Category Archives: Community Relations/Outreach

can volunteer engagement cultivate innovation?

Can volunteer engagement cultivate innovation within an organization where volunteers serve? And what conditions are necessary for such innovation by volunteers to happen? This paper explores that question: Beyond Service Production: Volunteering for Social Innovation by Arjen de Wit of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Wouter Mensink of The Netherlands Institute for Social Research, The Hague, The Netherlands, Torbjörn Einarsson of Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden, and René Bekkers of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

It was first published online on October 12, 2017 and was published on paper in the Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly by ARNOVA.

Abstract:

Building on theories from different fields, we discuss the roles that volunteers can play in the generation, implementation, and diffusion of social innovations. We present a study relying on 26 interviews with volunteer managers, other professionals, volunteers, and one former volunteer in 17 (branches of) third sector organizations in eight European countries. We identify organizational factors that help and hinder volunteer contributions to social innovation… This rich, explorative study makes it a fruitful start for further research on the relationship between volunteering and social innovation.

In short, their research question was: Which organizational factors help and hinder volunteers to contribute to social innovations in third sector organizations?

You can download the paper for free.

I found the paper because I’m quoted in it. And if you are a manager of volunteers, this is one of those rare academic papers on volunteerism that is actually worth your time to read (sorry, academics, but so often, your papers aren’t what practioners need).

By social innovation, the paper’s authors mean new solutions – products, markets, services, methods, models, processes – that lead to new or improved capabilities and better use of assets and resources by a nonprofit, NGO or other volunteer hosting organization that address its mission and serve its cause, directly. I define social innovation as something that is transformative for the organization and those it serves. Certainly volunteers that introduced mission-based organizations to the Internet were social innovators. Volunteers connecting an organization to new communities and people very different from those the nonprofit usually works with can be seen as social innovators as well.

Here are “a few illustrative examples” the paper identifies as social innovations introduced to nonprofits by volunteers:

a telephone service in a nonnative language (Swedish Red Cross), a School of Civic Initiative where people are educated to make them more active in public life (Hnutí Duha, Czech Republic), first aid education for partially sighted and blind people (German Red Cross), a bicycle campaign (Greenpeace Denmark), and a shelter for illegal male immigrants (Salvation Army Netherlands).

Examples of innovations occurring on a larger scale and introducing system-level changes that the paper cites are:

the lobby for new government policies (Czech branch of the Salvation Army) and a network to connect entrepreneurs in the field of environment with investors, publish their innovative work, and promote a financing network (Fundación Biodiversidad, Spain).

The paper delivers on identifying organizational factors that help and hinder volunteer contributions to social innovation. From the paper’s conclusion:

Organizational factors that may enhance volunteer contributions to social innovations include a decentralized organizational structure, the “scaling up” of ideas, providing training and giving volunteers a sense of ownership. Factors that may hinder volunteer contributions to innovations include a lack of resources and a reluctant attitude within the organization, for example, when a new project does not fit within the organization’s strategy. By identifying and exploring these mechanisms, this article adds insights on a new perspective for third sector research and offers useful tools for volunteer managers to improve the innovative capacity of their organization.

Terrific stuff. Kudos to the authors. This paper is worth your time.

Also see:

Wizard Activist School & A Leadership Academy

Back in the 1990s, when I directed the Virtual Volunteering Project, I researched and wrote about the phenomena of online fans of TV shows, performers and sports teams using the Internet to organize volunteering, donations and other support for various causes and nonprofits. I thought it was such a splendid example of both online volunteering and DIY volunteering. Fans of The X-Files, Buffy: the Vampire Slayer, Star Trek and various sports teams were engaging in largely self-driven activities to raise money for certain nonprofits and raise awareness about what those nonprofits were trying to address. Often, these fans started engaging in philanthropic activities with no direct prompting from any charity or celebrity.

