuring social impact is hard enough as it is; once you add in the amorphous world of social networking/media (which granted, many nonprofiteers don’t understand), it gets even harder. Even if benefits and impact can’t be shown, its still not wise to waste time or money without first having a plan and goals in place to guide that work.
If Mr. Goden would like to volunteer his time, I’m sure many nonprofits would take him up on the offer :)
— Elisa Sep 15, 04:25 PM #
For any company with a small budget — and what’s smaller budget than a non-profit? — social media offers low-budget brand awareness with an amazing ROI. It’s just a mental block that only frivolous young people use social media, and the non-profits that get around that metal block are having amazing success. The Red Cross offers all their press shots on Flickr. Look at Art.alltop.com and tell me again that all museums are paralyzed with fear over social media!
It’s difficult to generalize what “all” non-profits are doing, but I really believe that institutions with no web presence are completely missing the boat!
The Stickley Museum at Craftsman Farms has a blog (Stickleymuseum.org/blog), Twitter, Facebook and Flickr accounts. It’s been great to see people taking and submitting different views of the museum and grounds… nature photographers, parents taking their kids to the museum, Craftsman fans, etc. A previous commenter asked how we can measure the success of a social media campaign, and I think we measure success by an online community of different perspectives and different activities on the Farms.
— Meg (Meg@simpsonsparadox.com) Sep 15, 05:24 PM #
My charity client has been using Social Media in a big way for over a year now, and have had measurable returns in terms of donations with SM as the source. I commend Cars 4 Causes ® for being innovative and forward thinking in their approach to reaching these generous donors. Cheers! V.
— Virginia Sep 15, 05:40 PM #
To equate success only as being among the top 100 tweeters is a shallow and narrow view of social media.
Non-profits don’t see revenues as the only measure of successful social media. Inspiring action can actually the ultimate goal of the charity, and it isn’t measured in fundraising or twitter stats.
Sure, I agree that NFPs are somewhat fearful of change. But they also answer to overwhelming amount of accountability for every dollar spent on admin. The slightest error in judgment can attract media scorn, so a little caution cannot be ridiculed.
In poor marketing form, Seth ranks “hype” as the only measure of creativity or success. That’s too bad. He should focus on real results.
— Stephen Abbott Sep 15, 05:46 PM #
I think we need to continue to compare ourselves with Silicon Valley in terms of online innovation, as that is were more and more donations will come from in the near future.
We also can’t point at big gov or insurance, and say, well, they are moving slower than us, so we are not the worst, yet….
What I didn’t like about this was Seth’s reference to Twitter and saying that we as non-profits are not in the top 100. That will always be the case, no matter what, as I don’t recall seeing a non-profit on a gossip rag last time I was in line at the store. It is a popularity contest of individuals for the first 100 or 1,000.
Doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot of low hanging fruit that non-profits can still obtain and convert in the longtail of Twitter or other social platforms.
— Ryan Quiel Sep 15, 06:54 PM #
What I appreciated about his post, although I share many of the reservations already mentioned, was his call to action to re-consider how we deliver our message.
My experience as a nonprofit staffer, board member, volunteer, and trainer is that some organizations are being really innovative in how they use emerging technologies – including, but not limited to, social media – to deliver their services and message. However, I also see many organizations that are paralyzed by fear, and I worry that their inaction will be costly. Not because they’re not an “influential twitter,” but because I do feel that we’re in the middle of an important paradigm shift in terms of communications. I wouldn’t advocate trying every new tool, nor would I suggest abandoning all traditional forms of marketing and fundraising. But I think any organization that isn’t willing to dip a toe into these waters is making a costly mistake. For me, that was the crucial point.
Is that unique to nonprofits? Definitely not. Are there very real resource issues, such as time and technical limitations? Yes. But I worry about organizations expending time, energy, and money fighting a losing battle against new technologies. That is what frustrates me. And those organizations do exist.
I don’t want to blow this out of proportion. There are many nonprofits who are taking advantage of these tools. There are some organizations doing really smart things to advance their mission, raise awareness, etc – some of which are very small and nimble groups, others are more established orgs willing to take a risk. But there are some nonprofits who should read Seth’s post and consider his point – the work is too important to waste this opportunity because you are paralyzed in fear.
— Ashley Schweitzer Sep 15, 07:10 PM #
Regarding these responses:
Methinks the Lady doth protest too much!
Seth may be a bit animated, but he is dead on. I have plenty of experience with non-profits, and fear, in my experience, has always been the strongest motivator. So unfortunate.
— Josh B. Sep 15, 09:49 PM #
The American Institute of Architects has several blogs, wikis, and accounts on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. Although I agree that we, like many nonprofits, have had to deal with the fear factor and sometimes lack of understanding about social media, we’ve also had leaders who’ve fully embraced social media.
