Back in 2011, I asked if group volunteering was really all its cracked up to be.
The sentiment has gone mainstream: the Boston Globe published this yesterday: Corporate volunteers can be a burden for nonprofits.
Corporate social responsibility folks, managers of employee volunteerism programs: are you listening?
As a researcher regarding effective volunteer engagement and a trainer of managers of volunteers, I have high expectations when I engage with volunteers or the managers of such as a customer, client or volunteer. I’m a tough audience. I know that successful volunteer training and support, and appropriate customer service, come not from large budgets but, rather, from the organization making such a priority. I’ve encountered so many well-trained, conscientious volunteers from small nonprofits with tiny budgets, and so many ill-trained, distracted, unmotivated, uncaring volunteers from large, well-known nonprofits with large budgets.
I live near a group home for adults with mental disabilities, and I’ve grown quite fond of the residents – one in particular, who loves animals. He used to help his neighbor with her many pets, but she died last year, and all of pets had to be rehomed – taking away not only his beloved friends, but also activities that he absolutely lived for. About the same time, a stray cat living under a foreclosed house across the street had two kittens, and my friend started feeding them. We’ve cobbled together shelter for the cats on the front porch of his group home, and neighbors give him bottles to return to the grocery to get money for cat food. He has a renewed lease on life, and the cats are well-cared for. My friend loves his new role as cat caretaker – but I’m dreading new kittens in the spring. So I decided to see what our options were for getting the cats spayed and neutered. How could I catch these cats? And if I caught the cats, was there a place that would fix them for a low cost? And how would we provide after-surgery care, when he couldn’t have them in his house, and me, with a dog, a cat, and a cat-hating husband, couldn’t have them in mine?
My vet gave me a flyer for the Feral Cat Coalition of Oregon, based in Portland. I called the number, left a message, and within two hours, a volunteer called me back. She patiently answered all of my MANY questions, said that FCCO does a special surgery that allows cats to be released the next day after surgery, and said that my friend’s cats qualified as feral cats. She put me in touch with a volunteer a bit closer than Portland, who lent me humane traps for the cats, and she explained the week-long process to go through in order to catch the cats. Unfortunately, I was able to capture only one, but I drove him to Portland (45 minutes away), dropped him off at the FCCO offices just before 8 a.m., spent the day with various friends in PDX, then went back just before 4. A volunteer provided an orientation to everyone like me, new to FCCO, about how to release the cat and look for post-surgical issues, and then I came back with the cat to where I live outside of PDX.
Every FCCO volunteer and employee I encountered was wonderful. They had complete information, they all knew the process inside and out, and they answered my questions before I could ask them. They were always ready and willing to help me. I never felt like I was a burden, that I was bothering anyone, as I’ve felt SO many times at other organizations. FCCO made me feel so supported and valued. They didn’t focus on what they couldn’t do – they focused on all that they CAN do for people that care about stray cats. If they couldn’t provide something I asked for, they always gave me an alternative – not just a “No, we don’t do that.” I didn’t have to pay anything, but was happy to make the recommended tiny donation for the cat’s surgery, rabies shot and ear-mite treatment.
BRAVO, FCCO! You are doing a LOT of things right when it comes to recruiting, training and supporting your volunteers. And, based on my experience, I think animal welfare groups are some of the most challenging when it comes to effective volunteer management: the people you attract as volunteers are oh-so-passionate about animals, and that kind of passion and mission ownership be both a wonderful blessing and a horrific curse. Your volunteer management is obviously outstanding, as is your focus on customer/client services. WELL DONE!
As soon as I catch that other cat (the mom has disappeared, I’m sorry to say), I’ll be back!
And if you want to see what it’s like when I am NOT happy with customer service from an animal welfare organization, you will have to go over to my personal blog.