More than 20 years later, this kind of fan-driven philanthropy is still happening – so much so that I long gave up trying to track it. But some initiatives still stand out, and one of those is the Harry Potter Alliance (HPA). I’ve written about them before, back in 2011, but one of their more recent efforts deserve attention: they now host an online Wizard Activist School. This online school allows enrollees to complete modules to develop skills regarding effective activism, including:

  • Elevator Pitches
  • Goal Setting
  • Mission Statement Development
  • Member Engagement
  • Hosting an Event
  • Conflict Resolution
  • Leadership Styles
  • Social Justice 101
  • and more.

This may be the most ambitious project by a fan-based philanthropic group I have ever seen. I absolutely will be taking it – I know how to do all this, I’ve led workshops in many of these subjects myself, but I want a Wizard Activist School certificate!

My only criticism: lots of “click here” links on the web site. The web site needs to be accessible, and that starts with descriptive links.

In addition, the Harry Potter Alliance also sponsors the Granger Leadership Academy, an annual onsite event now in its fifth year. The next one is in Philadelphia, March 21-24, 2019 and it is limited to just 200 people. “if you’ve ever wondered what your own heroic tale would look like, this is your moment.” The Academy brings in experienced activists and leaders to provide attendees – most, but not all, women – with training based on the kinds of dynamic, collaborative, strategic leadership Hermione Granger exhibited in the Harry Potter books.

One of the reasons I find all of this fascinating is that there are constant laments that younger generations aren’t volunteering, aren’t joining traditional civic groups like Rotary, Optimist, Lion’s, etc. And all I can say is that younger generations ARE volunteering, ARE getting involved in their communities – but they are doing it in different ways. Maybe the local civic group didn’t bother to create any social media channels to talk about their work, haven’t updated their web site in years, and have spent more time complaining about declining numbers than trying to do an honest assessment of why that is happening.

17 year old successfully fundraises, learns lifetime lesson

A colleague’s question reminded me of when I got my first grant. It was a government grant. I was 17 years old and in high school – it was the late 1980s. My best friend and I formed a theater group with friends to produce a children’s play for the community. We bought the rights to the play, cast the show, rehearsed and looked into booking the high school auditorium for an evening. Then we presented a scene one night to the arts council in my hometown in Kentucky – the council acted on behalf of the city to make grants – so we could rent costumes and pay other fees.

We got the money! I was stunned! We were “just kids”! Was this government agency REALLY going to give us money, even just a few hundred dollars? Later, I learned that the council had been blown away by how organized our group of teens were – not only asking for money, but knowing exactly how much was needed and proving we were capable of pulling of the production. They were particularly impressed because, before we went into the meeting room, another arts nonprofit, one run by adults, had walked in and said, “We need money.” No documentation, no formal proposal, no budget, no list of how the money would be used – just a demand for support.

I have never forgotten that early lesson in making a proposal for support. We had no experience doing anything like this, but my co-founder – who went on to make The Blair Witch Project – thought carefully about how to sell our idea, to make it look worth funding. I thought it was audacious and doomed to failure – and I was wrong. In fact, our production was so successful that, the next summer, my co-founder and I produced another play for community children, one we co-wrote, this time in the central park.

Since then, I have never had any hesitation in writing a funding proposal or talking to any foundation, corporation or government agency about why a nonprofit I’m working with deserves support.

The name of our company, by the way, was the Henderson Audubon Repertory Company – HARC. Our first production was The Prince Who Wouldn’t Talk. There were three wizard characters in the show – I played all of them.

Also see:

awards for plain language

Earlier this month, the Center for Plain Language named 14 winners at the 2018 ClearMark Awards. These awards recognize effective plain language writing and information design that help people find information, understand it, and act confidently based on what they’ve learned. As with every year, the winners include a range of communication materials, from a knee surgery decision aid to a law school’s bylaws—and a newsletter I’m quite fond of, called We Health Literacy.

Here is what the Center for Plain Language says about plain language:

A communication is in plain language if its wording, structure, and design are so clear that the intended readers can easily find what they need, understand what they find, and use that information.

