In October 2015,
I had the pleasure of being the
Duvall Leader in Residence at the University
of Kentucky’s Center for Leadership Development (CFLD),
part of UK’s College of Agriculture, Food and Environment,
in Lexington. My visit was sponsored by the W. Norris
Duvall Leadership Endowment Fund and the CFLD, and focused
on leadership development and community development and
engagement as both relate to the use of online media. It
was a fantastic experience!
Among the many workshops, classes and consultations I was
asked to create and then present in my week in Lexington
was one on leadership online: not on how to lead a
team on a project but, rather, how a person can build and
demonstrate leadership and expertise online, and become an
influencer regarding a particular topic related to
nonprofits, NGOs, charities, community issues, etc. How do
you cultivate a profile online that builds your
credibility and reputation in a particular field or
regarding a particular subject matter?
That presentation in Kentucky was one of the
hardest presentations I have ever created in my decades of
being asked to create trainings, but it turned out to be
one of the most interesting of that entire energizing,
challenging week, and I couldn't let go of the
conversations about it. Hence why I now have this page on
my web site about this subject and why I continue to be
interested in such.
To me, leaders are looked to for advice,
direction, knowledge and opinions on specific subjects,
and leaders influence the thinking of others. This is true
offline as well as online. Online leaders engage
online - they don't just post information or their own
thoughts: they discuss, they acknowledge reactions and
feedback, they even debate others, respectfully. Online
leaders aren't measured by how many followers they have on
a social media account; rather, they are measure by how
often their opinion is sought out by others, how often
they are quoted both online and offline, and if they are
influencing others in their particular field of expertise
or focus. In addition, one viral
message, or one very popular blog, doesn't indicate a
person's leadership online. Rather, it's a body of work
and activities online, and how often that work gets
referenced by others.
In my
presentation at U of K, I emphasized that there's a
difference in advertising or promoting versus influencing,
or leading, online, though there is most certainly a lot
of crossover. Advertising and self-promotion is certainly
necessary: people need to know who you are, what your work
is, when you will be speaking, what your nonprofit, NGO or
charity is doing, etc. But such mission-based
organizations also need to strategize on how they their
executive director or executive leadership will influence
people online, how this person or these people will LEAD
online, how that person will guide and inspire others to
new understanding, new ways of thinking, even changes in
behavior. A nonprofit or government initiative has a
mission, and its online activities need to educate people
about that mission, create excitement about it, show how
it is relevant/vital, and position themselves as key
players in addressing issues related to that mission, and
that takes online leadership.
I broke it down this way, and I still do:
ADVERTISING: Announcing the dates and times of events,
start dates and fees for new programs, deadlines,
fundraising needs, etc.
INFLUENCING: Build awareness regarding a cause, offering
messages and sharing information that could change minds,
commenting on legislation, national or local news, asking
questions, etc. in such a way as to position an
organization or a person as a key player in addressing
that issue.
And to be an
online leader, you need a mix of both.
How people influence
online
People that influence other people online undertake a
number of activities to establish themselves, including:
- asking questions or offering perspectives in the
online comments section below a newspaper article
online or a blog.
- posting on their own Facebook page as well as those
of other thought leaders, nonprofits, government
initiatives, university programs, activists, etc., as
well as Facebook online discussion groups. They start discussions, participate in those
started by others, ask questions, comment, share
info, etc.
- using sites other than Facebook, such as BlueSky
and Mastodon, responding to messages you see there,
creating lists by subject matter or type of poster,
one that you not only find valuable, but that others
find valuable enough to follow as well.
- blogging.
- participating in online discussions via LinkedIn,
Reddit and other online communities.
- posting videos on YouTube or Vimeo, and asking
questions or offering perspectives in the comments
sections of these sites on other videos.
- using visually-focused tools, like Instagram, Tik
Tok, etc.
- posting valuable, helpful, relevant, even
provocative information or comments online regularly.
- talking offline about what is happening
online.
Leaders
online aren't just sharing information and opinion
through their own social media profiles, via their own
online spaces; they are also doing so on other people
and organization's online spaces, in a way that is
helpful, that moves a conversation forward, that
informs, that is relevant, etc. Which leads us to...
Qualities of online leaders
The aforementioned noted where and how influencers post
online. But what content do they post? A leader (not an
intern, not an assistant):
- provides relevant, even vital, content or
perspective related to the subject with which that
person wants to be identified.