I also have often blogged here on my official, professional blog site about unsatisfactory volunteering experiences, on my part and on the part of others, but I don’t name names. I provide these as cautionary tales – what NOT to do in engaging volunteers:
I’m not much for reality TV. Except for one show. Judge Judy. It’s my late afternoon indulgence, working from home. It has less calories than anything in my all-too-close fridge.
Recently, on a rerun, an episode from 2012 was shown. A woman sentenced to community service for a DUI said a pastor had swindled her into free labor. In Judge Judy’s own words:
“You had to do a certain number of hours for community service (320). Your claim alleges that Miss Stewart, who you knew, scammed you into working for her at a shelter that she runs. And you thought you were doing work that would go towards your community service. And it turns out that she did not have the right paperwork. So you want her to pay you for the 143 hours that you spent working for free at her rescue. That’s what your case is about. Unusual. Miss Stewart says it was your idea to come to work and to do whatever you did around the shelter.”
So, how did Judge Judy rule?
She said that the woman who was suing for payment should have confirmed with the court that assigned her the community service that this shelter – which actually turned out to be not a nonprofit, but a woman who was inviting women in need to her house to pray with her – would be acceptable for her community service, and she should have gotten that confirmation in writing.
That’s the legal ruling. The ethical ruling is, of course, that the pastor should have had a written agreement with this woman, saying exactly what they were, or were not, agreeing to.
I realize a lot of managers of volunteers refuse to work with people assigned community service by a court or by a class, and they don’t see this as any kind of issue they have to care about. I think differently: people work unpaid at nonprofits and unofficial community organizations for a variety of reasons, and I’m okay with that. I’m concerned with just how often people undertake community service as directed by a court or class and find out the hours they’ve worked won’t meet their commitment. I wish more managers of volunteers were as well.
Also see:
The Discover E-Volunteering competition by E-Wolontariat (E-Volunteering Poland) is the best showcase of new virtual volunteering initiatives on the planet. I’m a HUGE fan of this event – and governments and corporations in Europe should be too. Here’s why:
Why tech companies, telecommunications companies, banks, and other multi-national corporations aren’t fighting each other to fund this event, I’ll never understand.
As I said in my last blog, there are so many corporate folks chastising nonprofits and NGOs, saying mission-based initiatives need to be more innovative, saying they need to embrace the latest network technologies and revolutionary management styles and on and on. Yet these same corporations demanding nonprofit innovation aren’t funding virtual volunteering-related initiatives. The Discover E-Volunteering competition would be a GREAT one to start with!
And media, you should be covering not only this competition, and not only the individual applicants to this event, but also all sorts of great virtual volunteering activities happening in the world.
More info about virtual volunteering, a widespread practice that’s more than 35 years old:
I started talking about virtual volunteering – without knowing it was called that – as early as 1994, more than 30 years ago. Soon after I started babbling about it, I directed The Virtual Volunteering Project, based at the University of Texas, back in the late 1990s. Back then, I thought that, by now, well into the 21st century, there would be corporations clamoring to sponsor virtual volunteering activities and events. I could see back in the 1990s that this wasn’t just a fun idea – it was an effective one for nonprofits, NGOs, and volunteers themselves – and that it would become a widespread practice. I just knew corporations would want to be seen as leaders in the movement and, therefore, fund it.
Yet, 30 years later, while thousands of nonprofits all over the world have embraced using the Internet to support and involve volunteers, corporations remain largely silent in their involvement and support. I am frequently contacted by nonprofits and NGOs looking to expand their involvement of online volunteers, or that want to do something particularly interesting or innovative regarding virtual volunteering, but they need funding, and they want to know if I can help. And I can’t. Because corporations clamoring to be a part of virtual volunteering just hasn’t happened.