The definition of “plain” depends on the audience. What is plain for one audience may not be plain at all for another audience.

Our measure of plain language is behavioral: Can the people who are the audience for the material quickly and easily:

  • Find what they need
  • Understand what they find
  • Act on that understanding

Plain language is more than just short words and short sentences – although those tactics are important guidelines for clear communication. When you create material in plain language, you also organize it logically for the audience. You consider how well the layout of your pages or screens works for the audience. You anticipate their questions and needs.

When people have complimented me for my communications abilities, whether writing press releases or editing a massive United Nations report or writing a technical manual on how to use an online tool, I say thank you and, if I think they might care to know it, that it’s a dedication to plain language that makes me a good communicator.

I’m on a constant quest to improve my communications skills, and learning from plain language communicators has been better than any course I have ever taken since my journalism classes back at Western Kentucky University a million years ago. I loathe jargon, text and graphics that are more about making the author or host look important or an expert than trying to help people connect with an idea, change a mind, encourage a new way of doing something, etc.

Grumpy Jayne

I’m grumpy.

I need a vacation.

What’s making me grumpy these days?

Here’s a partial list:

Conferences that want to charge presenters to attend. Never mind that the presenters are a significant reason why most people attend the conference.

Corporations and for-profit businesses that want advice from me by email or phone about a new product they want to launch – but they don’t want to pay me.

Digital inclusion efforts that don’t talk about web and app accessibility.

Any inclusion efforts that don’t talk about web and app accessibility.

Digital divide initiatives that don’t talk about web and app accessibility.

Popularity contests disguised as “crowdsourcing.” You know: crowdsource who should get a special volunteering award! Such an award isn’t based on merit – it’s based on how well someone or an organization can market itself.

Crowdsourcing efforts actually being about harvesting email addresses / subscribers for something. Example: crowdsource answers to questions from nonprofits on our platform! But register first! (and be added to our newsletter where we will endlessly pitch our products to you) 

Organizations, especially schools, complaining that they don’t have enough volunteers, but then making it impossible to find information about how to volunteer, and what opportunities are available on their web site, etc.

Firefighters complaining that they don’t have enough volunteers, but having a lousy web site regarding volunteer information, refusing to use social media beyond “We posted to Facebook once last year!”, refusing to recruit in any ways that are different than “this is how we’ve always done it,” and targeting their recruitment measures to only those who might want to become career firefighters (volunteering is only a stepping stone).

People who say, upon hearing that their website isn’t accessible for people with disabilities, “Well, I don’t think we have that many people with disabilities trying to access our web site.”

Corporations and government officials who whine about nonprofits not being innovative or risk taking, but then balk at funding overhead costs, including staff training, computer technology, Internet access, etc.

People who never replied to my requests during a process I’m involved with regarding ways to improve or my questions on where to find something but then, when the event or campaign is over, are suddenly are brimming with ideas of how things should have been done.

People who don’t answer my questions and then are stunned when I don’t do work that matches their expectations.

People who post endlessly on Facebook about injustices or various social causes but never come to city council meetings, or citizens’ advisory committees, never attend public meetings to talk to police officers one-on-one, don’t attend candidate debates or town halls by elected officials, don’t vote, etc.

Consultants who make all sorts of suggestions about what an agency should be doing, but have never employed those suggestions first hand themselves. (“Here’s how you should be recruiting volunteers! Oh, no, I’ve never employed these methods myself… I don’t work with volunteers…”)

Consultants that promote themselves as social media experts and have just a few followers on Twitter.

Managers who believe lack of complaints means things are going really well (rather than, perhaps, complaints aren’t being heard).

Organizations that say they need volunteers but turn people away who try – including me.