To Seth’s point, though, do we have a comparable number of followers? Maybe not compared to some celebrities, but is that really a measure of success for a nonprofit? One of our goals is to create an online community among practicing architects. Yes, the numbers are important but I also think an assessment has to include the quality of our effort, too.
— Sybil B. Sep 16, 09:46 AM #
I hope everyone who has posted here has also posted on Seth Godin — given how little he knows about nonprofits and their Internet activities, he probably doesn’t know about this excellent rebuttal going on here.
— Jayne Cravens Sep 16, 02:13 PM #
Dear Seth,
If you understood nonprofits, human nature and risk you probably wouldn’t have stated your case so crassly.
Many nonprofit are using social networks, the majority, no. However, just like our commerical counterparts there are consequences to move full-speed ahead in an unproven and potential donor alienating medium. Once there is measureable, verified success, just like our commercial counterparts, social networking will have its place in our communication plans.
In addition to this nonprofits are in for the long haul; developing long-term relationships and not looking for any customer who will buy a $25 product.
— Jim McLachlan Sep 16, 02:18 PM #
Social Media is an important path in the future of non profit organizations. If anyone is “missing a boat” then we are talking about a fad. Using social media to tell a story, engage others in your mission and to empower the small donor has great value. All non profit organizations should keep focused on their mission and not the “celebrity” of the social media world. Keep up the good work and use the tools you can to support your cause. Our world is a better place because non profit organizations are here.
— Amy Allen Sep 16, 03:35 PM #
When I read Seth’s article, what struck me was how narrowly he seemed to be defining “non-profit,” making certain assumptions about how non-profits work and how they approach certain situations.
Those in the non-profit world know, of course, that non-profits are as varied and diverse as our corporate counterparts. What works for one does not necessarily work for another.
I work at a small, locally-based non-profit and we’ve embraced social media. It’s a vital part of reaching out to new people and cultivating relationships. We don’t have Twitter followers in the thousands, but we don’t want Twitter followers in the thousands.
I think Seth’s article revealed just how little he really knows about the non-profit world.
— Meredith Sep 16, 04:00 PM #
As a side note, @nonprofitorgs, a Twitter account, acts as a portal to all nonprofit organizations on Twitter by only following nonprofits.
As of today, it was following more than 8,600 Twitter accounts, all a non-profit of some kind.
— Meredith Sep 16, 04:11 PM #
Peter:
I agree Seth missed the mark with the broad strokes towards all nonprofits and his poor choice of metrics. It’s also thrilling that 89% of the 200 charities sited in the study by the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Center for Marketing Research are using social media.
On the other hand, according to the US, IRS, there are 1.8 million nonprofit associations in the USA and another 70,000 in Canada. Are all of those nonprofits using social media? Doubtful.
As a nonprofit employee for the past 15+ years, I believe the nonprofit sector has a long way to go before there is a majority adoption.
Kudos to you and others that are help leading the way.
— Jeff Hurt Sep 16, 05:44 PM #
Yes, nonprofits sometimes resist change (just like some for-profits or any major other institution). But Godin’s metric of success (number of followers) is flawed. No nonprofit is going to have the following of an Ashton Kutcher. We simply don’t have the same platform.
At the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, we measure success by community engagement and action.
We use Facebook (http://bit.ly/yvJzd) to engage over 24,000 fans, and have raised $90k by encouraging fans to do peer-to-peer fundraising on FB and other social networking sites. We’ve also had success using Facebook to increase interest in clinical trials and generate support for legislation important to us.
Using social media well doesn’t necessarily cost a lot but absolutely requires energetic staff who are passionate about social media and not afraid of taking risks.
— Amy DeMaria Sep 16, 06:19 PM #
Please forgive this cross comment to various blogs: My response is to repeat what I wrote when I took issue with Godin in 2006 for slamming nonprofits for not using Squidoo: http://bit.ly/06Godin
Given the episode in 2006, plus Godin’s response to Tom Watson about Squidoo ( http://bit.ly/401WHM ) one can’t help but wonder if the nonprofit execs that Godin cites in this week’s post were rejecting Squidoo, rather than online fundraising and social media in general. In fact, a friend from a large nonprofit told me his nonprofit was treated arrogantly by Seth and company when they refused to get involved with Squidoo — the nonprofit leaders were made to feel stupid.
And if we’re talking about blowing people away, you know what would blow me away? If Seth would publish a detailed report showing exact amounts raised by each nonprofit in the Squidoo program, along with case studies of the time and resources they expended. To my knowledge, detailed figures have not been published — there are only vague statements about thousands raised.
A detailed, transparent report would be the best thing Seth could do to help nonprofits use Squidoo effectively.
http://twitter.com/celestew
— Celeste Wroblewski Sep 17, 12:37 AM #
I’m with Seth on this one.
The self-congratulation in many of the posts above (“amazing success”) is telling.