- asks questions that spur thought and discussion.
- compliments and thanks others for relevant
information or helpful questions.
- confronts, even debates, in a respectful (not
insulting, but can be forceful) manner.
- provides content in a way that's particularly
accessible (for instance, it's FUNNY/entertaining, it
eschews jargon, it relates to current events or
leverages a current cultural trend, etc.)
- is consistently truthful and credible.
- addresses online criticism promptly, honestly,
sincerely.
- shows that he or she is listening to what others
say online.
- responds quickly to questions or replies to their
comments.
- talks openly online about what is NOT working at a
program with which he or she is involved, challenges,
etc.
- acknowledging that they have changed their mind.
- altogether produces content that is primarily
focused on the mission of whatever program he or she
is affiliated, rather than content that is negative or
insulting. Even someone leading a program focused on
something confrontational - increased taxes on the
wealthy, stopping racism within and brutality by the
police, rooting out corruption in local government,
etc. - can do so in a way that is focused on the
justice and benefits of doing so for the entire
community and for marginalized people.
It's worth
saying again: leaders online share info that is helpful,
that moves a conversation forward, that informs, that is
relevant, etc. They can be critical, they can question,
but they also acknowledge quality information by others
and they give credit for ideas or opinions that have
come from others.
The comment about using humor
proved controversial during my discussion in Kentucky. An
attendee said humor was best avoided, particularly in
multi-cultural settings, because it could be
misinterpreted. I just couldn't disagree more; while not
every joke is universal, humor most certainly is. Humor
has been vital in my success at
working
abroad. Indeed, knowing your audience and its
culture is vital, and humor shouldn't be entered into
without careful thought; but to avoid humor is to avoid
one of the best ways to connect on a very human level.
Examples of Leadership Online
There are a LOT of people that, through their online
activities, influence my work and my thinking. I had a
different list in 2015 and I had a still different list in
October 2020 of
some of the people that I believe
are leaders online, that do most or all of the
aforementioned. I am working on a new list, since I refuse
to use Twitter (and if you have any ethics at all, you
should refuse too). I like to look at the replies to their
messages when I see there are several, to see how they
handle challenges to what they have written. I'll post my
update of leaders online in early 2026.
The revised list will be some of people that have
influenced me and my work in a number of ways, that I feel
compelled to seek out and read regularly, and that often
change the way I'm thinking about a particular topic, and
they influence me mostly through their online activities.
Your list of leaders online will be different. My list of
leaders will probably be different in a year.
Media Monitoring
A key to leadership online is knowing what people are
saying about you and your organization online, and
responding appropriately, as well as knowing what is being
said about a particular topic. The Internet makes finding
this out super easy. For instance, you can use
GoogleAlerts
or a similar tool to track what is being said about you,
your organization, subjects that are most important to
you, etc. Also, ask your volunteers, staff and others to
let you know, as a courtesy, what's being said. I have
a detailed guide
about media monitoring here.
I take time at least three times a week to read BlueSky,
Mastodon and the Reddit groups I am interested in, for at
least 30 minutes at a time. I read through the messages of
those I follow and that are on specific lists (like people
who work in humanitarian affairs or public health). I
don't wait for time to do this; I make the time to do it.
I have a variety of
online
discussion groups devoted to topics in which I am most
interested that I make time to read, to share
information on, to start discussions on and to respond to
content by others.
Overcoming Intimidation (real
& imagined)
There's a reason many people, particularly women, are
reluctant to attempt to lead, online or off: the
Tall Poppy Syndrome. People talking about an
accomplishment or offering advice based on their
experience can be seen as bragging, and many feel that
when a tall flower is "bragging," it has to be cut down to
the same size as all the others - or even shorter. The
phrase is particularly popular in Australia, though some
people say it isn’t success that offends Australians but,
rather, someone that acts superior. Regardless, in many
places, a woman saying anything on social media is seen as
bragging, as acting "superior" – and she becomes a target
for her “tall” reputation being cut down, with
over-the-top criticisms and insults.
There's also the
Dunning-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias in which people
wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a
specific area because their lack of self-awareness
that prevents them from accurately assessing their
own skills. There are people who doubt their abilities and
knowledge, strong though those abilities and knowledge
might be, to the point that they may be afraid that they
actually have the Dunning-Kruger effect
and are over-estimating their own abilities - they may
have a fear that they are an imposter regarding their
knowledge and abilities. It's a vicious self-defeating
cycle - trying to be confident but being terrified of
being accused of being an imposter, and it's one that
women in particular experience.