It’s not true of all corporations: the international telecommunications company Orange seems to get it, to a degree: Fundacja Orange (the Polish branch) partially funds the ground-breaking Discover E-Volunteering competition, the best showcase of new virtual volunteering initiatives on the planet. But, sadly, the UK branch of Orange seems to have already discontinued its Do Some Good smart phone app to help people volunteer through their mobile phone, launched in 2012 – less than three years ago. Hewlett-Packard used to have a pioneering e-mentoring program, bringing together their employees, as mentors, with high school students, and the program is frequently referenced in academic literature 20 years ago about the promise of e-mentoring – but that program is long gone, and I can’t find any association between HP and virtual volunteering anymore. Rolex seemed somewhat interested in microvolunteering, a version of virtual volunteering that engages online volunteers in micro tasks, but that initial interest seems to have quickly, completely waned. Cisco was a key financial and in-kind supporter of NetAid, a part of which became the UN’s Online Volunteering service, but that support ended in 2001.1
You’ve heard it and read it so many times: corporate folks chastising nonprofits and NGOs, saying those mission-based initiatives need to be more innovative, saying they need to embrace the latest network technologies and revolutionary management styles and on and on. Yet these same corporations demanding nonprofit innovation aren’t funding virtual volunteering-related initiatives.
Time to put your money where your mouth is, corporations: there are some terrific virtual volunteering activities out there. There are outstanding innovations happening at nonprofits and NGOs all over the world. You say you want more risk-taking, more innovations, more tech-use by mission-based organizations – okay, they stand ready to do it. All they need is the investment. Are YOU ready to put your money where your mouth is?
And also… why haven’t you bought The LAST Virtual Volunteering Guidebook?
😉
1: The last sentence of this paragraph, regarding Cisco and NetAid, was added on July 24, 2015
Nov. 11, 2015 update: Nonprofit leaders are not focusing enough attention on innovation, measuring the impact of their efforts, and creating funding structures that encourage risk-taking, according to a new report from Independent Sector. Great – who is going to FUND THOSE ACTIVITIES?!
I really cannot emphasize enough the importance of keeping your records regarding volunteers up-to-date…
“Ada” was a volunteer for two years with a very-well known national organization’s state affiliate. She was very active with the organization in that time, taking on a number of high-responsibility roles and helping to increase the number of attendees at local events. But a conflict with an employee lead Ada to end her volunteering. There was no dramatic departure: she simply stopped taking on new volunteering tasks, stopped attending volunteer meetings, and let her membership lapse. Not one person from the agency contacted her to say, “Hey, where’d you go?!?” Ada always assumed they hadn’t noticed – or were happy that she was gone. A year after she left the organization, she moved to a city almost two hours away.
Imagine Ada’s surprise when, three years after she left the organization, she gets a very friendly email from the director of individual giving from the organization, talking about something that happened in the town where she used to live. The email wasn’t addressed to anyone specifically, such as “Dear volunteers in such-and-such town”, but given the informal, chatty nature of the email, it was obvious that that’s who it was supposed to be going to. As Ada had been gone from the organization for three years, didn’t live in the city mentioned anymore, and had never heard of the person that was writing her this oh-so-chatty email, she was shocked. And a bit put off.
“They didn’t even notice when I didn’t renew my membership and I stopped volunteering,” she said. “And now, three years later, they write me as though we’re the best of friends?”
By not noticing the departure of this volunteer, by not updating its database to reflect that she had withdrawn, and by contacting someone who obviously had disengaged with the program for quite a while now with a message that made it seem like they were still involved and happy with the organization, this organization now has an even more entrenched negative reputation as being incompetent and/or insensitive with this volunteer. Ada may bring this up to her Facebook friends. She may bring it up in social gatherings with friends and family. She may bring it up to co-workers. And it’s that kind of word-of-mouth experience that people really, really listen to.
Also see:
Many low-cost information communication technology (ICT) -based tools already exist to help nonprofits, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government programs and other mission-based initiatives to collect and share data on a large-scale, real-time basis. In fact, handheld computer devices have been used in various humanitarian, environmental and disaster-relief efforts since the late 1990s (when they were called PDAs, or personal digital assistants – you couldn’t use them to make a phone call but you could use them to gather data).