Can’t get enough? Here are other blogs of frustration:

What should be on a political web site

I’m a stickler for nonprofit organizations being as transparent as possible, well beyond what is required by law, regarding their financing, spending and staffing. As mission-based organizations, with missions that are supposed to benefit people and/or our environment, being accountable not only to donors but to all the public at large is crucial in showing credibility and ethics. Many in the for-profit/corporate and political sphere are threatened by the work of such organizations – nonprofits, NGOs, community-based organizations, etc. – and they can use an organization’s perceived lack of transparency about certain information to feed the public’s distrust of such organizations. Nonprofits can head this office by sharing as much info as possible on their web site about who they are and what they do.

I think a nonprofit, NGO, etc. should have on its web site:

  • a list of its board of directors
  • a list of its staff, at least senior staff, and their credentials
  • a statement of when the organization was founded and why
  • a list of key activities and accomplishments since the organization was founded
  • a statement regarding how much money it raised or earned in the last fiscal year and how much it spent, and at least a general idea on what it spent that money on

There have been nonprofits that I have seriously thought about giving a donation to, but when I go to their web site, they don’t have this basic info, so I don’t donate. I wonder how many other donations these nonprofits have missed out on because of this lack of info? There’s even more I think should be on a nonprofit’s web site, like complete information about volunteering, but that’s another blog.

I apply this rule about mandatory information that must be on a web site to political organizations and political candidates I’m interested in as well. No matter how passionately I feel in support of a candidate or a viewpoint, I want to know who is running things and how the money will be spent, even a general idea. You want me to donate to so-and-so so they can win an election? What are you going to spend the money on? In particular, how much will go to paying for TV time, radio time, flyers, web site development, etc., and how much is going to be paid to consultants for their ideas? What percentage of your staffing is by paid consultants and what percentage is by unpaid volunteers? And if you are a political organization, when were you founded, who is staffing the organization, and how did you pick the candidates you have suggested in your voter guide?

Another tip for political organizations: when someone comes to my door and says they are from such-and-such organization, and they want me to sign a petition about judicial reform or some new law or whatever, I am more likely to listen to that person if he or she says, “I am a volunteer with so-and-so.” Knowing someone is a volunteer, not a paid political person, gives whatever that person says much more weight with me. A volunteer is giving up precious time, often on a weekend, to reach out to me about a person or a cause – that’s how passionate that person feels about that candidate or ballot measure or whatever. And that carries a huge amount of weight with me. A paid person is the same as an ad on TV, and I just shrug, take the info and usually cut them off – I’d prefer to look up the candidate or issue myself in my own time.

Also see:

If I can’t find what I’m looking for on your web site, who else can’t?

Use Your Web Site to Show Your Accountability and To Teach Others About the Nonprofit / NGO / Charity Sector!

REQUIRED Volunteer Information on Your Web Site

Yes, I really did read that report you wrote

logoI worked in Afghanistan back in 2007, and I stay in contact with some of my Afghan colleagues there, including a member of my communications staff from back in the day. As I’ve written about before, I’ve been mentoring her online since I left, regarding her university studies, her career pursuits and her work.

For the past few years, she’s worked for a government initiative regarding water and sanitation. Communications regarding WatSan was brand new to me, and to her, so we both had to work to get up-to-speed on best practices, particularly regarding working in low-infrastructure communities, rural communities, low-literacy communities, and with women. How have we gotten ourselves up-to-speed on this particular type of public health communications? By finding and reading online reports by various United Nations agencies and various non-governmental organizations (NGOs). It’s been extraordinarily easy to find relevant, detailed reports on how water and sanitation practices have been communicated in every scenario imaginable and very honest reports about what’s worked and what hasn’t.

We’re still not experts. But the reality in humanitarian work is that, very often, you are suddenly asked to do something that’s at least a bit outside your experience, and you may have just a few weeks, or a few days, or even a few hours, to get the knowledge you need to proceed. That so many humanitarian workers have shared their work online has been critical to me doing my job over the years, and it’s proving invaluable to my colleague in Afghanistan as well.

So, thank you, all you communications staff at various UN, USAID, DFID, and NGO-supported initiatives all over the world, for detailing what worked and what didn’t in whatever project you worked on, and sharing that online. You may think you no one is reading your reports. But we are.