And there's also the fear of
making a mistake: of saying something without realizing
it's inappropriate, or saying something inaccurate and
being corrected.
It would be horrible if women
were so upset at the thought of being harassed, and so
scared of being accused harassment, defamation, libel,
slander and even blasphemy, that they were afraid to say
anything, including opinions and criticisms and even
questions. But that is, indeed, what is happening,
particularly with women.
Research tells us
that women may be left with little option but to resocialize
their own values or suitably
self-govern their online presence to live
within hyper-visible lakshman-rekhas
(lines
of propriety in women’s conduct that must not be
crossed) of performative online modesty. Misogyny in
digital spaces directly impacts women’s rights with
consequences for their physical, emotional, mental,
economic, reputational, and aspirational lives...
digital spaces proliferate subterranean male
networks and ‘bro clubs’ that are always ready to
strike... Cyberspace has thus engendered a new
masculine that terrorizes women if they dare to
assert their public selves. This targeted hate
against women impacts the inclusiveness of the
online public sphere through the chilling effect it
creates for women’s public participation. --
from "
Articulating
a Feminist Response to Online Hate Speech: First
Steps", from
Bot
Populi, October 9, 2020.
For those who are active online,
even if you think your subject matter is completely
benign - blogging about ethics in volunteer engagement,
or model trains, or the importance of tree planting, or
changes in the Girl Scouts of the USA programming, or
kitschy Christmas decorations, whatever - you could be
the target of online harassment and accusations of
defamation, and even a lawsuit. And unlike what we've
all been taught in movies, being truthful is NOT an
automatic slam-dunk defense against a defamation
suit.
In the article Cyber
Safe Girl: How Not to Write a Cyber Safety e-Book,
R Vaishno Bharati critiques a cyber safety e-booklet
titled Cyber Safe Girl – Beti Bachao, Cyber Crime Se 3.0
that was written by a well-meaning cyber security expert
and professor at the Sahyadri College of Engineering and
Management and credits numerous IPS (Indian Police
Service) and KSPS (Karnataka State Police Service)
officers for their inputs. The author notes that the
e-booklet:
uses the reductive
albeit common patriarchal trope of framing women’s
safety in terms of their relationships within the
family, their identities constructed and understood in
relation to the people around them. Furthermore, its
messaging seems to be directed as much at family
members — parents or guardians — who are purportedly
responsible for the protection of their daughters, as
women themselves. This is particularly notable given
that the book credits a group of predominantly male
police officers, thus foregrounding a male perspective
on women’s safety while largely ignoring women’s
voices and their lived experiences. In addition, the
title of the book patronizingly uses the term ‘girl’
despite featuring sketches that include women of all
ages. In fact, it does not address cyber safety issues
experienced by children at all.
another comment:
Many of the incidents
mentioned in the book are not specific to women, and
yet, the book seems to suggest that women need to take
additional precautions to make themselves safe when
accessing online spaces. This is not to say that women
do not experience cybercrimes or a disproportionately
more hostile online space on account of their gender
and other intersecting social identities. However,
some of the solutions offered by the book — such as
installing and updating anti-virus software, creating
strong passwords, and being wary of phishing emails
and messages — are practices that all internet users
need to be aware of, regardless of their gender
identity.
and
The book presents steps
and measures that women can take in order to avoid
being in situations that lead to gender-based
violence, harassment, trolling etc. The sketches warn
women of the dangers of cyberspace, making the
predominant tone of the book not one of empowerment
but of fear and danger. It equates safety with caution
— women will be safe if they do not put themselves in
unsafe situations — and places the onus of safety,
through self-policing, on women themselves. By calling
people to action with its subtitle of ‘save the
daughter’, the safety manual enlists families into
this act of policing, thus adapting the patriarchal
control and surveillance of women’s bodies in offline
spaces for the digital age.
And one more excerpt:
the book’s
narrative of fear and danger can significantly
discourage women from using the internet, especially
those who are new users of information and
communication technologies (ICTs). In a country like
India, where girls and women often find their access
to digital spaces already restricted, the narrative
of fear would spread faster than the access to
technology.
The critique of this booklet was published online
at from Bot Populi.
When I talk to women who fear
trying to lead, online or off, it's one or all of these
aforementioned factors that hold them back.