However, there isn’t a central place where organizations can access ICT-based tools and assess information so they can understand the features, the pros and the cons of different tools.
The Kopernik Impact Tracker Technology online catalogue is an effort to fill this gap, providing recommendations that assist users in making decisions about digital data collection apps, SMS communication platforms and more. The online catalogue is designed for small to medium-sized social enterprises or a nonprofit organizations working in international development or humanitarian emergencies with a main office that is located in an urban area with decent infrastructure and has access to slow to medium internet connection. But any nonprofit or NGO, or any government agency, anywhere, can use these tools. This project is fully supported by the Impact Economy Innovations Fund in East and Southeast Asia, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and Asia Community Ventures.
The catalogue includes information on:
Also see:
A key focus of the the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Strategic plan 2014-17 is inclusive and effective democratic governance. “We are committed to supporting citizen participation and engagement in policymaking and governance, to foster more peaceful and inclusive societies.” That’s why UNDP is launching the “Technology for Citizen Engagement Challenge”.
“UNDP invites you to come up with technology-enabled solutions that can help to better engage citizens in addressing some of the challenges faced in our daily lives. UNDP offers both funding of up to $10,000 and mentoring support to help turn the best ideas into reality.” Winning teams will also be invited to attend the 2nd Annual Build Peace through technology conference in Nicosia, Cyprus on 25th & 26th April 2015.
Examples of the use of networked technologies and tech innovations to help narrow the gap between citizens and decision makers that UNDP has supported:
So what are we looking for?
Do you have an idea for a technology enabled solution that can help to better engage citizens in addressing the following issues?
Common Vision for the Future – How can we use technology to bring together different groups to imagine a common vision for the future? Submit your ideas for how to embrace differing views to find common ground by sharing a vision for the future.
Inclusion through Diversity – How can technology help to diversify the voices that inform policy by embracing more inclusive decision-making processes? Submit your ideas for how to increase dialogue between citizens and decision makers so that a multitude of voices are represented in public policy, including those of women and youth.
Improve access to public services and data – How can we utilize technology to improve access to public services and/or data? Submit your ideas for how better access to services and data can strengthen trust in institutions and encourage greater public participation in decision-making.
Deadline for the submission of ideas is Thursday 5th March – Apply here
FOLLOW: @UNDPEurasia, @UNDPArabStates and @mahallae on Twitter for updates.
My blog today is actually for public relations and marketing staff at nonprofits, rather than those managers of volunteer programs. And my message is this: either help promote your organization’s volunteer engagement OR GET OUT OF THE WAY.
I talk to people managing their organization’s volunteer engagement activities – recruiting volunteers, supporting those volunteers, creating the majority of opportunities for those volunteers, helping other staff engage with those volunteers in their work, etc. – and among the many complaints I hear about challenges to their success is this one: the public relations and marketing staff won’t support me.
Those leading volunteer engagement at your organization need a variety of support from marketing and public relations staff:
Why no, I’m *not* the only person who talks about Virtual Volunteering / e-volunteering / digital volunteering, etc.
In addition to research and evaluations of virtual volunteering, that is tracked on the Virtual Volunteering Wiki, which has been put together as a supplement to The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook, there are also various other web sites, blogs, publications and initiatives focused on virtual volunteering, often under different names (digital volunteering, online volunteering, microvolunteering, etc.).
It’s impossible to create a comprehensive list of such – just as it would be impossible to make a list of all web sites, blogs and other non-research related to volunteering, in general. But I have made a list gives an overview of the different ways various people and organizations are talking about virtual volunteering, especially internationally. There are links to information about virtual volunteering in Spanish, Catalan, German, Polish, Ukrainian, and a wee bit in French.
Also see this page tracking news articles, blog posts, and other updates on virtual volunteering and this page lists RSS feeds that automatically link to the latest web pages, blogs, and other online materials that use terms that relate to virtual volunteering.
And, of course, check out The Last Virtual Volunteering Guidebook.