Also see:

I’ve been trying to warn about “fake news” since 2004

Since 2004, I have been gathering and sharing both examples of and recommendations for preventing folklore, rumors and urban myths from interfering with development and aid/relief efforts and government initiatives. And for years, I felt like the lone voice in the wilderness on this subject. It was almost my master’s thesis project, but while I could find examples of widespread misunderstanding and misinformation campaigns interfering with relief and with relief and development activities, and government initiatives, including public health initiatives, I could not get enough people to go on record to talk about these circumstances and how they were addressing such. For a year, I contacted numerous organizations, particularly organizations promoting women’s health and access to abortion, trying to get them to talk about how these misinformation campaigns were affecting them, but if they replied at all to my emails or phone calls, they said they didn’t want to bring more attention to the problem, even if that attention was in an academic paper that people outside the institution may never read.

I went with another subject for my Master’s project, but I had gathered a lot of publicly-available information, so I shared it all on my web site, and I have kept it updated over the years as my time has allowed. I have always easily found many examples of myths and misinformation creating ongoing misunderstandings among communities and cultures, preventing people from seeking help, encourage people to engage in unhealthy and even dangerous practices, and cultivating mistrust of people and institutions. I easily have found examples that had lead to mobs of people attacking someone or others for no reason other than something they heard from a friend of a friend of a friend, to legislators introducing laws to address something that doesn’t exist, and influencing elections, long before such finally got noticed because of Brexit and the USA November 2016 elections.

In my original web pages, I said that this subject was rarely discussed, and for more than a decade, that was the truth: while I could find all of those examples, it was very difficult to find any online resources or published resources outside of academic papers about how to address or prevent misinformation campaigns designed to interfere with a relief or development effort, public health campaign, etc. Where was the practical info on how to deal with this? It was few and far between. For many years, mine was the only web site tracking such.

How did I get interested in this subject? I noticed stories my friends and family told often turned out not to be true, everything from spiders or snake eggs found in a jacket of a friend of a cousin that lives in another state, to why a local store closed, to something they had heard about happening on a TV talk show but hadn’t actually seen themselves. Then, while attending Western Kentucky University for my undergrad degree, I took a very popular class, Urban Folklore 371, where we discussed these stories, how they were spread, how the story changes over time and why such stories are believed. I was hooked on the psychology of rumor-spreading.

When I worked at a United Nations agency from 2001 to 2005, I made a joke to a colleague about the outrageous mythologies about the UN that so many people believed back in the USA – I’m not going to repeat them here, on this blog, but they are easy to find online. She gave me a confused look and said she didn’t know what I was talking about. So I showed her various web sites that promote this misinformation. She stood there, with her mouth open and eyes wide, staring at the outrageous graphics and text. “Is this a joke?” she asked. No, I replied, this is very real. I showed her more. “I can’t believe this!” she said. I explained that we could stand there all day with me showing her these sites, and these were just ones in the USA – I had no idea how many there were based in other countries, in other languages. And I admit I was starting to get angry, because not only did this seasoned UN staff member not know about this, no one I worked with at the UN had ever heard of these myth-spreading web sites. Conspiracy theories, pre-social media, were already affecting our work, yet, I seemed to be the first person to be talking about it, at least at my agency.

We have a saying in English: closing the barn door after the horses are already out. It means you are too late in trying to address an issue. Now, all these many years after trying to sound the alarm, I fear that there are entire generations of people that will now never be convinced that global climate change is real and devasting to communities, particularly to poor communities, or that will never believe that vaccinations do NOT cause autism nor infertility, or that will never believe that condoms can prevent HIV, or that will never accept fluoride in their water because they believe too many outrageous things I can’t even begin to list here, and on and on. I fear these generations are lost forever in having basic scientific literacy. And I fear that if we don’t make a concentrated, sustained effort on educating young people about science and how to evaluate information they are hearing and reading, more people will die, more communities will be devastated, more lives will be shattered.