My advice
- Follow people on social media that you identify as
leaders and be conscious of what they say and do that
causes you see them as leaders and try to emulate that,
including how they handle critics. I've learned a lot from
watching how people like Chris Klewe (@ChrisWarcraft),
JohnFugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) and Imani Gandy (@AngryBlackLady) handle their
"haters."
- Every time you post to social media, do your best to
come from a place of sincerity and honesty and trying to
be helpful. Even in promoting yourself - a speaking
engagement, a new publication you have written, a new
video, etc. - remember that you are posting it to be
helpful, that there are people that WANT that information,
and they appreciate your sincerity and honesty and
information sharing, even if they don't like your posts
every single time.
- When someone responds and you feel criticized, explore
carefully the motivations of the person speaking. Are they
someone that is respected in their field and, therefore,
their criticism is something you might consider? If they
are disagreeing with you, is that okay - can you just
simply live with this person disagreeing with your
opinions? Is it a misunderstanding and you just need to
explain a bit more? Or is this person a troll that spends
an inordinate amount of time criticizing and insulting
others, is this a person that has an online profile that
is full of a great deal of negativity and name-calling and
outrage? In all but that last circumstance, you might want
to respond and engage with the person. But in the last -
do not respond, as it won't lead to anything but more
insults. See How to
Handle Online Criticism for more detailed
guidance.
- Every person on earth makes mistake. You will make
mistakes online and off. When someone says you've made a
mistake, evaluate what you said and decide if, indeed, it
was a mistake. If it was, apologize. If it wasn't, it's
okay to say you don't feel that it was, it's okay to
defend your position. But don't let the fear of making a
mistake keep you from posting online. Have a look at Handling
a social media faux pax. And, again, see How to Handle Online
Criticism.
- You got online for a reason: you are representing a
nonprofit organization, an NGO, a charity, a government
program, a cause - you are representing a mission, or the
interests of mission-based organizations, and you feel you
have something worth sharing. Being involved in the third
sector means you are a caring person that wants to make a
difference, to do good, to help people or the environment.
You are engaging online with the best of intentions, and
if the majority of your posts reflect that, you deserve to
take up space in cyber space. Please take up that space -
you deserve to be here.
Regarding these subjects in
particular, here are more resources you might want to
review:
A work in progress
All pages on my web site are a work in progress, including
this one. They evolve over time with new/changed
information.
Also see:
- The
Difference in Email, Social Media & Online
Communities: A Graphic Explanation.
It can be difficult for people to understand the
difference in email, in social media and in online
communities, especially since email can be used to
create an online community, or social media can be used
to create an online community (Facebook Groups, for
instance). And they all are people sending messages to
people - so what, really, is the difference? This is my
attempt to graphically show the difference, but I'll
still have to use words to more fully explain what I
mean. All three of these avenues for online
communication can intersect. But one online avenue of
online communication may be a better avenue for a
communication goal than another - this resource examines
that as well.
- How to Handle
Online Criticism
Online criticism of your organization, even by its own
supporters, is inevitable. In fact, your nonprofit is
probably going to be criticized on other people's blogs,
Facebook profiles, etc. You can't prevent it, but you
can be prepared to respond to such in a timely manner,
in a way that could increase your credibility with key
audiences.
- Why Every Staff Person
Should Regularly Read At Least One Online Discussion
Group
Each and every employee of your mission-based
organization should be a part of at least one online
discussion group, and subscribe to at least one email
newsletter, relating to their job. Why? It offers a
simple, easy way to get employees connected to important
news and resources they need in their jobs, It's
professional development right from their desktops!.
- Virtue
& reputation in the developing world
A caution to humanitarian and development workers
wanting NGOs and government agencies to engage more on
social media; you need to provide guidance for the women
who would be expected to manage online activities on how
to stay safe and protect their personal reputations. For
them, online activities can be a matter of life and
death.
- The dynamics of online
culture & community
Working with people online means building trust and
communicating clearly and regularly.
- Cultivating Online
Civility
When I began writing about online culture, back in the
late 1990s, misinformation was at a minimum and easy to
identify, and hateful trolls were oh-so-quickly banned
from online communities. Now, hate and misinformation
rage online, and not just among strangers - neighbors
are raging against each other on local online
communities. Can online civility be restored? Is it
possible to challenge misinformation and destructive
speech in the strongest, most deliberate of terms
without being accused of hate speech yourself? This page
links to efforts focused on online civility - most of
these efforts are not by me, BTW.