I do agree that Seth’s example wasn’t the best illustration, my experience is that two things are keeping most non-profits mired in mediocrity: (1) fearful leadership; and (2) an over-emphasis on tools, as opposed to creating passion through great material. It’s not about the tools, it’s about the content. Why is that message so hard to get across?
— Mark Rovner Sep 17, 08:07 AM #
Thank you for all of the great comments thus far. Clearly, this conversation has struck a nerve and I thank all of those who have shared their perspectives.
It seems that many folks agree with the crux of Mr. Godin’s argument — that nonprofit groups need to be open to change.
The complaints, it seems, are that he has branded the entire industry as being fearful and that nobody is out there pushing for change in new ways.
To that point, we offered several examples of groups that are — and there are many, many more.
I would like to clarify a couple of points that have come up in the comments.
First, while there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.8-million registered nonprofits, the number of active groups is likely to be much lower — since there are many groups that no longer operate. In addition, many groups in that population are simply too small to be engaging in any type of meaningful social-media operation. These are groups with budgets of less than $25,000 annually and/or have modest missions.
Taking these groups out of the picture, it would seem that there are still a lot of groups that aren’t taking advantage of these tools. But the point is, the gap isn’t as big as it would seem at first blush.
To Celeste’s point, it would be interesting to hear whether any groups are successfully using Squidoo to raise money or awareness. She says there isn’t much information about how charities are making money in that space — but we’d like to hear more from either Squidoo or nonprofit groups that have tried it.
Thanks. And let the conversation continue …
— Peter Panepento, Chronicle Web editor Sep 17, 11:49 AM #
I think this is a fascinating discussion and an indication that there are many non-profits happy to be in this space.
I do think there are non-profits in Canada who are doing a great job of promoting their services through Social Media. @mealexchange is one of them (they were selected as the charity of choice for Toronto’s Twestival – a good indication that the twitterverse is listening!).
As a non-profit organization (Framework) we want to see Canadian organizations be recognized in the tech / social media space. We’ve worked hard to build a social media strategy and communications plan to be sure that if we’re going to participate, we do it with reason, measurement and outcomes. I’d love your feedback on our strategy – http://it.timeraiser.ca. I think we’re doing a great job with our social media tools – we’re on facebook (facebook.com/timeraiser), twitter (@civicfootprint) and Youtube and LinkedIn. I’m happy to read all the examples of others in this space. Keep it up!
— Amanda Grainger Sep 17, 02:13 PM #
Thanks, Peter. I’d like to clarify that I was not suggesting there wasn’t much activity at Squidoo—my question is genuine: I’d like to know
specifics on the money raised by nonprofits through Squidoo. This, in fact, would be a great subject for the Chronicle — a story on Squidoo, based on interviews with nonprofits that are listed on Squidoo’s site and with Squidoo staff for details on dollars donated (consistent with best practices for transparent cause marketing).
Beth Kanter posted my comments on her blog http://bit.ly/2JKYb4 and Seth has responded: http://bit.ly/fromSeth (Thanks, Seth.)
— Celeste Wroblewski Sep 18, 12:12 AM #
Celeste —
Thanks for clarifying that point.
I’ll pass along your idea to our other editors.
— Peter Panepento Sep 18, 10:18 AM #
In relation to Twitter, visibility is more than just a follower count.
Using http://twibbon.com causes can create overlay images that supporters can wear and which will be prominently displayed with all their twitter communications and surfaced in all the nooks and crannies that tweets manage to get into online.
Without a twibbon, the nature of the Twitter stream means that to support a non-urgent cause a supporter used to have to keep bringing up the subject of the cause repeatedly.
— Jonathan Joyce Sep 21, 04:13 AM #
Amy Allen (comment no. #20) says: “Using social media to tell a story, engage others in your mission and to empower the small donor has great value. All non profit organizations should keep focused on their mission…” Amy the beauty of social media is that most of the time, non-profit organizations CAN focus on their mission through social media. Plus they can easily reach a new audience. Education, and raising awareness of a cause or issue is often at the top of non-profit’s mission. In addition, social media allows the non-profit’s passion to show through. It is a great way to allow new people to find your organization, and those people often turn into volunteers or donors sometime down the road.
I work for a non-profit that has embraced social media. When I had trouble with my older computer and running TweetDeck and Facebook, they decided social media was important and they somehow found the money for a new computer that could run these programs for me.
I feel like I have the best job in the world. I get to be passionate, work for a non-profit I care about and share this passion with others through blogging, Flickr, YouTube, Twitter and more. I’ve reached out to so many new people who would have never known about our organization, or might not have known the right things about our organization but now they are “fans”. Building these relationships is a valuable thing. In a time when everyone is looking to the future and who will support any particular non-profit in the long down the road, I expect the relationships we are building now are more valuable that you think. You don’t have to ask for money via social media in order to see a return on investment! Building community and listening to what people are saying to us and about us has been a really wonderful thing.
— Jonah Holland Sep 27, 05:53 PM #