Also see:

online communities, sexual harassment & hate speech – UNESCO weighs in

During the 62 Session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW62), UNESCO participated in an event exploring the role of online communities in relations to sexual harassment and hate speech. The event took place on 13 March at the Permanent Mission of Finland to the United Nations in New York and other partners were Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in Finland, National Institute for Health and Welfare and Kenya Human Rights Commission.

Interventions to combat the online hate speech were presented including a guidebook, #WeWillNotBeSilent – What is hate speech and what it has got to do with gender? (PDF)

This multi-stakeholder effort raises awareness of the (sexist) hate speech and offers guidance for youth on responding and preventing (sexist) hate speech online.

Currently, 1 in 5 women using the Internet lives in countries where abuse of women is likely to go unpunished and 73 percent of women online have experienced some form of online violence.

Gender equality is one of UNESCO’s global priorities and well reflected in UNESCO’s interventions. These include efforts to counter online hate speech, empowering women and girls to harness digital and media literacy skills, promoting the safety of women journalists and gender parity in media. UNESCO is also addressing the issue through the development of international frameworks to build an open, human rights based, accessible and pluralistic knowledge societies and media environments.

Also see this publication, Countering online hate speech

More:

A lead from a friend online is still a lead from a friend

When you see a list of how people find out about volunteering opportunities, you will often see the number one reference, by far, as from someone else already involved in the group. That gets categorized as word of mouth.

You might also see other highly-scoring references, like from a community of faith or from a local newspaper. And very low on the list of ways people got leads for volunteering will probably be the organization’s web site or Facebook.

BUT WAIT!!

There’s a big problem with the question and the way people were given to answer on these surveys.

For instance, I may have been referred to an organization to volunteer by a friend VIA FACEBOOK. So, is the reference from a friend, word-of-mouth, or Facebook? Which category does it go into?

I may have been referred to an organization via a newspaper’s FACEBOOK PAGE. So, who gets the credit – the newspaper or Facebook?

I hear a lot of people still dismissing the Internet as a tool for volunteer recruitment and they base it on things like this survey from the National Council for Voluntary Organisations in the UK. But you need to be VERY cautious about such surveys. Remember: we think of messages on social media from friends as messages from friends, or from a church or temple, or from a newspaper, not from the platform itself. We might think of a message on Twitter from a newspaper as a message from the newspaper, not Twitter. If a survey asking volunteers how they heard about a service opportunity doesn’t also ask, for instance, in what context friends talked about the volunteering activity – face-to-face in a social setting, in a phone conversation (yes, people still have those), etc. – you can’t make assumptions about how that referral happened, that it must have happened face-to-face.

Indeed, word-of-mouth, in a traditional face-to-face setting or via a social media platform – remains the number one marketing tool for MOST things, not just volunteer recruitment. I’ve witnessed no better example of this recently than the reaction to Black Panther, one of the biggest grossing movies ever here in the USA. I have seen a huge number of people among my online friends post testimonials on Facebook about this movie, and responses from their friends saying they are going to go now based on that feedback. The people commenting have ranged from the wife of a local pastor here in my tiny town, both white and over 50, to friends that are teachers all over the USA. But credit doesn’t go to Facebook for the reference – it goes to the friends.

But with THAT said, here’s another consideration: the more sincere a word-of-mouth testimonial is, online or face-to-face, the more effective it will be in motivating friends. The more it sounds scripted, the more likely it won’t have as much effect. If a volunteer is sharing how great it is to volunteer somewhere, and is sharing that info – online or face-to-face – in a sincere moment of spontaneity and honesty and excitement, it’s going to have a much more impact than a statement an organization has given the volunteer to share with friends. A volunteer sharing a scripted message that an organization has asked them to isn’t going to have nearly the same impact – if it has any at all.

And one more thing: if you haven’t seen Black Panther, you totally need to ASAP. It’s awesome!

More: